Kerbart

Yes, if you back up only the saves folder and the gamedata folder you're good to go. For additional vigilance, exclude the squad folder from your backup, as well as scenarios and tutorials from saves (I think they're called like that)—those are provided by Squad as well, so you want those updated with new content if you update the game (and not being overwritten by your backup when you restore mods & saves).

It depends a bit on expectations. We don't live in the 1990s anymore where you'd buy a CD with a game and that was all you got. In this day and age ongoing development is much more the standard than the exception. If "no longer being developed" means "out of EA" then KSP will likely (or hopefully never) be out of EA. If they should have waited until the game came out of EA. Well, there wouldn't have been a KSP in the first place. Or maybe something like 0.18 As the publishers, Squad gets to choose when the game comes out of EA. If we agree that it's a good thing development of the game won't stop, I think that a good definition of EA-end is "if we stop developing now you'd be happy with the game in it's current state". To be honest I don't think 1.0 qualified for that, but 1.1 does in my mind. A lot of loose ends have been tied up. The vanilla version is far more stable. Yes, there's a ton of bugs left that need to be patched, and I expect that to happen over the next few weeks. But aside from the outstanding bugs (and they should be fixed) we're looking at a fairly complete game now. Unlike 1.0 which really couldn't qualify as such. If you mean in the sense of how it indicates the state of development, I agree. We passed that station arguably with 0.90 and definitely with 1.0. It's still convenient though for separating various versions. "That was not introduced until 0.90," those kind of things.

While Steam, may, according to some, be an invention of The Dark Lord himself, one of the advantages is that anything you buy can be played anywhere, anytime (provided you have internet access to install the game). The download key from the store works the same way, as far as I know.

The OP said not to alter the game drastically. Part mods and KJR do not really coincide with that, one can argue.

Not with KSP but MSFS had this all the time. If I recall correctly it had something to do with loading the textures into the video card (“but 64 bit!” — yes, the textures are in your main memory, but necessarily loaded onto the video card required to actually render them on screen). Never found a solution for it but I didn't look very hard either.

As this is by look and feel not something KSP creates, the obvious source must be your video card. Googling the words "physx-cpu on screen" (give it a try, really!) revealed this, and I quote:

Good point. Although I'd be open to the suggestion that this 1.1 release is, in some ways, the true 1.0 release; I'd be perfectly comfortable if the previous release was .27 (or even .90.6, 0r .93) and this was the big one point oh release. This version seems much more worthier of it than that botched 1.0 release. With all the legal shenanigans going on (license transfer to some postbox company in Amsterdam, etc) i always wondered what the reason for that was. I assumed just good ole' financial assetts offshoring (while the Netherlands doesn't mind taxing its citizens to the wazoo, it's quite the tax haven for foreign owned companies and it doesn't have that "tax dodge" sound like Liechtenstein, Cayman Islands or Panama). But I can imagine that securing the required contracts from Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo was a lot easier with a "1.o" version under their belt; good point.

Let's stick to the right nomenclature here. If you have a meteor in your room I'd be interested about your room. A meteor, by definition, is in flight. Once it's landed, it's a meteorite.

Not to mention that the current version represents itself at 1.1.0.1230 There is no fixed rule for version numbering (“The FBI raided the house of rogue developer Adam Smith who used #.#.@ versioning scheme instead of the approved #.#.#.#-@@@@ scheme”) and yes, Squad can jump from 1.1 to 2.0 or 1.2 at any time they see fit (as they obviously did in the past).

@Porkjet said: “ @Gryphorim I guess in reality since they rely on pressure for structural stability, they'll allways need to have higher pressure on the inside. So at 5atm at eve sealevel they'd need ...6atm inside? Not a problem to do probably, but nothing we have to worry about in KSP anyway ” Actually, I heard on The Orbital Mechanics podcast this week (episode 54) that such is not the case—at least not with the Bigelow units. Which is why Bigelow insists on calling them expandable, not inflatable (let alone “blow up”). Of course, the Kerbals might have taken an entirely different approach to the concept of extendable units, as “blow up” does not have to seem the stigma in Kerbal Kulture that it has in ours... (Sorry for the crappy quoting, but even in Chrome for the desktop I could not get it to work today)

They announced *today* that they stop making them, so technically, no.

Dude that is soooooo outdated. Hahahaha!

It's still UPloading to steam... be patient..

I feel the real HYPE

You'll notice that the first thread post hasn't been updated since June 2015. And that the there are two download links; one on the generally hated curseforge (I don't mind it, it's reliable), and one on Kerbalstuff. Kerbalstuff has ceased to exist. As the mod author obviously did not find the time to update his links, the CKAN version is still pointing to the Kerbalstuff download that no longer exists.

1224 is long since obsolete, we're in 1228.

I love the irony that it’s apparently very hard to produce this super strong material without breaking it.

I had a feeling that was the issue that was going on, so I figured clarifying things would help.

