Shania_L

The media loves a disaster, they forgot how to do praise many years ago.

Hi, I have installed your 0.2.0 version, I have MM 2.6.17 I have managed to upscale my system to 6.4 times and it is working beautifully, however with this latest version you say I can now alter the PQS values independently of planet scale? How do I do this? There is no category in the settings file that I can see, ideally Id like to have my planets at 6.4 and maybe 3.2 for the mountain heights? 30km high mountains are a bit much, I could however live with 15km Also, whilst searching through the files, I noticed two of the files in config/redimension are .txt rather than .cfg, is that intentional?

Hey nice career so far! Its always nice to see another different way to do things, one of the reasons I love this forum section. Quick Q, though, Bobs rescue mission to Minmus, you sent him in a 2 man 1.25m capsule? is that from a mod, if so which one?

Day 286, KSC Day 287, KSC Later that same day, KSC Day 288, Mun Verity VII, recently renamed Verity VII-Mu due to an -Mi sister craft being put into production, enters Mun SOI. 80m/sec burn to increase orbital inclination to 23degrees and lower Pe to 17km. Day 289, Mun Day 289, KSC

I do a 2,500m/sec escape burn from Kerbin (which is more than enough for escape velocity) and aim the escape angle to get an intercept. 150km LKO to a 25km Minmus intercept in 8-9 days, If I want to go for one of those "efficient" transfers it takes more like 15 days. Capture burn is just around 1100m/sec somewhere IIRC and that captures to a low 20ish km orbit. So yeah, I do quite aggressive transits even for probe vessels, just call me impatient More is coming, I have been spending time (again) trying to get something working in a more up-to-date KSP version, but alas no beans as of yet. I do have a very pretty 1.0.5 install with a very similar mod setup (running under 3Gb RAM) my problem is pulling my progress across. One of the hefty problems I have is that I am running a re-pricing mod that makes fuels and tanks more expensive ... it has renamed all my procedural tanks and this particular mod is no longer supported in 1.0.5. Practically every vessel I have contains one, if not more procedural tanks, so I'm looking at having to manually edit every single vessel in existence. Then ofcourse there is the entire career structure, science I have already collected, the redesigns to the tech tree since 0.90, bleugh, I may be staying in 0.90 until 1.1.

I suppose this would be a question to both Jodo42 and/or Sigma88, would this mod completely replace 64k? or is it to be used in addition to? I am looking into ways to simplify my 64k install and get it working in the latest KSP versions with OPM and a bunch of realism mods and Dimensions seems like it could really help out with that.

Wow, colour me impressed. Are there any mods you haven't got?

I'll assume that for the current KSP version it is the same as any previous versions, once you have installed RealFuels (plus any hard requirements) and chosen a pack of engine configs then it just works .. For me that was RealFuels, and the Stockalike engine configs, with procedural tanks as an optional (although very useful) extra. All your fuel tanks start empty, you place an engine underneath and configure that how you want, then you just right click the empty fuel tank and you get the option to fill it with the correct mix of the correct fuel.

But that is the great thing about zombies, they never quite get when its all over, necro is second nature to them!!

Machine like in some aspects certainly, the science must go on! But efficiency? have you seen my moon missions? Perhaps I'll settle for psychotic machine ... there is no use crying over every mistake. Day 275, Low Kerbin Orbit Day 283, High Kerbin Orbit Day 284, Low Kerbin Orbit Day 285, KSC

Anime, about a Japanese space program whos astronauts are teenage girls ofcourse. For their size and weight benefits, nothing to do with skin-tight spacesuits at all!

