Sirrobert

Well, docking ports really are a utility thing in my opinion. That's where all parts with a specialist function go

Welcome to KSP What most people do is throttle up, THAN launch. This sets the engine at 100% thrust right away. Not that important, but a nice gimmick

The tree progresses logicly if you look at it purely from an advanced rocket perspective. You start with 1 pod, 1 engine and 1 parachute. Than comes the decoupler. Than comes more science, ect. The game introduces a part, lets you use it and figure out what it does, and than introduces more advanced parts. And the Mun argument is once again bullcrap. New players CAN NOT land on the Mun with tier1. The tree is designed for new players to introduce them to everything slowly. And it does that just fine. Just because Usain Bolt can run 100 meters in 10 seconds doesn't mean it's to easy. It just means he's good at it. And just because some people ask questions, the entire system is worthless? What kinda bullcrap is that? So because a couple of students need extra lessons, the entire school system might aswel be skipped? Or would you rather have a new player get dumped in the almost 200 parts and say 'figure it out yourself'. Cause than you get . And that kid is still guided by an expert

They are however very efficient

Yes they do

- and + keys zoom in the VAB

"Hello I'm allmhuran from the Track IR witnesses. Do you have a moment to talk about our lord and savior IR Tracking?"

If you want to stress test your lander a little, put a launch stabalizer on it and 'launch' Now deploy the landing legs, and trigger the stabalizer. This will cause the lander to fall a little. A good way to test at what speed your lander can hit the ground, and if it can stay up. A lander can land with rocket power alone if it has a TWR (thrust to weight) ratio higher than 1. Lower than 1 will mean it can't slow down enough and crash. Now for specific planets, you will need to know the deltaV stats. There are a few good guides on the internet that show how much deltaV you need to land on a body, and how much to takeoff and return to kerbin. To get the deltaV of your craft, use Mechjeb or Kerbal Engeneer redux, or calculate it yourself (I'd recommend the mod ) If you want to know the TWR that it is probably on the relavent planet, double click on the planet, and open up the info. It'll tell you how big the surface gravity is. Compare this to kerbin (kerbin is 1. Everything else is in relation to it)

Note that the inline docking port and the shielded docking port are the same size as the normal docking port, and those 3 all fit tougether

The staging is very mixed up. I can't open KSP atm so I'll have to explain by words. Someone will probably drop a screenshot later Firstly, move the stabalizers all the way down. Move the parachute all the way up. Now the engines: The bottom 3 engines need a fuel tank above them. Fix that first. Decouplers don't transfer fuel, so put the fueltank between the decoupler and the engines. Than, move all 3 those engines into the same stage tougether, so they all fire at the same time. The decoupler that's above those engines needs to be in the stage above the engines. So from bottom to top, the staging needs to be: Lowest engines + stabalizers Decoupler above those engines Engine above that decoupler Decoupler under the commandpod Parachute Each time you hit spacebar, it will activate the next stage. So once the first engines run out of fuel, hit spacebar will fire the decoupler and drop the engines away. Hit spacebar again activates the next engine. Once that is empty, you ran out of fuel and will start to fall back eventually. Hit space bar will fire the decoupler, and now the commandpod will fall alone. Hit spacebar again will open the parachute. Do this at about 5km above the surface. A couple of extra remarks: You can put the stabalizers at the bottom of the rocket rather than at the top. Not big a deal now, but it's alot safer if you build bigger rockets. No need to worry about parts that stick out hitting them. This rocket does not need the stabalizer part under the commandpod. The pod itself has more than enough torque to keep the rocket under control. Adding that much more will make the controls very sensetive. There is such a thing as to much torque

I can't tell exactly from the picture, but are the fuel tanks on the jet engines to the side rocket tanks or plane tanks ? The difference is that rocket tanks have liquid fuel AND oxidizer, while the plane tanks have only liquid fuel. If they are rocket tanks, than replacing them with plane tanks would lighten the back of the plane, moving the CoM forward

