Temeter

Yeah, it's like you just start the game, then, like a good gamer, minimize it and go surf some sites, and then you can't even read to the end before music starts playing! Very disappointed in Squad, all the old rituals aren't viable anymore... :/

SAS was goofy for a long time. Somewhere around the first big upgrade (~0.23) stability assist was reliable, but after some changes it can't even even hold a small capsule with SAS module steady when you add a single radial parachute.

SAS also causes planes to oscillate at physics timewarp again. 1.0 was actually stable. :/

The point of the change is that you shouldn't activate chutes as soon as possible, because they'd just burn up instantly during reentry.

KER seems to have some issue with D/V calculation, but drag isn't calculated anyway.

My launch profiles were still at 3400 d/v.^^'

Same issue here, still on 1.0.1.

Career is just a guideline for the gameplay anyway. Could have been an excting parts of it's own, but that would result in a completely different game. 90+% of gameplay is building and flying rockets, as it should be.

1.0 was compatible with 1.0.1, so...

Thanks for the update!

Yeah, indeed there are people have that much fun with KSP. Next to none of the small nitpicks actually damage KSP's core. It's an absolutely brillant game. One of the few games which can bring setting, gameplay and presentation into a perfect balance. The latter might be a bit lacking at times, but the former ones really play to the strenghts of a videogame. There are few other games that reach that level of harmony between it's concepts, where exchanging any part would inherently damage the product. Dark Souls would be another example. Awesome! Btw, in case you're not trusting that level journalism: The 7-10 scale is something which matters to well-advertised tripple a titles. If that guy plays KSP for years and gives it that rating, then it means somthing. Otherwise, if that doesn't mean much to you, the formerly mentioned 4Players is actually critical and excentric. Shot down Far Cry 3 for being to generic.

You misunderstand. The 909 is only better with little fuel tanks, it results in lighter ships, since the LVN is 9 times as heavy. Take a 18 ton tank and then compare both engines performance. Never go for fuel tanks lighter than the engines they are attached too, that will always result it terrible efficiency.

I wonder if they bring out multiplayer before updating to unity 5. Would be a huge delay, but I imagine porting an mp-system into another engine would be rather work intensive.

I like it. This is a rare case of properly added cockpit shake, because it 1) makes sense/visualizes actual forces, and 2) does only happen temporarily in specific circumstances.

Seems to work.

Tried it with 1.01, new update fixed it. A satellite with a antenna won't even go super sonic with 9+ TW, while a cone just removes 90% of that drag.

Chutes, Heat shields and fairings are fixed.

Guess you could then use a drills heat generation to power it. Otherwise I don't really see the purpose. Nuclear engines already have alternators and produce electricity (which is rarely needed thanks to solar panels). Might make sense as a emergency generator to keep the reaction wheels running during reentry, but that one is easily solved by a few light batteries.

Nuclear engines are heavier than the remainder of your ship together, a 3 ton engine compared to the pod+fuel tank being 1.4/1.9 ton combined. Their low thrust, high weight and insane efficiency makes them prominent interplanetary long range engines. You need to put them on larger tanks, though, and shouldn't go for a thrust to weight ratio higher than 0.5 (usually 0.3 is a good starting point). I recommend using the kerbal engineer mod, it will show you delta-v and T/W ratio during construction and flight, aside from adding some nice optional hud elements. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/18230-0-23-Kerbal-Engineer-Redux-v0-6-2-3

Looks funny, but the capsule came down with 2 digit speed and looks like it got 1+ ton of brakes. Single 0.1t chute would have done a better job.

There aren't any SSTOs in real live.

Can't be true, i've seen him dying. A lot of times.

Sounds like it's one of the attempts of squad to keep the game-mechanics, while derived from a realistic base, easy to understand and simple. The heating of a full part is much easier to keep track of and more static than some system of a certain spots/angle heating differently.

Btw, what's the big difference between using wings as radiators and using radiators as radiators? Heaving true parts might be nice, but it shouldn't change to much. Sounds somewhat like you just want an easy engine. Then why not modify the config or just use cheats? The LV-N is still magnitudes better than every other engine in the game, it was probably the engine which was hit the least by a nerfbat, since it's usage increased in complexity rather than loosing efficiency (aside from 0.5t). Even more so, the engines is, in comparision, actually an even stronger engine than it ever was. The (nvm the ion) 2nd most efficient engine the game is the poodle at 350 ISP, other than the KR2 with it's extreme thrust/weight ratio. Our nuke still runs at 800 ISP. If you want to talk about old ship-designs not working anymore, then the LV-N is the last engine you should worry about. If you want fast and secure burns, use conventional engines.

Awesome! Is the AI able to use fixed machine guns?