Vindelle_Sunveam

I did my first infini glider in the SPH. THe plane cockpit, lots of canards on a stack of 1.25m reaction wheels and batteries. I feel like Luke skywalker in the death star trench while flying it around KSC. Still cannot pass under the bridge :/

Oh, I forgot, Does Kerbal Alarm Clock count as an disqualificating mod ? I use it for my transfer windows and it would be a real bother to uninstall it.

As long as Mapview is tolerated, I think this is quite easy, but as not to boast, I will do it. The real challenge would be to do this to dock to something with a Clampotron Jr in front of the MK1 (equatorial docking for hardcore challenge, as opposed to the easier polar oriented one)

Got some Aperture Science flags to match the mood of my new save : no respawn, no save, no revert. You have some ideas as to what should I add to this fresh save to add to the "expendables test subjects" feel ? The goal is still to have no casualities, so I will use probed test runs as soon as I unlock the Stayputnik :-)

I recommend you to move this to http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/forums/20-The-Spacecraft-Exchange. Where all spacecraft related business happens

Munar Gravimapper (link) A lightweight probe, with a very tiny launcher and an ever so small transfer stage to scan the gravitationnal fields of Kerbin's natural satellites. It is very easy to control. Some people might prefer to replace the tali fins with a SAS module, but I think it is overkill with the RCS. I love this probe because it has just enough fuel to do it's job. The center of the launcher is supposed to go on a 300Km graveyard orbit and if you do not forget to put yourself directly in a polar orbit, the transfert stage's sepatrons can déorbit it, so you have almost no debris. If you are a neat freak, you can still send a claw to grab and deorbit the stuff that's at 300Km.

you have 0.23.5.459. This update have problemes that were quickly fixed by the hardly noticeable 0.23.5.464 something like a week later. You should have an update runing the patcher.exe if you are using windows.

Welcome to the forums. I wish you a nice stay.

Lately, in this section, I noticed that some people were discussing gameplay issues using the following argument to dismiss other's ones : "if your computer isn't powerful enough, you don't have a part in this" meaning that only people with what they redeem being a powerful enough computer can discuss the game and it's performances. I recognize that this is a valid argument as I cer-tainly won't take seriously (for that matter, not in general) somebody trying to run KSP on a '98 average computer, I also think it is quite unfair to limit the game to those who have little yet good processing power at their disposal. With regards to that, and as I feel this issue must be discussed and quite definitely set to smooth some aspects of the discussions we can have in this part of the forum, I would like whomever has the knowledge to do so, to discuss it here. I lack such knowledge and so I trust you with this. Edit : while writing this, I definitely forgot to ask the final question : what do you think a minimal configuration for KSP is ? (I feel like I have a good computer (a 2013 HP with a i7Quadcore, Win8 (64bits OS) some 8GB o' RAM and a GPU nice enough to run AAA games in High graphics (TES V, Batman AC and Dark souls 2))

Sorry for the wave of paragraphs... I read that some users like to take the devs' intention into account before critisizing a feature (or the lack of). While this is a very nice thing to do, I think it has little to no influence on how people will play the game. We don't play the game with the devs' will in mind, but with the gameplay and the tools they give us. The problem here, is that the gameplay core mechanics and the tools given to understand it do not match. We have a game that quickly goes from "play with moons" to "get your mind around orbital mechanics". When I only played with moons (I started in 0.18, thanks to the demo) I didn't care and didn't need to know about Delta V. Chain crashing on the Mun crust was fast enough not to be bothering. But things have evolved. As soon as I had the level to put bigass ships into orbit, I wanted to go to other planets. I also didn't want to do ridiculously big missions and come back with 1400 units of liquid fuel in my pockets (pretending it's snacks has it's limits). To start doing so, I had to stop playing the game for a week. My game time brutally morphed into crushing numbers into Excel, to undertand how much delta V I need to go in Orbit around other planets, and go back ; then calculate it (circumventing the usual design problems, but without the KSP Jazzy tune, nor the nice graphics and it was quite a bother, because I actually wanted to fling spaceships to Duna and stuff...). Learning about delta V, I also learnt that it was useless, unless I learnt about transfer windows, which I had to calculate, and calculus isn't my strong suit. I am not complaining because I had to learn stuff. This is a great opportunity and I liked it. But I hated it at the same time because I wanted to play a game that lacked a ton of info that I needed to play. Even after calculating all my first Duna Mission characteristics, I didn't come with a good enough design. Once I had a Good enough design, I still had to learn how to fly it properly, and trust me, AFAIK, none of the displays I needed to get to the fun part (building, flying, orbiting...) would have helped me to play the game. They only would have allowed me to play it, while I wanted to have some Kerbal fun. And as for the "newbies argument", I dare say that, at worst, new players won't understand, or care, or dare give a crap, but as soon as they will want to give their designs some thinking, they will take notive of how the numbers displayed behave, use/misuse it at first ; Then some will look it up on the wiki and others will deduce it's use from trial and error ; But in the end, everybody will feel better for having it than to, either give up due to a lack of accessibility from the game, or boredom because they don't like/don't have time for the math, or just have their fun game time spoiled by learning thing they are not so interested in (we can like space exploration and at the same time, keep our leisure-learning time for other subjects). I didn't vote because we are to few to make a representative poll, but I hope I made a good case of why I think it is important to have more displayed info in the game, including Delta-V readings.

So here I am, with my disausaur revenge project. The goal is to put disosaur-shaped ships into... well wherever I can. The problem being : Dinosaurs are much more Spaceplane shaped than rocket shaped but still. Image : https://photos-3.dropbox.com/t/0/AAAg50Grl5w_hlEOXA0xKUGtMbA8TyaG2nm1pVgC-CKfeQ/12/4217729/png/32x32/3/_/1/2/screenshot9.png/L9dv40JyLOkVttGTB5dFTeIzAnZC1mwd6DTmkEMkcOM?size=1280x960 Here is my first draft : https://www.dropbox.com/s/wo3fxrdh1dx5371/Stegosaurus.craft It can't move, I could have put wheels on it, but these little struts looked too funny on it. Hope you enjoy this little intro and may the jurrassic be on your side dear kerbal spatiopaléologists ! PS : Is there an equivalent to [spioler] on this forum, to hide/toggle images ?