Corona688

Oh yes, it's amazing I just want to see it come apart. Proto Station received yet another prototype: On left is the new docking adapter with battery bank and huge reaction wheel. Also it now looks like some sort of robot goat throwing a small spaceship at you. We needed a mascot for the tourists anyway.

Now try it again with gravity on XD

More reasons: Difficulty getting advice on ships or gameplay when there's only three people worldwide who will recognize that exact combination of part mods and gameplay mods. Difficulty sharing ships for the exact same reason. Parts which can't be used very creatively, like "most of a helicopter". All of which are good reasons for me to not use mods. Other people seem to do okay. You guys have fun.

Did you disappear my post? I received no notification of it. I don't think it fit any of your criteria, but I'll try to be more careful. Listen. The attack helicopter tumblr identity rainbow isn't real. Neither is the femipedant brigade. Neither are the "make-me-a-sandwich" trolls. Neither is the flat-earth movement. All of these movements attract the odd "true believer", but the vast majority have always been trolls poisoning conversation on more legitimate subjects. The slippery slope doesn't exist, this is all just conversation. Not a thing to be afraid of except trolls.

Again, I can't really see your spacecraft, so I'm limited to wild guessing here. The negative numbers fooled me, could they have fooled you too? What if that's -20, -30, etc? I do know the game doesn't care one bit about ullage or inertia. Which is why you can climb your way into space by transferring fuel. The root part may matter, as well, so if you built your craft upside-down or something, try reversing the polarities anyway. It works in star trek.

Memory bandwidth and graphics performance are also relevant to KSP, both of which are, in mobiles, just the pits.

You are correct, I got it backwards. I was probably confused by all the the negative numbers the game auto-assigns for some reason. Anyway, that's how you do it.

I can't tell for sure with a high-res game crammed into a low-res video, but it looks like your bottom tanks have a higher fuel flow priority than your top ones. I think the game burns the lowest-numbered tanks first. I think you can alter fuel flow priority in flight. Checking. [edit] Yes! You can alter fuel flow priority in-flight. Set your bottom tank to zero, the tank above it to 1, etc, etc, etc, and they should burn in the order you want.

Feel free to ignore those.

Once again, I think this heated argument is completely deflated just by pointing out that THIS GAME HAS NO CHARACTERS. None. Nada. Zilch. There is no plot to clumsily rewrite around a new female Kerbal. There is no lore to throw away and disrespect by adding a new female Kerbal. And the worst has already happened: Female Kerbals already exist in-game. The wailing and gnashing of teeth in this thread cannot compare to what happened then, but the world failed to end. It was probably a good marketing decision. In the end they're just game pegs. If people want different colors of game pegs, I don't really care why, it's no skin off my nose. You may have a point. Two pilots are useful when starting a game. Two scientists and two engineers, not so much. I'm not sure you can even deploy six entire Kerbals with the L1 buildings.

On the right is Val in the Rover Can. After driving through two biomes and over 30 kilometers she "pulled a Jeb" on the last leg of her trip to the sea: A boneheaded manuever sent her tumbling off a cliff. Hitting the retrorockets somehow made it worse. But when the rover hit the ground at 58m/s, it was spinning so fast in just the right way that it bounced, four times, in horrifying slow motion, then slid to a halt sideways -- completely unharmed. Val still seems to be my good luck charm. Bob, on left, has the somewhat simpler job of biome-hopping via rocket to take as many materials bay samples as he can. During one trip outside to reset, he managed a flawless backflip by accident.

Those are all mods, why would stock game have wings for a mod?

Whatever happened to Kerbalizer, anyway? Silly as it seemed, it would put all these questions to rest.

You might have a point if the game had any real story, or they looked any different from each other. The only unique thing about the starting three is their orange flight-suits and Jeb's unique "BADS" bit.

Yup. Mods usually mean something you load in the game to extend it, not a wire poking it in the brain making it smell burnt toast. That kind of programming is pretty bad juju, honestly, especially on modern multicore computers.

