Rosco P. Coltrane

I guess the meaning of "simulator" depends on your background. Mine is flight sims. So in my view KSP is a game, not even remotely close to simulation. A simulator's goal is to simulate, as best as possible within the limitations of a computer, the conditions of real world within the subject matter, be it space flight, atmospheric, marine, or whatever. KSP doesn't do that: it recreates some of the real world implications to some point, point where it's deemed to be unfun to go further. The very core of a simulator, as a product for home computers, is its flight model. The "game" aspect of it, while extremely important, is a wrapper around that flight model and somewhat secondary. You can have a simulator with boring gameplay (DCS, I'm looking at you), but you can't have a simulator whose flight dynamics are game-ish. In other words, a simulator tends to aim for to the realistic side of things, while a game goes for the "casual" side of things. For some people realistic also means fun, because that's what they're looking for in a game, for others it's boring. A matter of preferences I guess. I like hardcore realistic flight sims, but no way in hell I'm interested in a hardcore realistic space travel sim.

Not so many mods as one might think, thou. And even without mods the game ends up going over the limit due to memory leaks.

I had a dream last night, too! I was doing some stuff in space and I moved my mouse and bang! A new planet right there in my view. I had to zoom in a lot, like a sort of a telescope. It was like a big big big Kerbin-like planet with cloud a everything. Big as in "half of Kerbol's SOI" big. Orbiting very close to it there were two moons, one that looked suspiciously like Duna , and another that looked a lot like Ike. I somehow moved my mouse away from the thing and then I couldn't find it again! It wasn't shown on map view or anything, it was like a hidden mechanic had been introduced in the game and nobody but me had discovered it. And I couldn't find the thing! I was like "nooooo... I could have been THE king of KSP when I showed this on the forums". I frantically tried to get it into view again, but no cigar. I never found it again. That mysterious gigantic blue marble was lost in the middle of the darkness of space, never to be seen again.

The whole point of early access was, in part, that you would pay less for a product that might or might not become what you wanted. That's why it was cheaper than the final retail price. You supported development out of hope, and in return you would be paying less for the final game. That was the original idea. But at some point it went into "we want your money and this is our sells pitch but in no way we promise anything really and you should not feel like we owe you nothing in return for your money. You're buying what's available right now, even if it's just a trailer video". Also, many developers took this attitude of "but we didn't specifically said we were going to include X or Y". To which I say BS! If you're making a, say, F1 race game, there is the implication that you will not add dragons and spell-casting wizards in it. A prime example of this is IL-2 Battle Of Stalingrad. For those that know squat about IL-2, it's a heavy weight flight sim themed in WWII. So this company decided to make a new IL-2 with the EA thing going on... The game turned out to be completely different from any of the other games in the sequel, but "hey, we didn't promise anything of that and never said we weren't going to include console-like RPG elements into it"... Yes you did, you called your game IL-2! People expects certain things out of the game because it's a sequel to an already existing game. That and the argument that "you got your money out of the game because you spent X amount of hours playing it and it's cheaper than going to the movies"... Yeah... because I bought the game thinking on it's current state and not any of the flashy things you showed in your concept videos and dev blogs, right. So we went from "we have this cool idea but no money" to "we want your money but no string attached at all". EDIT: BTW, I think this modus operandi will come back and bite them in their behinds. Which is a shame because it ruins it for anybody else that might actually benefit from EA business model.

Yepe, there's the In-Flight Waypoints mod that helps a lot.

Well, last time I tried it was in 0.20 or something like that. It was pretty much impossible to predict that a ship would have the problem and when it would happen. Sometimes you would send the ship all the way to Jool, only to decouple a probe in orbit and have problems there, a year after launch. That's why I stopped doing any designs that required many cubic octogonal struts "too close" to each other close to decouplers... So I don't know, tried several designs now and I can't make it happen anymore, but as I said, it was something that you never knew when it would happen.

Well, I went to three different schools in high school. Last one was for adults, at night, good because it allowed you to have a day job, which most of us had. Also, being your own guardian, you can sign you off the school whenever you wanted! Not me because I was 16... but I had a friend that could do that for me. As it was an adults school, we didn't have much of anything. Sciences, math, or anything else really were at the minimum possible, given that you don't have much time for homework, you have an actual job and family outside school. As you can imagine, when I graduated and went to college (computer sciences) I was at a complete lost. Integrals? What the hell is that?! Talking about computers... I remember we had them, don't remember what exactly, but it was the late '90s, so... I guess Pentium II, Win98, MS Word and Excel pretty sure... Yeah, I recall using Encarta for a Physics project in 3rd year. Encarta my god....

Can someone confirm that clipping ("traditional", not from the debug menu) octo struts it not prone to disassembling your craft anymore?

