Gargamel

And a banner... all classic mods need a banner! Glad to see you take this one over Lisias!

Try the rocket button, it transfers both LF and OX at the same time, and in the correct ratios.

The bad idea was Rose not scooting over and making room!

If you mean "land somewhere", that can often be a fix for MJ issues. I will sometimes get close with landing at the target, and then if stuff starts going wonky, I'll take control, recover, and then use Land somewhere to finish the deal. SmartASS is superior to SAS IMO, and is very useful, just gotta get used to it. Only down side is that it is slower to enable versus stock SAS (a few mouse clicks vs T and a mouse click), but it does have more options. I used to play with SmartRCS a lot, but of late (last couple years), I haven't touched it much. But if you are having RCS issues, try fiddling with the settings, you might find a sweet spot.

Is that part of the right to arm bears? @Scarecrow, Love this concept, actually makes me want to build submarine bases soon. I might give this a go some day. But since it is a simple success/failure challenge, offer a nifty badge for peoples sigs, that will give them something to earn. And perhaps a hard mode. Undock from a LKO station, re-enter, then dock with a base on the sea floor. This I might try. Gonna have to get some ballast mods working.

Excellent idea @kerbalstar, I was just coming over here to link the Elkano thread, and I was thinking, Hey wouldn't it be great if we had a sticky that contained all the great challenges? And oh wow, here it is! Kudos sir.

You mean Juan Sebastián Elcano, correct? Magellan never made it. Hence the reason we have the Elkano challenge.

This is my personal preference. I can pick the size, shape, color of whatever tank I want, and then I'm able to put in it whatever fuel I want. The DV gains from using a stock tank with the Ox drained vs using a stock tank switched to LF are quite substantial. But the bottom line is, anything other than just LF is just dead weight you'll never use (unless of course, you specifically want to carry it to use it later on a different stage).

Send them out on a second high G lithobraking mission. It shouldn't hurt your rep, but I'd quick save first.....

Thanks guys for finding that! Hope that helps @justanotherdude

As in, the mod is still active (it's on my 1.3.1 install at least), but that particular part is no longer there. So I know a hexapod is doable, I think it just simulated the legs by actually using wheels, but showing legs, there may be other mods out there that have one. Yeah, I don't think it's current, but I don't keep up on it, I think a updated version is pending, I dunno.

Nope... nevermind this post, I was thinking of another mod. Carry on! But try a stock lander, see if it's still twitchy?

Groan... but you get a like for that one... I mainly just use them if a lander needs a little more fuel left over for ascent, but @Vanamonde is correct, that does reduce the efficiency somewhat depending on the design. But if you design it so that you are under powered for the descent, and lose the tanks right before you need all the twr you can get, then you should be ok. I also like to use them on working plane designs, but need a bit more range for whatever reason.

Start with a picture of your craft, you may just have a design that doesn't play well with MJ's algorythms.

Errr.... I think it's been depreciated, but I think the Modular Rocket Systems (MRS) mod used to have a probe core that was a hexapod. For a little rover-esque walker, that would be the thing to do. Infernal robotics would also be the place to look, as it adds servos and hinges to the game.

I think it was in the 1.2's that the bumpy runway issues and texture gaps got out of hand, I might have my version wrong though. You have upgraded the runway to it's highest level correct? (haven't played with those mods in particular, so maybe that's not a thing). The level 0 runway is not worth being used as a runway, it's way too bumpy. The best runways in the game are the flat grass fields beside the runway. Taxi off the runway and try from there. You are also playing a version that is outdated, and that old version may be the reason for your issues, but I understand why you chose to stay with it. Try a stock install of that same version, and of the current version (1.4.3), build a similar plane, and see if the same issues persist. Also check the mod threads to see if anybody else has encountered these issues and if they have a solution.

That is goofy.... Hmmm... Happens in a purely stock install too? Ummm... pull off half your mods, see if you still have the bug, then the other half. If the bug goes away, start adding and removing half of whats left till you narrow it down. Other than that, I'm outa ideas. I really didn't have much other than to help you get the ball rolling so some one more knowedablge in this can step in and take all the glory. Good luck.

Yes, and no. They do set their odds, as Mike mentioned, based on expected betting patterns. But this does not pit you against another player. You, from your point of view, which is the only one that matters, are always betting against the house. The house house is not forcing players to bet against each other, just trying to balance the bets in their favor.

It all depends on the payload, just because an engine can do X, doesn't mean he doesn't need the engines to do Z. I love asparagus staging, and build them all the time, usually using engines more powerful than vectors. I've been tempted to do a 7.5m core 8 stage asparagus just cause. Well, they can't be, or else it's not asparagus staging. You might have set up an asparagus / bamboo hybrid, which is overly complicated for just about any task. You haven't said if you have run some tests. Build a simple rocket that never launches. Three identical fuel tanks, three identical engines, two tanks radially attached (by decouplers) to the core tank, fuel lines both feeding in. Attach that to a launch clamp, and fire it off without leaving the ground. Prove that this is a bug. Let's build a basic asparagus launcher and see if that works, then we can add more parts and maybe recreate the issue. The other thread you bumped seems to also have a similar design to yours, with a asparagus/bamboo hybrid, so there may be something. Since I'm an asparagus fan (Until I recently discovered grilled asparagus, I never liked the vegetable though), I'm on board trying to help figure this out. If this test case works (and it seems to with every version I've tried), then it's down to this wonky design you got. I might be more on board with the design if you possibly highlight what decoupler is where, so I can read along and understand your thought process ( I like new ways of doing things, even if it's weird :D). So maybe some more description to the pics?

