Bane1998

I just nope'd the DLL pending a new release. Vessels destroyed and duped, fubaring the gamestate so I'm in a weird missing KSC state, etc. Seems a lot of people are reporting this, and I'm glad to see you're on it, and in a more holistic approach rather than trying to track down individual bugs and hotfix them. I was about to consider finding an alternative or doing without and writing this mod off since it looked like you were on hiatus or whatever, but if yer on it I'll hold out and see. Does all seem related to vehicle separations and reworking that process entirely sounds good. Any thoughts when this might be usable again?

I hate that I have to consider laggyness in my designs. It's perhaps the first part of KSP that has caused me to lose interest. It's infuriating to have an awesome base/station design with multiple missions over time to build the thing up, and at a certain point it just becomes to laggy to be worth it even if everything is stable and engineered correctly. It seems like a simple fix is some kind of welding mod like system built into the game, where as you start getting lag, the game automatically starts welding parts together or simulating less of it. I'd far rather trade off physics becoming an approximation rather than experience horrendous lag. When I have 1000 part station does the game really need to simulate each part interacting individually anymore? Just treat it as one massive object and dynamically weld/unweld parts together.

Wasn't getting into orbit, or landing anywhere, or going anywhere. It was my first successful dock that gave me the feels. Unfortunately the feels was about now being able to build massive structures in space and upon trying, the lag was too much and the feels went away. After that the feels were further degraded by there not being much 'to do' really. I tried going with Kethane to have a project, but I realized it's kind of silly as I can get infinite fuel into orbit from Kerbin basically, there's not much point in refueling other places. I'm looking forward to launches having a cost maybe. Having to find resources other places you can't get from Kerbin. The ability to set up vast meaningful operations. It all seems sort of 'role play' right now what people do. Imagining needing a base when you don't or putting your own limits on yourself. Setting up ops on a remote planet to find some rare resource to bring back to Kerbin. Sort of like science somewhat gave me that feeling of purpose. I get that it's a sandbox. But a sandbox needs a far larger set of things to do than landing on different textures with a different gravity value. Looking forward to future updates!

I don't care about wobbly. It means my ship isn't stable, and I should fix it with struts or a different design or something. It's a feature, not a bug. However, the amount of lag it causes is unacceptable. Maybe I'm just very sensitive to lower FPS, but I find it extremely unpleasant to play with any sort of large structure, which is very unfortunate.

I've built a few stations, and after a few 2-3 modules added on, it's way too laggy to be any fun. Either, everyone playing KSP is very tolerant of a ton of physics lag or somehow have amazing machines (my machine is pretty darn good). Do you guys just not mind that everything slows to a crawl?

I think I might disagree with this in at least principle. If my goal (as it is before trying to understand the Oberth effect better) is to escape Kerbin, and join Kerbin in an orbit around the Sun as close to Kerbin's orbit as I can, then I don't think it matters which way I escape, if I can perfect my burn so that I stop the very instant I achieve escape velocity. Or at least, not practically. I suppose in theory I have to have a different trajectory than the Kerbin system by some infinitesimally small amount, but the direction I escape will be not even worth the bother of choosing the 'correct' direction. You can see this in KSP if you plan a burn just up to escape and not a single dV further, you basically have the same orbit as Kerbin, and it doesn't matter which way you chose to exit. At least up to as good as you are timing your burn to stop the moment you have escape trajectory. This of course is only if your goal is to first just escape Kerbin, and then do a transfer to another planetary orbit as completely separate operations.

For the record, I don't disagree with the effect existing, I just can't quite grok it intuitively. Which for me needs I try to somehow find that intuition. I guess my problem in understanding the Oberth effect is it's based on 'speed' From Wikipedia: What I can't follow is... isn't speed relative? I have a speed relative to Kerbin, Kerbin has a speed relative to the Sun. Why I don't get the effect is escaping Kerbin just zeroes out my Kerbin speed, it doesn't zero out my Sun speed which is much higher, almost to the point that it almost seems the Kerbin speed is a minor point when summing it all up. Yet somehow it seems it's not. That's the voodoo part of it, to me. You could choose an arbitrary reference frame and say that I'm going 'fast' in that reference frame, and will gain a magic Oberth effect from that unknown reference frame. This explanation makes sense to me. The faster I escape Kerbin, the less time Kerbin has dragging me back towards it, so the less velocity I lose on my way out. But, is that the Oberth effect? The effect seems to have nothing to do with gravity technically, so gaining an understanding of it in this way seems like I might be understanding it incorrectly, still. And that worries me some. Does this mean the dV map I linked in the OP is not quite correct? Going to Kerbin from Duna is more expensive than going to Duna from Kerbin? Or is this back to the magic voodoo gains from exiting the Duna system at high 'Duna speed' somehow effecting my solar speed?

So given my frustration with dealing with maneuver nodes, I've been wondering why all the guides for going to Duna or anywhere talk about building your node directly from Kerbin orbit. It seems to me, that it ought to be the same delta-V planning the route directly from Kerbin, as it would doing an escape from Kerbin, then doing the transfer after the escape. My thought process is, no matter what, you have to escape Kerbin. In fact, it doesn't even matter which direction you escape it in. You burn just prograde until you just barely get an escape. If you only burn exactly that far you resulting orbit should be almost identical to Kerbin's orbit around the Sun. From there you plan your transfer, and do another burn using the more convenient solar-level maneuver nodes. My brain tells me this SHOULD be equivalent. There will be some Delta-V negligible losses if I overshoot my Kerbin escape maybe, or escape via Kerbin's retrograde when I need a planetary prograde burn, but the first step of going anywhere is to escape Kerbin, so why not just do that first? One could argue time perhaps. If you work out the phase and such ahead of time, you wouldn't even have to sit around in space waiting for it, but most guides have you sitting in Kerbin orbit anyway. Why does it matter if my Kerbals are sitting in a convenient Solar orbit nearly identical to Kerbin orbit, or sitting in a Kerbin orbit when I start time warping to get the phase? Then again, I figure I must be wrong, and would be awesome to have someone explain why I am, because I'm not hotting the Delta-V targets on this map at all: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/w/images/7/73/KerbinDeltaVMap.png My Kerbin escape is around 1000 Delta-V, which is close to the map, but my Duna intercept is another 1000 Delta-V, and the map says that's 100. This is hard for me to test, as I get way too frustrated trying to intercept a planet directly from Kerbin to actually see if there's a difference. Anyway, thanks ahead of time!