Exxmorphing

Or pressing quickload when you mean to quicksave. Or pressing quickload when your last quicksave was an ungodly amount of time ago. *Shudders* Let's not forget pressing "Tracking Station" in the menus instead of pressing "Revert Flight".

Perhaps to elongate his path, as to avoid falling too steep to safely slow. Or he's prolonging the animation because he finds burning up and gambling dying fun. I know I do. Today, I made and flew a cost-effective probe, chock with early science modules, on a flyby of the mun. I'm pretty happy that I was able to do it without SAS whilst coming within 55k, and coping with how the mid-stage tended to flip over twice in atmosphere immediately after detaching its boosters. Then again, that kind of pales in comparison with all the massive duna landing operations that are in this thread...

Holy crap, I missed the pre-party. And I'm gonna miss the post-party- Bad graphics card... Ey, does anyone think Squad will actually care about the release reviews, seeing how punches won't be held because of the in-dev tag anymore?

My most recent fail wasn't in exactly in the form of a crash... I was about to rendezvous with a kerbal stuck in orbit. I was in a 77-71km orbit. The kerbal was in a 100km orbit. Completing this contract would put me in the last phase of needing advance conics to go to the Mun and Minmus. Just this, and a few last survey contracts, before I would make the grand endeavor. It would be my first lunar expedition in our current career mode, with the fund count on my back for each tank of fuel I added. I knew I had a high risk of going past my target kerbal when I approached it in our respective orbits. I pressed F5 to quicksave, held it down as long as my memory told me so. The "Hold F5 to Quicksave" message appeared. I wasn't willing to waste some in-game days trying to fix my position to it if I did mess up; I had contracts that would expire soon. I headed to the tracking station to time accelerate. I accidentally came too close to my target. But I would give it a try. Besides, I quicksaved. I reached one of my major orbit distances. Apoapsis, periapsis, I don't remember. Looking back at how the nodes moved, or didn't move, it probably was the periapsis. It didn't matter at the time. I burned, with an LV-909 engine, until the apoapsis touched the orbit of the kerbal's. I hoped, knowing it was a practice in futility, that I wouldn't catch up ahead of my target before I reached the apoapsis. I did. I knew that I could still rendezvous even though I was ahead. However, I had never done it in such a way. It didn't matter that the procedure was pretty much the same as being behind my target. The irrational bug of the thought that I should be behind it prevailed. Besides, I had my quicksave. I was happy that I quicksaved before I went to the tracking station. I had something to fall back on, as reverting my flight was out of the option due to changing away from my vehicle. The horror stories of people reverting days of work came to mind, thinking that they had pressed F5 when they hadn't. Thankfully, I did. There was no observable error like that which I performed. I was calm. I knew what I was doing. I pressed F9. And I became yet another individual within the collection of horror stories. The moment I saw the launch pad and the blue skies I knew that it went wrong. I knew that I had reverted my game data to an unintended date. And I knew that it wasn't good, as I was looking above the launchpad, where the average rocket would be towering, but the vehicle in focus was down below where I was looking. I knew it wasn't good when the vehicle in question was a small one. My pupils shifted down. I almost instantaneously recognized the vehicle. It was four LV-909s connected to standard fuel tanks that were all attached to an unfueled skipper engine. Its purpose was to fulfill the agonizing mission of carrying the engine to the water, intact, activating it for a test contract, and carrying it back. It was a mission that I completed long ago. I mentally collected myself. I pressed alt-F9 to look for a more recent save. But, as I expected, albeit tried to deny, all the most recent saves were from 12/21/14. In my recent days of playing, I had abused the "revert flight" option obsessively, but neglected the quicksave function. I looked online for solutions, knowing that it was yet another prime example of an exercise in futility. Soon, while doing so, I quickly figured out what happened: I didn't hold down the quicksave button long enough. From my previous memories, I knew that I under-held it only for a fraction of a second. But it didn't make a difference if I held it for only a minuscule bit less than I should have or if I tapped it. It never saved. And so, finding no viable solutions, I decided to take a vacation from the space program. I didn't hold down the quicksave button long enough, causing me to revert to a two week old save-state.

