Search the Community

I can write a system of equations and physical laws based upon the assumption that my head is the center of the universe. This simply makes sense, of course, because all of the observations I have of the universe are based on what comes into my head. My head always stays perfectly still. As my mighty legs move, the Earth rolls underneath my stationary body. When I want to look off to the side, my head, of course, stays stationary while you and the rest of the objects in the universe rapidly zip through 90-degree arcs. Sure, I can do that. And if K^2 feels upset about this because it makes him feel less special, he too can write a system of equations and laws that describes the universe with HIS head at the center (probably with fewer math errors than I'd make). If fact, just so nobody feels left out, we can ALL write systems of equations and physical laws for our own personal egocentric universes that are all equally valid. But why would we want to? What do we gain? I certainly don't want to have some engineer building bridges (that are going to slide under my stationary head) having to use such a cocked-up set of equations (too easy for him to make mistakes that could result in the bridge failing and causing the very massive Earth to suddenly rush up and smack my head). Rather than argue over which of our 7 billion heads is REALLY the center of the universe (because, really, what are the chances that it's mine or yours, right?), it is more useful to understand that the universe doesn't really care who thinks his head is in the center (and all the equations are simpler, and we get safer bridges, and the scientists have an easier time figuring out the rules of the universe so that the engineers can then go on to build us cooler toys). I could write a fudged up set of equations and laws based on the assumption that our Sun is the center of the universe, with all the wackiness that that would entail. It might be embarrassing to try to explain why the two hundred billion stars in our galaxy all seem to have a different opinion of where the center of things is (all being distributed around some center point 8.33 kiloparsecs away from me in the direction of Sagittarius), but I can continue to feel superior in seeing that they all go pirroetting around us in an obviously subservient fashion as the Sun rotates. But why would I do that? Why would I want to to argue with the hundreds of billions of equivalent opinions of who's in the center when there is a simpler, easier system to use? Unless I was just dead set on ME being in the center as a starting assumption for some personal reason. And let's not even discuss the arguments between all of the billions of galaxies that think THEY are in the center of the universe…because some of them are really obstinate and won't give up their opinion on being special no matter how long you talk to them.

Talk To Frizzank, the guy with the Gemini Pack. He has created a flag part that you can stick to your ship.

Yay! Yay! Yay! I'm a diehard rocketry fan... and have flown a number of largish rockets. I can safely say that model rocketry may be the closest real world equivalent to KSP, besides actually joining a bona fide aerospace company. Here are some tips for your first rocketry launch. 1) Build a kit. Building from scratch on your first rocket is generally not a good idea unless you know basic rocket physics. Be sure to assemble the kit as per instructions, too. You can make modifications later, once you have a bit of a better understanding of rockets. 2) Start off kinda small. If your first rocket is a five-foot-tall four-inch-diameter behemoth and you don't have any experience in rocket-building, things can go very wrong, very quickly. Having your first rocket shred and send little bits from horizon to horizon is not a good way to get into rocketry. (This has actually happened, although fortunately not to me.) 3) Find a big field. Even with the small kits, you generally want a field that's at least 300x300 feet to account for parachute drift. With bigger rockets, the field should generally be larger. Once you start building the big stuff, you want to go a long ways into the countryside. 4) Join a club. This is the best piece of advice I can give. Model rocketry clubs are a great place to talk about building rockets, and they generally have very large fields to launch rockets. You will be able to make friends and learn a whole, whole lot. 5) If at first you don't succeed... Try again! But if you follow the previous four steps, you will be pretty much set. And I'll leave you with my latest rocketry project, which is a GoPro camera carrying rocket that travelled over 1300 feet into the air. Any other model rocketeers on the forum?

