Ming

Thanks for the input (really). I didn't know that noob & newb were so different in meaning. Thanks to you, and the Urban Dictionary, I've learned something new (for me) today. I corrected my original post title.

deleted ...

Yep, that be me alright. I read often (since April, 340+hrs on KSP) and post very little. But this is not about me or some arbitrary rules concerning the use of the "F" word. It's intended to help others who may feel rather badly about their "save" files not working.

By now most, if not all, KSP forum frequenters already know in detail what the new 0.21 will do to their "save" files. However, most gamers do not use forums until a crisis has occurred. So, it's most likely that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of new KSP'ers will be jolted to the bone when their "saves" don't work. With this in mind the intended purpose of this thread is to solicit ideas from us "frequenters" as to what might be done to lessen the impact of this coming horde of hate. I totally agree that "save" breaking is part and parcel with alpha-adventurism and is to be expected. But, rest assured, that the majority of the uninformed KSP community will not see it that way. I will start: When you fire up KSP, direct or on Steam, you will get a BIG BOLD NOTICE (perhaps with a link) about the impending update and what it's impact will be. Kind of like what you get with Minecraft, Borderlands, etc.. NEXT ....

If I must wear a "clown" moniker to get what I thought was a reasonable question answered then so be it. I'm not trolling here. I truly enjoy KSP but I'm not a "real" rocket scientist, programmer, or design engineer. I asked the question about the latest update possibly trashing craft saves so I could hold off on any further designs until the update came online. I read everything in this thread but the answer to my specific question concerning "craft save files" must have eluded me. Dev's and skilled KSP'ers alike need to understand that we lesser skilled "clowns" are not trying to disrupt this awesome forum. Rather, we are trying to understand what seems to be at times impossible to understand. That's what learning is all about. So please don't "run out of patience" and scare us off with insults and jabs. P.S. I wasn't soliciting a verbose and most likely esoteric response to my very simple question. Just a simple "yes it will" or "no it won't" would've been a really good way to respond.

I second that question, "Will crafts be broken as well?" Does anyone know?

Squad's silence (positive feedback) on this issue unfortunately makes it more likely that it's the latter portion of Tiron's assertion (they don't think there's really anything they can do about it) that is most accurate.

Many prior threads have already covered, often in heated detail, this KSP performance problem. Short of a Unity engine change nothing is going to significantly increase your frame rate while using high part count designs. For right now "sushinut" has the best idea. Make it abundantly clear via a forum sticky, both here and on Steam, that there is a "known" performance issue with overly populated design structures. This sticky could even make general recommendations on max part counts (300, 400, 500, whatever). But say something! Just letting new players stumble blindly into this already known pit of frustration is being, IMO, very inconsiderate. P.S. Personally, I'm willing to put up with 1-2 FPS while launching 1100+part rocket-tubbies. However, most folks aren't as patient as me.

I'm really impressed. Very good work. How did you create it (oils, computer paint program, etc.)? Also, do you have a website or online gallery of your work? - Thanks

Yep, played Star Trek on the PDP-11/34 (circa 1981) while working in Korea. Also, very interesting and rare about your "Binatone PONG". I had completely forgotten about them. My first computer-like device was (circa 1958): Wiki: "The main instruction book, as well as a supplementary book of wiring diagrams, gave jumper positions and wiring diagrams for building a number of "machines," which could realize fairly complicated Boolean equations. So, the behavior of Geniac could often be computationally complex and interesting."

Nope, never "punched out", wasn't a pilot. I worked on the radar and navigation systems for the listed aircraft. However, I did witness a runway punch-out on an F-8 Crusader while at Cherry Point, N.C., and an equally horrific runway punch-out on an F-4 Phantom in Chu Lai, Vietnam.

I'm 67 (Sept 68) 63-67 - N. Carolina and Nam, F-8 Crusader/A-4C Skyhawk/A-6A Intruder support 67-68 - Vandenberg Tracking Station (VTS), Apollo & 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty support, Vela (satellite) 69-71 - Thule and Kodiak tracking stations, Vela (satellite) 71-80 - Other stuff 80-82 - TX and Korea, Hawk Missile support 82-84 - Okinawa, PHANTOM II RF-4C support 84-86 - TX, Hawk Missile support 86-92 - Germany and TX, Patriot Missile support 92-01 - Other stuff Retired 2001 Yeppers, I'm really OLD!

I'm actually depressed about this performance issue because, as others have already pointed out (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/25508-The-Future-of-KSP-and-Unity3D?p=311677&viewfull=1#post311677), it could be KSP's eventual death knell. I already break the boundaries of common sense with my humongous (1000+ parts) lifters and pay the price with low FPS. However, even with the self inflicted low FPS I still enjoy the game. But, as the KSP dev's add more and more functionality (Alpha-Beta-Release) to an already over stressed physics engine even conservatively designed rockets may stutter to a <1 FPS grave. I'm not smart enough to know what the answer is other than to suggest capping rocket/station parts count (don't kill me). But I'm fairly certain that Squad dumping Unity would be way too expensive because it essentially would mean starting over ($$$). I truly hope for all of us KSP junkies, and Squadites alike, that there'll be a workable solution discovered for this nagging problem. Perhaps some really smart folks can create an "Optifine" (Minecraft) solution for KSP. I know at one point I nearly quit Minecraft until Optifine came along and restored my FPS levels.

Well said Stupid_Chris. I use MechJeb (1.9.8) and love the game wayyyyyy tooooooo much. Everthing I've done with Mechjeb (so far) I've also done the hands-on-the-controls way at least once. However, to manually go through slow plodding launches (to orbit) as many as 10-15 times a day just wouldn't be any fun for me. As a matter of fact it would be completely boring and ruin the game. I too, like Stupid_Chris, am an explorer extraordinaire and master builder of all things rockety. Nothing shall slow down my conquest of the Kerbalverse ... such as boring, repetitive, carpal tunnel syndrome producing, been there done that a zillion times before manual tasks. Ask any commercial pilot if they would like to have their autopilot removed so they can start having more "fun" flying every day. So, rock on hansman1982, be proud of them there badges and ribbons and go forth and conquer the Kerbal cosmos and blaze star-trails for the rest of us. Also, to all of you hands-on only Kerbalnauts, many kudos for your extraordinary digital (as in fingers) accomplishments. Most importantly be one with your Kerbal brothers and sisters, be them "auto" or "manual". - PEACE Hmmmm, I wonder what Captain Kirk would say about this continual "auto" vs "manual" conflict, hmmmm ... Answer >>> http://bogscifi.forumotions.net/t260-let-that-be-your-last-battlefield-episode-70