metl

I can understand rebuilding the structures to support male and female, but to make the two completely different is a really crappy thing. I love using different suits and I am sure they will eventually get updated, but I would choose different suits over female kerbals. Sorry Squad.

This is what happens when they jump into release without actually beta testing properly. Manley found a bug on live stream for Squad's sake!

I'm actually getting double fps with higher settings.

Completely cleaned out the the KSP folder and am downloading a fresh copy on Steam so when it updates I can just go!

It's the smoke rolling out from the launch tunnels

I've logged close to 600 just since buying it through Steam (to log hours.) I probably have close to 50 hours pre-Steam, and I do not use FAR or DRE so those aren't especially a necessity to play past 100 hours. To each his own.

IR is nice, but as far a necessary, not really. KER or KAS add much more fundamental functions, KER more so probably. Especially if you consider it from the point of what mod do you rely on the most? Clearly the one that provides you with the information needed to get everything else to where it needs to be.

I would think deformable terrain would be far more difficult than just a couple of days work. If it is "impact craters" then it is probably just a surface decal.

Oh now THAT is just a funny visual (and very Kerbal!)

Here's the big question: Is this a countdown to release or a countdown to the release of the release date?

I was wondering if anyone else caught the 10 screenshot images today... tomorrow 9???

The other planets are coming. So far Mun and Minmus have also been added.

Whoa.. wait... You did what!? We can do that with this?! We can seriously disassemble a rocket completely? I have to try this out!

Bah! Why did I not think of this?

I'm a little aggravated about the barn issue. I want the barn and think it was pretty cool, but honestly the biggest issue is without it, there is a severe lack of real progression in career. There really needs another tier of buildings and something about pushing it post-1.0 just seems wrong. At this point I don't even care if it is the barn any more, just something! Hopefully the tech tree changes mentioned in the dev notes are going to be well thought out. I feel like I unlock almost every part of the tree now before I ever even attempt to go interplanetary just because I really don't want to send only one Kerbal (even more so now with the XP addition.) The memory leaks should have been handled by now, but at least they are finally fixing it. I think the current fairing model is ugly. Maybe it's just max's terrible design for one, but it looks awful. Oh well. At least they have fairings. I'm glad to see heat and hopefully heat will have an impact. I'm fine with not having extra "heat shield" parts. That means there is no "just put a bigger heat shield on" way to avoid heat. You will have to re-enter properly. DRE is nice, but ultimately easily bypassed by just using another layer or larger heat shield (which is what I found myself doing so often that I finally just stopped using DRE.) I really wish they would release some videos of the new changes or something. I really want to see the aero stuff. I'm anxiously waiting for 1.0, for I am beginning to really be concerned at the speed at which they are pushing all of this out.

Can someone please tell me if I am doing something wrong. First, to attach something I have to drag it out of the backpack and just "drop" it. While doing this, My Kerbal's jetpack reacts to the mouse control and he begins dancing around. After I drop the part (which hopefully is not floating away too quickly) I have to then right-click on it and select "attach" while at the same time maneuvering my kerbal back into the position he was at first before going for a joy ride on his jetpack. Then I have to hope that the distance between the dropped part, the kerbal, and the rocket are all still close enough to reach, or I have to do the whole thing over again. Please tell me there is an easier way.

Not sure if this has been covered in the past 35 pages, but is it possibly to disable the conflict with mouse controls? As soon as I pick up an item from the pack (either by right-click or by using keyboard shortcut) my Kerbal goes into mouse control mode and flies around with the jetpack while I am trying to drop the item.

I've been trying to help severedsolo squash some of the more problematic bugs and I think we about have it ready. Being ale to re-select the station is in case for some reason the game forgets you had a station. I know I used that feature heavily when testing. Once everything is for sure stable, it might not be a bad idea if severedsolo changes it so all of the construction pieces have to be new vessels. I would be inclined to leave the "core" as-is just in case KSP forgets there was already a station in orbit.

The newest pre-release required CC 0.7.8 but yes they work with and require contract configurator

I finally got it fixed with: DATA { type = Vessel requiredValue = false targetVessel = [ LKOStation ].Random() } REQUIREMENT { name = NoStation type = Expression expression = (!@/targetVessel.IsOrbiting()) } Thank you for the help. If there is a problem on your end, I hope this helps you find it.

Yeah I tried that too. I even tried DATA { type = Vessel requiredValue = true targetVessel = [ LKOStation ].Where(!v =>v.IsOrbiting() && v.CelestialBody() == Kerbin).Random() } REQUIREMENT { name = NoStation type = Expression expression = (!@/targetVessel.IsOrbiting()) }

I was pretty sure an expression would have to be used in some way. I'll play around with this and see if I can make it work. At the moment, it only wants to give the contract if I set the expression to require true (I took out the !) but then it won't stop giving it out. Hmm. I had actually tried the '@/targetVessel == null' I don't remember what the error was, but CC wasn't happy with it! Lol!

With it set as either true or false, it is always still offered. I've double-checked to make sure it is in the CONTRACT_TYPE area, but I will move it above everything else to make sure I haven't missed a } somewhere. On the debug menu, there aren't any errors at all for the contract. And I think your debug menu works just fine. In fact, it gives an extremely thorough amount of information! I'll get a screenshot up here in just a few. The DATA node appears to be working correctly. the contract shows the target vessel as being LKOCore (my VAB name of the ship used to do complete the contract.) But even though the requirement is set to require a false (null?) value, the contract still appears. In case you are wondering what in the world I am doing, I am trying to help severdsolo finish out the space station contract pack. The goal I am working on is to make it so the contract to launch the initial space station core no longer appears once there is a station in orbit, then the expansion contracts will show up. He originally used the ContractCompleted requirement, but that proved to be too buggy and did no good in the case where a station might get destroyed or disappear. I haven't tested it on the expansion contracts yet as I wanted to make it work here first.

That took care of the errors, but it doesn't have any effect on whether the contract is offered or not. Does the DATA node need to go within a parameter or requirement? It's currently on it's own. I tried it in the VesselParameterGroup, but it didn't make a difference. On the bright side, by the time I get this figured out, I just might know what I am doing

Nevermind. I'm an idiot. I should have looked at the error log better. It isn't the requiredValue flaging. It says "Can't find method Kerbin for class List 1." Lts of parser stuff, then it shows error occured near "*" [ LKOStation ].where(v =>v.IsOrbiting()).Kerbin() .*<--Here I'm thinking I need to define "Celestialbody().Kerbin()" maybe? Or can i do "[ Kerbin ]"? I know, you are probably about getting sick of playing 20 questions just trying to help an idiot (me) solve this one problem. I just assumed the "Random" that was on the wiki example could be swapped with a planet name. I should have known it wouldn't be that simple