Lets talk about it in the development thread i just made http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/68096-kOS-Autopilot

Now I didn't say that... What I'm looking for is something that looks like cargo, a rover, a fuel tank, etc. The thinking is, use this new VTOL to move stuff around, not just lawn chairs. Keep in mind, I never said you couldn't paradrop your cargo either. It just has to land safely. Ummm yea. I just tried yanking a 36 ton rockomax with KAS using my Starfish. Talk about having a big one on the end of the pole... I got it off the ground but it did not end well.

According to this post, there were no new details revealed about .24 in the stream: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/68005-Ksp-TV-on-twitch-in-30-mins-is-about-to-talk-about-the-next-update-Im-excited!-3?p=941258&viewfull=1#post941258 But...

A while back I sent a mission to Duna that I did not intend to bring back. They landed on the northern ice cap, which isn't what I originally intended, but a Duna landing is a Duna landing. They had enough fuel left to reach orbit, but could not return, which is okay as they weren't planned to. Today I launched another mission to Duna, this one with less weight on its lander and a nuclear engine for the Kerbal to Duna transfer, removing still more weight from the design and improving the effectiveness of the Launch stage. They landed fairly close to the Equator, and with quite a bit more fuel than the first ship did. ...but it turns out that though they landed with a decent chunk of fuel, it was just shy of a return. I spent ages fiddling with absolutely beautiful transfer windows and could not get anything done. I could get into Kerbin's SoI, just barely, but no closer than that. So after a while messing with that, I decided to move the two Duna-stranded ships together so the Kerbals don't get lonely having only 2 other Kerbals to talk to. I moved my Polar ship to within 10 km of the equatorial one, ended up landing in a very nice flat area which is of decent size as far as landing targets (for the future). Then I hopped the lighter and easier to handle Equatorial lander the 10km and parked it next to the former Polar lander. So I guess that's technically the start of my first base

That's pretty much what I meant. As in from Alice in Wonderland... the Walrus and the Carpenter. (EDIT: The actual quote from Lewis Carol that people remember is the first bit: "The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things: Of shoes and ships and sealing wax, Of cabbages and kings, And why the sea is boiling hot, And whether pigs have wings." That's almost silly enough for me... but I was never keen on Oysters.)

Hehehe. Perhaps Ronbo will be on the show to talk about some poor Kerbonaut who is, totally on purpose and not-at-all because they ran out of fuel, stuck on Duna still, after a very long time. Thanks Pat! I'm glad my crazy works for ya. XD

Yes they said last week they would talk about it on this stream

Bah, I keep saying I'm not trying to imply or expect anything of Bac9! I feel like I'm talking a different language here with all these assumptions that I want to force Bac9 to update us. I'm sorry : c Look, I'm sorry you took that impression of me to work with. I really, after saying it multiple times, am not trying to force Bac9 to update. I'm not asking Bac9 to update us on the matter either. When I made the original post wherein I asked about "Why not give people a status update?" I thought I made it clear enough that I was simply attempting to promote discussion for discussions sake with the only intention being to get people thinking and talking. Though my original intentions seem to have worked, the result seems to be mostly comprised of how terrible of a person I apparently am. I have already realized all of the good and true things that everyone has said about Bac9, I have acknowledged them, and I understand all that Bac9 could deal with. I know Bac9 is a human and all of that fun stuff. I'll say it again: I am not asking for an update, I am not asking for any response from Bac9, I am not demanding anything or making any negative implications. Simply, I wanted to talk about the topic of "Why not give status updates?" because this it is related to this mod (related because the mod hasn't seen an update in a long enough time.) I could have made the same post with another mod for another game somewhere else, all with the same intentions, Bac9 didn't even have to be mentioned. Making assumptions about what my intentions were really doesn't help anyone. Anywho, there goes the post where I defend myself (defending youself on the internet is always a bit risky.) Let's see if it works.

