Superfluous J

Often more than the original game, which is crazy. I've never paid someone to play games at me but it always surprises me when someone gift subs like 30 people in a shot. Even if that's $1 a sub (and I expect it's more like $5) that's more than I spend in a month on video games total.

Why, when they could add Gas Planets 2 through N to the other stars?

Hm see even I miss out on my rules. Though I don't think it would hurt in any way you are correct, I did say all landings must be kerbed. So no, you cannot land your probes though they can do orbital duties like relays and ore scanning. Good catch This is a huge NO. Other than science gained (and Kerbal XP if you have that enabled), each mission should be able to be completed with the single launch for that mission. You should be able to do your entire mission after going into the tracking station and deleting all vessels.

The music that plays when you first load the game is awesome. All the rest is... well frankly I don't remember it because I've had it off for so long.

OMG I totally forgot about this. I was going to swap over my avatar right after Thanksgiving. Thanks for the reminder

Spoiler alert, that doesn't change outside of college. Especially if you're lucky enough to get a job where you have to interact with customers of any kind.

Yes. you can use them as relays and as scanners for ore, but not much else. You could technically land one but I literally cannot think of one reason you would, except maybe to determine a nice flat spot to land your real ship. That would be okay. If you have any other reasons say them here because they may break a rule, or require a new rule .

Those are three of the rules, yes. Note probe cores must be launched along with the rest of the ship (as you only get one launch per mission) but may not be attached to the orbiter or lander between the entire land-and-return portion of the mission (as Kerbals must do all that themselves).

Another consideration when we're talking about mods is the added complexity of not having stars pass too close to each other yet also never get too far apart. If they move at all you have to be concerned about one or both of those things. If they don't, you don't.

Yeah that's fine so long as you don't use those two nodes on the science car.

Not at all, and it's not always obvious. For the drivers, newer software will use news drive features and if the drivers aren't updated that can cause issues. For verifying Steam files, I really don't know but it works. For some reason 1.8 has required it a lot more than previous versions. Buggy software is my guess. *shrug*

First off love the attempt, can't wait to see how this goes for you. Note you don't have to complete the tech tree for the challenge, just most do. However, you've inadvertently broken a rule, in that you did not fully research a tech level before moving on to the next level. Luckily you did this at the very end so hopefully it's fixable.

Actually it's more than that. You really DO need a low TWR to be efficient.

I see no reason to make them orbit each other or a "galactic center" or anything like that. Over the course of a game they'd barely move relative to each other to the point where it'd be a lot of extra code (and player brain taxing) for no real gain (in enjoyment). As an outsider with no more information than anybody else who's likely to reply to you, all I can say for sure is we don't actually know. But you asked for opinions, and mine is they won't and don't need to.

Googling the errors at the end of the log: d3d11: failed to create buffer d3d11: attempt to lock null buffer I see references to verifying game files on Steam. It's worth a shot. Also, reinstalling your mods may be in order. Also (and easier) would be verifying your graphics driver is up to date. Also, you could add -force-glcore to your switches (I see you already use -popupwindow so just put it there) and see if that alleviates the problem as the game won't be using d3d11 anymore.

It's really hard not to vote linuxgurugamer.

I also did the ad for that on the mod pack's forum page. Possibly my favorite and surely my most abridged video ever.

Hey No j/k I know I'm the smallest of frys. I'm so small fry I'm smaller than the small frys you have on this list. Anyway, on that list I've actually heard of about 5 of them, have watched maybe 3 and only regularly watch one. So I voted Scott Manley, the one I actually watch on the reg.

...and you should probably activate Windows.

Rovers are garbage on low-gravity worlds. I define low-gravity as anything lower than Eve.

It depends, on a lot of things. First off, if you build all 4 ships (the actual ship and the 3 satellites) AFTER the contracts are accepted, you should be totally fine. The problem with satellites losing their "newness" is when they dock to older ships already launched, and gain that older ship's time stamp. Secondly, even if the mothership is already built you may be fine. I've actually docked satellites to refuel a lot of times and in the contrary to what many people say, I've never had a satellite contract not fulfill because of it. Thirdly, what sucks is the only way to know is to do it. You can test it before you eject to Eve by detaching the satellite from the mothership temporarily and seeing if it still satisfies the "build a new satellite..." clause of the contract, in the contract window in flight that will have a check if the satellite is still valid. However there's never a guarantee that it'll still be good once you get to Eve. And there's no way to test it before launch and docking. Fourthly, if the game and you disagree that all your work was worthy of the contract payment, by all means go into Alt-F12 debug mode and complete the contract. It's not cheating if it fixes a bug.

It is extremely likely that the expansions are not causing this, but whatever is supposed to happen AFTER them is. It is also extremely likely that either you have too many mods or one of them is causing the problem.

I don't know. I just know that if I was half as angry as everybody else here seems to be, I'd swear off the service that slighted me so.

I know why you're not getting any dV losses here: Thrusting sideways you have 0 gravity losses. The only thing you can see is drag losses and you get LESS of those by throttling down, not MORE. Of course it's better to design your rocket to have 0.5 TWR at that stage naturally, but in KSP with it's lower dV requirements overall that's not always easy.

Thank you for the recap. I suspected some of it based on the comments. It seems though that Matt has forgiven, or perhaps forgotten. Unless he's also not going to use YouTube anymore after this video.