PDCWolf

if we make case, anything above 1:1 is spamming. When contrasted to real life though, real engines have a combustion chamber that needs certain ammount of air, and adding more intakes doesn't necessarily make more air flow to the combustion chamber, on top of that, intakes need a logical, straight way to reach the combustion chamber which is not the case in KSP.

There's updatespam, where people just re-upload the same file and call it an update to reappear on the front page, then there's just a huge amount of .craft files to clear them all (This was said by a spaceport mod), and on top of that, tagspam. Spaceport 2 was coming and it was the supposed end to the problem, but since n3x1s was fired nobody knows what happened with it.

Joined around 0.13.3, I remember setting up a stream showing people how to -incorrectly but successfully- reach the Mun. Then I stopped playing and came back for the spaceplane update (didn't know it happened until I saw the hangar and started figuring out what it was all about). I set up a stream again, this time showing people how to fly remember a few watchers couldn't believe I was doing that stuff (Landing planes was kind of reserved for the elite back then) and also going (with the same incorrect but successful method) to Minmus. I stopped playing for a time and came back for 0.18 and then I joined the forums which collapsed exactly 3 days after I registered, I was like "Dude, I just discovered the place and now they are closing down?" and then realized it was a forum crash. So yeah, I've landed on my engines, then on my fins, then made rovers which consisted of a rocket toppled over with landing gear on its sides, I went to Eve when the average consensus was that getting there was impossible, and I saw the beauty and ugliness of early version's procedural terrain. Then on 0.21 I bough the game on steam and have clocked 350 hours since then (Could be more but my rig died 27/12/13 and it's still on boxes being repaired by a group of untrained monkeys that call themselves technicians). That was my little "You children have it easy now, back in my time we..." Great fun from the game, even if I dislike most of the choices taken from the dev side.

Probes will turn useful as soon as kerbals stop being expendable, that is when things like reputation, life support, budgets and permadeath are a full-working official thing. Once those features kick in, you won't be able to just send a Kerbal to unknown places because of the risk, the cost and other stuff, it'd also be a great idea to go full murrika and send Kerbals to a moon or planet and returning them safely just to kick reputation up. Until then probes will remain useless both in career and sandbox, except for roleplaying(or mod-playing) GPS/commsats.

Since it's never enough people explaining the same thing: Starting from a 75x75km, 868m/s are enough to take us there, but not to get us back to a reasonable aerocapture/aerobraking return. We have to tweak both the burn position and it's duration (or rather, the DeltaV used). Here's the planned maneuver with 873m/s. As you can see we get some really nice numbers. Obviously we are definitely not mechjeb, so executing the maneuver perfectly to the same numbers is impossible, but I got rather close this time, I got some really nice numbers on both sides, and we can fix the Kerbin periapsis later! Time for probe separation. Notice how I used a docking port as to diminish any perturbation made by ejection forces. Also, the probe has no engine, it's all RCS. Mun periapsis getting closer, here's where we burn prograde to make our kerbin periapsis lower. Burning prograde on a mun-retrograde orbit means we are burning retrograde on our general Kerbin orbit, that's why Kerbin periapsis decreases. I got it down to 35km, great for a 2-pass aerobrake (I like it this way because I get to regain kerbin orbit and from there I can decide where to land). Notice how much monopropellant I used on the resources tab, it was at 100 units

definitely should be called Kesos

Starting from a 75km circular orbit, the smallest possible amount of deltaV for a free return is 868m/s. To get a free return with an aero-capture back at Kerbin, you have to tweak both the position of your ejection burn and it's duration. Also remember most of the time mid-course maneuvers are required to achieve perfection, those maneuvers are done by adding a few m/s on the radial/antiradial vector with RCS, or you can do them at your mun periapsis via prograde/retrograde burns (or RCS, depending on how much deltaV do you need). Can't really show you anything right now because I just don't have media of that kind available.

