Superfluous J

Do you watch anything? Like, must you feel murderous to watch a movie with violence in it? Or do you still get something out of it even without the blood lust? And do you instead just go out and kill people or do you settle for watching the movie?

I watch the regular season and the superbowl. As a Cleveland Browns fan, I have no real reason to watch the playoffs. Ever.

Amusingly, I had this in the first post's first draft, but didn't want to start what I hoped to be an overwhelmingly positive thread with a negative. However, I know EXACTLY what you mean

Boringly. "Mun Science 1," "Minmus Orbiter," "Duna Rescue" are all common names. The last one too common

I hate to throw another video at you (except that it's mine ) but this answers your question exactly: How do you go from "getting within a few km" to "parked meters away at 0m/s relative velocity" It's not the best way (The pictures you have above detail that) but I think it's the best way to learn. My suggestion: Do it this way until you realize WHY it's not efficient and you'll understand the efficient way. Also, it's not really all that inefficient.

HMV Plays, you can find a link to my most recent KSP videos in my signature or right here And Disc Golf is basically that, yes, though they're not technically frisbees. The discs are designed specifically for the game. I have about a dozen different discs for various things, like long drives, curving around trees, putting, and even ones that float in case I'm afraid my shot will land in water.

I am not aware of this concept you call spare time. People have time to spare? More seriously, I record YouTube videos as my primary indoor fun times. Outside when the weather permits I play disc golf and last summer I started paddle boarding.

Recently I right-clicked on a part, and pinned the menu to the screen. It seemed so natural and normal and yet it was not all that long ago that that was not part of the game. In fact, there was a time not so long ago where clicking the "screw up this mission" button instead of the "do the thing you want" button was a very real danger, as you frantically clicked at a moving button. Then I started to think about all the other little changes to the game that I didn't even know I wanted, but made the game so much better. The editor widgets to rotate and translate parts. Not having to turn off SAS to turn your ship (only the old timers remember that one). I'm sure there are dozens, if not hundreds more. I'm not talking things like "The new aerodynamics" or "Kerbnet." I'm talking the little things that seemed nice but otherwise not notable, that over time you didn't even realize you appreciated so much. Or that you didn't even know you wanted until you got it.

What was being reported was Tundra within walking distance of the KSC, on the equator. Nothing educational about that.

I thought this was going to be a suggestion to automate keeping satellites in constellations (like, each 90 degrees apart orbiting all at the same altitude) in sync with each other. I don't think we'll ever see ships doing anything that modifies their orbits while on rails in the stock game, and I'm not 100% sure if I'm for or against it. I'm generally for anything that removes drudgery but I'm not convinced that nailing a perfect mid-course correction counts as drudgery. Getting into orbit after a good gravity turn though is.

I always just assumed that - because LFO was the most likely thing to want - the Kerbal part builders made it so you could opt to make it twice as fast.

I'm not sure if it works in 1.2.2 (because they redid the biome maps and I don't know how much they changed) but the Field Research contract pack for Contract Configurator has a "Rare Science" set of contracts.

First impression: Way too many engines. What's the TWR of that beast? You can estimate it by looking at the G meter when you launch. I made a rocket as close as I could to yours (though I can't really tell what's going on under that FL-T100 fuel tank) and it has a TWR of 2.36, or about 1g too much. Without changing the ship much, I'd ditch the thuds and simplify the upper stage to a FL-T200 fuel tank and a Terrier under the Science Jr instead of... whatever you have That gives you over 4000 m/s in just the first stage and a still-too-high TWR off the pad, but if you're not comfortable making a super-efficient gravity turn that should get your ship to orbit. That first stage has more than enough beef to get the whole ship into orbit if flown well. A much more reasonable design would ditch the 2.5 meter parts and use - say - a single Reliant under a pair of FL-T800s and fins with control authority. Say the Delta Deluxe. Even with a payload with 2 mystery goos and 2 science jrs, it's got almost 4000m/s all told (not just in the first stage) so a well-flown gravity turn should reach orbit no problem. But not much more than that. I'd not try to go to Mun for example EDIT: I just test flew that rocket and got an 87km apoapsis on the first stage. Rode it up and decoupled in space (to keep it pointing forward in atmosphere) and then used the 2nd stage to reach orbit. I got an 87x79km orbit with about 1/3 of the FL-T200 tank left.