If they know, then posting forum topics begging for a fix isn't going to help. What might help is more details on the problem, screenshots, save files to precisely demonstrate the problem, posted to their bug tracker.

Is that where all those arches came from. For starters, the KSC is on the coast and just slightly above sea level

I see no reason why not.

So far in this save, I've encountered the Kraken exactly once, when it daintily nibbled upon some vital antennas.

I think it was in a aerodynamic stall condition. When your plane is at a strange angle with respect to its movement, especially when at slow speed, your wings and ailerons may abruptly stop generating lift. Worse yet is when some but not all wings and ailerons stop working, which can generate net forces that twist you around! This is a real thing and has killed many pilots. In some conditions it's almost impossible to regain control. KSP can cheat a bit with reaction wheels giving you marginal control even when all other control authority is lost.

You need enough engines to push you faster than 0.3g, and enough fuel to not run out on the way down. That's what really matters, and if it's not good enough for Mechjeb, that's Mechjeb's problem. These fancy mechjebs, flunjers, capdabblers, and smendlers occasionally make the game harder, not easier. They follow the curve of maximum efficiency, which means riding the ragged edge between touchdown and lithobraking -- and anything which violates your autopilot's hardcoded assumptions, be it atmosphere model or unusual craft design, can cause catastrophic results. Not because these things are so difficult, but just because that's the way it flies. You don't have to fly that way. Not even NASA does real suicide burns, not unless they have crash cushions.

I too find flying aeroplanes boring. 30 seconds of interest on takeoff, 2 nail-biting minutes on landing, and however many minutes of waiting while hitting 's' as you want inbetween. If only there was a way to get them to their destination faster, so you could just go do what you want then recover. A smidgen less than entirely successful at that but far from boring. Maybe if I depended on parachute landing...

Twisted candle is asparagus staging which throws away the bottom of the rocket like normal stage-atop-stage stacking. This avoids the "fat rocket" drag problem and lets you throw away your heavier engines, but needs some sort of radial engine for the upper stages. "The Refresher" is twisted candle with all those thuds. Oh, yikes. The Spark engine used to be hyper-efficient due to its very high thrust for its weight. "What engine do I use?" "Sparks!" "But its tiny" "Use more". Things like this happened until they nerfed it (to oblivion). Party over.

Rover can, rover can, does whatever a rover can... ...and more, with those twin ants it should be able to biome-hop at least once. Currently driving towards the nearest sea.

This is also what you'd expect of an incorrectly installed mod, but I'd expect that to show up in a log, so... It doesn't really work that way. TCP as used the internet over includes checksums for everything internally. The odds of an error slipping through are about 1 in 64 thousand. The only times I've ever had corrupted downloads are from incomplete/resumed downloads. The EXE is extremely likely to have some form of checksumming itself, also. The vast majority of errors would be in graphical data files, and either show as artifacts or get logged. Errors in Unity or game code wouldn't wait until 95% loaded to crash out. A truly corrupt install wouldn't work at all, not work "sometimes". What's telling, to me, is the lack of a log. That suggests the kind of exception that kills it unilaterally without giving it a chance to say what the error was. What's also telling is how it started working again when you reinstalled it. This does sound a lot like file corruption - but of a different sort. An ailing hard drive can cause exactly this, when executable data is suddenly needed but unavailable. Sometimes this read may succeed but take a very long time. Other times it can just fail completely, after a long wait. When that read inexplicably fails, the computer is forced to unilaterally kill the program, nothing else it can do. Reinstalling may fix this, since it's very unlikely to reuse the exact same spot on your hard drive. Another thing which can cause this is memory errors, but given it went away when you reinstalled, this seems less likely. It may be nothing, but I think you should get your hard drive checked out, especially if anything else starts giving you mysterious trouble. Better safe than sorry. "If it doesn't work, reinstall from scratch" is your expert advice?