PDCWolf

Moon and "Natural Satellite" are synonyms. We call it Luna too. Also, both "Luna" and "Satelite Natural" (Natural Satellite) are synonyms in spanish too.

I voted the second one. I also use "I land on the moon", it's a moon after all so it is technically correct.

It's not a single part's fault though, reactions can't happen without actions.

Resources was "not fun", I don't see how reentry heat would be fun under the same eyes. My opinion? It should be there, like permadeath, like structural failures (Not talking about struts and wobbling), like weaker "magic torque", like relays, like fairings, etc. Those are a vital part to spaceflight and are the shapers of our IRL space vehicles, rockets look like rockets because of those factors and some more (Yes, there's permadeath in real life as far as everyone knows). It would be crazy not to include them in a game related to space.

I'm all in for making the magnetism toggeable. I personally don't need it and it ruins my beautiful approaches by pulling the crafts together at 1m/s. Pods' inside-cameras COULD use a bit of re-positioning so that looking outside is easier. Lights should be made smaller, they are stupidly huge. Maybe making a fixed but rotable version could help a lot too.

I think you guys are too used to Skunky. Guess what, he's not here anymore. I want to believe discussing mechjeb is no longer taboo as long as we keep things civil. A million times, one more doesn't hurt. I think mechjeb is too powerful a tool, it just cuts an important part of a spaceflight game, which is the spaceflight part. You are obviously free to use it the way you want, as much as you want, but if you want my opinion (Why the thread is here), don't use the autopilot functions until you've done everything there's to do in the game by yourself. Otherwise not only are you killing a part of the game that you'll never discover, but you are also ruining the experience SQUAD wants to transmit with the base game.

Not sure, I know the problem is on one those by seeing how the computer fails. Problem is power supply was still under warranty so I had to take my pc to a local technician (which I don't trust) because the problem could be a faulty power supply. Somehow it's taking him more than a month to say "Hey, the problem is not the power supply" Is there a way to use those pods without having to download the entire mod? I -think- I have a solution. Gimbals would never work since the engines are above the CoM and KSP has no idea how vectoring should work when that happens.

Really sorry everyone, my rig died 27/12/13 (What a christmas present) and its still on hold. For now I'm stuck on my notebook and it barely runs KSP. As soon as I get my rig back (might end up fixing it myself), I will continue with the parts. As I said, I'm really sorry for this, but it escapes my control.

If somebody didn't expect this to happen like CAREER MODE, or SCIENCE!, or MULTIPLAYER!, really, they are missing a few candies on their jar. Called it, skyrim style "infinite quests" contracts. Exactly what I get for expecting more. Will keep some hope for this one. Kind of a contradicting statement. I really want to see how "asteroids not on tracks" work. So instead of asteroids we get loner rocks. I hope at least there's a lot of them.

And that creates a big problem, a minecraft 2 of sorts. So yeah, if you want it to work, make it an in-game thing, non-ignorable.

Not really agreeing or disagreeing with you, but I think "living on" is not a good way to judge a game's progress (neither is sales for me). I mean, look at minecraft, that thing lives on and has a lot of sales, now go and ask to the people that played when the game was in "indev" and got promises from notch personally. "black and white view of the community" yeah, the one I talked about on the "what's the community to squad" thread, right? that's totally black and white. Unpleasant manner? Sure, I can take that one, what I can't understand is how a few samples of sarcasm can make people so crazy as to really skip through an entire post just because of a few words. About being called troll, I don't really care.

You are not the only one. That's for sure. Now sit back and enjoy being called a troll. So here’s the list of things that I find highly questionable and, actually, wrong: "Solves part of the puzzle" said harvester, while telling everybody that he wanted something for people to get into orbiter knowing something when he started this project. Now he wants some kind of trial and error simulator it seems. Don't worry, fecal matter will probably hit the fan as soon as kEdu comes out and it has this kind of stuff. Not really, the ones that don't care are mostly the people doing SOKERBAL XD jokes. Even a dev said they hurt the game, but yeah, money first I guess. Reentry heat was mentioned multiple times, There's no reason for it not to be implemented until now except for the constant focus changes. I began to believe it will never come because "it won't be fun", resources reference totally intended. Also, reentry heat makes returning stuff back to Kerbal even more rewarding. And risks of losing Kerbals vs probe gives you even more choice here. But I’ll talk about probes a bit later. The tech tree deserves a book for itself to voice all the stuff wrong with it, a long one at that. Back-ass-ward logic, meant to be a tutorial but it teaches nothing, it just limits the parts. Manned flight first ("HEY, LET'S PRESENT THE TRIO TO THE NEW PLAYERS FIRST SO THAT THEY CAN KILL THEM FASTER"). "career is in development" is the common excuse for all this, but yeah, no solution or even a "yes, we know" has been given from the dev side. They can't give a road map if they are changing it as soon as a new money grabber comes at hand (Multiplayer, EDU, "Scope complete", whatever comes next). This is a problem with the community, and it happens on every moddable game. It's pretty much like saying "Yeah, we know the game is cr*p, here's a mod, play with it or shut up". Shows the conformism from the community, which also happens on every indie game for some reason. Me? I agree with this, even if your reasons differ from mine. The rest of the forums probably think you are a troll.

