Anquietas314

I think a fairly solid argument could be made that valve's prosperity is a result of the popularity of the half life and portal series (not to mention Left4Dead etc) and the fact they own steam.... it has little to do with the modability of their games. Of those games you just listed, only counterstrike was made by valve, though they obviously get a cut from the steam sales of the others, as well as probably some revenue from the use of the source engine (this part is really no different from the Unreal and Unity engines - neither are games themselves).

He meant contracts that were on the other side of the planet from KSC.... some of them are surface-based.

Well yeah I guess there's that. I probably should have clarified; I meant a manned lander lol (nice job landing a stayputnik on the Mun with no SAS!)

Figures I guess. Detailed particle simulations are really hard to do in real-time, especially in a game like KSP where there's a hundred(thousand?) other things happening at the same time

Given the temperatures typically found in a nuclear reactor, you really don't want oxidizer anywhere near that thing (this is less of a problem for rockets since the exhaust carries most of the heat away from the engine itself).

I also added a simple solution to the very problem you described shortly after you posted it... I was not the only person to provide the suggestion either. Clearly, some of us at least had thought about it. But let's not turn this into a poop-throwing contest

Well, isn't that what the RADAR altimeter is for? I think it really depends on your difficulty settings though. In my 0.90 career I was physically unable to go the Mun (required both VAB and launchpad upgrade) until after I'd already unlocked the lander can anyway. (disclaimer: no doubt somebody's figured out a way to do it without the upgrades.... I am not that guy )

You do however need legs if you want to survive a landing at more than 6m/s... (and you're not using a plane designed to survive a hard crash)

O.o that was in before 0.90? V was "angle" snap which served a different purpose - that's still in the game. In any case, use the offset gizmo with angle snap turned on; that does what you want, I think (hold shift for greater precision).

It's called funds in the save file . You can actually just do a Ctrl+F search for "funds" and you'll find it pretty quickly. Science on the other hand is a bit trickier to find

Heh.... not on hard difficulty, I assure you. *looks at "test $700 decoupler for $200" contract* I do however get your point, and a few people, including me, already made it

It hasn't gone anywhere As part of the overhaul the implementation was slightly changed though (mostly for the better)

Oh I know that part, I was referring specifically to the airflow physics - i.e. does it do some sort of particle-based simulation or just use a decent mathematical model?

lol no problem

Supersonic airflow is fairly well known for doing very weird things, so chances are your model's a bit too simplistic I have no idea the extent to which FAR accurately models real-world physics though. (disclaimer: I am not a physics expert)

WanderingKid: you could do that yeah, but that's an awful lot of (boring, tedious) work switching back and fore between mission control and a probe in the required orbit for much less reward than you'd get abusing the strategy system and doing contracts normally. Good idea though about making a list

Well, one could make the argument that the player is in charge of all of those combined (perhaps this is what you meant by abstraction). Don't JPL do most of the legwork for building rockets/rovers/etc anyway? I do see what you're saying though, and I agree to an extent with most of it

Heh.... it was only a matter of time before someone posted that, wasn't it?

>_> did you not read the edit?

Having just tried that, no it doesn't work. You can however cheat-complete contracts.... but neither of these is really what the OP is after.

Change the numbers and save? EDIT: You can open persistence.sfs or quicksave.sfs in notepad if you don't have a better text editor. Use Ctrl+F to find that. EDIT2: Also, didn't notice horseman had posted. Derp lol

Line 63 of my save file: DIFFICULTY { AutoHireCrews = False MissingCrewsRespawn = False BypassEntryPurchaseAfterResearch = False AllowStockVessels = False IndestructibleFacilities = False } CAREER { StartingFunds = 10000 StartingScience = 0 StartingReputation = 0 FundsGainMultiplier = 0.6 RepGainMultiplier = 0.6 ScienceGainMultiplier = 0.6 FundsLossMultiplier = 2 RepLossMultiplier = 2 } This is what you're after. EDIT: I should clarify: "0.6" = "60%", etc.

You could try editing the save files - the settings are stored there in a somewhat readable fashion. It's also quite possible someone's made a tool for that - check the modding/tools and applications forums .

You know maneuver nodes are a thing, right?

I'm simply stating the ability already exists, provided you're willing to make the effort to do it. There's really no need to be rude about it. As for whether or not I mod, not for KSP no, however I am a fairly experienced programmer and am fully aware of what it takes to mod a game. In KSP it's incredibly easy due in no small part to almost everything having human-readable config files, which incidentally is not great for loading times. For most games, modding requires opening up DLL/SO/executable files in a suitable tool and examining the exported functions, and a hell of a lot of trial and error before releasing the mod as a binary-patched version of the DLL/SO/executable adding/removing/changing whatever. However, that does not make it impossible. Just look at minecraft - that even used obfuscation back in the day! (it may still do, I haven't kept up to date, also questionable example since it's java). As for making kerbals and buildings easy to mod, sure great idea. IF it doesn't eat up so much of squads time that they have to pull some feature from a release lots of people want.