The lack of detail in the contract descriptions. I mean, would it kill to say that you want new science around [insert celestial body's name]? I mean, there's only so much science I can gather with the stuff at hand, and now I've just wasted so much time and money... Also, perhaps a small display of a map/globe within mission control would be good for some of the survey contracts: *Goes to Mission Control, waits for it to load Hey look, new survey contract! Well, I guess I'll just head over to the tracking station to see where it wants me to go... *Goes to the tracking station, waits for it to load Err, so I guess there's more than one contract for surveys available. Hm... Which one was it? *Heads back to Mission Control, waits for it to load Ah, so that's what it's called. *Heads back to the tracking station, waits for it to load. Again. Err, that one is a bit high in altitude and far to reach with my current funds and tech tree... How much money am I getting in advance? *Heads back to Mission control, waits for it to load. Again. Hm, it's nowhere near enough to make me comfortable about it. It's possible, but it may be worth my time to go with this one instead. Now, let's see it in the tracking station... And so it goes on I think a lot of these pet peeves could be legitimate suggestions.

An idea to address those who state the issue of how parts fall over when they land. I'm not sure if this idea is complicated enough for its own thread, and it would be great if someone would tell me if it is so. However, we're already discussing mainly on this thread, so I'll post it here for now. And yes, I know that it's extremely ambitious and highly theoretical. Flame Shields up. It may be possible for an algorithm to be implemented that uses the dimensions of section off-ed portions of debris for a more realistic recovery system. While I believe that this is quite feasible, it is just a theory. Let's say, just to give a tangible example, that every 2 meters or so of an object's determined height, the game will check the general spatial dimensions of the object and possibly mass, thus statistically "separating" it into "portions". This could take place when it's no longer part of the main vessel, or when it goes out of the 2.5km limit. Those values could then be inserted into an algorithm, to which the objects within each section, whose boundaries are defined by the the locations of the measurements, are given certain chances of survival. First, objects in higher up sections have a lower initial chance of getting destroyed, and the lower objects have a higher chance. Naturally, these chances are also affected by the calculated speed of the object (the speeds of it with the parachute deployed at the highest possible point) when it hits the ground and the impact resistance of each object. As an example, a part with a resistance of 4 m/s will have a 90% chance (Figures are more or less random) of getting destroyed when it is in the bottom most portion of the overall object when falling at 6 m/s, but only a 20% chance of getting destroyed when in the top section. But with the point of toppling over, any calculations made above will not be the final chances of destruction. This theoretical algorithm will then compare the general dimensions, and if possible, mass, of the selected points for a chance that the object will "fall". Certain areas of Kerbin, probably biomes, are then to affect that chance. For example, if the measurements of the bottom portions of an object is quite skinny, say 5 meters in diameter, while the overall height of the object is high, say 40 meters, the chance of "falling over" is to be quite high; let's say 60%. If the object happens to land in a mountainous area, those chances are bumped up to 95%; if in a flat area, it may simply stay at 60%; if hilly, it may go up to 75%. Once that's calculated, parts of the object are assigned different chances of getting destroyed, depending on which portion they are in. Generally, objects in the lower portions have a lower chance of getting destroyed, while objects in the higher portions have a higher chance. If a certain portion has a large area/width compared to the surrounding portions of the object, the objects in that measured area ("portion", as I've been referring to them as) may get a higher chance of getting destroyed, but a lower chance for the objects in the surrounding areas/portions. These calculated chances are then applied to each object, with their own individual impact resistance If possible, it may also be wise for the mass of each overall area to play a roll in the chance of destruction. Here's another example: An object with, say, 5 portions, is to be calculated for damage. An object with a resistance of 10 m/s in the bottom-most portion has a 12% chance of destruction if the object is to fall over or topple. That same object in the top most portion, portion 5, is to initially be given a 60% chance of destruction. However, portion 4 has a large area or width when compared to the other portions due to some outcropping objects. The same object in portion 4 has a 75% chance of destruction, but the same object in portion 5 is to have its chance of destruction changed from 60% to 40%. Once this is calculated, chance takes its roll on the object that is to fall to earth. First, the initial fall destruction is to be resolved, and some objects are to be tagged for destruction, and others not. Afterwards, whether or not the object will have toppling damage applied will then be figured out. If luck has it that it does fall, then objects will have another chance of destruction, but with the new calculations meant just for toppling over. I find it necessary to not combine the chances (falling and toppling) and make it all one big chance of destruction. Any object that survives the roll o' death is then recovered. As an option, if the object fell on mountainous terrain, all of the objects will have another chance for damage, but this time not in the measured portions, but rather proportionately equal. Also, if an object is to exceed a single portion, should only the highest chance count, or should it have 3 chances for destruction? While I'm sure that my idea is possible, its only a theory, and hella ambitious for one, and thus may end up being not very feasible at all. It would be great if someone more learned on this could provide some insight on this and some actual values that could be plugged in. Edit: There would also need to be a way for the game to determine the bottom and top of the object.