I VERY much disagree with this point. While it is technologicly possible for the real pros to get to Minmus in the first flight, and stuf like that, it's not something most players can do. For me personally, the career mode has pushed me to send probes everywhere in the week or so that I have played it, WAY more than the sandbox has in the many months that I played that before the update. Getting to Minmus on the first flight is a huge challange in itself. And when the economy part of career rolls around, with parts costing money, I'm sure we'll see it no longer being possible. On the science as a currency part: I like that you just get points, and you can spend those points on whatever you want. Rather than doing the research, you actually bring back data. That data is than used in research, and your program is awarded research budget to do stuf with. I like the mission goal idea though. I am however a little confused on this part: Now if I understand this right, almost making your mission goal would allow you to spam science on multiple missions, while making your mission goal in 1 go would limit you to 1 mission. So failing would grant more science? I'm not sure how that would work out. And don't forget that you unlock more science parts as you progress. If you were to lock the rewards of a goal, and than unlock new science parts later, could you still use it in that setting? Now on the points of the OP: I agree with nr 1. Landing is still an important part of space though, so maybe a middle ground? I'm mixed on nr 2. Adding more ways of research would be awesome, but it would also allow you to get way more science points than you can now. As it is you can send interplanetary probes pritty quickly in your space program, there is no need to fully deplete the Kerbin system first as it is. So it would need to be ballanced carefully. With ballance in mind though, I'm very much in favor of more varied science

When the fuel tank drains, the CoM will move back. If it's so close, it might even get behind the CoL. Maybe that's it?

Here's how you use a decoupler: First, build your rocket like you are used to. Pod, fueltank, engine. Under the engine, put a decoupler. Under the decoupler, put another fueltank and engine. (don't forget the parachute ontop) Now, launch the rocket. The lowest engine will fire, and carry the rocket up. Once the first fuel tank is empty, you fire the decoupler. This will ditch everything below the decoupler, freeing up the 2nd engine. Now fire the 2nd engine. You now have a full fueltank, while the rocket is already up in the air and has speed. This is what multiple stages is. It's more effecient than just putting 2 fuel tanks with 1 engine, because it means that your rocket doesn't have to carry the empty fuel tank. Less weight, more distance you get On science: Don't forget you can right click the commandpod and do a crew report. This is worth science. You can also go on an EVA (mouse over the picture of the kerbal while controlling the rocket, and click on EVA). If you do this, the kerbal will apear on the outside of the command pod. You can right click on him and this gives allows you an EVA report. This is also worth science. If he's on the ground, he can take a surface sample. Also worth science. Remember though: If you EVA your kerbal while in the atmosphere, he will get blown off the ladder and plummet to his death.

It would sound like you didn't install them correctly, but since it's so many mods I highly doubt that's the case. Unles you made a consistand error Are you seeing the normal AI? F2 toggles that one

Always remember to check the staging before you launch

Yes, I watched it. He turns his head to turn the view, and thus has to move his eyes and look out of the corners. Or half corner. And yes I watch the vid, he DOES move his eyes I don't care how small the angle is, that is less comfortable than looking right ahead. And yes I tryd it. I got sick of it pritty damn fast when I turned my head slightly and had to move my eyes to still look at the center of the screen In the real world you may turn your head to watch, but the thing you watch at is still directly infront of your head. NOT to the side of it. That's the whole point of turning your head. Make it so you don't have to turn your eyes to much. And like I said, I break from immersion if I move. Stop defending it like it's the Messiah of gaming. It's not. Would be pritty neat if you had a 360 degree screen though (exact same reaction to allmhuran)

You mean gray/white when you look at the bar in the tracking station? Right click the icons

So what, if I send a rocket somewhere, and have other things to do while it's suposed to arive it'll crash because I had real life things to do? No thanks. Besides, that wouldn't add anything since we have timewarp. All it would do is force the game to run on the background and eat up resources. If you want this, just never turn of your game

Actually a real immersive way of controlling your rocket is currently available. ONLY using the instruments. Looking out a window off the side wouldn't really help you steer it anyway

Docking ports dock to other docking ports when they 'kiss' You will have to put docking ports on the multi point connector. Or whatever else you want to be able to dock to

It's all one big anomaly

That's sounds horrible. How the hell would it be better to try and look at your screen from the corner of your eye, than to move a mouse? I get immersed just fine. In the real world I don't turn around by turning my head either Might be nice for VR glasses, but looking at my screen only works comfortably when I point my head AT the screen. Anyway, to each his own weirdnesses I guess. With regards to KSP: It looks like something that would take abit of specialization to implent. So if it were to come, it's probably something for near the final version, when they finetune the controls and everything

I'm not exactly sure what you are suggesting here. What is it supposed to do?

It takes 4500m/s deltaV to get into orbit around Kerbin. After that it's only a little extra to get a randevous with the refueling station. This means you can use your interplanetairy stage to finnish getting into orbit, and than start the burn to another planet (or the mun) with a full stage anyway. I also use my stations as a multi ship dock where I assamble my big rockets in orbit. I send each stage up with a seperate launch, and than dock them tougether in orbit and top of the fuel tanks