Maxwell Fern

I have yet to see a mod that is only running on 64. It's actually the other way around for now.

Come on you're saying the only reason you hate 64 bits is because you can't have it. You sound like a kid throwing a tantrum.

Stop crying, 64 bits isn't working for Windows either.

Are you kidding me ? You think the rockets and engines they put on a launchpad haven't been tested in computer simulations millions of times before being unit tested in facilities thousands of times before being put on the launchpad ? There's a reason they don't fail... They know it's gonna work. While you can achieve that level of confidence in KSP with enough experience building rockets, it's an entire other game when dealing with spaceplanes and SSTOs. Those reusable crafts need testing and fine tuning.

Wow this is amazing, I was looking for un mod like that only a couple of days ago ! Did you read my mind ? I really really hope you'll get to have realistic explosions, I mean on the physics side (I don't really care about the graphics). It really bothers me when a staged SRB hits the main engine, and it just goes poof, leaving its fuel tanks intact, perfectly sealed. I wanted to see it explode ! So the next tank explodes too ! And the one after that ! And the entire rocket ! Anyway the launch was failed the moment the SRB touched the engine, so might as well go with a huge blast

IMO that's the only real way to enjoy the contract/fund system. If you can reload any failed mission, where's the challenge ? You can never fail a contract. I really wish there was a "hard" mode that you can pick when you start a new career, which permanently disables quickload/revert. Of course you'd need an option to "simulate" missions in order to test your design. That could be actually really simple: instead of clicking "Launch", you click a "Simulate" button which lets you do everything, except no contract can be completed, obviously, ships doesn't cost anything and you have a 'Revert simulation" option in the echap menu, once you're done, which acts like a "revert to VAB". Hey wait... Isn't there a mod that does that ? That's actually a pretty good idea for a mod.

Is there some tutorial/documentation on how one's supposed to correctly use the flight assistant ? If not, here are some points that confuse me. Please note that I never activate SAS whenever I intend to use the assistant: - Is there any way to "keep altitude" ? How is the pitch assistant supposed to be used ? It doesn't seem to do much, my plane is always nosing down no matter the value for K. - How does the AoA work ? Even after entering 1 and -1° for the values, I have no trouble whatsoever reaching any angle of attack (displayed in the flight data). - The DCA is great, I stopped tearing my planes apart once I discovered it. What does the scale correspond to ? Is it related to the number of Gs somehow ? I looked everywhere for help, and read the "ingame" one several times, but I can't find any "best practice" to apply to this assistant. Which means I will probably write one, if I can wrap my head around those concepts. Thanks.

I usually tend to wait for mods to be smoothed out, but this one is too tempting. Expect a thorough feedback

Exactly. FAR is not even close to being friendly to new players, and the current model, while not making a lot of sense, is enough. So I understand they don't wanna change that, since there are replacements for any skills (NEAR and FAR) that are doing extremely well. Why fix something that isn't broken ?

Yes, I'm playing this career game with quickload/revert disabled, so I'm extreeeeemely careful with my ascent. I launched this fatass on a 500km orbit to avoid a tight gravity turn and spending too much time in atmo. I will run some tests along those you suggested and will come back with the results. IMO it's unlikely related to RT2 only, since I have the exact same issue with the radialy mounted parts of TAC life Support, although it can always be a coincidence. Edit: could Deadly Rentry be involved ? I set it on hard mode (shockwaveExponent 1.12, RSS shields), but I didn't think of it until now.

Thanks Smunisto for taking the time to help This is the ship, and this is the top payload. As you can see it's not overpowered (I adapt the throttle in flight to never exceed 2Gs), the launch went smoothly, no wobling, no atmospheric effects, but when I jettisoned the fairings at ~80km I noticed the dishes had fallen off. The flight log said the atmospheric pressure had the attachment fail. After some research, I think I have found several ways to correct this, mostly by putting the dishes in an in-line fairing under a tank or something, but I'd like to know if there's a way to protect parts inside the fairings from atmospheric stress (as it should be).

Maybe I'll be more lucky here: I'm using FAR with this awesome mod, as well as, amongst other mods, Remote Tech 2. I'm having huge difficulties to launch communication satellites with dishes, for they get destroyed during ascent, even when thay "should" be protected by the fairings. I know the mod's description states they can't be shielded from aerodynamic stress, but is there a workaround ? I asked in FAR's topic where Ferram told me there as indeed a workaround, but nothing more. Thanks guys.

