Tw1

Hi JumpsterG, I seem to have been having trouble with the converted save. A non converted version seems to load a little better. Will it still work if I load craft in 0.90, or will that remove info needed for the conversion? Here are some error reports if that's any use, the first two should be the ones where a converted save was loaded https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ht2olb1r8uw9e7y/AAA4AQhQF9Vxt4Oe5KqopUy8a?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/sh/pnvz42hf005iyb4/AACelr0qCAmCl3sOJuRWaFgfa?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8c8lplx1ofej7hg/AABYmt-RNYY21l_peghvNGrsa?dl=0

Re my problems from the other thread, moving where it was installed seems to have fixed it. It seems to be running smoothly. Though it did onec say this in the log:: [Warning]: File 'C:/Users/Thomas/Downloads/KerbalSpaceProgram/KSP 0.90/KSP_win/KSP_Data/../saves/OoECoM/KK.cfg' does not exist And this: [Log]: KK: KerbalKonstructs.updateCache could not determine playerPos. All hell now happens. I am getting some crashes when switching to space center, but that's still under investigation, and seems to happen even if KK is not there.

I've been to parts of the internet where people default to "them" unless they know, but this doesn't seem to have become the norm on the kerbal forum, people are used to most being male. I know there have been times when I've looked back through someone's profile to check before deciding which pronoun to use in a comment. Having something that suggests which gender you are is probably useful. I've noticed a few MtF people on this forum. I think it could be a point that argues interest in this sort of stuff is nurture rather than nature, but I make this anecdote with extreme caution. I have no data on people's life experience, very limited data on what proportion of kerbal forum girls are this, and I know from the fact that the girl kerbal debate was still a thing a few months back, that some of this forum don't react well around issues of gender. See? Squad, take note! (Except the part you should be adding is the female kerbal.)

That seems to have calmed things down, KSP is running a lot more happily now. Thought I'd updated my mods, apparently not. But I'm still not getting the icon working:

Hi. I seem to be getting nullreference errors which seem to be coming from this mod. Near the end of this copied output log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/oum74y4yiw4jj34/output_log%20-%20Copy.txt?dl=0 As this probably isn't good, would someone be able to offer some assistance? Edit: confirmed it is E.V.E. causing this.

I'd prefer it as an official mod, if it were to be available at all. Don't need code clogging up heavily modded installes. BTW, the only things you'll probably miss are infiniglide, and maybe some of the souposhpere effect, and laughing at it the dodgyness. Plenty of craziness is just as doable with NEAR.

Hi, I'm having some problems, they seem to be partially coming from kerbal constructs. I get a lot of this when I switch to any map view, also things during flight mode. I'm also seeing the KK icon in the VAB whited out. Here is an output log from the last time the game randomly closed, and a crash report. I hope this is useful. https://www.dropbox.com/s/pyiifwghwo75u45/output_log1.txt?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5k5crmqlo8r1d8s/AABFMvcA74giO9FGhxyEMrBaa?dl=0

It's a pity really, I know many nerdy/gamer girls IRL, but not so much on these forums. It's would be nice to have more balance. (Resists urge to rant about reasons why they should get cracking with those female kerbal models, and invite more in.) For the record, I am male or female.....Why is there no "yes" option in the poll?

Nothing, was attempting to get the mods I use for Oceans of Eve to run in 0.90, but stuff kept crashing. If symptoms persist I might need to get some assistance.

I actually would quite like this as long as the effects were fairly gentle. But, it probably should be a mod, or at least an advanced option, otherwise new players would have even more to learn before flying anything. I'd suggest adding something about how shape effects how a vessel will point when reentering the atmosphere. In my experience with NEAR and FAR, it's harder to design things with heat shields that will point the right way, but then, they reliably do once you get them right. This is the main thing I get out if KSP too. KSP has a combination of spaceship design, spaceflight, and the ability to explore another would as a little astronaut that no other game truly matches. To me, developing this aspect seems far more important than setting up gameplay elements like points to score and things to unlock. Those elements can be got from almost any other game.

Realisticness is pretty much the main thing that makes KSP stand out from many other space games. It's a chance to try your hand at facing the real issues of spaceship design and flight planning, and it will be the closest most of us get to experiencing a visit to another planet. That said, I think the real problem here is how the issue has been framed- as fun vs realism. A better way for us (and maybe the Devs) to view it would be to picture it not as fun vs realism, but as working out how detailed the realism should be to bring out the game's potential. I don't think many want to be assembling every valve and circuit within a ship, though someone somewhere had to design them for real spacecraft. We use patched conics rather than n-body physics for orbits. Even far doesn't model every last detail of real aerodynamics, and has reasons for doing so. It's just a case of how close to real life it has to go to make a good game. A few details have to be left out, a few details have to be changed to make sure it works well as a game. I also think it's important to note fun is subjective. My idea of fun is careful, deliberate missions with lots of things to explore and discover at the destination. Others might prefer racing through missions and rallying up large amounts of computer points. I think rather than focusing on an idea fun, it would be more worth linking about it in terms of experiences and opportunities.

I think I recall it being about 125, last time I did a test, (a propperish one, not a dodgy pop up one). The user below me has not posted yet!

I concur with this statement. Yes! Though I don't think Negative rep should be a common thing, (we want this place to stay friendly, right?) this is a thing that should exist.

Why do kerbals go to space? Well, there was that one guy who got there by accident, and we needed to get him back.

Now this is a much better interpretation! We know accidents can happen: Rescue contracts are a little renewed now.

