spikeyhat09

dont forget about spaceplanes

They're by no means supposed to be. the easier something is to achieve, the less impressive and satisfying it is to complete it.

If you have the right attitude, piracy can be helpful. Perhaps there may be a game that you're not sure if you'll like it or not. so you download an illicit copy and decide on whether its good or not. If it's good, you pay because your an honest person, if its not you delete it because you haven't payed for it. Not a single person loses money or is stolen from, and you ended up supporting the developers because you gave the game a chance, which you might not have had piracy not been an option. However, there is no excuse for piracy if the game offers a free demo such as KSP. At that point, all you want is to play the most updated version without giving a couple bucks to the guys who worked hard on it.

I had a hard time voting, as there was no "TOTALLY FREAKING AWEZOME OHMYGAWWWWWD" option.

I suppose your friend hate minecraft then... I find people like that to be a bit closed minded and lacking creativity... My favorite games are the ones that are open ended and let you do whatever the h*ll you want. you can make your own goals and storyline. being highly educational is also a big plus. KSP is all of those things... except easygoing on the average computer, sheesh.

I know that this would probably be incredibly difficult and out-of the question, but, theoretically, could squad rebuild the game using a different engine in order to have multicore support? that would, theoretically, be AWESOME (*hint, hint)

as for having two PLANETs orbiting each other, I have no clue how that would come about...

I actually successfully landed on minmus (on the dark side too ) and returned safely on my first try... anyway, you should leave bob there and make a three-person rocket to go rescue him.

Or perhaps it could be more like SpaceX and there's no looming, budget restricting government over your head, you just have people pay you to launch rockets and if you don't you go bankrupt.

I was thinking more along the lines of two moons collided with each other and a piece of debris was sent into a very low orbit I suppose. point taken.

Ah, I see. However, would you not agree that, if I go on calling it Kerbol, everyone will understand the body I am talking about? And isn't that truly all that a "name" is? (btw I found the official wiki and it still calls it Kerbol: http://kspwiki.nexisonline.net/wiki/Main_Page) [ATTACH=CONFIG]33989[/ATTACH]

I don't see why it would be impossible. A moon can be as small as an asteroid, mars proves that. If its small and moving fast enough (as long as its outside the atmosphere), it could orbit in the same way that your rocket can orbit kerbin at an altitude of 70K meters. It could still work if it was big, even planet sized. it would be like a binary star system, with two planets orbiting each other. however, I'm not sure if a binary planet system could still be stable when orbiting another star... maybe, but im not sure.

http://184.154.141.114/~kerbalsp/wiki/index.php?title=Kerbol explain? also, the definition of universe is: "All existing matter and space considered as a whole". therefore, if the kerbal "universe" is different from our "universe", it would, by definition, not be a "universe", and we would have to come up with a whole new word to describe the "bigger 'universe' " that all these "smaller 'universi' " exist in.

honestly, what I REALLY want is randomly generated planets. OR, maybe when you create a save file, there would be multiple solar systems to choose from (And each one would have kerbin to start from, a reasonable distance from its parent star). That would be AWESOME!

You don't know that. what if Kerbol is really Gliese 581? Kerbol is, afterall, a red dwarf. Then one of the planets we've "discovered" wouldn't really exist...

I agree. But it would be interesting if there where other countries and such to deal with on kerbin that would have their own space program and get pissed at you when you land your capsules in their territory.

the size of the rocket seems to be irrelevant, the parachutes just simply disappear when deployed.

You are, of course, assuming Jool is composed primarily of hydrogen & helium, which wouldn't account for it's green color.

I've noticed that every time I use the new physical timewarp modes, the parachutes, if they're not open at the time, sort of break. like, on the way up, I'll timewarp, and by the time I'm ready to deploy my parachutes, they magically "disappear". This only occurs if I've used the in-atmosphere timewarp, on any level (not just x4). This defeats the purpose of having the timewarp in the first place, because I know that if I'm sending a rover to Minmus and i timewarp, I already know the mission is doomed when its time for re-entry.

You have found yourself a WALL-E

Definitely nail Mun and Min landings before you attempt interplanetary travel. in fact, I would even become pro at landing on both in one mission, since that's pretty much what you'll be doing when going to other planets, except on a MUCH bigger scale and MUCH smaller SOIs.

A common misconception is that more DRAM = faster computer. while having a good chunk of ram is fine and dandy, what you really need to run many games smoothly is a fast CPU and a fast GPU (with lots of dedicated GPU memory of its own). KSP being a really math-heavy game, I fast processor will do you well. My processor has a Windows Experience Index rating of 7 (out of 7.9 possible), so KSP runs fairly well, even though I only have 4 gigs of DRAM. also don't listen to this advice. while overclocking your processor may sound like a good idea, it will greatly shorten its lifespan, and you will end up shelling out more cash when your PC dies prematurely. your better off buying a decent processor in the first place.

My point is, you can't just randomly place struts everywhere to fix the rocket, you have to see where its wobbling or breaking and place struts accordingly.

This may be true for going straight up, but many people want to get into space as efficiently as possible and perform a gravity turn on the way up. this is exceedingly more difficult when the rocket has rotation.

I have no sympathy for the person who complains rather than taking action himself. You can't get mad about the fact that sometimes the staging messes up, but are too lazy to figure it out yourself. saying "im just a kid, its too complicated for me" will get you nowhere. if something is confusing for you, then just keep trying. And if your rocket STILL falls apart after PLACING STRUTS THE RIGHT PLACES, then the problem is your rocket is poorly designed, and you need to rethink it.