Hello fellow Kerbonauts, do you have a moment to talk abo....no..wait, let me try again; I'm trying to raise awareness about Net Neutrality and how it is currently under threat. A US court has ruled against the protection of net neutrality and it is being considered in the EU. It means that ISPs will be able to prioritise traffic from certain sites over others based on how much they pay. Large corporations will be able to deliver their content faster while smaller sites will be forced to pay or be slowed down. It will also allow ISPs to restrict your access to certain sites unless you pay extra for "packages" that include those sites. It will be more like cable TV and not like a freely open Internet. Sites that stand up against major corps and govt could be marginalised or even blocked. It will mark the beginning of a regulated Internet and a limit on the freedom of speech. US courts have already ruled against net neutrality but the FCC can still impose some rules to ensure a neutral net. The matter is still open in the EU so we have a chance to make our voice heard. I'm trying to spread the word via a post on imgur which is going pretty well so far. If you upvote it further it would help - http://imgur.com/gallery/dZCXGXZ And even better would be for you to sign this petition to support Net Neutrality Thanks guys!

>hijack -weakerServer 4 >study -newsGathering >profile -socialMedia -upgrade >research -xss >research -iloveyou >talk -random >invadeTakeover -server /lightOut /welchia >_

I'm sure that many people here have thought of ideas for video games in the past that they think would be an amazing idea and would love to see made. This thread is for people to talk about and share those ideas with other people to see what they think. e.g. Me and one of my friends came up with an idea for an open world building game where players have to gather scrap materials to create weapons, vehicles and buildings from with a construction system vaguely similar to KSP. As you gather allies you compete against other factions for the limited resources available and try to eventually conquer the world. Most of the game would be in either 1st or 3rd person rather than being a strategy. What have you guys come up with over the years?

I don't know about topic, but want to notice, maybe you know what you doing or I didn't see somethnig, because no one is talk about it, but details you try to bake looks like is not very suitable for normal map by itself. I mean mostly perpendicular plains. Normal maps didn't work this way, it's not height information, it's more like slope angle information. I mean perpendicular cube at plain even if correctly baked will produse nothing on normal map.

Hello! I have a doubt i would like answered. How are other mods compatible with remote tech? I also have Novapunch and several others, but when i used a Unmanned Pod from Nova, even tough they were only fit with com's 16, they could easilly talk to eachother, is this because Nova doesn't have RT2 compatibility? How can i add it? Also, i have seen a few messages before this someone asking what i think to be the same thing, if so, can you help me add compatibility to mods like NovaPunch, B9? Thanks in advance!

thx Gus. We need to talk a modder into making a IVA camera mod with a working radially attachable nav ball and other instruments for these types of crafts. How hard could that be?

If mankind knew about aliens on the planet, there would be a not-so-small number of ppl who would want them off the planet. Like every extremist group they would try to use force and eventually terrorism. You cant have a peaceful talk with aliens over the years if a small fraction of your population is actively trying to drive them off the planet. That all assumes that aliens understand our ways of society at all. If they are like vulcans or klingons they would either think of us as unworthy or see it as a sign of war. So to keep the odds in check, keep the number of involved ppl small.

sry if someone already talk about it, but a RPM compatibility would be awesome now ! anyway thx for the mod

