Perry Apsis

I think maybe a tweak got un-twuck. I have RO installed, and the fuel cells show that they require Liquid Hydrogen, Liquid Oxygen, LiquidFuel, and Oxidizer. I attach one to the side of a tank that contains LH2 and LOX, and it says "Fuel Cell: Missing LiquidFuel." The same is true for both the fuel cell and the fuel cell array. I was considering editing the parts manually, but then I thought I'd consult the collective wisdom of the Internet to see if there was a better approach. Thanks in advance for any light you can shed. EDIT: I did eventually find the source parts and removed the LiquidFuel and Oxidizer inputs. Some MM patch adds in LH2 and LOX, so now it's working fine, but I imagine some upgrade or patch will break it one day.

Thanks, Alcentar and Phineas. I'll give these a try.

This is the SPS engine for the Apollo Service Module. It looks like they took the ant engine model and blew it up until the bell is the right size, but the top part is so large that my service module sits inside it, rather than the other way around. Has anyone else seen this? Could someone suggest a way to replace the model with one from an existing engine that's approximately the right shape?

Gah! 30km above the surface of the Moon was not the place to discover this.

I had to build a new Perl installation from source. I spent 15 minutes trying to figure out why I couldn't run ckan to update some packages. *facepalm*

Just scrolled through the changelog. When you put the whole thing together like that, it's truly awe-inspiring. A monumental achievement. Thanks and admiration to the entire team that made this possible.

To be perfectly honest, Squad couldn't change the shading on a landing leg without facing huge community backlash. Speaking for the KSP community generally, backlash is kind of our thing.

It is time for you to take your place at my side at EA, and fulfill your destiny...

Was working at Squad. Fancy carrying on its development yourself? I do hope that there are no hard feelings and that Sarbian will continue to support Mechjeb and module manager. But I wouldn't ask it of him if the circumstances surrounding the departures are less sunny than the Reddit post suggests.

Might be nice to respond to the departure of so many well-known developers. A few words about development going forward? Shift in priorities or strategies? Farewell and thanks to those whose vision and hard work helped get KSP where it is today? No?

Announcement posted one minute ago regarding release date. " If you’ve been following us closely, you must be aware that we’re growing and we’ve been looking for talent and great collaborators that help us build the next milestone of this franchise. New talents have enrolled in the past few months and they are just as excited as we are. Bringing new talents is allowing us to bring fresh ideas to the plate and we can’t be more excited for what’s coming." It's a franchise, you see.

Roverdude's output is amazing, no doubt, but I don't think he'll be picking up *all* the slack. Perhaps we will get something in announcements from the remaining team describing the situation going forward.

Mike (Mu), Bill (Taniwha), Nathanael (NathanKell), Sébastien (Sarbian), Jim (Romfarer), Brian (Arsonide), Chris (Porkjet), Nathan (Claw) Yikes. That at least *suggests* that Squad will be moving more into a maintenance state, rather than the aggressive development of new features we've been seeing.

I see no reason to believe that claim. In fact, for each release in the past, it did not come out until I had been mashing the reload button more and more frantically. Apparently there is some threshold of frenzy that's necessary to trigger the mechanism. You can't argue with empirical science, man.

Careful! Once people get the idea that the game should just work well, they're going to get REALLY demanding. (Great news about the retracting gear fix, and the continued improvements with orbital drift!)

Could we possibly allow for some difference of opinion on this issue? Personally, I would have said the same thing about money. In fact, I did. Now I use settings that make it so money doesn't affect my gameplay. I like playing with life support, and I would enjoy having a stripped down version in stock. I'm sure it would be optional if it were implemented.

I guess they're entering QA, then. Unless compiling meant compiling the notes, which in retrospect seems more likely.

Like remote control, resource extraction, (more) realistic aero, procedural fairings... (Just tweaking. I agree that multiplayer isn't likely.)

1. Stock swap with Logitech. 2. Cause thousands of people to click the refresh button for three days, overheating their mouse buttons beyond design specifications. 3. PROFIT !!!!

I can't quite be sure from reading the dev notes but I think they may have addressed the general problem of clicking on the blue line, even when the purple one ISN'T nearby. Perhaps that will help here, as well.

Backspace to restore focus to the active vessel when in map mode, rather than tabbing through every body in the system. Oh, and hiding the navball in map mode lets you shift-tab to shuffle through bodies in reverse. Just don't come crying to me because you held down shift to get back to your ship, and found that when you got there, you had run through your orbital station at full throttle.

Kerbals aren't people?

Does "they" in that sentence refer to the bugs or the people? I asked because the meaning of "duped" changes dramatically depending on the referent. It could be that both interpretations are true.

Yes, that's a particularly good synergy. Or is it a clear conflict of interest!?!??!???! Maybe he lets a bug lie in the code and fixes it in his mod. Sure, it's just easier and quicker, and the important thing is to get the fix to the players, right? Only now everybody's hyping his mod, and he's got nothing more to release. He's getting desperate, because he's started to get used to all the money his mod's been bringing in. Maybe the bank is threatening to repossess his Jaguar. So... maybe just one time, he introduces one little bug and puts the fix into his mod. Only it's never just one time, is it, @Claw???

Quick data point. I've attempted to repro six issues going back from 1.1.2 through 1.0.2, and five of them were reproducible. It makes me wonder if by archiving them in bulk, you'll be throwing away more wheat than chaff.