NFUN

That seemed to have fixed it, thanks!

In my somewhat heavily modded KSP, I will crash every few flights. In the middle of a session, I looked in Task Manager and saw that the RAM usage for the game was slowly creeping up, even though I am just idling in the VAB. Is this a known bug with any mods, or has anybody else noticed this in their game? I am using OpenGL and Active Texture Management.

...Welcome to the forums! I'm sure you will be a very active member

I think the many KSC biomes might have something to do with how destructible buildings were added, but I pulled that out of my arse.

I just realized what has been missing from the game the whole time... we need to be able to rename ships from the Tracking Complex! This game is complete.

Had the privilege to create a challenge for Squad +100 points Said challenge forced many participants to commit competitive suicide -100 Even more evenness!

The thing is, most players of almost any game aren't hardcore players. The silent majority of stock players also tends to fit nicely in the sphere of 'softcore'. In other words, nearly all of the hardcore players use mods anyways, so SQUAD wasting development time catering to the relatively few players that already mod would be quite unproductive. That isn't to say realistic aerodynamics (which should be added in regardless) and DRE shouldn't be put in at all, but rather that a lot of realistic features (Life Support, much larger bodies) would be unused by a majority of the community, and those who would take advantage likely would have been experiencing the feature already. In short, this post was terribly written, and most players that want a more hardcore game already mod and have it. It would only be fun for the minority.

Many mods are disabled on x64 now, especially the larger ones.

You could try using Active Texture Management, that can help a lot with RAM issues.

Melons? Like Bananas? Banana Science maybe?

It would facilitate the removal of the souposphere. For example, a few days ago I installed NEAR and launched a simple small rocket on a new career save. I immediately quit and downloaded Real Solar System for that save-- it was so much easier to leave the atmosphere with it being realistic at its scale that more of a challenge was needed. If Squad ever wants to add a realistic atmosphere, they will need to either extend it stupidly further into space to make its density near the ground closer to some form of reality, or, preferably, make it less dense and more logical. Since decreasing the density is too easy, the bodies should be made larger up in response, and to keep the scale of parts consistent as a bonus. Besides the size of the planets, his suggestions combine features of several of the most popular mods, which is feasible due to the new diffculty slider. He has some rebalances that may or may not turn out well. The one thing that might be iffy, more than the radically changed aerodynamics is the change in ISP, which could be a bit of a shock to veterans. Having different thrust/fuel unit as density changes would take a little getting used to. A mod should probably be made to test the viability of this, if there isn't one already; it sounds interesting.

No, this is the official photo. Also, "this" "is" "Iran's" "steal"th "fighter:" " /"laser" //pay attention...

Trick question! You see*, the only real unicorns are Pink and Invisible, so the answer is pink! *Second person is all too common. I'm relatively sure the OP was referring to the tendency, particularly in pre-college science, for interactions to be described as 'wants' or 'tries', such as gas molecules want to move to areas of lower pressure and they will try to do so. YNM has it right, in that it is usually easier to explain interactions in such a manner. The disrespect DEJN is really uncalled for, it is common in many areas, especially outside of professional discussion. Usually it is better to use less human, desire-based words when the reason for an interaction is presumed to be known, and the reason should be explained when the audience doesn't know. For example, gas molecules' random motions lead them to elastically bounce off of other gas molecules, so less dense areas of gas lead to less interaction and thus less 'repulsion'. /it would really be embarrassing if I was wrong in my example, but the point stands

You play KSP, you should know the best way to get to space is up-- if you descend, you have a bad problem and will not go to space today. It's 'decent', you said it twice

Eh, there might be more activity there for the time being, but it is looking a little like there might be a power struggle there, as Fat Boy hasn't been seen in more than a month. And if they scale up their space program, many will translate that into nuke capability, or at least normal missiles. Any more sabre rattling, which they are prone to do, might not end as well for them as it did last time a year or two ago. But if they want to use space for peace, I wish them luck. At least they aren't Iran... (Iran has a tendency to photoshop weapons, or use obviously fake plastic/wood models as real planes)

If it is only saying that the mechjeb part is bad, not the plugin, you can go to the mechjeb part's file and find where it references the plugin. Then you can copy that into another part so that it will function the same and not be blacklisted.

Pretty much. Thanks!

With the advent of actual hard mode without reversions, I believe that it would be prudent to have a mod in which each launch would have to be declared a test or not. As a failed launch can be disastrous, cheaper 'test' launches would be insurance in case of silly, difficult-to-avoid building flaws. A test launch would probably have no Kerbals in it, even with a manned capsule, and could be launched at some fraction of the original cost. However, no contracts could be fulfilled in a test launch, the ship would not be persistent after the flight is ended (or some effect to that manner), and launches might be restricted to the Kerbin system, though that restriction might not be necessary. Potentially, this option could be enabled or disabled in the new difficulty settings, and the launch discount could be changed. I would attempt this (learning C# is probably a good idea in general), but I don't have the free time or likely the aptitude. I feel this mod has potential to make the career more logical, and might convince some players to take the plunge into Iron mode without the fear of long-term enfeeblement due to a simple staging mishap. Thanks to any who want to try to do this, and to everybody who has already made mods.

The revert function is disabled on the release version. Apparently it would occasionally delete every vessel on the server.

Welcome to the forums, we are glad to have you here! There is a lot of support for those mods in the addon forums, and if you like Kethane, you might want to check out Karbonite.

Welcome to the forums! To start, you might want to look at the tutorials to figure out how to build/fly. Personally, I think its more fun to crash and burn on your own, but if you get frustrated, they are always there. Career mode can help you learn about the basic parts and can gradually get you up to speed, or you can just put together random stuff in sandbox to see what happens. Just remember, a rocket needs a command pod/probe core (to pilot it), fuel and an engine. Most combinations of these parts will lead to some sort of explosion, so have fun!

Server List. Take note of the version number-- the stable release build for First Contract (.24) is version 1.5.6. If you are using KSP .25, you need to use the DMP Dev Build and find a server that uses it as well.

The consensus is that it is usually best to start your gravity burn about 10,000m (± 1000) high-- at this point, you've risen above the soup and about half the actual atmosphere.. If you want to practice when to start the burn, you can turn infinite fuel on with the debug menu (F12). For planes, you may want to look at some examples to help you out. Pay attention to the placement of wings and canards as others have mentioned, and take a look at the mass and lift rating too. You've joined the game at the perfect time for building planes, since the mod Spaceplanes+ has just been added.

Just build something Kerbishly Awesome but Impractical-- do each challenge beautifully to feed your ego, but mess up foolishly in some crucial way to throw the competition. For a Mun mission, send 5 rockets simultaneously and land them, but make them crash into each other on the return trajectory to Kerbin. Build an SSTO and 'accidentally' trap in on Eve.

I hope you can have multiple copies, I probably have at least 7 somewhere on my hard drive at this point. I made extra copies for mods and then kind of forget about them... Also, KSP uses patched-conics, not n-body, just a heads up in case you are used to the latter.