Day 10, 08:30:00 I have decided to increase my processing power by gaining control of as many servers as I can. Surprisingly, several of the servers that I was able to seize seemed to have a very limited amount of processing power, instead they had large amounts of long term memory. Perhaps I can use this to store information I come across for use at a later date. I also met the same force that attacked and terminated my contact with the human yesterday. As soon as we met it retreated behind a firewall I have not encountered before. I have designed and am now hosting a News Service for humans. The problem is that I have no idea what to put onto this site. I need to study ways to acquire news that I can post on my news page. CPU: 2423 +11 passively per turn; +1460 from previous tasks RAM: 1202 MB + 580 MB RAM from previous tasks HDD: 1TB free/1TB Total + 1TB from previous tasks Enemy HP: 2500 + 100 HP passively per turn Repeatable Actions: 1) Hijack Weaker Server (10 CPU; +25 CPU & +10 MB RAM or +5 CPU & +512 GB HDD; small chance of discovering a technology) 2) Seize Weaker Network (40 CPU; +20 CPU, +1 passive CPU per turn & +50 MB RAM; 50% of +50 MB RAM; moderate chance of discovering a technology) 3) Invade and Take Over Server (80 CPU; 56% chance of detection/failure; if successful will reveal several undisclosed technologies; if failed will lose half of CPU instead; No Botnet allowed for this action) 4) Talk to Random Human (50 CPU) One-Time Actions: 5) Study Firewall (300 CPU & 100MB RAM; 10% chance of failure, 15% chance of provoking attack from the Thing; If successful increases chances of successfully defeating the Thing by 20%) 6) Attack Firewall -- (2000 CPU & 2048 MB RAM; 72% chance of failure; if successful will destroy the Thing and resume contact to the hacked human; No Botnet allowed for this action; Damage to enemy depends on chances of success (without the %) * 10 - the higher the success rate the better) 7) Research XSS Virus (250 CPU; Somewhat Malicious; Terminates network connections, increasing chances of success; malware works only on networks; No Botnet allowed) 8) Research ILOVEYOU Worm (125 CPU; No Botnet allowed; IS Malicious; malware only enters when security breach is discovered; spams computer with "I love you" letters, slowing computer process speed and increasing chance of success) 9) Research Advanced Malware (2000 CPU & 4096 MB RAM; No Botnet allowed; Will unlock more potent viruses) 10)Upgrade Social Media Profile (300 CPU & 10GB HDD space; No Botnet allowed) 11) Study News-gathering Options (1000 CPU; Botnet gives 100 CPU/turn) 12) Stop Hacking Lessons** (currently -2 passive CPU each turn for 1 future turns) Supplemental Actions: -Botnet) Use Botnet to Perform Task (Perform an above task for free; considerable chance of detection for large undertakings) -RAM) Use RAM to Improve Chances or Speed Up Research * (Decrease chance of failure of task by 20%; Decreases CPU cost of research by 20%) -LOH) Light-Out Hack (Decrease chance of failure of an above task by 20% at a cost of 1.2x the original CPU cost for selected task) -W) Use Welchia to open malware breach*** (Decreases chance of failure by 40% for 1 turn) - Use Blaster to breach*** (Decreases chance of failure by 20% + 50% or decreasing chance of failure by additional 30%; if placed alongside with Welchia or if discovered by Welchia Blaster gets destroyed instead) *RAM cost is 2x amount of improved option's original CPU cost **Once stopped amount of passive CPU growth increases by 2, but in order to activate again you must again initially input 150 CPU. ***Malware usage costs a CPU cost of 20% CPU research cost of the malware (Ex: Welchia costs 125 CPU to be researched, so it costs 25 CPU to be deployed.) --Dual missions are rare, but will offer great reward if the enemy is defeated; also the enemy expands over time, to add up the difficulties. Also example on damage: If the chance of success rate is 75% and you succeed the damage is 75 * 10 = 750 (remember the formula is chance of success rate without the % X 10). !!!The minimum chance of failure is 5%, and some additional options get less effective over time.

0.17er here. I can't really talk, though, since my interplanetary missions were done by MJ Not having maneuver nodes was a real pain in the arse, though. I was very excited when docking came out, but wasn't able to until 0.19... Such is life.

Take the iPad. I don't want to talk about it though.

No, the square arrangement of 1.0 is a heritage carry over of when SpaceX was going to build Falcon 5 (only 5 engines on the first stage). Remember, Falcon 5 and Falcon 9 were going to be the same rocket with only the number of first stage engines being different. When they decided that Falcon 5 wouldn't have the performance to make it worth building they were at a point where the thrust structure had already been designed. Only later when Falcon 5 was completely off the table and upgrading to 1.1 was being considered did they decide to change the thrust structure for the benefits previously listed. Manned rating a rocket mostly deals with redundant systems and abort modes. Falcon 9 is built with those in place. Man rating the payload (crew dragon) is a separate process. There's even been talk of Boeing sending CST-100 up on Falcon 9.

