Dichotomy

Hello All Hope this is OK to post. Just posting on the off chance that someone wants to trade with me for a digital copy (STEAM) of JUST CAUSE 2 (with bundled PRIMA STRATEGY E-GUIDE) ? I am interested in being traded, TRADING CARDS and GEMS, possibly with the addition of backgrounds/emoticons if you really get stuck. I am open to cards from quite a list of games, including : 1. MOST WANTED ============= Kerbal Space Program 2. NEXT BEST ========== Crusader Kings 2 Democracy 3 Reus The Walking Dead 1 XCOM 3. GOOD ======== FTL Outlast Plague Prison Architect Project Zomboid Sid Meiers Civilizaton V Sid Meires Beyond Earth Space Hulk 4. OTHER ========================= AI : War Fleet Command Chainsaw Warrior Dont Starve Dying Light Europa Univalis IV Forest Of Doom Game Dev Tycoon Gauntlet Gods Will Be Watching Gratuitous Space Battles Killing Floor Organ Trail Payday 1 Payday 2 Sang Foid : Tales of Werewolves Sid Meiers Ace Patrol Surgeon Simulator Talisman The Escapists The Ship This War of Mine Tropico 4 Tropico 5 Universe Sandbox LOW VALUE =========== A Valley Without Wind Antichamber Battle vs Chess Dead State Deadlight Deadnaut Frozen Synapse Jagged Alliance - Back In Action Krater Lunar Flight Monaco Neo Scavenger Omerta - City of Gangsters Paper's Please Sid Meier's Ace Patrol : Pacific Skies Sir You Are Being Hunted Trapped Dead War For The Overworld Worms Revolution NOTE1 : Low value cards are approximately worth (to me) about 40% of a KSP card. Assume its pretty linear from there I would appreciate a selection of cards, rather then all from one game. Also FOIL's will be given extra value depending on the set they are from (generally from 2 - 5 depending on the game). GEM's are worth approximately 200-400 a card. NOTE2 : I always hate it when someone posts a trade request but does not give you any idea of a ballpark figure. So I will do my best to avoid this mistake. For me, if the cards were all high value I would say about 25-35 cards. This is just a ballpark figure as it does depend on the trade. Hope it helps. Finally I am a card collector, not a card trader, so I am only interested in cards/gems. I am looking for a fair trade, not one that disadvantages either side. Thanks for reading. All the best. ADDENDUM : Please respond to this thread if you are interested and we can "negotiate" on steam. My steam username is "Dichotomy".

Sorry, but that was glorious. I am still laughing. Thankyou for making my day.

In regards to Lagrange points. I would have thought introducing a new SOI with No/Low mass at its centre, would solve the problem. Given you can only be under the effect of a single SOI in KSP. Perhaps this would not work and I am over simplifying the system. I don't know enough about how the SOI integrate with other KSP systems/mechanics to know if a quick and dirty solution like this would work. A little disappointed by what you said about heat. I don't know why but accounting for heat (in its various forms is a really cool aspect of the game for me , or at least I think it will be). AM seriously looking at Deadly -Reentry ATM, and will look around for other heat MODS. Your comments on the 20km limit, were heartening. I was a bit concerned by that one. Still makes me nervous about satellites, especially since I may just decouple/launch them at barely newtonian speeds Thanks for all your responses. - - - Updated - - - Thanks for the link (even if it wan't intended for me!). Will keep an eye on this. - - - Updated - - - Thankyou for your reply and greeting !!!!!!!!!!!!! Yes I do want realism, but it is more realism of mechanics, rather then just plain realism. That last sentence is confusing even me, i will try to do better ... For example the re-scaling of the Kerbols diameter, while keeping an earth like Newtonian gravitational force is fine by me. Its more : given a series of assumed constants/forces/etc does the world behave in a reliable and logical way. Thats more the realism I am after. I have actually been looking at that exact thread (realism overhaul) over the past few hours. I think I am going to keep my MODS to a minimum to begin with, and really only looking at modding the parts of the main game that are the least realistic/immersive (either due to a poor model, or not being accounted for). Perhaps I also might include a few utility MODS like Kerbol Alarm Clock. You guys/gals really are a great community. Really expected for this thread to degenerate into a "why are you trying to mod the game when you have so little experience etc etc etc". I really like to savour my first playthrough of a unique game like this, and I have a week or so to kill till I can play so learning about the mechanics and choosing MODS is on the agenda. On a totally unrelated note : SCANSAT is awesome !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - - - Updated - - - Thankyou for this I will give it a look. I have been fairly careful about looking a gameplays videos so far as I didn't want to spoil to much of the "cool moments" ie eclipses, seeing Jool (is that what its called) for the first time etc. This looks pretty safe though Thankyou for the link and (from newbs like me) for taking the time to create it. EDIT : Have just watched the link. Very professionally done. Unfortunately for me, none of this was new, but both kudos for the vid and thanks for the heads-up. I am sure it will help many new players. Good ol' Kepler. I remember doing a Year 5 project on him and Copernicus, way back when......

