T-Bouw

I have only played Republic Commando on ye old Xbox, but I found it a very immersive game! The presentation of the HUD really helps with that. And unlike most FPSes, the game was pretty tough!

Planes are also my preffered way to make local (quarter globe) explorations. In my experience, the fixed landing gear is a lot more rigid (duh) than the retractable ones and therefore harder to use on rough landings. Yes, I've crashed quite a few planes that way. Bounce, skip, skip, slide, explode!

When I have SRB's and a gimballing engine attached to a rocket, I usually set the throttle to no more than 1/3 or even 1/6 power. Purely for steering. Then, when the SRB's are jettisoned, it's 2/3 to full power (yeah! (love flames!)).

Oh man, I'm just thinking about the tons and tons of money required in the beginning. That bail-out strategy would get used a lot! Still, at the very least, such a reverse tech-tree makes you think...

Lets give them a little time to unwind. They deserve it! Eventually, I do however would like to know what's up with the future of KSP and Squad. Squad told us they will keep developping, but in what way is what I would like to know. I think the contant stream of updates, blogs, announcements and posts will gradually decline in both number and frequency, but a final word about this will be nice.

The balance of the three currencies is the best I've experienced so far, but I need a little personal tweak. % funds -> science at 5 % dedication is the strategy for me even at the very start of a new career. I'm not good (yet) at maximizing my science-gains from missions, yet I can make fairly cheep craft that get the job done.

To learn about how to learn. More specifically, how to remember better and read faster. Really, I can't remember stuff well and reading things takes forever. If I'm having a particularly hard time concentrating, I have to read things like 3 to 5 times!

I owe you some more constructive post. It's my wager that the 2nd smallest size gear role was already and adequately fulfilled by the old landing gear bays and thus the new one deemed "not needed"? Though, I'm having a hard time getting a "word of god" post about it. Not a lot of stuff on the matter to be found indeed.

Well to me, the, what you call, "ugly old thing" is actually a "beautiful old thing" that fits with the sleek plane-parts. The big new landing gears are by that notion "ugly new things" that only fit with the "equally ugly new Mk1 inline cockpit". Some you win, some you loose. But to each his/her own of course.

Chroma Squad was released recently. It's a tactical RPG with isometric pixely graphics. Has anyone played it already? Is it any good? It may very well satisfy my nostagia in more ways than one from the looks of it! Here's the website: http://chromasquad.com/

You can visit this site http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri to see if you can run KSP. My guess would be, yes, but at minimal settings. I don't recommend buying a new laptop for just one game.

I can deduce from your specs that you're running the game on a laptop correct? The graphics-card, I guess, seems to be the bottle-neck of your computer because the rest of the specs seem up to snuf. You could try to reduce the Anti-Aliasing further. AA is known to take a lot of resources. If you get it running better, then you could bump something else up again. Edit: Oh it may also help to set the resolution to the native resolution of your screen. It may seem counter intuitive, but running at a (slightly) lower res than native can actually be slower because the GPU has to re-calculate where which pixel should be drawn.

The fairing should protect from heat as well (stated in the wiki) though I haven't confirmed this myself yet. Are you firing an engine directly underneath the Science Jr.? Heat in KSP is also known to conduct to other parts.

It sounds like you're ascending too fast. The high speed causes friction which in turn causes heat. Tune the throttle a little lower until the flames disappear.

Rapid-fire mouse-clicking on the next button made it into a movie ha! Very Kerbal!

Ah, those things happen to me all the time as well! Like forgetting to refuel tanks or re-add thrust to the engines after balancing them. Makes for a lack-luster take-off or a nice poof-effect. (Wie z'n hoofd niet gebruikt...)

I tried getting the best of both worlds by applying the heatshield PhysicsSignificance-fix from Flowerchild in reverse to the airbreathing engines. That way I hoped that the mass of the engine got added to the parent-part it was affixed to. COM should then still be were it belongs, whether the plane is big or small, engine mounted horizontally or vertically. I got buggy results though, so I'll have to work on this.

Waaat! Well that saves on packing chutes... Good timing too!

I want to try to give an explanation for this as well, but ahhh...I can't... That's almost unbelievable indeed! Perhaps it's related to the fact that radiosignals posesses energy? I'll ask a colleague of mine specialized in radio-tech when I have the chance.

Sounds to me as if your power supply wasn't providing enough power anymore. When you removed the old HDD, more became available for the other HDD.

Though I agree that SAS is not adequate enough for plane-use, I also think planes are getting a lot of love already. Don't get me wrong, I love planes as much as the next fanatic. But we have flaps/flaperons and spoilers/spoilerons now, 4 different sizes of landing gear, 5 different plane cockpits, bigger wings, etc. Besides, ejection-seats are fighter-plane territory (guns). Even the Space Shuttle didn't have those later on (could've helped though). I have my gripes with the game, true, but for me, flying is more fun/realistic than ever.

Are you using physics warp? That sped things up for me in 0.90. I haven't got that far yet in 1.0 though, so I don't know if that's still reliable.

Good fix! I had a hard time getting a pod back to surface that had bob in it (no SAS).

That is a nice and clean design! Though I still can't agree with the change. I want to say it's unrealistic, but I know that argument is moot considering we're talking about a game. [sigh] Guess I'll have to stick to modding the cfg-files... (for anyone interrested, it's this line: CoMOffset = 0.0, 2.3, 0.0)

I was about to post this bug today as well, but then I read this answer. This weird workaround for a "problem" that wasn't there will screw up more potential designs than it will solve. For instance, a VTOL with the engine placed vertically, will have a tremendous tendancy to roll/pitch because it'll be top-heavy. I really hope Squad will revert the change.