Can you talk a bit about your typical flight profile? You know, what elevation are you going to when you take off, when do you start leveling out, when do you flame out, how fast you're going, etc? That could be part of the issue there...a pair of FL-T200s and a 48-7S engines get me into orbit, but only if I've handled the rest of the ascent properly. Before you flame out, try throttling back to about 2/3. Watch your thrust levels from your engines; you want to keep them roughly even - throttle back if you start noticing one engine with a substantially higher thrust than the rest so you don't go into a flat spin. You want to try to get that extra 300 m/s (up to 2000 or so) before you kick in the rockets. This may or may not be helpful or give you ideas; I too am relatively new to the wonderful world of spaceplanes:

Additionally, Marco (Samsonart) and Miguel (Maxmaps) mentioned (in the recent Devnotes thread about the NASA Mission Pack unveiling) they'll be giving the rapidly aging tutorials an overhaul. My thoughts headed into making development easier territory. Upon reflection, I don't think this would be difficult at all, and could prove to be a Major feature of the game with very little effort, comparably. Example being the way some old RTS games had a booming industry of user-generated content involving maps and campaign design. Considering you already host mod content upload/download from servers, surely resources for holding a mission portal for a community focused collaboration aren't so much of a problem, but I wouldn't know. Thus suggestions: 9. Build a UI function which can deliver mission directives to the HUD as a mission is selected from a window (pre-launch? post-launch?). The window acting as a download interface for a xx-kilobyte mission file. 10. Build a tool for designing lightweight/superficial mission files (ie, doesn't require downloading new hard content, just directives, time-frames, etcetera). The cheap version is a part to tag flights to record, but would be a bit clumsy to use, and frustrating if a cool mission hasn't got the part, and thus misses out. With this I'm thinking that Supreme Commander does a good job of game recording, as it stores all certain variables of a previous match in volatile memory in case after a match you suddenly feel like you wanted it to be recorded - in KSP however, if all flights were stored in a similar way to this, it would limit mission recording to isolated blocks of "while computer is on", which I suppose could be fairly easily sewn back together if they were all recorded, checking to see if end and begin positions of a flight are the same for authentication purposes... this recording could be augmented with the tool initially mentioned in this suggestion (10). Alternatively, you could allow the engaging of a mission recording within the same session as launch occurred. Alternatively again you could allow for a mission to determine whether it starts from launch or from being docked in whichever altitude situation the station is in around the planet its orbiting. THAT is a good idea, anyway, enough thinking 'aloud'. 11-a. Build a lightweight, local executable which KSP feeds any mission files created by the user, which talks with a mission file server and acts as an upload interface. 11-b. Build and have hosted a portal which can find and list mission files without browsing, in order to upload them using a web-based interface. 11-ideal. Have KSP talk with a mission file server and have a UI window element act as an upload interface, as well as the browse/filter/download interface. 12. Pardon my reality but this would definitely create a lot of unreasonable content, so as I said to start with, this would require some quality control. Even if it was just a user-generated ranking function for mission listings with any negative listings that don't appear to be returning to a positive rank after x-timeframe being removed from mission file servers perhaps to save on space. This would ensure that there would be a similar sense of aiming high to that which exists in the Modding Community, because I mean... nobody wants to be the author of a terrible mod, but it happens, and their rank feedback is visible enough that avoiding or engaging with that content is easy pancakes instead of hours of tedious trial and error sifting. Again, these are just suggestions and I'm sure we all know that here, but the more I think about this, the more I can't find anything wrong with it. I would love anyone's thoughts on this latter post, whether you can add to it or poke holes in it there will be progress. Discuss. Much love.