Pecan

The loading screen refers to rounding-up and training wild Kerbals so that they are fit to appear in the game. It has been said (by the voices in my head) that most of the training involves Pavlovian conditioning such that boosters become strongly associated with snacks. It's the only proven way to get Kerbals into the vehicles that most of us build.

There's a mod for ... oh. Why can't we have everything stock including everything there's a mod for!?

Yeah, I'm with you there. Space exploration is so simple. Why do these rocket scientists make such a big deal about it anyway? Seriously, I'm not sure what your point is. The whole reason for sandbox games or simulators is so that we can use them to make, test and use the things we think of instead.of using a few pre-defined objects. It's no surprise most "sandbox" games are like that, whether they're indie or not. The exception being the Sims series, of course, which a) is full of bugs,, b) doesn't let you do much anyway, c) costs a fortune for every boring add-on. It's not that were willing to put time into making things, but that that is exactly why we want a sandbox simulator - something that allows us to build the things we want to. Are you suggesting that Squad should provide specific vehicles/bases instead and build the gameplay around traffic and economics? It's an interesting idea and would be fairly easy for them to include, since they have stock ships already. It's probably not a game I'd want to play for long but I can see the appeal for people who bought KSP even though they don't want to build rockets. Totally with you on the 'tools are good' comment though.

Oh noooos! KSP is pay-to-play ^^ While I feel a bit guilty that this only cost me about $15 and the ROI has indeed been outstanding we have to remember that we are the self-selected KSP addicts. If I were in the OP's position I would not take the $40 chance on a game I didn't know and which may not be as attractive/addictive for them. Then again, I've chosen to live on a very low budget (more or less dropped out of the system and all that) so that represents twice my weekly entertainment spending. It's a tough call for software vendors as modern video games require so much work.

In 1.0.5 I was mainly doing exo-atmospheric stuff for the past several months so, obviously, not using heat-shields. Now in 1.1 I'm starting from scratch and have noticed something which seems odd to me. I hope this is an appropriate place to get others' comments on it: Launching causes high temperatures and I saw that my heat-shield was ablating before even reaching orbit. Now during launch it's both facing backwards and has a shroud fitted from the decoupler just below it. Since ablator adds mass I was trying to carry as little as possible and this meant there was insufficient for re-entry (although the rest of the ship managed to take the remaining heat-load) Is this ablating during launch correct behaviour?

Are you trying to get to "Forum Games"?

You look at stock vehicles? Cool, they have a purpose!

Whereas I want to use 64-bit I also want to share the things I make and write with as many people as possible. For that reason I also run the 32-bit version to ensure compatibility. Remember the fuss there was about mods that weren't supported on 64-bit because the developers got so much hassle about (Unity/KSP) issues outside their control. Imagine if mod-developers using 64-bit were unable to check if there was any problem - such as memory - using their mods on 32-bit. Choice is good. Lowest Common Denominator testing is good. Why wouldn't there be an option?

Since you ask - I've been thinking of bridging the Dres canyon. Sounds like the sort of thing you'd enjoy. Welcome back Whack, you've been missed. What is the dream job?

Just in case you're including my response as one of the four I'd like to make it clear that I haven't encountered a Start Menu problem, just that the so-called Start Menu IS a problem, which is why I replaced it with something usable. On the other hand - I'm using Shadowplay + KSP + Win 10 and haven't had any issues there either.

I can confirm that Dres is a lie. Poor people shouldn't waste their time flying in search of it. [Ok in-crowd, that'll keep the plebs away. Dres seaside resort bookings are at a premium for the discerning customer]

Since my particular interest is in beginner's guides I usually have to go over most of the same stuff again and again. I'm impressed with the tutorials in 1.1 though so I might be able to go further straight away. For 1.1 I think my focus will be on ISRU everywhere (with the hand-waving assumption that fuel's running out on Kerbin or something). That probably leads to bases and so means KIS/KAS as the only sensible way to connect landed parts. Until now that's been a mod too far. But hey! \0/ Not only 1.1 but a brand new beast of a computer \0/. Might as well chuck in all the visual enhancement mods I can find as well, but apart from that my mod-list will probably stay as MJ, KAC, SCANsat plus a few others. Bit worried about surface-work though at the moment with the reported problems that wheels/landing gear are having. Whatever happens I'll be trying to stay as far away from Kerbal Flight Simulator as possible, despite (or perhaps because of) it becoming ever more popular and the game being ever more unbalanced in that direction.