I'd get this just for visualisation of the orbit I'll get off a single burn. Its great and all knowing where the 'cheap' burns and planet transfers occur, but I'd just like to see the route I'll be taking

Cliffhanger yes, but I saw a smirk from Valentina, so I think its not a 'fatal' cliffhanger just a funny one as to where they will be landing. As someone who has recently watched Rocket Girls, I rekon I have a decent idea where this is going

I am running a quite heavily modded career game and I would like to transfer into the latest version of KSP without losing my progress, is this possible? I am currently running in 0.90 with 32 active flights (I am not concerned about the debris or asteroids that also fill up the persistence file). I have got myself a 1.0.5 install with the same mod setup, I had to fudge about getting part names to line up a little due to mods changing, but I'm pretty sure I got that sorted. I have tried simply transferring the persistence file into a new game created in 1.0.5 and although the vessels do show up in the tracking screen, I cannot select them or start to fly them. Also, are there any hints people have about dealing with long persistence files? selecting individual craft can be quite a chore of scrolling and hoping not to miss the beginning or end of the section, is there a way I can make pulling individual craft out easier?

Nobody is dead 'till you bury the corpse ... even then horror movies happen.

Was hurting for Funds, still hurting for Funds, the last R&D upgrade costs something like 6.3Million, I have 2.5 currently. So I still have a lot of saving to do. Nelsy is still falling from Minmus, its a 15 day fall, So I had time for a few missions in the meantime He is not lost in space, I am still determined to save him after all he is carrying a lot of science !!

Day 271, KSC Also on this day, 4 KCT upgrade points have been bought with 120 science, (8+16+32+64) these were spent on the research category, 2sci earned per 86,400 build points. This works out at 2 sci per 150 tonnes of construction, a fully loaded HoundDog III tops out at about 148 tonnes, so thats quite a convenient marker, 2 sci gained per HDIII built. Day 272-273, Minmus Day 274, KSC

I run pretty exclusivity career mode, my published and private games, so Ill wade in a little here. I'll agree with you that early game mass and part counts are the restrictions, and rightly so I wouldnt (even if I could) want my second flight to go to the Mun. Once you have unlocked the medium pad/VAB then they effectively cease to be a concern, even on my 64k scale game I am quite happily sending manned missions to Mun/Minmus on the medium level. However, where I disagree with you is funds, funds are a massive bottleneck for me, in pretty much every game I have to weigh the benefits of launching a fun mission versus a profitable mission. I am currently up against a wall of trying to save to upgrade my R&D to the final level, and it is taking me ages. More granularity in building upgrades would be welcomed, so long as it goes towards splitting the progression down into more, smaller, cheaper upgrades rather than the 2 big jumps currently. Or perhaps requireing additional checks to be passed, any nuclear or advanced tech requiring the top level VAB to handle, tying certain techs to specific upgrades. all possibilities.

Hmm, I'll give that a try, this page certainly loads faster the second time! Old forum still loaded contents of spoilers even when collapsed, seems this one actually waits till you open them Looks like I need to find myself a picture, all the cool kids got themselves shiny avatars now ... what to use though?

Fascinating concept possibly, but sadly treading far too close to the law regarding religious content in messages for my liking. I'm not looking for a locked thread or a ban!! =========================================*Imagine there is a separating line here*======================================== Day 267, Minmus Day 268, Minmus Day 269, Low and getting lower by the second Kerbin Orbit Day 269, Elsewhere in LKO at the same time. Day 270, LKO Day 271, Somewhere in the desert east of KSC ====================================*Imagine separating line here*==================================================== What with forum updates and whatnot its been quite a wait since my last post, hope this tides you all over !! I know you all want to see if Nelsy survives and so do I honestly! but he has a 15 day fall from Minmus ahead of him and I have other missions in progress which will be reported as they happen. Maybe its just me not using it right, but I havent got used to this new forum yet ... first day though so ill give it a chance, just annoying that I cant direct post links and for some reason my left/right cursors are disabled in the text but up/down are not. (they work in other windows, even to scroll the page, but not to move the cursor! And the dividing lines! how do I do dividing lines!

