CaptRobau

The CoM offset is done with this code: CoMOffset = X, Y, Z X, Y and Z being the three dimensional axis. I think you need to use the X-axis to mimic the real capsule's CoM offset. So something like this: CoMOffset = 0.3, 0, 0 You'll want to experiment with different values.

From a gameplay standpoint everything so far seems to work. Definitely the best Apollo CSM out there. I would suggest you try to add some baked shadows (ie. shadows in the texture itself). Frizzank knows how to do that like a pro. It'll help break up the simpler parts of the texture.

This recent article says otherwise: http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/12/27/kerbal-space-program-devs-hope-to-add-budgets-reputation-in-2014/ Career should be about dealing with limitations and making the best of a situation. Sandbox about doing whatever you want.

From the wiki: And maybe there should be a decoupler between the Instrument Unit and the LEM?

I thought it would be cool if we had a dedicated place to share screenshots of our small, large, simple or complex asteroid bases. Can't wait to see what everyone else has created. Here's my contribution:

Is there a download link? The thread title seems to indicate that version 1.0 was released on April 7th?

Okay, I tried out the new Saturn V parts. As far as I can tell they work as they should. I can get a historical configuration into a 100km parking orbit without too much trouble. While I did not have trouble with wobbly rockets, it might be wise to redo all the stack node sizes for all FASA's parts that are larger than 2.5m, because with the ARM patch you now have a stack node with size 3. All the 3.75m and larger parts that I looked at in the FASA folder had stack node size 2.

Looks beautiful. Can't wait to get my hands on it. This together with Frizzank's Saturn V will be great!

Stupid_chris, I was working on a similar rebalance mod. You've already got all the engines down, but maybe you can find some use for some of the other ideas that I had. Everything with an * already has ModuleManager .cfgs that I can send over (just PM me). Anyway here are some tweaks that would help balance the game and make give use to parts that previously didn't have any: Antennas* Speed is the advantage that the larger antennas have, yet this is the least important. Power consumption is much more important, especially in the early game. That's why I moved the advantages and disadvantages around. The smallest antenna (the 16) is now the fastest, but requires more power to transmit. The largest one (88-88) is the slowest, but requires less power. The middle one (DTS-M1) is in between those two. Covered Solar Panels* The solar panels that can fold up into their own compartments (SP-W/L) are never a better choice than their uncovered counterparts (OX-4W/L). The solution to this is to make the OX-4 line not retractable. In space this is not a problem, but if you want to reuse your solar panels after going through an atmosphere, the SP-W/L panels now have a use. Solar Panel Power* Compared to real-life solar panels are incredibly OP. With a single OX-STAT you're generally set electricity-wise wherever you are in the solar system. In real-life solar power reduces much more drastically with distance (inverse square law). The powerCurve I made for one of my mods approximates the inverse-square law and simulates the real-life consequences quite well. RTGs become more efficient around Jool's orbit (aka Jupiter) and are reduced to almost nothing once you get out to Eeloo (Pluto). This results in two interesting changes to solar panel use in KSP: RTGs are suddenly useful if you go to Jool or Eeloo where they can compete with solar panels and if you go beyond Kerbin you have to think more about which or how many solar panels you have to put on. Both offer much more interesting gameplay than the current situation offers. Shielded Docking Port* Has the same drag as the normal docking port (0.25). If it was the same as other aerodynamic nosecone (0.1) it might be actually be a non-aesthetic choice to place it on the top of your spacecraft. HubMax and Micronode* They're not useless but would be more user-friendly if they have stack symmetry enabled. That would all you to use symmetry on the horizontal nodes (handy when adding a symmetrical number of docking ports or something), while still allowing individual placement at each node. RoveMax Model 1 The RoveMax is heavier, more power-hungry, slower and all-around worse than the Ruggedized Wheel in every way. My proposal would be to make the RoveMax the lighter, slower, power-conservative and more easily breakable of the two, while the Ruggedized Wheel would be the heavier, faster, more power-hungry and sturdier of the two. That should give both their own niches. Hydraulic Manifold According to various threads it's one of the more underused parts in KSP, as its decoupling force doesn't scale with its mass. If it's mass would was reduced (from 0.4 to for example 0.045 or 0.05) it'd be more competitive with the smallest decoupler.