I forgot a very important point on the arguments list, and it is that most people talk about spaceflight without knowing jack .... about it or it's evolution while justifying their use of mechjeb. That's generally what detonates a mechjeb talk thread. This was most obvious with our lovely but biased previous CM.

Main argument against this is that every mission needs a specific autopilot in real life, while mechjeb is just a global computer that "just works" everywhere unless you suck at making rockets, and that's why most people consider either progcom or kOS better options if you want "Realistic autopilot capabilities". On top of that, progcom and kOS -unless you download scripts from other users- limit to your own capabilities and it's still you playing the game and not a calculator. Everybody knows the rest of the arguments, so I'll just name them. •Leaving the spaceflight part of a spaceflight game to a computer and comparing it to downloading an aimbot for [flavor of the month shooter game] •Less rewarding everything •"If you think spaceflight is tedious then why do you play spaceflight games" •"If you don't care then why do you make threads to justify yourself" -this is kind of a "flammable tail" argument, meaning you do something as to not set your own tail on fire or let others do so. The inverted case is easier to understand: "Look at their opinions about mechjeb, better to make a thread so that I show I have a good reason to use it and I'm not just a cheater in their eyes" •"Those are not your achievements, mechjeb did them" -Mostly in response to "LOOK WHAT I DID" threads with obvious use of mechjeb. But yeah, you can do what you want, it is your game and nobody cares (or rather nobody will jump on your neck) as long as you don't go over the line like the last 2 points in the list. Otherwise, get ready for arguments. Me? I consider mechjeb a too powerful tool that kills the experience both on old and new players. It's something that should never be stock (And hopefully wont according to the devs). It goes against the vision of the game and kills half of the gameplay. I also agree with most of the arguments in the list.

Directly contradicted by a dev. In case you are wondering, YES, I love to quote that fragment. Also, I think there should be people submitting (or creating) myths in this thread too.

Prince Of Persia on MS-DOS when I was 2 years old (1995), some time later I rented it for my Sega Genesis. I still haven't fully completed it.

Atmospheric flight simulation is already there. There's "modular spacecraft building" planed too. The fact that KSP is pretty much stalled into simplistic things because of the subpar target audience, dev's lack of experience or just bad choices doesn't mean every game works the same.

The shuttle was a good idea (Idea as in "a reusable vehicle to get people and payloads to orbit" not as the final shuttle design) but they managed to put it in practice by lying about capabilities and making false promises, pretty much like you average indie dev.

Not sure if already posted but double clicking the mouse-wheel will reset the camera offset (not the zoom/orbit) when in flight. KSP doesn't simulate chamber pressure, that means you don't lose efficiency when throttling down so good throttle control can make you save loads of deltaV (This is exploiting/cheating for me but may be just what you need). With correct throttle control and good piloting you can get to Low Kerbin Orbit with only 4200m/s. And no, Mechjeb just lacks the amount of human thinking that's necessary for this to work. You don't need to clip the camera inside tanks to stich-strut them, just move the mouse carefully around their top, you'll see the strut disappearing between the tanks and then click, then just click the tank above and that's it. For replica builders: You don't need to use every tank you add. For realistic results/payload fractions/mechanics you can place tanks but reroute/disable them so that they are dead weight. This is even better now with tweakables, as you can just add empty tanks for height simulation. Always do the orbit insertion burn at the periapsis, because at that exact point you are no longer fighting gravity, you are just moving laterally. The most efficient TWR at lift-off is about 1.57. Launching at that TWR means you won't go past the terminal velocity unless you are ditching a lot of weight by staging causing your TWR to jump up.

There was a mention of NTRs no longer using oxidiser, but that's all I know about, And it was related to both tweakables and resources, although dependent only on the first one.

My bad for explaining myself wrong. The concept I'm trying to do is kind of advanced, I'll modify the op in a second. Should have pointed out that I'm aiming for near/possible tech practices and not for "right now" stuff. Let's say I can harvest individual minerals or proteins or whatever and synthesize them into edible food, would it be possible? I mean, not possible because if the tech exists or is invented then it is possible, but would it be useful and sustainable on the long term? what would be it scale for say 150 people? Would I need a huge processor/extractor/synthesizer for that?