I would like to subscribe to this issue, especially in the mission report sub-forum where consecutive posts can contain a large number of embedded images it can take one whole hell of a long time to load. The new forum seems to have a higher post per page setting than the previous, so being able to select this ourselves or even a return to a similar number would be appreciated. Also, yes I am one of these people with a high image count thread to maintain

Got there in the end, but boy did it take a long time to load them all. Well all except your 17th Nov post anyway that one is still showing the code line rather than youtube vid (garrisons youtube link is displayed) Pictures came out ok, but unless we reduce quality/number of posts per page then this isnt really going to work This forum update is displaying more posts per page, so that would account for a decent chunk of extra loading time.

Ok, I think I have just about burned my eyes out with so many different CPU numbers ... but I rekon Im getting a better idea of where I am. Because I am not going to be running particularly multi-core supporting games, I'm looking at Intels primarily, but I'm sticking to a similar price as the [URL="http://www.ebuyer.com/503899-amd-fx-6350-3-9ghz-socket-am3-8mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-processor-fd6350frhkbox"]AMD FX-6350[/URL], so around £100. This brings me to the I3 range, I know your recommendation was an I5, but I'll get to that :). The ones I am considering are the [URL="http://www.ebuyer.com/706948-intel-core-i3-4170-3-70ghz-socket-1150-3mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-processor-bx80646i34170"]I3-4170 (£91)[/URL] the [URL="http://www.ebuyer.com/629962-intel-core-i3-4360-3-7ghz-socket-1150-4mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-bx80646i34360"]I3-4360 (£118)[/URL] and the I3-6300 (£116 but this one doesnt seem to be reliably available). As for an I5, I can only realistically look at one of those if retaining my Radeon 7870 is not an issue, the [URL="http://www.ebuyer.com/629960-intel-core-i5-4690-3-50ghz-socket-1150-6mb-l3-cache-retail-boxed-bx80646i54690"]I5-4690 (£174)[/URL] is the one you recommended .. the K variant is simply unlocked for overclocking yes? if not then it is an extra £6. I will not be overclocking. With my current CPU being AM3 chipset, any upgrade Intel or AMD is going to require a motherboard upgrade also, AM3+/1150/1151 will cost about the same the only difference will be I think the 1151(Skylake, for the I3-6300) will require new DDR4 RAM? (an extra £40) I currently have 4x 2GB DDR3 1333MHz sticks. So! finally opinions on this choice? The I5-4690 (£174) [URL="http://www.ebuyer.com/643025-asus-b85-pro-gamer-socket-1150-vga-dvi-hdmi-8-channel-audio-atx-b85-pro-gamer"]Asus B85 1150[/URL] Motherboard (£84) [URL="http://www.ebuyer.com/584148-coolermaster-gm-series-550w-semi-modular-80-bronze-power-supply-rs550-amaab1-uk"]CoolerMaster 550W[/URL] PSU (£57) - The actual reason for upgrade ... the grinding of my current 500W CoolerMaster is getting annoying .. but it has lasted nearly 7 years. This would mean I keep the Radeon 7870, and the 4x2GB DDR3 RAM as well as HDDs and all the external stuff.

Not to poke all the Musk fanbois too much, but this just looks like a media friendly soundbyte a few days after a BlueOrigin success. Just a little "Hey remember us?" for SpaceX to stay current in a very short-term memory world. Sure if you take all the payload off, I'm sure a whole range of different rockets could be SSTO, there is no reason to do such a thing though.

That just makes no sense to me at all!! Everything I have looked at agrees with what you say, it seems the performance increase is in hidden details that dont get displayed making it practically impossible to see why the I5 is faster! Is there any benefit to having the AMD CPU with the AMD (ATi/Radeon) graphics? or will my HD 7870 play nicely with an Intel chip? I am a total fish out of water when it comes to Intel, I have been with AMD since my first Athlon 15+ years ago. Changing chipset would require a replaced motherboard, so what do I look for with them? or is that all in hidden stats too?