"You just CAN think of what to set the starting funds too " ?????????????????????????? OK 238 Funds if you add the missing "T" to your OP.

Hello I am a new player who is contemplating which MODS to use before my first playthrough. I have played around with KSP a little a while back, but little more then that outside of forum lurking. I have a high-threshold for failure, and prefer realism/immersive type MODS. I was hoping that other forumgoers could recommend a few MODS, where they felt that the stock game was inadequate, and that the MOD was both stable and complete. The only MOD I am set on ATM is SCANSAT. QUESTION 1 Not mod related, but didn't want to saturate the forums with another seperate post. I have read the wiki and other articles regarding kerbal stats ie COURAGE AND STUPIDITY. The general consensus is that these only pertain to how kerbals behave (primarily when in danger IIRC). Unfortunately MOST of the articles I read were quite out of date, and none were post 1.0. Can any one tell me if these stats have any mechanic based functionality ? QUESTION 2 These are the MODS I was interested in : 1. ASTRONOMERS VISUAL PACK 2. FAR. 3. Deadly Re-Entry 4. Finally can anyone recommend a life support MOD that requires a life support to be accounted for (simple or complex), but still allows for the possibility of rescuing stranded kerbals (I like the idea of this)? I was looking at TACS, but think it probably rules out any rescues gievn the timescales involved. These are the questions I was interested in : A. Does the MOD account for the stock science tree, and integrate any new parts/systems into logical nodes of the tree (that do not unbalance the player's intended progression through the tree) ? B. Does the MOD account for currency in career mode (if applicable), with balanced costs associated with any new parts/systems. C. Any other notable impressions/comments pertaining to the MOD ? D. Is anyone using any of the above MOD's ATM with stock v1.02 and if so are they stable. Finally does anyone have any other MOD suggestions they think might be of interest ? Thanks for any replies in advance, and apologies for the rather open ended and long question.

So does this mean Kerbals have finally found a use for food? Fattening up humans, the sneaky little sods !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well done mate! Kudos for both finding, and sticking to your dream. I would wish you all the best, but I do not think your future will depend on the generosity of fortune. Instead may I say I admire your resolve. Take it easy

Thankyou for your response. Can I assume you would be suggesting FAR and Deadly Re-Entry then ? I have not used either and I am in two minds about their inclusion. I am a bit of a realism nut, but my background knowledge is not sufficient to be able to determine what spacecraft parts are not performing in a realistic manner, vs those that are (unless it is egregiously so). So #2 and #3, concern me more then #4 . #1 I had always assumed would be a cut down model, so not really disappointed, when I didn't really consider it a possibility in the first place. Thankyou again for your insights. - - - Updated - - - Oh OK, (faceplam for me). And here I was thinking I was being funny I see what you mean now. That does sound more than a little extreme. Thanks for edifying me.

That made me laugh. I wont be using timewarp for anything remotely circumventory (if thats not a word I am coining it!). I found this thread : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86334-KSP-vs-IRL-reaction-wheels and will be reading it after I finish this post ! Thanks for the heads up. Hey just realised you were the OP!!!! Small world on KSP ..... I am more worried about the opt-out exploits, rather then the opt-in (or should that be the other way around, IDK). As I intend to play a custom career mode, (no do-overs, deaths on, all the other realism settings on etc, but not sure about where the sliders should be, probably either normal or moderate for the sliders. I don't mind if I have to run out of money and start over.), I want to make sure that I consider the implications of my design and the limitations of the world I am designing for. So I intend to go in with as much mechanic info (not gameplay stuff) as I can. Plus I have a week or so to kill until I can get my hands dirty, so this whets the appetite. Thanks again - - - Updated - - - Perhaps they have been "rifled" Hmm I will have to consider this. Assuming I am understanding you, is this a consequence of the atmospheric model they are using ? Thanks for the reply