You can also tab through all planets and moons (and the sun) and your ship. And I think your maneuver node. You can also shift-tab to go backwards, but watch out as shift is also throttle-up.

NEVAR!

With that setup then I'd be playing Kerbal Slideshow Program.

It's an argument for better resource management tools before more resources. Life Support requires more resources unless Kerbals are going to eat rocket fuel, so I think it is a bad thing to develop right now. Not "not great" or "could be better." It's BAD. It will just add more cruft. Incidentally, I've never installed a Life Support mod I liked. Some I liked better than others, and some I tolerated longer, but all of them got the boot eventually. I'm not even sure I'd use a stock Life Support system. Granted, I never really liked FAR or RemoteTech yet think Squad nailed the stock versions of those mods, and even though it adds another resource type I like the stock ISRU system better than I liked the various mod options. So there's hope yet, I suppose.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Please no more resource types until we get procedural tanks that automatically change paint jobs based on their contents and size. It's ridiculous that every new resource needs to come with its own bevy of tanks in all sorts of sizes, which either aren't numerous enough to be effective or are in far too many varieties to be manageable. Or both. As inanely, ridiculously apparent as @Capt Snuggler thinks Life Support is, I think it's just as apparent that ever since we stopped only needing LFO tanks, things should have gone procedural.

Well of course twice as many parts on an ISRU base = twice as much Rs U'd IS. But to actually utilize all that you will basically be playing Space Trucker Simulator 2017 for the rest of time.

I totally agree that it should. But it doesn't. The only thing I've got to work consistently is to set all the "distribution" parameters to zero. In the original config. A Module Manager config won't cut it. Seriously there's something wonky here I just don't know what it is.

I'll try that. It was actually the ultimate goal but I thought (incorrectly?) that just removing the resource definition without also taking care of planetary resources, tank resources, etc would cause problems. Of course, it can't cause much more problems than I'm having now - considering I've all but thrown in the towel on it due to the fact that the bugginess seems part of the stock game. In that if I remove Ore from the stock ore.cfg and put something else in instead, it fails in the same way as it did with ModuleManager. EDIT: Nope @sebi.zzr that has the same effect that removing the GLOBAL_RESOURCE had: It does in fact remove ore from the planets but it does not allow (or removes, I can't tell) all other resources I try to add as well. It really does seem that when it comes to planetary crusts, it's ore or nothing.

Ore seems either hard coded, or defined elsewhere. I manually edited ore.cfg in the Squad folder and renamed "Ore" to "Foo" and now there are NO resources anywhere. Also, the icons in the toolbar are wonky. After the orbital survey, the ore icon isn't available but the "which kerbals are on this ship" icon is. If I tab away from the planet and then shift-tab back, the ore icon exists. I'm going to try this without MM or any other mods at all and see if it's a stock thing.

First off thank you for helping. I really do appreciate it even though... ...this still isn't working. Here is my exact config. I cut it down to the bare bones: !GLOBAL_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Ore]]:FINAL GLOBAL_RESOURCE { ResourceName = LiquidFuel ResourceType = 0 Distribution { PresenceChance = 100 MinAbundance = 1 MaxAbundance = 15 Variance = 50 Dispersal = 3 } } This config does successfully add LiquidFuel to planets, but it still doesn't remove the ore.

There are two things that - together - make large ground bases rare: They are difficult to make. This is caused my many things. It's hard to land exactly where you want, within a meter or two. It's even harder to land right on a docking port or right next to another vessel and aimed the correct way. As a base gets larger, framerate issues will exacerbate this. And if you're getting framerate issues building the base, good luck landing a sizeable ship near it. They serve no purpose. Once you have a huge sprawling ground base built, what can you do with it that you couldn't do with a smaller base? Answer: Nothing. Now either of those things can be overcome. If they're hard to make but useful, that's just good gameplay. If they're useless but easier to make, hey why not this is mostly a sandbox game anyway and woot they look cool. But putting both together eliminates both sides of the player pool from building them.

Hmm. A picture of map mode and the contract would be helpful. If you can't do that, search your persistent.sfs file for some of the words in the contract and then copy/paste the entire contract block into a code block in the forum. NOT THE ENTIRE PERSISTENT FILE The code block is the button above your post that looks like this < >