What does GMO-Plankton means? Also, harvest-requiring resources (Algae) and/or greenhouses aren't allowed either. So yeah, I'm pretty much trying to see if it's possible to live from the water or any geological resource (Like the fumaroles I mentioned)

generate food on an underwater base? Some rules to follow: •Technology like synthesizers, extractors, and any other stuff that is "not magic" and that you can explain or imagine how it would work is allowed. (Say, I can't eat rocks, but maybe I can get some basic matter out of it that I can then transform into food). •No consumption of alive organisms (algae, plankton, fish, etc) unless they can be cultivated and end up being sustainable as resource. •No food shipping from the surface. So yeah, only ourselves, technology, water and the seabed. I though underwater fumaroles would create streams of "stuff" coming upwards and that you could capture and purify said smoke stream and then synthesize what you get into edible (Even if not tasty) food. Then I realized no "stuff" comes up with the smoke the fumaroles produce.

You are free to believe or not. Time will tell, for I speak no lies. My view is that for the tracker to be useful everybody should use it. Some people don't even know it exists in the first place. Views are views and again, time will tell. A large amount of the people who start out playing this game mainy does it for fun and the explosions and then later move on to make more serious ships and learning the physics behind it. If we take away this part then these people might not get to the point where they realize that space and the more serious simulator aspect of it is fun as well.

Would you put "ocean lag" in the tracker after squad mentioned it? Maybe you would if they said they fixed it and it is still there. Its pretty much like resources and anything pre-skunky-being-fired. No evidence exists anymore. You'll have to trust me on this one, like with resources and squad saying multiplayer was not coming which everyone but the fanboys can confirm. Everything that remains is nova's/bac9/any other ex-dev's word and user memories.

Nope, squad said it is a bug. Not a feature, not realistic, not intuitive, not a good mechanic, not a challenge, just a bug that must be dealt with.

Since the last demo we got this feature called "ocean lag" implemented. We also got "performance fixes" and "Better scene distribution to avoid reloading everything when you change the scene (like from vab to space center or space center to flight)". I used the quotation marks because you, a 0.23 user can see those "improvements" over a 0.18 user.

Too low TWR, too little torque to bend. By the time the twr is good (for normal rockets) you are not fighting any force. Well, given this is an abstraction it is correct to assume that 5 tanks together form a bigger one (I'm talking about internal tank structure) than just act like 5 different tanks. Wobble is still a problem and a bug, even if avoidable. Procedural everything kills the challenge in creating replicas, at least for me. Thank you for calling me an elitist just for liking a bit more challenge than you. But wobble is still there and it's going to show sooner or later. I get procedural everything, and wobble is still unsolved so the next guy is going to come on the forum and complain about it. Do you plan on telling everybody to use a mod to overcome a bug or is it better to have squad finally fix it? Even if there are workarounds (sacrificing the aesthetics) wobble is still a problem and is going to show up eventually.

My bad then.

Bullet physics wouldn't quite work for KSP, it would be great for calculations about penetrating stuff though. Hating anything? not really. I want to get the best possible outcome, even if I agreed to the post 0.18 EULA. I may sound aggressive though, sometimes deliberately, most of the time is just because I don't know a better way of wording something. This. The only limits are unity limits (Floating point calculations, Max physic-able space, etc). And following the game I've seen a lot of "unity limitations" being circumvented or simply proved fake thanks to the modding community and sometimes even the devs themselves. I also prefer a full improvement over a patch, but I doubt squad would put the work needed into that at this point. About mods, that's personal taste. I prefer strutting over mod-fixing because I like to share my designs (not on the forums, but directly to my friends) and they play mostly stock, so using mods would put a barrier on that. I also work hard to keep them away from mechjeb, at least until they can do everything in the game without it. Like our community manager said "It would stunt growth or something". My opinion on mechjeb (hate aside) would require a totally different thread and those always end on a flame-war and I'm always late.