These two, which I explored Rocky, airless planets with in 0.18 and 0.19. The main one had drop tanks set up to change the COM from driving suited to flying suited. I was quite proud of the design. Duna Explore-o-pod, long term mission. Equator to icecap, then back in time for rescue. Laythepod, a recent amphibious design. Ye Old mega munar load lifter: A smaller version of this was once used to relocate sections of a Mun base some 10km. Cube KAS Climber, fastest climber of the VAB in a challenge. This thing, an old fave, versions of which have seen use since roverwheels first came out. I now need to redesign it probably, because of the massive new Mk3 parts. Stealth Rover!*Batman theme plays* Kethane truck thingies, which have varied slighly over time: The Mantis Shrimp climbing rover. I still haven't done that Mohole mission. Mega Wacklifter, used to flip an awkward load and tow it into orbit. Used in the Kerbin Cup competition. And lastly, the Evepod. It's like a high gravity, rough terrain motorhome. Also, quite capable in the water. Misspelt word deliberate. There's a taste of my rover menagerie.

Amusing. Yeah, that's clearly Kerbin, and clearly Kerbal parts. The bit on the front looks like a stock girder. Anyone identified the nosecone and fuselage? But hey, people from my home town doing something with space. No reason I can't get behind this.

That's 1 in 0.8, very steep for a vehicle, those screw things must work well. Nice to see a video of it in action. It's interesting how it has some flex to it- not a bad way for a long vehicle to respond to changes in terrain angle. It will be interesting to see how your Walkabout II, or whatever you name it will differ from the original. You've got fair few things you'll be able to improve, and experience informing you how things could be better. My own Evepod rides much better with some tweaks informed by experience. I do think using a more catamaran style balance could be good for the watermode, should you still have water crossings in mind. I'm convinced it's better with KSP's "water physics". You gave the one vehicle only approach pretty good bash, we'll look forward to seeing how long you can make the next one last. On with the adventure!

I recall doing something similar a long time ago, but blowing on my kite with the thrust of mainsails rather than giving it its own power. I love kite flying, might give this a go in a while.

My biggest annoyance is still that they've overlooked developing any meaningful, engaging gameplay for people who want to spend time on the planets. It's pretty fun just hopping about, but the kerbals have some times traveled months, and will be stuck there for months. There should be more to do than a few quick tests, then stand around until you fly back home. Kerbal lets people have an experience of space exploration few will get to have in reality. It would do well to flesh out that experience more. That and the fact that the gameplay is all about building up a space center, not sustaining productive space activities once you've got the basics covered. And that stations, bases, etc, don't have much of a natural role in the game. Link to blog where I make some science suggestions.: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/entries/1767-Science-is-pretty-shallow-Could-it-be-shaken-up-a-bit As these weren't listed I chose life support. An easy to use life support model would open up possibilities for gameplay, and be a logical limit.

You're gonna look Danger in the eye! Laugh in the face of Danger! Or maybe you welcome Danger? I also ignore them most of the time (I'm running kerbin's space program in this save/universe, not someone else).

But if you have a high rep power, one press of the rep button gives +5.

That's not a good sign. Save corruption? This has been a good adventure so far, quite a feat of endurance. An interesting choice, going with screw propulsion. Making a reliable Eve amphibious vehicle is tricky, my own was tested and revised for a long time. I use a wide, catamaran design with a low COM for stability. It uses separate wheels and propellers, and sits in the water- the body is made of carefully chosen impact resistant parts. I didn't have the same limitations though, and mine was only for one Kerbal. I like how yours looks like a boat from side on. It is quite long, what sort of terrain steepness can it handle? Are the screws incompatible with mechjeb rover autopilot? I find that quite reliable, and being able to plan the route in detail in advance is quite useful. Though, this autobutton thing looks useful. I might have a go myself, and see if it could help, should I return to my attempt to tour the Jool moons using a ladder engine. The Eve sunset is awesome, and your description of it, fantastic. You haven't had much luck with those part placement glitches. Interestingly, my experience with part position in the save file has suggested the opposite, with position being set relative to the Root. I've adjusted parts of vessels using those parameters before. My own Eve story is one that's more about Kerbals as characters and planets as environments than the mechanical battle to travel them, but then, it's a different genre. Each to his own. I will be following this, if you get it working again. Otherwise, it was still quite the feat to read about.

I also think the pointlessness of some contacts is a negative. Setting up stations and bases might be more meaningful if they had a reason to be there- something like the research system I wrote about in my blog. Just plonking them there is a bit odd, but if the game had a simple life support system, sustaining a station over time, getting gradual payments, could be a beter challange. I agree, this is a problem with the way career mode is being developed. It's too much like the finiitness of BARIS, where they could pursue a continuos management style, like in simcity.

So, like one of those pay if forward things? Cool. I've learnt that if people are gonna rep, they're going to rep no matter. Sometimes I prefer comments; they make threads less lonely, and bump them so more people will see and engage with the stuff you made/wrote. It's encouraging to have people engage with stuff you've made. For me, Christmas was technically yesterday, but here's who I've passed the Christmas rep to: The Error: long time regular reader and commenter in the fanworks section. LABHOUSE: Another guy from fanworks, also makes models. HarvesteR: though rep is more about what you do in the forums, the guy who made the game could do with some too. The Jedi master: another nice forumer, and YouTuber L3GO: fellow Aussie and YouTuber, has a cool name, Blackheart612: mod maker, who also did a bit of drawing for me. Wait, that's not five. Oops. Uh, merry Christmas!