The way it works in 1.0.5: You open the flight computer You click on any of the orientation modes (orbit, target, relative velocity) Optionally, you click on any of the desired directions (prograde, retrograde, normal, radial) The craft will hold said direction. There may be an initial delay as the command to hold this direction has to travel to your craft, but after that the flight computer will hold direction in real time. As far as I know, this is exactly the behavior you want it to display. The way it works in 1.1 pre-release: You open the flight computer You click on any of the orientation modes (orbit, target, relative velocity) Optionally, you click on any of the desired directions (prograde, retrograde, normal, radial) The craft will spin in any direction but the way you want it to go. This might or might not stop, depending on the capacity of your batteries and the rate they are recharged at (or how much monoprop is left) As far as I know, this is a known bug that the mod developers (a pre-release mod targeted at a pre-release version of the game) are working on. Yes it's frustrating. It's being worked on. By people who do this in their spare time, for free, for your enjoyment. But not right this second. If this is not what you mean, then please be clearer in making us understand what is the issue (as of yet I haven't seen you mention the version of KSP and the version of RT you're using. But I might be wrong).

You're aware this is a known bug in 1.1 that the RT dev team is working on, right?

It's a good thing you didn't throw in hydrochloride, or I could have said that it was a baseless statement.

When I start thinking about it the possibilities are endless. You could mix & match follow up contracts, and the knowledge that there are follow-up contracts (preferably profitable) would remove the current loopholes* in the contract system. Something like this: Launch unmanned science probe in orbit from x to y km with z° inclination. Have an antenna, a thermometer and a goo container on board. Do not activate the goo container yet Based on readings from (1), reposition satellite in new orbit with parameters a, b and c (apo,peri, incl). Based on readings from (1) and (2), do the goo experiment while in orbit with parameters a, b, and c. Reset the goo container and do another goo experiment De-orbit the satellite A contract sequence like that would offer a variety of activities, good income, an incentive to not re-purpose the craft for other tasks (something the current contracts allow and thus kind of encourage), and a final de-orbit (paid for!) contract would also guarantee that you're not ending up with a cloud of debris in orbit. How hard is it to write contract mods (I have no clue)? * For instance, right now I'm executing three contracts in one mission: (1) put a station in Kerbin orbit; (2) put an unmanned satellite in Mun orbit (same station, it has a thermometer slapped on it); (3) put a station in Mun orbit. Station extension contracts tend to make my stations unuseable (space for 35 kerbals anyone?) so I don't care about those in the first place.

I agree, and it shouldn't be that hard. Already there's a template in place, it's just tremendously lacking. Instead of the random gibberish, the text for a satellite contract (thermometer, goo pod) could look like this: Introduction: Ever since Jinglefrod Kerman discovered a new radiation belt between [PERIAPSIS] and [APOAPSIS] km above [PLANET/MOON], Kerbal scientists have been wondering about it's energetic properties. Mission brief: Flood Dynamics has graciously offered to sponsor a science mission to investigate said energies and for that reason we're asking to to put a satellite in orbit to measure the temperature, in order to find out more about the energy distribution in the radiation belt. Since we don't know how dangerous the radiation is, we will also send in some goo to see how it is affected by it. The underlined words can be picked at random, and for each contract type there could be four or five paragraphs to pick from. Rescue a Kerbal? Easy to come up with a dozen different background stories why Dingleberry Kerman was left in a Mk 1 capsule in LKO. The system can even be made moddable (all you need to do is provide a text file with some prescribed tags), opening a whole new avenue of modding to a very talented part of the community (given what we see at the mission reports) that perhaps feels left out right now when it comes to making mods.

In an amazing coincidence, KSP offers multiple modes to play in! If you don't like career, don't play career. Now, since we're in critique mode, there are various issues with the list you present, which would entice people, less educated and patient than those that posted in this thread, to misunderstand it. You're using numbers, not bullets. That means that the order in which things appear is important. And yet... they do not form a coherent list, with an overarching storyline or emotional investment, or cohesive thought (aside from "contracts suck"—but why the list then). Most of the arguments "make no sense," "are not logical," "are not linear, "no reason to play" are stated as opinions. They might be facts but there's no argumentation added to them, which makes checking—and thus accepting as such—those facts next to impossible. The list is either repetitive or follows circular reasoning. In a shell: “I don't like it, because it sucks. Why does it suck? Because I don't like it” Now, for some of the points you brought up: Career Mode has no redeemable story/no reason to become invested in/no reason to be a mode. I'm not sure what redeemable is supposed to mean. Should I get cookies when I reach certain goals? Neither does Sandbox by the way. Or any mode in KSP. Does that make KSP a bad game? As for “a story”; personally I’d like to play the role of Kerbart Kerman, the role model of Elon Musk. My personal goal is to develop a profitable space program so I can turn my profits into a foundation for exploring the Kerbin universe. Others play Career mode with other stories. Or no story at all, just as a challenge mode. Recently there was a thread on the forum, basically asking why the Reliant and Swivel engines exist. When pointed out that they are extremely cost effective, the answer was "I don't play career mode. I don't care." Yes, but others do. The constraints (limited technology, limited funds) Career provide can stimulate some people's creativity in ways Sandbox doesn't for them. Contracts do not make sense (in about ten variantions) I don't get it. It make perfect sense to me. Rescue Kerbals and earn money. Put stuff in orbit and earn money. Go places and earn money. The reasoning why? Well, yes, there's room for improvement. To be honest, I rarely ever read the gibberish at the top of the contract. For me a contract is "Build a space station that can hold five Kerbals in Mun Orbit. It needs to have an antenna, a docking port and it can generate its own power." What doesn't make sense there?

I'm going to assume you don't play career mode. As practically any contract involves a thermometer and the science jr pod.