The NASA pack can't stand on its own. KW or B9 can do so to a far greater degree, as they have a larger range of engine types and sizes. Stock and the NASA stuff need to be used together, which means that they can be compared.

1. There will no doubt be some update that will break saves (like one that redos planet surfaces like when they added those procedural craters to the Mun). Then they can add something like this. 2. A new external model allows for a new IVA. The current design of the Mk1-2 is horrible for an IVA as you can see nothing out of the windows. 3. Above the crew, as it was for the Apollo capsule. 4. Why couldn't a new Mk1-2 pod design also be an Apollo style analog?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/69907-0-23-Distant-Object-Enhancement-v1-3-Planets-satellites-in-the-night-sky%21-%283-3%29 This mod increases the visual distance (not physical) to 750km. - - - Updated - - - http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/69907-0-23-Distant-Object-Enhancement-v1-3-Planets-satellites-in-the-night-sky%21-%283-3%29 This mod increases the visual distance (not physical) to 750km, so it's definitely possible.

I suggested something similar before and made a mockup of it. I made it pixely because a blurred planet feels much more like it's a bug and the planet's texture is rendered at a low resolution. This looks strange enough that newbies might not immediately go to the forum and say 'why are all my planets so blurry?'

Cool idea!

The Raw Minerals would need another part to convert it to for example LiquidFuel+Oxidizer or Monopropellant. For simplicity's sake it might be easier to have this part also be the tank that stores the Raw Minerals resource. Also Raw Materials is a more accurate name for what you'll get from the asteroid, as it encompasses ice, rock, ores, etc. Minerals refers to a subset of materials you can get from asteroids.

You sure about that Mainsail claim. According the wiki the Mainsail actually only became more powerful after the 0.17 update.

There are four frozen orbits around the Moon, in which a spacecraft can stay indefinitely. One Apollo subsatellite was accidentally put close to such an orbit and stayed there for at least three years (after that they terminated tracking). Another subsatellite was not so lucky and crashed into the Moon after only a month. So Lagrange points and the surface aren't the only option.

Thrust-wise only the LFB needs to be nerfed in my book. It's the only part that completely outclasses another (the Mainsail). It's possible to have one of the parts still give a niche use while the other is used for everything else. That's a more interesting solution than leaving it as it is only now, with the LFB being better for every situation. Isp-wise I'd love it if we could have some consistency. In the real-world different types of engines (first stage engines, upper stage engines, vacuum engines) have different ranges of Isp. In KSP first stage engines sometimes have Isp ranges of upper stage engines, second stage engines those of first stage engines and every other combination.

Will the next version also contain the 1-man Landing Pod IVA that Denny has made available in his own version of his part of the mod?

I agree that the Space Shuttle is NASA's past and if they would want to cooperate with Squad again, it'd be to highlight the things they'd be doing now. Personally I'd be most interested in something that enhances something that even mods can't do well. One thing that comes to mind is robotic arms. ESA is launching the European Robotic Arm in 2015. Canada has the Canadarm 2 which it might want to brag about once more. The robotic arms in KSP look the part, but are way too wobbly and can't for example seamlessly attach to another point and 'walk' across a station. Just like mods added asteroids and grappling hooks and the ARM patch improved on that, the ARM 2 patch (see what I did there?) would also improve a very important system that mods simply can't get completely right.

Why not? We have a tech tree and we have a career. We have the whole range of engines now. Finally there's the ability to start balancing everything out.

Generally don't care about my saves, so I'll happily start over. Will be using less mods now.

I think the adjustment (buffing or debuffing) should be paired with a rethinking of each engine's role. A lot of engine stats still reflect a time when the respective engines took on roles now taken over by other engines, etc. The T30 for example is severely hampered in its usefulness by its lack of gimbal, simply because the lack of gimbal was a big challenge at a time when you only had three engines. Now the challenges lie elsewhere and the stats need to be geared towards them. Ideally each size would have an engine that acted as a First Stage Engine, Second Stage Engine, Upper Stage/Vacuum Engine, etc.

I'd say I lost as much posts as I have now. Also a few of my mod's threads. That was a weird period, without zero information.

I imagine the way mods handle planets is far more memory intensive than the way Squad can do it. No reasons to do wor*arounds due to direct access to the game's source.