little square dot

Haha... Erkle + ORDA... thems was the days.

The only difference is more effiecient dV use and fewer orbits before encounters, but the mechanics are exactly the same.

This is a really odd question considering the sandbox option. If you see the tech tree as a nuisance, which appears to be the case given that you're seeking hints on how to earn "massive" science on the forums, play sandbox.

They work, but some tweaks are definitely needed. I seem to remember them moving very slowly, and alterations to the torque settings in the .cfg didn't have any effect on the tracks. The only way to increase speed was to scale-up the parts. I found that the tiny tracks rescaled 2.5x are excellent, but I discarded the others because they were either going to be too huge or too slow... point being, the tracks don't quite work "perfectly", as the plugin could still use a bit of tweaking.

Do you really think the answer will be worth hearing?

Hey Stavinsky, unfortunately the "chainsaw" method is the only one available at the moment, assuming you mean that you removed the lights from the .cfg's altogether. Due to part module limitations we can only add one fully functioning light per part, so your options would be to either have one light that functions normally, or multiple untoggleable lights stuck on. Unfortunate point #2 is that the lighting in KSP is a touch wonky. Lights seem to become exponentially brighter with each subsequent light that is placed facing roughly the same direction. If you would like me to post a version of the docking port with just a single, fully functional light, I would be happy to do so. Btw, if you happen across a way to dim lights in your travels, let me know!

Sorry 'bout the slow reply dude... I didn't see your post until now. You have to set up action groups in the VAB/SPH for camera activation and zoom in/out functionality.

Good gravy... I need to give the Jool system more attention.

I like them all, but I voted for Minmus because it's small, low-G, easy to get to, there are plenty of flat surfaces for landing/base-building, very little dV required for the return trip to Kerbin, and it's far enough out there to feel like the trip is a bit of an adventure. It's also a fairly safe destination for kerbals, as regaining orbit is a breeze in the event of an aborted landing. I love Mun, but the novelty wore off somewhere around my ten gazillionth landing.

dude, ease off a bit. The thread title is simply "Let's Discuss"; it's definitely not "Let's Strictly Discuss Shapeway's KSP Products", and I don't see how a general discussion of KSP paraphernalia would be off-topic given the decidedly vague thread title. Several people mentioned that the Shapeways products are too expensive, and a few also stated that they would like to see plush versions. How is that off-topic? Non-moderate "moderating" that inhibits discussion is not good for forums.

Haha, and yet we'll do it again and again. Suckers for punishment I s'pose.

Best Sci-Fi 2013: Kerbal Space Program

About 200 hours, 10 cases of NOS, and a penchant for subjecting myself to horribly monotonous undertakings that somehow seem to be good ideas at the outset. =) A word of warning: staring at notepad for 12 hours straight will make you go loopy.

I just use Crew Manifest. It does what you've described and doesn't require additional entries in the part .cfgs. I don't know how vanguard works, but f you're determined to use it, check out the part.cfg's of pods that reference the plugin. It might be something as simple as adding an entry like this to the part .cfg: MODULE { name = vanguard } pm me if you need help getting it up and running.

I don't know man... I had my career lock up on me because a .craft file was corrupted somehow when I saved it. Of course the game doesn't tell you when this is the problem, rather it simply makes your saved games disappear while the debugger says "object instance not set to an instance of an object", or something to that effect.

Ha, sure... has anyone ever even heard of these awards?

? Please tell me that you weren't correcting "less" to "fewer", haha... The internet must be a very difficult place for you.

Ha! That's the basis for my welding company btw, to get the full ridiculousness you need to see which includes the absurdly non-segue-ing segue.

It's not so much a matter of cheating, 'cause it's mighty difficult to cheat in a single player game, rather it's eliminating the challenge. As someone said, it all comes down to whether you're a journey or destination person. Personally, I'm always on the wrong side of the fence. During the journey I want the destination, and after arriving at the destination I instantly seek the next journey. Ah, the human condition...

KSP received 75% of yesterday's votes.

Will do. That works. If the plugin is updated at some point I would suggest a new thread altogether, but in the meantime I s'pose there's no real need.

voted. I am unfamiliar with these awards... who would have selected the nominees?

He was exiting the atmosphere at 4km/s with 800m/s dV remaining. Retro-burning the rest of his fuel would not have helped. Manoeuvring to make use the Mun might have been possible, but at 4km/s following aerobraking, it'd be pretty tough to avoid escape.

JackGruff is right. You have two wildly different mods with different user bases. There may be a little bit of crossover, but it makes no sense to keep them together. Also, the "RBI Continuation" part of your title is easily missed by those who wouldn't touch the General Propulsion offerings with a 39.5ft pole. People tend to lose focus if the first few words in a title don't grab a hold of them. I missed it and skipped over your thread until my eye randomly caught the word "Tracks" as I was scanning for a different thread. I was working on sound for the RBI tracks when the creators up and vanished. I'm glad to see that the pack is still quasi-alive, however until there are concrete plans for the plugin I will probably keep the project on hold.

SirJodelstein, I'm loving this plugin man. One of the things that I most disliked about KSP was that I could spend hours upon hours exploring the moons and planets, however the next time I loaded up KSP I would have no idea which craters I had previously explored, and without taking notes I would have no idea how far I'd come on a particular day, what I had come across, etc. Now every time I begin a new excursion I start recording a new trail, and the visible progression and differentiation between trails motivates me to actually plan my excursions with a set goal in mind, which adds a level of immersion and keeps things interesting. Although it may just be a bunch of multi-coloured lines, it's nice to finally have something to show for my exploration efforts. =) One request/suggestion that I have is adding the option to lay the trails along the ground, regardless of what altitude the player may have been travelling at while recording the trail. When flying, or using the EVA pack to explore low-G environments, the collection of trails can begin to look quite messy from the ground when they're roller-coastering all over the place, both on land and in the sky. Such a feature could also be used to record a descent/landing trail which could then be laid on the terrain in a relatively subtle colour scheme for ground vehicles to seek-out and use as a bread-crumb trail of sorts with which to find the landing zone. This would allow for more interesting search and rescue/recovery operations in which the player could opt out of using the map and simply use the good ol'-fashioned ocular search method to find the trail and follow it to the lander. I don't even know if this is a practical suggestion, but that would be my 2 cents. Regardless, thanks for the cool mod.