Man, with all due respect you can't expect anyone to read through 500 pages hoping they might find an answer to a simple question. Moreso, if this is a regularly asked question, maybe consider adding a tip in the OP ? Also, I don't understand your point. How can reading the topic keep it closer to the top ? I thought posting in it was what bumps it.

I'm using FAR and procedural fairings, but the stuff inside the fairings is still subject to aerodynamic pressure and gets destroyed if I go to fast. Is there a workaround ? Sorry is this has been asked before and thanks for this awesome mod.

I feel stupid but I gotta ask: I don't understand how github works. Is there a way to only download the GameData folder or do I have to download the entire master ?

Thanks for your replies, I'll give them a try. This sounds the most interesting. Anyone ?

Hi there, I humbly consider myself an experienced KSP player. Prior to .24, I always designed small, minimalist rockets that would do exactly what I needed, nothing more nothing less. And it's really paying off now... Right now I'm using a selection of mods to make the game harder and more realistic: - Deadly Reentry, "hard mode" (everything burns up during reentry, unless it is shielded) - TAC Life Support - FAR - Remote Tech 2 (although it's kinda buggy right now, which basically means I never transmit anything, only recover) And of course I disabled quicksave/quickload, revert and respawns in the debug menu. So far, I'm having a blast. This new irreversibility of my actions really made me re-discover the game. Every mission is carefully planned, has at least one contingency plan, every ship has an "abort" action group to try and save its pilot(s) in case of a Rapid Unplanned Disassembly. And many destructions occured. Many unfortunate deaths, too. However, I literrally never look at that number in the lower left corner of the VAB/SPH, and never got anywhere near a financial situation. The entire Funds and Reputation part of this update is oblivious to me. I just pick contracts that fit my goals, and do my things. Am I the only one on that case ? What could I do to really need to watch over how I spend my money ? Thanks

The mission says you have to bring back that one Kerbal. It does say you can't leave another one up there, so you can just switch places and still get all the funds and rep. Or, you know, you could stack two pods.

Does it really need to be easier ? I think the learning curve is very well balanced for new players, who will unlock parts as they learn how to fly. But for experienced players like most of those on these forums, the first tier of the tech tree is pretty tedious to unlock, and we never get funds issue.

Well, thanks moderators for moving the thread and destroying the poll... - - - Updated - - - I couldn't agree more.

I'm interested to know what you guys think about this. Should the stock game stay the same for every player ? After all everybody is free to mod it to their liking. Or should the core mechanics of gameplay be tweakable to address a wider range of player's skills ? On the one hand, I think the gameplay is now mature enough, as well as the player base is experienced enough, to introduce some difficulty settings. Easy would be the game as it is, Normal would make the Funds and Reputation harder to earn, and Hard would have quicksave/revert disabled, harder contracts, lesser rewards, higher penalty for failure, and why not, a "Game Over" screen. On the other hand, I keep in mind that this could split the community, which is never a good thing and might push it towards a path where so-called "elite" players look down on "casual" players. What do you think ?

Thanks for the quick answer ! So I went through the readme, bascially I would need to change the shockwave exponent and install the heatshieds from RSS, correct ? Edit: the link provided in the readme is dead (https://github.com/NathanKell/RealismOverhaul/raw/master/RealismOverhaul/DRE_ShieldsFix.cfg)

Thank you for this awesome mod without which I wouldn't even imagine to play. However, something bothers me: debris rarely desintegrate upon reentry. I'm talking about this last stage that I decouple just before entering atmo, and that fly by me, unharmed to the ground. On a recent mission, I accidently placed a tiny decoupler upside down on an ablative shield, so it stuck to it upon reentry: not only didn't it get destroyed, this ridiculous part took all the heat, leaving the shield in pristine condition. So in short, I'd like anything that is not shielded to disintegrate during reentry, just like in real life. Is that possible ? How would I do that ? Thanks a lot, please keep up the good work

The game wouldn't ask you all the time, just when you might be at risk to lose some work, like any other software out there.

Maneuver nodes machanics definitly need an overhaul, and this idea might be a very good start. It's as great as simple.