HeadHunter67

It's better to ask for permission first, rather than expect lenience for taking the liberty. If you don't, expect some well-justified flaming by the community. The only people who will look favorably upon this are those who aren't bright enough to install their choice of mods on their own. Also, expect that you will be the one who will be obligated to answer support questions for "your" pack. If you aren't sure how or if mods you're including might conflict, ask yourself if you're prepared for the responsibility.

Here is Largo Station, assembled entirely in orbit in about 7 launches and more than a dozen docking operations: And I'm not the only one who's done MIR, of course, but I love the way it came together:

OK, things are a little clearer to me now that I've done it. I guess my problems before were due to not making my initial LOI orbit large enough to make an intercept with a low PE rather than an impact trajectory. I'm sure if I knew more about actual landing techniques, a collision course would be OK. Trying to be economical with fuel, I guess. Thanks again for helping me to learn how it's done.

I understand - by "landing orbits" I was referring to what you're doing here. First problem: I set an intercept orbit by dragging the prograde handle until my Kerbin apoapsis was the same as the Mün's orbit (a little over 11.4 Mm), but no matter where along my parking orbit I drag the ring (even in the area where I have intercepts), I do not see a Münar "periapsis" marker that you refer to - and honestly, I don't think I ever have. This may be why I've had problems with LOI before - I have to adjust my burn after encounter or I'll crash right into the surface. What am I doing wrong here? I was hoping this would teach me, but I'm not seeing what you speak of. Are you using different patched conic seetings than the default or something? All I see are Pe and Ap markers for my existing and projected Kerbin orbits, not for the Mün. [EDIT: OK, I did manage to get a Münar Pe marker, but it required setting the initial orbit to quite a bit beyond the diameter of the Münar orbit - about 12.1Mm. That's a bit of a difference.]

In that case, there's really no worry if the author includes a license that's too permissive at first - the worst that can happen is that others can fork off that version (and that version alone) if the author decides on a more restrictive license in a later version. Some people may not desire this, and that's certainly understandable. But choosing the wrong license for your 0.9 version shouldn't have too much impact on, say, your 1.4 release later.

Fair enough - but I want to compliment you on the job you did with the Science Lab. It looks great, outside and inside too! The interior is nice and looks "scientific", the fold-out instruments animate nicely and including the barometer, thermometer and gravimeter was a nice touch (why no accelerometer?). We could certainly use more modules like this in the game - and hopefully when the R&D experiments come out in .22, it will be easy to update this module to work with that system somehow.

We really need a good 2-person command pod!

They certainly can - happens all the time in the software world. Licenses and terms of service get updated, and the user has two choices: Accept the new license, or stop using the software. (Many choose the unofficial third option, "ignore the terms and keep using the product", but that won't hold up in court).

[EDIT: My apologies, Allmhuran, if I misunderstood what you said. I took your post to mean that you think two stacks side-by-side would behave no differently than two rockets flying separately, which of course is ridiculous and in defiance of common sense, let alone this game's aerodynamics or actual physics. I must have misread your post.]

Two things: 1) Make sure your camera is set to Chase Mode (use the V key to switch modes). This way, "up" when you translate on-screen is the same as "up" on your keyboard (default K). 2) Make sure your RCS thrusters are balanced according to your ship's Center of Mass. I recommend the RCS Build Aid plugin for this. But it sounds like the biggest issue is you were trying to translate without using lateral thrusters. It's hard as hell even for experienced pilots to dock just using forward thrust and yaw/pitch/roll.

I'm certainly hoping for (and explicitly asked Squad for) a Science Lab Module. Something the size of a large fuel tank (2.5x6 or more) that can hold several crew and has a variety of robust science options for data collection, analysis, etc. [EDIT: zzz seems to be on the right track with the Science Lab module!]

Thanks! Your tutorial missions have been very helpful to me. I've done Münshots before, landed safely and even managed a free-return trajectory once... but I've still got much to learn (like the most effective ways for LOI and landing orbits). I'll give this a try.

I love the new radiators, and especially the science lab. Also, I just watched Silent Running again last night and I love how your domes remind me of the ones on Valley Forge.

I'm trying to understand why you'd build a station with all that crew capacity if you didn't want to crew it.

That's kind of what I had in mind - it can be done in incremental steps; it needn't be done all together in a single update. In fact, it's quite unlikely that they'd pack that all into one update, simply due to the size and scope of it.

I don't think we're "arguing about ribbons". But it's clear that some people can't make their point without hating on how others play, and I agree with you that this should not be encouraged. I'm a big proponent of individual choice in sandbox games, and I don't like it when people aren't nice to each other. It makes me "not nice" too. I agree that we should try to seek a common ground rather than allow individual insecurities and parochial points of view to spoil that.

There's no need for an "official post" when common sense holds the answer. How and why would they include a feature for orbital construction if they had not yet included the materials to build with? You can put resources in the game that don't have an immediate use - players can gather them until they do have a use - but if you include a construction feature without the needed materials, all it will "gather" is dust. Clearer to you now? You are right that it's possible that they'll be released concurrently, I just wanted to explain how that's not necessarily... necessary?

Seems to happen with any lighted command pod when in time warp while orbiting - not just this one.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm simply trying to illustrate how that door swings both ways. Those people aren't including that caveat for their own edification - they're including it in the hope that others will be more impressed by the accomplishment. Honestly, that's really all the ribbons are about after all, isn't it? I like to show off what I've done, but I keep it in perspective. I don't expect everyone will be impressed, and honestly, I don't care if they are not. I hope that my efforts can yield something that entertains or interests others, but I don't worry if it doesn't happen. I was just trying to say that players on either side of the issue can be elitist and/or oppressive, because it's inevitably relative in this sort of game. *I* care. I don't care if you care or not. And my ribbons don't take up any more space than your post, and are at least as worthwhile - plus nicer to look at. They represent accomplishments - can you say the same about your post?

There is so much unexpected irony in this statement, you could build a railroad to Jool with it. "I prefer to play in an unstructured environment with no set goals or purpose, but if this new stuff doesn't provide those in this mode, I'm not interested!"

Well, I'd bet it was not for lack of fuel!

They're not going to add either of those features without adding the resources first. I'm sure you can realize why.

I had a robotic tug that I used to build my newest space station. When it was completed, I transferred what fuel I could to the station, and with the remaining fuel, I paid a visit to my other remaining station at a higher altitude. With no monopropellant remaining, I couldn't dock, but I did fly by close enough for the crew to wave farewell to Tugger before he was decommissioned by being deorbited. I kind of felt the same way I did when I deorbited my first station - a little sad, because it had done its duty and served well. But to me, that's the proper end to a spacecraft's noble service.

You weren't talking about exclusivity, you said it's "unintuitive". I'm not saying it's a must for modders, but I seriously doubt that someone who can't understand GitHub is going to be able to effectively maintain an abandoned mod.

So could "cheating"... that's the point. Relative terms are meaningless in this kind of game, because how one person plays doesn't ever affect anyone else in the least. It's no different than many other things in real life - if how someone conducts their own life doesn't actually affect anyone else, the only people who feel a need to pass judgment on it are those who are insecure about their own place in things. It's sadder still when we're talking about a game. And what you see as "cheating", others see as "enjoying their own game the way they want to, because it doesn't affect how others play in the least". See how it's all relative?