Similar to the op, he's stuck in an orbit above moon with Bill, Bob, and Buzz (all the right people) after a lunar landing. They just have enough fuel to make a highly inclined orbit, but the periapsis would still be a couple million above kerbin's atmosphere. Rescue mission is pending.

So, how many times has it crashed?

Perhaps the game information counted a portion of the exosphere, thus increasing the numbers. Since the exosphere is extremely thin, it's just left out of the actual game, but included in the numbers.

That... Is not normal. A corrupted game, perhaps?

I did go to space, with four of my finest, but they're stuck in it, and to this day, I'm still trying to get them out. It all started with a new design of my science craft. After I unlocked and added the science jr. and ladders, I went from a weird design to this: Eager and greedy, I decided it was good enough for the moon (as you can see in the pic above). That was my first mistake, as I should have waited until I got the fuel lines and bigger tanks. After my successful landing, I posted a flag, took a few kick-ass photos, and took off. I then proceeded to make my second mistake: I made a counter-clockwise orbit, not knowing that you waste fuel like that. I quicksaved in orbit, and attempted to get back to Kerbin. I escaped the moon, got in a big orbit with Kerbin, only to run out of fuel when my periapsis was a short distance away from Kerbin (maybe about a million and a half meters): After several retries using the handy button called F9, I realized that I just simply didn't have the fuel. Thus, I sent home what science I could, and used new parts to build a space craft grabber to grab the craft and push it back to Kerbin. However, even after a night of learning how to rendezvous with another craft in orbit, I just couldn't quite make orbit well enough with the mun (it was VERY tilted, and I was going to crash almost each time), and I realized that my single night of education wasn't good enough to get to it even if I did come close. In the end, I resorted to pushing my craft using Jebediah (the crew was Jeb, Bill, Bob, and Buzz. All the right people, correct?). I would have to push to hours to make it back, so I eventually gave up after cutting about a couple thousand meters off my periapsis. After holding that sacred button that shalt be dubbed "F9", I called it a night. And thus, they are stuck forever orbiting the mun until something new comes up. Ideas, anyone? (Sorry for long post; man, if only we could use spoilers, and yeah, I know it was boring, but I didn't have anything else. Seriously, I had nothing in my recollection that was absolutely shocking and non-steriotypical)

I always set an action key for detaching the command module and releasing the parachutes. I also ALWAYS press the revert button if it goes awry at launch instead of changing vehicles, thus making their deaths only temporary.

Hello ksp community, I've had my eyes on ksp for some time, and recently I got the demo. I swore that I would not create an account here or get the full game until I successfully landed on the mun and made it back. wut- no spoilers? Several bucks down the whole and a couple days later, here I am. Also, I'm a forum veteran. I've been on multiple forums, and know my way around things VERY well, so don't expect me to ask how to put up a pic. (Actually, I will ask how to post youtube vids directly embedded into the post, but still) I hope I get to know a lot of you guys!