Superfluous J

Your orbit would have too have the same period as the planet's rotation, and I don't think any moon's SOI is big enough. I think it could work with Dres or Eeloo, though I haven't actually checked. As to nailing an orbit so perfectly as to hit the same ring every time.... I really can't see that being practical. Nailing it once though would be really cool, assuming you weren't going so fast that you passed by too quickly to see anything.

Were you also accused of being Dangerous?

@Motokid600 I found it! Well, someone replied to its post and I saw it. But still.

Plenty of stuff uses electric charge in stock. Probe cores themselves so long as they're not hibernating, for one. Only if you don't make a backup of your save. But there's no way to know if you can load it without your own particular set of mods until you try.

Yes. And if it has a relay antenna on it it'll happily continue to function for all of that time using 0 power.

Posting videos

First off, 20!? That's a crazy high number of satellites You really only need 3 or 4 for full coverage. However, if you're really wanting to do 20 just for fun, continue below. 360/20 is 18, so you want your satellites 18 degrees apart. There IS a mod that helps you with satellite but I literally cannot think of its name which is driving me a bit mad. The problem is I've never used it as I don't bother with relay networks and instead just keep throwing satellites at the problem until coverage is good enough. One mod that's not made for this but that would allow you to do it is HyperEdit. Just go to each satellite and paste in the exact values, and then just keep adding 18 to each satellite's LAN (I think that's the one, it's been a while since I fiddled with HyperEdit too) until you get thorugh all 20. If you do them all one after the other the error from their orbiting should be low enough that you won't even notice it.

I do not think I'd know you'd made the change if you hadn't said it. I've been accused of being not very observant, though. I can tell there IS a difference, but it's just not that big (pun!) of one to really get in my face. Example: Before I read your text I just saw the two pictures, and thought they were 2 pictures of the same model.

Like how if you use someone's music and they promise it's totes legit but then later you find out it's not?

Who knew playing video games for money while not ensuring you had total control of both your content and distribution methods would be so fraught with problems!

You're not in fine control mode. Hit capslock and the little oranges gauges in the lower left (roll and yaw) will turn blue. Then your RCS puffs will be far less powerful. 0.5 m/s is about 5x faster than I tend to dock. I'd fully expect, if you don't do it absolutely perfect, that you'd have trouble at that speed.

If anybody can think of any more I'd be interested. RMM does the one thing I almost never need to automate because most of what I launch from Kerbin is new stuff.

You could also alt-f12 complete the contract. I do it all the time when the game and I disagree that I fulfilled a contact's specifications.

That doesn't change that it will require special code to handle.

Anything more than 2km long gets... interesting. It's not impossible. This is KSP after all. But it'd require hand-coded special cases to be invented and implemented.

This is the classic case of the game giving you too much information in one place (the contract) and not enough as much in another (your ship) As @mk1980 says above: Not only can you, you should do it that way. In fact if you're in map mode while doing your burns, not only can you eyeball the orbit but you'll know instantly when you complete the contract when the orbit lines vanish. Note: You won't complete the contract for 10 more seconds due to that final clause in the contract.

Another alternative is to not play games you don't enjoy. One man's grind is another man's gameplay. For the most part I enjoyed No Man's Sky though I've no desire to play again. I don't play any game where you can (read: must) pay to progress faster. I'll personally never understand the concept of playing a game for dozens of hundreds of hours and not enjoying it. If I put more than 100-200 hours into a game it's on my all time favorites list. If I don't like a game after 10 hours I'm cutting my losses and moving on.

I find it odd that people on the KSP forums are complaining that games take up 1000s of hours of play time. That is a huge plus in my book. If that's what you're talking about when you say a game doesn't respect your time - that it's so engaging that you play it to the exclusion of all else for months or years - then I have to say more power to developers who make those games.

The only thing I can rule out is the stock game, as it doesn't touch EC on ships not in the physics bubble. I think your only chance is to drop half your mods, try it and see, and keep dropping half of your mods until it doesn't happen, then you know the culprit is in the half you dropped. then repeat with just those mods until you've narrowed it down to 1 mod. In all this, keep TAC Life Support installed, as that one is necessary for the test. It's possible that it's the cause, so you may want to try it all by itself first. It sounds daunting (and it is a bit) but with 75 mods you should be able to find the bad mod in 7 passes.

Well it is a game about physics and rocket science. FTR when I was 8 I was playing Pong. Though it wasn't brand new it was darn close.

Tell that to all the unskippable cutscenes in most every game that's more than 5 years old. EDIT: ..and the lack of saving anywhere. Oh yeah respect my time by making me hoof it back to that fight I've failed the past 8 times.

The vast majority. Of course not all of them. You pretty much can't make any blanket statement about all people. Except, I suppose, that statement I just made. With extremely small exceptions, I would rather play a game made in the last few years to one made in the 90s. Or the 80s when I was playing them on my Atari or my Apple //c. I can probably come up with a list of dozens of games I enjoyed from the 70s, 80s, and 90s. About 4 of them I would actually enjoy today*. And in both of those lists I'd include all 3 classic Elite games. I loved them. I played the original like I was a space trucker for years. I tried it a few years ago (well, Oolite which is a pretty faithful clone that is if anything better) and it's hot garbage. *Atari's Adventure, or its clone Indenture, is still fun though it doesn't hold my interest nearly as well as most anything that came out this year that I actually wanted to play.

Go to the challenges forum. Participate in every challenge there that even remotely strikes your fancy.

And yet people still prefer games made this century over those made last century. Comparing FFE with Elite Dangerous is comparing apples to apple seeds. Sure the seeds had no bruises...

I can answer this one even though I'm not a mod. No. You have to start your own thread and then either the OP or a moderator can put a link into the old thread pointing at your new one. I know this because when I transferred All Y'All to LinuxGuruGamer he could not take my thread (even a moderator couldn't (or wouldn't) do it for him. It was just not done). So right before locking my old thread, I put in a link to his new thread.