The key difference is that those MMO games (MMO, which KSP is none of those three terms!) work as a service because they "make you want to" buy stuff all the time. Many times what you buy makes you, your character, or your fighting equipments, better. Instead of grinding you buy, sometimes what you buy can even be considering cheating, as it's pretty common to hear of people experiencing "better than usual" performance in, say their guns, after they paid. World Of Tanks is one of those. Imagine that in KSP, you pay to upgrade your Mainsail to level +65 to have more Isp... That wouldn't work at all.

This just happened to me and reminded me of this post... Self circularizing capture? Hell yeah, right? Well, no... KSP's predictions were WAY off. Didn't take a screenshot, but I ended up leaving the Duna system for good.

Nevermind. I got it all wrong.

Test and revert if it's a simple test, usually just launch and get to orbit. If it's something more complex, then I go for sandbox because sometimes (didn't bother to research why) you just can't revert. That's how I got an 8 satellite carrier in orbit around Mün... hyperedited the thing there, tested decoupling one sat and suddenly I couldn't revert! Big lose of money because I have no use for Münar satellites anymore in the stage I am in my career.

nevermind, ninja'ed by zarakon.

This is BS. Everybody knows that a GOTO statement should link to a line number. So you number your lines... and then start adding minor numbers in between to make space for new lines... Then when you run out of digits you start adding "subnumbers"... Then you ditch everything out of frustration and go play with Pascal. Oh my beloved Oruga 1.0, what might have you become if it wasn't because of QBASIC 1.1 (and my ignorance about sub-routines). [/old_f$%&t_rant] EDIT: darn, you make want to search for my QuickBasic 7 and code away some stuff.

Voted "I've tried them, not really my cup of tea.". As it stands right now, it takes more clicks to get to an "advanced" fancy sorting filtering tab, than just click a regular tab you want and then the "next" button at the bottom. So no, I don't have a use for it. The only use I'd like to have is filtering by mod but that's not an option, so... meh. I hope they rework this, as somebody said, the design behind this UI is quite weak. But give them time, I'm sure they'll build up on it, after all it's the first iteration of it.

Something posted in another forum: hahahaha

Ding ding ding! "Acelerador" is not the ship I'm launching. That ship is landed at the KSC and I use it for time-warping, it also has a Protractor calculator thingie. Could it be that Protractor somehow loads based on the presence of the part on the wrong ship? So when the ship I'm actually launching gets far enough (hopefully, darn you Jool and your dV requirements!), Protractor gets unloaded? EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm launching a ship with a protractor in it, while at the same time I have another ship with a Protractor landed nearby. As soon as I get far enough from that ship the icon disappears, which is what happens at 23:02:37.

Anybody having the icon disappearing problem again? Mine at some point or another just vanishes, not visible anymore on the toolbar, nor on the options for visible icons on the toolbar, just like it wasn't there.

Well, I figured it out. You just place the part and then switch to offset mode with some medium to high angle set up and move it and it will snap to the center... The old "V" method was far superior, but what you gonna do.

Order of operation as in place the wheel on the beam and then rotate the beam? Will try that later... darn day job. What's the deal with this re-rooting you speak of? You mean making the beam the root and then place the wheel?

I'm facing a problem here. Any idea how to vertically snap stuff with rotated parts like we used to do in the "old days"? Say for example the following wheel. I used to put the thing there, and then "V" to center it vertically at the end of the beam. But with the new editor now vertical snap aligns the thing with the horizontal center (which was the vertical center before I rotated the part).

Yeah, Kerbonite allows you to convert to regular fuels, I didn't see that. Information on these mods seems a little "sparse". KSPI also seems interesting for not for now, now I want something simple. Thanks a lot gents.

So I've been wanting, I think, maybe, perhaps I would try resources... Now what I want to do is pretty simple: I want a base to extract "stuff", process it into fuel/RCS, and fuel ships with it. So after some research, what I get is that there are two systems: Karbonite and Kethane. Kethane seems to be on-hold and not entirely working with 0.90, and Karbonite requires the use of specific engines (the fuel you produce is not regular rocket juice), which is something I don't like. ... so, any other system that I overlooked or any of this I got wrong? As I said, my basic goal is to have some sort of use for a station around some moon or planet. Nothing fancy or overcomplicated (at least for now), just something that would give a station/base a bit of purpose, even if a little.

Well, you shouldn't need nodes at that stage of the rendezvous anyway. You can select it as a target right? Then match velocities by burning retrograde. Then burn towards target to get your prograde marker over it and some 10 m/s in speed. Without nodes, you don't know when the next encounter will occur, but I guess you can keep an eye on the distance in the... erm... "not-map" view, once you see it increasing again burn retro and towards again and so forth. You should sooner or later get to it.

yeah...