Oddly enough, we have taken this question back on topic, an absurdly hypothetical scenario, where there will be serious concrete math to answer it. But again, a consortium of well backed players will eventually win out. Any losses they incur before winning will be held by the house, and so when they finally win, they will recover all their previous losses, and now any dividends they accrue from the rest of the casino will add to their winnings. They then eventually transfer ownership to the next winner. But that's assuming there is some onus for them to stay in business after winning outright. They'd be farther ahead to immediately liquidate the casino after winning, to not risk losing in the future, as there is no winning solution for the house. But since there is no winning solution for the house, then the act of winning the bet (as a player) actually becomes a loss, so the player will lose no matter what they do, so their best option is not to play. (Somebody post up a WarGames meme please :D)

I see this bug a lot, as I love swept wings, so when I see it, I just click "Deploy inverted", and that usually solves it, but not always.

Upload a pic to imgur, and then link it here. There's a few good tutorials in the Kerbal Network sub forum. We're also going to need your mod list, and maybe a log file. But it almost sounds like your Kerbin orbit was at a higher inclination than you are used to. Confirm that it is an equatorial orbit, and see if the bug still exists. While using MJ, after getting an encounter, create a "fine tune closest approach to target" node to say 100km, and do that. See if you still only get a brief flyby.

That's a sucker bet for the casino. They're eventually 'guaranteed' to lose everything, with enough players coming through the door. A properly bankrolled syndicate of players, where a banker provides each player with let's say $100 as their total net worth, let's these players go place their one single bet. If the players lose, the banker then refills the players' bank accounts and they try again. Eventually, with only a 99.9999% house edge, the house will lose everything. And if they're not allowed to return, nobody would play, and the house still loses. There's a reason most casinos put limits on the amount a player is allowed to bet at any one time. Too much, and one lucky roll of the dice, the house loses big. I understand your point @kerbiloid, that the vast majority of gambling is nothing more than voluntary taxation, but there do exist circumstances where a player can walk away from a casino with a regular profit. I paid for my house down payment and a few trips to the Caribbean with the winnings I made playing poker as a part time job for many years. Since the waters have dried up with increased regulation and the poker craze fading out, I no longer play regularly, as I am no longer the big fish at the tables. Hehehehehehe.... I wouldn't want to be the croupier for that table.... But that said, some online casinos do claim to use natural events (static received from untuned antennas for example) as seeds for their RNG's.

1) Have you tried asking in the MJ thread? Or submitted a bug report? 2) I have never had this happen. Are you referring to when it zeros out it's horizontally velocity right before final descent? If so, just wait, it's letting the RG drift to up on it's own.

I really hate the term "rigged" when it comes to casino games. A casino will not put a game onto it's floor that will not show a profit per the Law of Large numbers. These games are not 'rigged', a legal casino is required by law to have the payout stats available upon request (at least by the governing body for that casino) for any mechanical game on the floor, and table games odds are well published on their own already. A game is only rigged when the actual odds are intentionally different than the published odds, either by alteration of the mechanism of a machine or through mechanics on a table game to affect the outcome. There are a couple methods usable by the player to obtain a legal edge over a casino. The most obvious is card counting in blackjack, it can turn a very slight house edge (usually less than 1%) into a significant edge for the player. And it's not illegal, it's just that casinos don't like it (obviously), and if they figure out you're doing it, they can ask you to not come back into their establishment. Of course, if you are using a mechanical device to count cards, that is illegal. Another edge players can get is in roulette. With long, tedious, and very careful study of the history of a particular wheel, you can discern if it has any biases. If you find a wheel that has a bias, then you can alter your bets to reflect that bias, and potentionally gain an advantage. It is not a practical solution, as it requires tens of thousands of spins to generate a decent history, enough to show a discernible bias (think detecting the Higgs), and again, you'll have to record the data by hand, and a casino will probably kick you out for sitting there for a months or years writing down the results in a notebook, and then change the wheel out, ruining all your work. It is also possible to calculate the probable outcome of a spin, if you know the starting conditions of the wheel (see the previously linked reference). But again, it's not very practical without mechanical/electronic tools to crunch the numbers fast enough to alter your bet. Of course, having the wheel on a said river boat or cruise boat, the random action of the water would probably have enough effect to completely negate any advantage you could obtain. There are only a few casino 'games' where you can legitimately regularly have an edge. These would be Sports Betting, Horse Betting (other forms of track betting too) and 'zero sum' games against fellow players. In both the Sports book and Horse racing, the odds are set by humans, and those humans (with or without the help of computers) have to study the various teams/entrants, and compute all the data to present odds to offer to the player. A player has to do the same research, and come up with their own conclusions. If the player thinks an odds line is far enough away from where it should be, they can make a bet to maximize their return. That's one of the reasons why you will see an odds line change after a sports book has starting taking bets, if they are made aware that they might be wrong, they can change the odds they are offering to reflect this. The other scenario is zero sum games, like poker, as they are played against fellow players, and not the house. While the house will take a % of each hand usually (or hourly, or whatever), a skilled player can earn enough off the other players to earn back the house rake they have paid out, and have a decent return on their time. Hopefully this post hasn't violated any forum rules, as I am not promoting gambling here, just pointing out the fact that a studious, mathematically minded player can easily see the vast majority of gambling games are losers for the players, but there are certain times it can be profitable.