OtherDalfite

I like the forums and all but the extreme amount of censorship is sometimes unbearable. Most anyone who voices an opinion will be jumped on and then devolve into whining or namecalling if they were proven wrong. That and the fact that everyone seems to think these forums are supposed to be a hugbox where no one will ever make you sad ever, which really takes away what a very unique quality internet offers, a place to speak your mind.

So... how long did you actually wait before yelling at the man/woman like you did? They could have been called away by the boss as Mercy stated or gotten a call of some kind and had to leave. Just try again if you don't get good service, not go and proclaim they are awful just because it's EA.

I like the new loading screens. Used to, it would pause and not give any indication whether it was working or had locked up. Now, since you can see the small loading icon moving, you can tell the program is actually working.

My guess would be that you are using those gigantic wheels with almost no mass for them to lift. If say, a big fat orange tank full of fuel was stuck under there, then a lot of your problems would disappear. Wheels and the ways in which they work are pretty wonky right now, I just hope they are fixed in a later version.

Happens at the poles too. Not really too much of a problem if you ask me.

I've had it happen enough times to know what causes it. It's always Kerbals hitting them whilst in EVA, something dropping on them, or them being dropped on something. On a more unwinnable side, it could be just collision errors when going too fast or dropping out of warp, causing parts to jitter and "slam" into things without visible notification.

Well, they can break by colliding with things or hitting the ground too hard. I'm not sure if Kerbals can repair them or not. They could have been damaged in flight or if you had a bit of a rough landing when you ejected the probe.

I'm aware of how they are squeezing everything out of the current program, but surely something can be done about it. The new Mun looks many times better then it used to, and still gives me an astounding 60 FPS on average. I can have a single tank rolling on Kerbin from a discarded rover or crash and I can't look anywhere but up or down without the entire game turning into a powerpoint presentation. There has to be some better way to handle the terrain then the current fix.

Seriously dude? Spam the Off-Topic board with these stupid shenanigans, not the actual Science board. This is probably the third thread I've seen from you as just a joke. Post it on Funnyjunk or Facebook or Off-Topic. Not here.

Never heard of Towns to be honest, but I played Dwarf Fortress for a good while and still don't know everything about it. Just be sure to have the wiki open as you play it. Also, stick with the vanilla ASCII pack when you play, it makes it a whole lot easier down the road.

Screenshots shouldn't be in the Fan-Art section anyways. Post them in the "Show Off Your Awesome KSP Pictures" thread dedicated to just screenshots. This board is for animations, drawings, sketches and the like.

While the physics may be computer intensive, I think the terrain generation is far more, at least ocean generation. On the Mun and any other bodies without oceans, I get a nice smooth 40-60 FPS even if I have a 200-300 part spacecraft, and it's fine on my decent rig. The fact I can't enjoy flying a plane around Eve, Kerbin, or Laythe is why I'm currently upset with the game. If they are going to have it released now, at least let us enjoy the planet we start on.

Yeah, I'll agree KSP does need some thought put into how terrain is handled, as right now it is a very slow, computer intensive bit of the game, and probably the most intensive (on my part, at least). The ocean, a flat barren sea of blue makes my normal 40-60 FPS chug down to a grueling 15-20. I'm aware that Unity supports only 1 core for PhysX calculations, but what about terrain? EDIT: @Johnno I think OP is having more trouble with his terrain than with parts, as you really don't have to worry about that until you get way up into the 300+ part counts.

Ah, yeah mods tend to have unintended side effects even if nothing is related to the mod. If this happens often, try uninstalling and reinstalling your mods one at a time to see which ones are causing the problems. (If) it's the mod causing it and not just the game, make a post in the modification's thread.

If anything ever had that kind of speed, it would be faster than anything man has ever had in the atmosphere ever. It would also burn up from the excrutiating heat.

Make a bug report using the bugtracker. I haven't gotten this myself, and haven't really seen anything else like it. But it's worth making a report and giving it to the devs.

I'm not even sure if that story is just a hoax or a folk tale (forgive me if I'm wrong) but even if it did have the force to somehow make it into space, it's time up there would have been very small, as it would have simply gone up and fallen back down.

You mean to tell me you have to be Scott Manley to be a decent pilot? This is the product of quality work and testing.

Don't ruin it with an explosion because lolsokerbal. I think it looks really good as it is.

Alright, so what is there for man to accomplish on missions? Plant a flag? Take some samples a robot could take at a fraction of the cost? Just lack of "imagination" isn't a good reason why Kryten was wrong.

You can order one online. Just don't expect to be able to buy it with the stuff you find in your couch.

I think you may have managed to capture it at an angle where it looks small. At least to me, that is.

I'm by no means a physicist, but I can try and answer that to the best of my abilities. We know it's rotating because it's easily visible. That, and you can feel the effects imparted by the rotation of the torus. According to our current knowledge of the laws of physics, it has to be rotating, because everything rotating around it wouldn't make sense, as it would basically make that torus the non-moving reference frame we need to decide. We take the guess it is rotating by outside view and comparison of it to it's parent body or the stars. If you happen to mean that it isn't rotating, and that it matches the non-rotating reference frame, that wouldn't really follow the law of centripetal force.

Actually, your guess was almost perfect about the orbital track we take. If you like OP, there is a very easy to use game that simulates N-Body physics, and can show you what path an object will take while on a spinning object moving through space. http://dan-ball.jp/en/javagame/planet/ It may take a bit, but try and put a small moon around the blue object. Watch the orbital path that it leaves behind. This is basically the same as if you were standing on the rotating Earth as it orbited the Sun, only you would make larger "loops".

Hey Pootis, we actually have a specialized thread for screenshots in the general discussion forum. It's at the top of the page highlighted in orange. This fan-art board is more meant for drawings, renderings, or sketches.