So, I took the original rocket powered VTOL and improved over it's design while keeping its original things like the droptanks at the sides and the ejectable pod. When I say improved, I mean it. Pros: •Really easy to fly. •Doesn't rely on magic torque (Although you can just keep it enabled). •Unique fuel flow design allows for high adaptability, the center engines shut down when the center tanks run out, this means more less fuel being consumed. •Flight time: Enough to get bored, longer than the original that's for sure. •It actually looks kinda good. •Runs on my toaster. •Doesn't rely on other cheaty techniques such as hardcore clipping or hidden wings. •I kept the headlights. Cons: •Relies on semi-cheaty engines (48-7S) •When center tanks run off, craft tends to go nose down a bit (Game error, both engines run out of fuel at the same time, and the craft is flyable after that indicating no CG shifting). •At take-off time, the TWR is a bit low, no rocketing to the sky. •It has a totally non-original name. Pictures: Craft: http://www./view/64reviyb9vuiabr/Rocket-power_VTOL_2.craft

I was talking about calculations on Unity's side, unity is not ready for such heavy processing. Crafts' orbits could remain railed, after all your craft is not going to exert a force on anything. N-body can be implemented in a separate way from complex gravitational forces (orbital decay, gravity gradient torque, etc), also remember orbiter is pure n-body and it handles 1.000.000x timewarp while maintaining possibility of control (even if it's unusable). Also, gravity gradient torque is not bad at all, the most useful thing you can use it for is to make a long probe and have it self-orient vertically pointing to Kerbin or whatever you are orbiting. They are not implemented for gameplay reasons probably, you know, imagine in 2036 the devs coming and being like "Hey guys, we showed you tidal forces, complex forces and we got up to the point to playtest them and they weren't fun". btw, gravity bumps are small (or not) differences in gravity. For example, the Moon basins exert more pull on an orbiting object than the rest of the surface.

If you read my second post you will see I corrected myself.

Care to explain how a non-playercentric model that would allow for native implementation of dynamic systems (Barycenter objects on a coherent manner for starters) and more gameplay options could deteriorate the gameplay? As long as you keep complex forces away, the game would stay the same except for a few fixes as to keep the planets the way the are (Otherwise vall would fly off and become a loner followed by bop as soon as the game starts). -It could potentially solve it (Depending on the engine), given it's a bug in how unity stores the floating points and unity not being able to manage a space bigger than 2.5km² and requiring work-arounds like what scaledspace is. -One day -It was tested by modders and the engine/code can't handle axial tilt without dying. Let's say its a 50/50 between the actual engine and gameplay reasons. -Complex forces refer to gravity bumps, gravitational gradient torque, tidal forces, etc. Unity would pretty much commit seppuku with the ammount of calculations required for that which are all floating point and CPU driven. -n-body is not an overcomplication, unity just can't handle it thanks to what I mentioned in the first point. -Optimization has a limit on unity and on every off-the-shelf engine. -Unity doesn't have the potential to implement volumetric effects and/or 3d-particle effects. -The workarounds discovered until now (like KJR) have their failures, no method is able to fully circumvent the bug except for welding which is just turning multiple parts into one eliminating any joints present.

Damage effects[citation needed] Damage effects[citation needed] [citation needed] [citation needed] Wish I could resize it to the point it pixelates into an unreadable mess. All in all, quoting the planned features page is pretty much useless.

Not on the forums, not on reddit, you guess where it is. Exactly, they should lose Isp when throttling down due to the combustion chamber losing pressure, not by a big number but there should be some loss. KSP doesn't simulate this and reducing the throttle to a more efficient setting while getting out of the atmosphere can give us some benefits, well, ACTUALLY, we are keeping the rocket slower than terminal velocity while maintaining it's Isp, so it's not a benefit gained, but rather a non-existent penalty.

Kerbal Space Program doesn't simulate chamber pressure, so burning at lower throttle doesn't generate a decrease in efficiency. What this means is that if you have a stupidly high (and inefficient) TWR, throttling back will give you more deltaV. This was proved when people started to use throttle management and they were able to reach orbit with 4200m/s deltaV, contrary to the supposedly 4450m/s minimum mechjeb set.

Major limitations include floating point calculation, CPU only physics, no axial tilt for planets, no realtime space, no realtime lighting, no complex forces, no n-body, no optimization, no good particle effects, buggy joints, etc. Also, I think the op was making a supposition, not suggesting to change engines.

Taking the current events and their turns, I don't think we'll have reentry heat, because it won't be fun.

It would be a loud-explosion-tryhard-lensflare-scripted hardcore rocket action game. Frostbite engine is the most buzzword filled engine ever, it's popular because of lies and non-existent features.

Not saying evidence points to random things, but rather to incomplete and half-implemented stuff.

We don't really know much, but if we take a look at how previous updates were (0.19 and ahead), we might get some half-implemented skyrim-like system with a random generator that goes like "get <satellite/probe/rover/manned flight> to <planet>/<orbit around kerbin>". I hope I'm wrong for the better and not for the worst.

A month without my main rig, I'm playing on my lap-warmer and it runs the game pretty well if I turn everything down. I managed to make a shuttle which I'm refining. For now it can take small cargo (2 tons max) to orbit but I'm working on that. It's full stock, the KER module is accessible and I can just get it off and upload it to the forums. Part-count without cargo is 138. Flying this thing is fun as hell, I want to believe it's too much for autopilots (unless you go full chicken mode and combine that automatic thrust management mod with mechjeb). It requires active throttle control on the skipper with the limiter, good timing, a complicated ascent path, etc. As I said, active throttle control on the skipper is a must. It's like that because the main orange tank also transfers fuel to the shuttle tank. Once the main tank is gone (Watch out for fuel-deprivation, as you'll start spinning as soon as it happens unless you are very careful) the thing flies great, it has a tendency to go nose-down when full powered because the CoG is a bit down compared to the thrust point. I'm sorry for the overall quality, as I said I'm playing on my notebook and I have to set everything to low, except for the textures.