Rosco P. Coltrane

Speaking of KSP being a different game... How many games today offer you a demo before you buy? The lost practice of the demo... Yes, for that matter, how many games are DRM free these days? But still, it's like a throwback to olden times, better times (at risk of sounding like an old fart).

Apparently is some 30% reduction in the dV needed for getting to orbit... Don't quote me on that, thou.

In your KSP directory > saves > name_of_you_game, Anything that's not called persistent.sfs is a quicksave. For God's sake don't delete persisnent.sfs or you loose everything.

You got it all wrong. It all started loooong before 1.0, even long before 0.90, although 0.90 kicked a whole new wave of negativity. But more importantly here, if the developer's idea of how the game plays is the opposite of what the same developer said it was going to play, then... Entitlement? What entitlement? People expect what the DEVELOPER said was going to deliver 4 years ago (2 in my case).

Yes, but that was Alpha. I think people just got tired. The patcher still doesn't work in 1.0, full release, for really real this time. I had tons of patience towards SQUAD when we were in alpha, it's part of being in alpha. But time went on and for many people including me, things didn't get better. That's the bitterness you see on the forums. Speaking of receiving updates as gifts, remember when 0.20 came out (or was it 21?) and people were complaining not-so-happily about the SAS? Guess what, still broken in 1.0. That's the sort of thing that I'm talking about. People just got tired.

EDIT: no no wait, I'm the smartest person alive, I tell ya. I was using Tab to switch bodies and M to get out of map view... Obviously I was looking at the same body the whole time. So my Ovok looks like a white Hale. That's the problem. Question. My bodies look very rough, sorta like Hale, all of them, even stock ones! Any pointer in how to start troubleshooting this? I looked at the KSP.log but no error there that I can see. My install is vanilla BTW, using OPM as it comes out of the zip. Thanks.

I'd like to see hinges so we could fold and unfold things. Maybe not at the level of Infernal Robotics, but at least something. It's a shame we have fairings but nothing to store folded in them.

For those interested, this guy has a podcast called Astronomy Cast (http://www.astronomycast.com/). It's very interesting because, as the podcast's motto says, "we help you understand not only what we know, but *how* we know what we know" EDIT: no no no, that's not the guy! hahaha I had it all wrong.

If you find irritating thread complaining, imagine how that people feel when you post a thread complaining about the complaining.

I was wondering if this got implemented... and if not, please?

Oh yes, I've lost many encounters to this bug, I now have the habit of hitting F5 before warping... Probably will replace the whole mechanic with AlarmClock once I start installing mods again.

Good choice, if you were into blond supermodels then you might have a problem there. But if you're looking for geek and smart you probably have to worry more about what you say than how bald you are or how you look in Batman undies!

I don't know if I should congratulate you for building the cockpit or for convincing your wife. Kudos nonetheless!

Oh yes, but that ballpark figure was backed up by a solid set of equations that worked in giving you said ballpark figure. So I had the excuse! Listen buddy, don't blame me, blame the math if you like but I have nothing to do with it. My method for getting those numbers is objective and you can calculate them too if you like... and a long list of etceteras where I don't take any responsibility for the newbie's misunderstanding of what a dV map is about. I think I'm gonna wait until MechJeb is updated and they punch the numbers for different ascent into the autopilot and see how they work. Last time I checked in 1.0 MJ was having one hell of a time piloting your rockets on the way up... so I don't know. Might as well try with kOS or KSPRC scripts.

Problem is, as the author of a dV map, I'd like to have something to back me up. So when somebody comes saying "your numbers sux, dude" I have something to answer that would make look smart. But no seriously, that's pretty much, I'd like to have something to reference when asked.

I like the idea of getting a reward at the end of the quest, like a monolith and that said monolith allowed you to teleport stuff. You would find these monoliths doing quests and then ship them where you want to teleport. Obivously you have a finite number of them and nobody knows how they work. Maybe the quests could reward you with monoliths some times, and other things some other times, so you don't end up with a hundred teleporters all over the place? Of course I'm thinking in having more than just one quest here, but that's maybe too much, because you have to come up with a ton of riddles. As for the messages. I'd suggest going with the "they wanted to test if Kerbal kind was smart enough before revealing things" approach. Once you're there, you can specifically challenge the player instead of going with the more logical "but the message was meant to be understood" line. That opens the possibilities for having more varied riddles. Also, I would keep the type of riddles varied. It's all fine doing some crypto but at some point it might be tedious for some people. Now you throw some math in, some geometry, some crypto... and I can see my slef going through a type of problem I don't like just to get to the next one that I might like.

Pardon the off topic... Mr. Horseman, have you tried flying your asterplane in 1.0.2 to see how that thing falls like a brick from hell fly? It could be fun!

+1 to the size of the numbers issue. The problem with your ship's name is not really a bug, but a design decision. The name of your ship is used as the name of the file the ship is saved to. Operating systems have some characters they won't allow to be used as file names because they have other uses. ? is one of them along with * and / and \ and many others. I guess the game does some conversion somehow? Otherwise it would just fail to save your ship. Now to the important stuff: come up with a name that WILL break the game when you try to save the ship.

So, with all the discussions about needed dV to orbit now with the new aero... Does anyone knows or can offer a pointer as to how mathematically calculate this? I know this will depend on the shape of the rocket, whereas in pre-1.0 pretty much all parts had a drag coefficient of 0.2. But in any case, is there a method that would give as a ball-park figure? I tried launching multiple times by hand but I got very different values, even with the same rocket... because my skills are lacking I guess.

I always dreamed of a mod that would add this. Picture a blue-ish sphere with white lines for reference, where you set the size, gravity, atmosphere. And then you launch a copy-cat replica of a ship you created (say, it has the right shape and stages and all but it looks like it's a white plastic model for a wind tunnel). Then you can fiddle around with it ala hyperedit to see how it behaves. Hell, it could even be incorporated into career with different levels of simulation it can do so you have to upgrade it. It could even be it's own building! The Computing and Simulation Building. Too bad I know squat about modding.

FYI, delta-v map updated with new Wal orbital parameters and added Tal. **VALUES FOR BODIES WITH AN ATMOSPHERE NOT YET UPDATED TO 1.0.2**

Yes, you have to enable it. Click on the "O" button on the PN's window titlebar, then un-check "Use x10 UT Increment". "Show additional UT controls" should be checked as well.

Am I the only one haveing the node gizmo left floating in space after hitting the delete button in PS? It deletes just fine if clicking the in game tools for that, just not with the PS button.

Yeah, but I wasn't sure. In 0.90 if you entered the SOI of a body to which you didn't get contracts yet, then you would never get them. Or at least that's how I understood it back in the day, not sure if 1.0 solved that.

Well, I don't know if easier, but more interesting for sure. I just wish they fixed the SAS once and for all. For whatever reason that thing has never been right, first it destroyed your rockets, then it was too soft, then... and then... and now in 1.0.2 it induces some serious oscillations into your otherwise very stable rocket (which, if it wasn't for the re-done joints would tear your rocket apart ala 0.18 SAS).