Maxwell Fern

I'd say it depends on how close you are...

That was incredibly interesting to read. I learned something today ! As for the topic, Atmospheric Sound Enhancement is the mod mentioned earlier. It displays an effect when breaking Mach 1 then sound can only be heard in a cone behind the ship. There's no sound in space either, except muffled inside the ship (and in map mode). It's a pretty cool mod that works great with FAR and Deadly Reentry.

Those are two details that would make the gameplay experience more enjoyable IMO: - A simple "do you want to save your ship ?" when you discard your ship in VAB or SPH (by clicking New for example). I lost many ships to that misclick. - A "Return to desktop" button somewhere, probably from the Space Center or even the esc menu. As of now it takes an absurd amount of time to leave KSP: Press escape Leave to Space Center Loading Quit Loading Back Quit Are you sur ? Yes. Wait I think those two little improvements would just make the game more confortable to play, at really little cost.

If my rig is too weak to run 2 instances of KSP, I guess I could run the client on a separate computer right ? As long as they're on the same network ?

Thanks ! I'll give that a try with the latest version and let you know how that goes !

A 40 minutes burn to the Mun might be realistic, but it's far from "good in the concern of gameplay". Ion engines now have the same Dv as before, only with 4 times the thrust. This might looks stupid compared to real life, but at least I might start using them. And this is what gameplay should be concerned about IMO.

I can confirm that reinstalling DR alone does not cause the engine overheatings I had. Care to share your config ? I always found reentry to be way too easy but never managed to get an acceptable config.

Totally possible. I had so many mods installed that I decided to start a fresh copy, and the overheating was gone. So it's possible that another mod interfered, or that it was outdated. I'll give a try to the latest version just on its own and let you know.

I uninstalled DR and the overheating is gone too.

Hi there, I just tried going in orbit with a rocket made of the new parts, every engine overheats and explodes before 5000m, no matter the throttle level. Could this be DR related ? I get the crackling sound and flamme particules before they burn up.

Because they clearly don't show the points where my target and I will be the closest to each other. I had already noticed it on some docking procedures where I was closer to my target than the node predicted, a couple of minutes before reaching that point. Plus, they don't show all the time on every orbits, which doesn't make any sense to me: no matter the targets or the orbits, there is always a point where I'm the closest. It seems to have something to do with planes inclinations, but I'm not sure. Then this happened: I'm going to Duna, but I'm not getting an intercept. Closest approach seems to be 1.281km. So I try the natural thing to do: And then BAM: Just by simply placing a node, closest approach bounced to 30 MILLION km. You can see the node is empty though. Also, you can't see Duna here but it's just on the right, maybe 1° ahead of the "target position at closest approach", which once again just seems plainly wrong. So, what do I make of it ? How are those markers calculated ?

You can place spotlights on your launch clamps to light up you ship. Awesome at night. You can also place fuel tanks and connect them to your ship with fuel lines. This way you can start your engines before releasing the clamps, without wasting fuel.

The alleged "stability" they're supposed to provide does not outweigh the mass and drag they add. If your rocket somehow tends to flip while in the atmosphere, you'd better add controls such as surfaces and/or reaction wheels. Nosecones are, for now, useless. Or anyway not useful enough to be used.

I like your ideas, but they would just make probes a super-science module you should add to your manned mission for best results.

How is making something better (as per the title of the poll) a downgrade ?

That's absolutly right. I don't understand why people are so afraid to adapt.

Well... I totally agree with you but you're thinking on the long run, I just suggest something that can be done right now, and later integrated in the money management or whatever. Science is the only thing we can earn right now.

The Shuttle can land on a runway, and that's exactly why they made it: they had an incentive.

You make a good point. My bad.

Most of the return missions mankind has realised were intentionnaly splashed down.

If you want to go there, then tell me how intuitive it is that bringing back a thermometer provides more science than transmitting its readings ? Carreer mode is just blooming, there's not a lot of sense in what we're doing anyway. I'm not talking about realism here, I just want to suggest a simple tweak that will justify the mere presence of the SPH. But if you want some logic, just see it that way: the ressources (money, kerbals, whatever) you used to recover a ship stranded on the other side of kerbin are ressources you can't used on studying the experiments they brought back. And that's actually accurate: if the Apollo missions had not been so expensive, maybe there wouldn't have had been so many "lost" moon samples.

I never understood the forum poll choice "I have no opinion". If you have no opinion, don't vote.

Actually the penalty for landing far away is not the main point: I just want to have an excuse to build a shuttle to go in orbit, rendez-vous and pick up my hero crew back from a mission on the Surface of Eve, and land them safely home on the runway, with all the press and fans throwing a huge parade. Yeah, I'm a dreamer.

Hi there, here's the basic idea: right now, no watter where you land or splash your vessel on Kerbin, recovering it gives you a fixed number of science points. That's ok, but I think there should be a little incentive to control your landing spot. So I suggest a little tweak: - +15% bonus for a KSC landing - + 5% for a splash down - -5% for a landing at poles - on top of that, up to a -5% depending on how far you are from KSC I think this is low enough for new player to not care about it, but still interesting for experienced players who want to maximize their missions' results. But above all, this would make spaceplanes/shuttles usefull, and give players a reason to land on the runway. What do you think ?

The problem with that is that it turns probes into science modules, so the best choice in all cases will still be to send a manned mission, with a probe attached to get that robotic arm experiment. We need a new game mechanics that justifies sending unmanned one-way trip missions. RemoteTech2 somehow fills that void for me, but it can be better and more deeply implicated.