Thankyou very much for your comprehensive answer. Exactly what I was looking for. Sounds good. The water issues surprised me a little, I thought KSP would modal these a little better, but as you say its not a huge game focus so ....... I do hope the Reentry Heat issues are patched. I don't quite know why but accounting for reentry heat appeals to me. If I may : Does the game account for other forms of heat ie direct solar radiation, superheated atmospheres etc. The under 20km caveat concerns me a little, but I did know that one existed, I assume its so that discarded stages and space debris don't end up hogging cpu cycles and memory over time. I assume care must be taken when dealing with satellites etc. Thanks again for your help. BTW I have been looking at the various mods for KSP and have only settled on one one so far : SCANSAT. Am very happy it has been recently updated to the current version, and that it integrates with the stock scanning parts. Can't really explain it, but the scanning aspect is probably the bit I am looking forward to the most about KSP. I am currently perusing a few of the more realism related MODS, ie FAR, deadly reentry and life-support. Not really sure how far I want to go, or how balanced/complete any of these MODS are yet. - - - Updated - - - Excellent ! Am quite stoked about the engine heat modelling. Inverse square solar panel efficiency is nice too, had not really thought about it one way or the other. 1. Ha - 5KM drop into the water Given the nature of the kerbals I can live with this 2. I was kinda assuming the rockets would be more "elastic" then RL, from some of the second hand stories on these forums I am assuming they are still "breakable" enough 3. This one I knew about but do wish that had to be taken into account, even if it was limited and they went into some kind of hibernation when stranded (to open up the possibility of rescues). 4. Hmmm,yes I see your point.Torn on this one, but do agree it is probably better for gameplay without the latency. I guess it is not really different to the lack of latency with manned missions. In those instances I will "rationalize" it by assuming I am controlling the pilot, rather then HQ, and with the probe core I will assume I am playing the probes "ai". Thanks for the info. - - - Updated - - - Yes I was wondering about Lagrange points, shame about those, I was really hoping they existed. I was naively assuming SQUAD had implemented something like what you suggested. I think LP would add many unique gameplay opportunities. I will have to have a hunt around for a MOD, or just hope SQUAD adds the functionality at a later date. Thanks for your help

Hello All FULL DISCLOSURE : I have owned KSP since it first appeared as EA on steam, but have refrained from playing it (other then some brief testing about a year or so ago), until now. Its been a long wait, but finally I will get to play it in anger . The reason for mentioning this is that there is much I am naive about regarding the game (despite being a forum lurker for the past couple of years). So apologies for any such idiocy on my part I was hoping some of you might be able to answer the question below for me (or point me to a readable link that can help out). I have read much of the wiki (trying to avoid gameplay spoilers, mechanics only) and a few guides here and there but have yet to find a list. QUESTION What real-world forces/phenomenons does KSP account for, and of these which are calculated, vs approximated ? (Are there any noticeable absences ?) My reasons for asking this is to answer questions along the lines of, "what am I designing my ships to account for"? I am probably going to get way too into this game, but its been a long wait Thanks in advance to anyone who can spare some time to help me out. EDIT : Just realised this should probably be in the gameplay/mechanics section. Would it be possible for a helpful mod to shift it for me please. Apologies for the inconvenience.

@Torham234 I considered this but figured that anyone that was trying for the most minimal build would still have a part count average/median that there craft meandered around. I also thought that differing people could have vastly differing ideas with regard to "minimal". Anyway I decided against it as it would not allow for a numeric representation of those people. Thanks for your input. @Everyone Thanks everybody for all the votes and replies, managed to get a decent sample size IMO. Very helpful (and interesting), from my perspective. My goal for this POLL was to determine where the middle ground lay, with respect to part count, for KSP forum-poster's craft designs. As there have been "many" threads detailing MAXIMAL PART COUNT DESIGNS, I figured one that was more representative of a given players "average/median" would be interesting to submit. I also wondered if people were limiting themselves solely for performance reasons, or if there were other gameplay/philosophical considerations at play ? I find it pretty interesting that the results (outside of the WJ Fan Club!) are relatively evenly spread about. @Whackjob Your vote is self-referential ! But given your response adds instant kerbal-cred to my POLL, I will let it slide

Smart Arse. Yeah OK, should perhaps have revised it, was trying for clarity for those that only read the titles and not much else.

Apologies, please blame my newbness. I was naively assuming that in-orbit part count was much less restricted then it appears to be, also being new I am more focused on the launch side of things So you are most likely right. Might create another POLL should this one get enough interest, same question but pertaining to ORBIT only. @ALL Thanks for the replies/votes. Hope they keep coming.

Thanks for this. Will keep it in mind.