Temeter

Yeah, I somehow missed that 'hold alt' thing. That's a cool feature. I'd love to see that feature work in IVA. Could do quite a bit to improve your situational awareness.

Maybe i'm missing something here... but isn't that exactly the same thing you could always do with the mouse wheel?

Wat is dis. I've played this mod for quite a bit and suddenly there is a hidden options menu? Well, anyway thanks!

Jep, that's what i ment: It's not only the buttons not working, but the button test doesn't work too. Same result for another controller.

Nah, thanks to your for developing this fun mod!

So, this time i'll try post in the right thread: Is there some way to bind firing guns to an action group? Using a controller and it's just impractical to reach for the mouse just to fire static guns. The weapon manager shortcut only seems to work for missiles.

Or better, surprise attack with advantage, meaning the enemies are just starting their jet and you'll get a chance to kill them during liftoff. Always a fun mean thing to do in IL2 Sturmovik.

Yeah, pretty sure it's hardcoded. I'm just stupid and posted that into the wrong thread, that was supposed to got into the BDArmory thread. xD Thanks, that does indeed sounds great! Let nobody say momentary stupidity isn't good for anything. edit: Just tried a new 102 install to make sure: The custom action group shortcuts (set to joystick in KSP's options menu) work in vanilla, but not with Action Groups extended. Also in the editor the editor extensions do not seem to detect my controller at all (wired 360 pad). Only one game-controller is active and preferences are set.

Is there some way to bind firing guns to an action group? Using a controller and it's just impractical to reach for the mouse just to fire static guns. The weapon manager shortcut only works for missiles. Btw, independent of this mod: Does someone else have the issue of custom action groups (0-10) not working on controller? Had to bind functions to stuff like Stage or RCS.

I would absolutely love Air to Air! You could do things like attacking a bunch of fighter craft, or maybe a bigger-bomber style craft with some aa-guns on it and escort, maybe a cloud of crafts and you only need to kill a VIP, maybe combined ground/air attack. No clue about how complicated the coding is, but it should work in the game mechanics.

Nah, the vaccum performance, it's 450 for the tunguska vs 410 for the volcano. The latter is actually better in atmosphere. Personally, after toying some more around, I still find the tunguska lackluster, too. It's just not strong enough as an upper stage engine, and the new atmo really rewards high t/w ratios, which makes the skipper even better. It only has a bit of a place in interplanetary travel where it's actually good in very small range of ~3k dv with 0.5+t/w, but it get's otherwise outclassed by more weight efficient lfo engines (or volcanos) and utterly destroyed by nukes (which are ofc still more expensive). And all planets further than duna require at least 4k dv to allow for a return.

That mod saved me a lot of work.^^'

I'm not really convinced by feels. If you invest an unlimited amount of time into fulfilling contracts, then you get an unlimited amount of money. Does that feel exploity too? Seriously, a million isn't actually much money considering how much time you must have put into executing the contracts, not to mention collecting them, since quite a few actually have a clause that the craft needs to be launched after the contract is accepted. Could have earned a lot more in that time. Comepleting so many missions in a single flight is an achievement. I'm not seeing why the game shouldn't reward you for the effort?

I had the same issue with the BDArmory ai pilot module. Also YAY thanks for updating the mod. Using normal vertical landing gear can be kind of a pain with smaller planes.

Oh come on, save us that 'like they should'. The same mindset can be used to say 'orbital speed should be around 7800m/s and spaceplane reentry needs to take 6 hours because realism'. Atm those turboramjets are the only supersonic engine in the game and they get barely anywhere because of the high fuel consumption. And said fuel consumption 1st hardly even matters for the weight of a spaceplane and 2nd cripples every other 'long range' plane you took out to do stuff on Kerbin. Then 3rd Rapiers come around the corner, they are a bit faster and, since you'll need max thrust at the highest speed, make trj's kind of useless. Maybe it would be different if we had some intermediate engines (note that rapiers still would replace them), but we don't. In my eyes this is a part where realism resulted in a net loss, there is no comfortable way to go explore Kerbin anymore.

I usually take science, but it seemed to be bugged. Removed money but didn't actually give me science points in many cases. So I reloaded and just ignored contracts.

Btw, funny side-note: I think we can take this thread as proof that Squad sometimes indeed knows better what the community wants than the community does.

I would bet that it's connecting to the symmetry bugs. You know, the weird stuff that happens if you connect a part with multiple symmetry, which has other parts connected to it including struts. Apparently breaks hirarchy or so and causes nullreferenceexceptions. Cause of the greyed out ghosts parts you can't remove from a craft, or duplicated parts, or VAB buttons not working anymore, or a million other things this game is plagued since an eternity. 100% reproducable and very, very old. Made a thread in the support forum, but nobody answered. :/

Something similar happened to my first nuclear mothership. So I was in space after the ascent, preparing for my final orbital burn, turned the camera... And found my launch clamps following in formation around 200m behind my ship. Creepy things.

The vertical ascent is very inefficient in terms your of flight path, tho. Transforming the ascent into the shallower trajectory is hard at high speeds and can cause a lot of drag losses. Low speeds on the other hand cause less ISP and more gravity losses.

Recently did an ascent with 3290 dv, and that was purely by accident. One thing to note was the low trajectory and a relatively strong 2nd stage (rocket was 2 stage + booster) with 1.55 t/w.

Buffed between 1.0 and 1.0.1. They had like 153 thrust. Rockets are still a lot smaller than in 0.9, the nerf wasn't that hard.

Actually, planetary tranfer vehicles are stil cheaper and easier than 0.9. See, you have 400dv less in Space, but your lander needed 1000dv less to bring said ship into space. Otherwise nuclear engines were always the prime choice for long range missions. On the other hand, and as someone else said, we really could do with an engine in the 450 to 600isp range to bring some more flavor into the game.

You could go for a claw, although i'm not sure how stable that is. I wonder what unlocking their joint would do... *goes away to test stuff*

That sounds amazing, I have to watch out for those contracts.