The only game I've had issues with is Skyrim - specifically the unofficial bug-fix mod. KSP 1.0.5 (32-bit) and 1.1 (64-bit) are good so far. On the other hand ... having come from Win 7 like you, I've got plenty of issues with Win 10 itself. First - you will find the 'start menu' actively awful. It's not as totally bad as Win 8/8.1 - how could it be! - but you'll almost certainly want to download and install the (free) Classic Shell or similar start-menu replacer. Second - every single one of the Win 10 'apps' are completely useless on a desktop and several of them grab system resources whether you want them to or not. Expect to spend an hour or two clearing them out - except the ones that MS insist on you having (Cortana, Xbox, etc.) Third - Win 10 goes another step in locking-down the OS, making it even harder to stop MS controlling your computer, let alone actually being able to control it the way you want to. It has convinced me to dual-boot Linux just so I can make sure I know what's on machine and what's on my machine is only what I want on it.. If you delete, replace or disable just about all the 'features' you'll be able to get an OS nearly as good as Win 7, with the advantage of virtual desktops. Win 10 isn't inherently bad, it just goes out of its way to be.

As John FX said - alpha[numeric] keys as opposed to the ones on the number pad.

My mission for the weekend is working through the 1.1 tutorials to find out what's missing/wrong/difficult. Once I've had a look I'll be glad to walk you through them to see what issues you are having.

Wings ... and wheels if you want to land horizontally as well. As soon as you have them you're good to go.

"To celebrate the Turbo Charged Update, Squad is offering 40% off Kerbal Space Program. " What's the Steam deal talking about? Yes, 1.1 is coming but the last update listed on the store page is from November,

If the question is "SSTO" the answer is tech 0. If the question is "aeroplane" the answer is as soon as you have wings for gliding to landing. If the question is "spaceplane" the answer is tech 3. if the question is "refuel" the answer is as soon as you have a docking port.

There is a lot of room for confusion here as the demo for 1.0 kept the 0.18.3 version number on the menu screen. I have the older one as well as the current one and would happily put it on dropbox for you but get confirmation that it's permitted from Squad first. Last time I talked to them about copyright issues they wouldn't/couldn't come up with the standard sttribution - "KSP is copyright of Squad ..." - type text so don't hold your breathe. (And it took them several months to decide I wasn't allowed to publish screenshots)

MechJeb if you want to circularise. Just tell it to create the manoeuver node for you, then you can read the dV and burn-time from the navball and see where on the orbit that altitude is (if not at actual Pe/Ap). Then remove the node if you don't want to actually do the burn.

Everything else being equal - which it never is - I also think equal dV in each stage is optimal. Can't remember where I got that from though - mhoram maybe? The main thing that almost certainly isn't equal though is the relative sea-level and vacuum ISPs of your engines. Ideally you'd want your upper-stage engine, optimised for altitude, to take over at the point it becomes more efficient than your lower-stage one, optimised for launch. If your upper engine hasn't got the thrust to carry all the fuel from that point just stick it down on the first. Most of my launchers now are SSTOs anyway, since it's so easy. Can't be doing with all that messing about with spaceplanes though.

I have two hands, left for rotation and right for translation. Why would I change mode, just because I'm docking? (And, since I've got the navball, why would I change camera mode. Then again, I do have NavballDockingAlignmentIndicator).

LV-1R - leaves room for a docking-port because, you know, no satellite left behind. (I am kidding, but the engines are still good)

From Dec 2013 - Dec 2015 KSP was about all I did (about 6,000hrs over two years ^^), with Total War side-trips. On hold durning 1.1 pre-release phase. During the break I've so far been through more than 30 other games that a) I hadn't looked at because there was always KSP, b) don't stand a chance of occupying me to the extent KSP does. This War of Mine is engrossing me at the moment, but obviously not in the same way.

That'll be all the dark energy cluttering-up the place and making everything look untidy then. You should write-up the thesis. If only Dr. Darkness didn't sound so 'batman' ^^