Search the Community

[15:16] <@Capt_Skunky> <BrownFox> how would staging on interplanetary vessels work? [15:16] <@HarvesteR> but I like the idea of an expansion pack that adds new features [15:16] <@Sordid> Though I have to say, the idea of multiple players with their own separate space agencies and separate budgets pooling their resources to do something grand sounds really awesome. [15:16] <@HarvesteR> and new possibilities [15:18] <@HarvesteR> Oh, new announcement on the servers [15:18] <@HarvesteR> we\'ve ditched the mediafire idea, because it seems they don\'t really offer an option to have a private download [15:18] <@HarvesteR> we are now setting up a new, beefier server [15:19] <@HarvesteR> it should be up and running in a few hours, and we will eventually move the entire site there [15:19] <@HarvesteR> for the time being though, we will offload the downloadable files to it [15:19] <@HarvesteR> so the community and downloads will be separate [15:19] <@Capt_Skunky> <N3X15> Why is KSP not using a relational database like SQLite for persistance? Wouldn\'t it be more effective? [15:20] <@HarvesteR> for a save format you mean? [15:20] <@N3X15> Yeah [15:20] <@N3X15> A few other people asked about this. [15:20] <@HarvesteR> the SFS format was created to be as straightforward and robust as possible really [15:21] <@HarvesteR> we did think about using established formats, like XML or something, but in the end, it was just adding needless overhead [15:22] <@HarvesteR> the SFS is just what we need really [15:22] * @N3X15 nods [15:22] <@HarvesteR> it\'s easy to work with, human-readable, and so far, we\'ve been able to keep it organized I think [15:22] <@HarvesteR> also, you don\'t see it by looking at the file, but there is a system for saving and loading metadata [15:22] <@HarvesteR> parts use it to store part-specific data [15:23] <@HarvesteR> like the amount of fuel in a tank [15:23] <@HarvesteR> which wouldn\'t make sense to have in the definition of a SAS module [15:23] <@HarvesteR> we do have plans though, to create an upgraded format later, called SGS [15:23] <@HarvesteR> SFS = Saved Flight State [15:23] <@HarvesteR> SGS = Saved Game State [15:24] <@HarvesteR> but for now, we\'re good with that [15:24] <@Capt_Skunky> <Causeless>for 0.15, are you going back to the 4-week updates, or are you going to take the time to try and iron out as many bugs as possible? [15:25] <@HarvesteR> I\'m rethinking the way we do updates here, and we might possibly do some changes to our system [15:26] <@HarvesteR> the initial idea was to return to the 4-week cycle as before, and indeed, we are not going to do a .14 sized update again anytime soon [15:26] <@HarvesteR> we\'re not THAT crazy [15:26] <@HarvesteR> but, the 4-week cycle is lacking in some respects [15:26] <@HarvesteR> Lately, I\'ve been thinking of running a dual-3-week cycle [15:27] <@HarvesteR> 3 weeks to go crazy and take the game apart, 3 weeks to fix the mess [15:27] <@HarvesteR> and a release at the end of each 6 weeks [15:27] <@HarvesteR> but we still have to discuss that as a team really [15:27] <@HarvesteR> it\'s just an idea at this point [15:28] <@Capt_Skunky> <BrownFox> Harv, would it be a good idea to have a \'Lock Docks\' function, similar to staging? Will Assemblies have a way to jetison specific nodes at will? Perhaps a bank of dock actuator buttons? [15:28] <@HarvesteR> well, I had imagined that un-docking would work only from child-to-parent [15:29] <@HarvesteR> that is, you can undock the vessel you\'re commanding, but not undock others from it [15:29] <@HarvesteR> but, that would be a nice thing to have implemented as a contextual action for docking nodes [15:29] <@HarvesteR> which is an idea I\'ve been playing with for a while [15:29] <@HarvesteR> actually, now that we\'re on the subject, I\'ve been wanting to have a discussion on this [15:30] <@HarvesteR> the staging stack isn\'t enough to control everything a ship can do [15:30] <@Capt_Skunky> on that note [15:30] <@HarvesteR> so several systems are being placed in separate actions 'channels' [15:30] <@Capt_Skunky> <NovaSilisko>is a staging overhaul going to be required for docking? considering how much will change (multiple capsules per vessel, even at launch) it might be needed [15:30] <@HarvesteR> heh, just in time [15:30] <@Capt_Skunky> Yup [15:31] <@HarvesteR> well, what I want to do, and mind that this is not planned for 0.15 yet [15:31] <@HarvesteR> is to revise the staging system completely [15:31] <@HarvesteR> or at least add whatever is missing to it [15:31] <@HarvesteR> so I have a couple of ideas, some conflicting, that I wanted to talk about [15:31] <@HarvesteR> the first is the so-called \'hotbar\' [15:32] <@HarvesteR> it\'s a UI area where you can drag part icons to, to remove them from the staging sequence [15:32] <@HarvesteR> those would be mapped to number keys, and you could activate them manually there [15:32] <@HarvesteR> that\'s one idea [15:32] <@HarvesteR> then there is another concept I\'ve been going over, which I call \'action groups\' [15:32] <@HarvesteR> action groups are simpler really [15:33] <@HarvesteR> and already unwittingly partially implemented [15:33] <@HarvesteR> they\'re things like SAS, Gears and RCS [15:33] <@HarvesteR> only there would be more of them [15:33] <@HarvesteR> those control parts that do the same things, as a group [15:33] <@HarvesteR> both systems have pros and cons really [15:34] <@HarvesteR> because some part types are better fitted for action groups, others are better with hotbar-style mapping [15:34] <@HarvesteR> others though, should be controlled individually [15:34] <@HarvesteR> and lastly, others work best as part of a sequence [15:34] <@HarvesteR> as you can see, we have our work cut out for us [15:35] <@HarvesteR> I\'m not trying to think up a single unifying control scheme thoug [15:35] <@HarvesteR> but I don\'t want to have a lot of similar-but-not-the-same systems in either... that would just be confusing [15:36] <@HarvesteR> I would like to keep it as simple as possible though, without detracting from flexibility [15:37] <@Capt_Skunky> <Ascensiam> What environments are most likely for new planets, and are they going to follow the same size-to-gravity as Kerbin? [15:37] <@HarvesteR> well, we want to keep the entire Kerbal star system in more or less the same scale [15:37] <@HarvesteR> although it\'s not exactly a scale per se... it\'s more of a paradigm we\'re trying to follow [15:38] <@HarvesteR> radius is 1/11th of the original, G at surface is the same [15:38] <@HarvesteR> so far, that\'s been working well [15:38] <@HarvesteR> although we did break that with the Mun [15:38] <@HarvesteR> Most games exaggerate the size of the moon on the screen quite a lot [15:38] <@HarvesteR> because of the larger FOV on-screen, the moon would appear to be a speck [15:39] <@HarvesteR> you can see that in Orbiter, which makes no compromise [15:39] <@HarvesteR> but here, we wanted it to feel right, so the mun is much larger than the moon-earth relationship [15:39] <@HarvesteR> anyhow, about other planets, we want to keep going with the solar-system-spoof idea [15:40] <@HarvesteR> so there\'ll be an analogue for most \'popular\' celestial bodies [15:40] <@HarvesteR> and we\'ll get creative with the less known ones [15:41] <@Capt_Skunky> <witeken> 1) Will there come ever merchandise? If yes, what are the requirements? 2) How many times is KSP purchased? Can the devs live with the money they get from people buying the game/donating? [15:41] <@HarvesteR> Merchandise is planned for the near future, although there is no ETA on that atm [15:41] <@HarvesteR> but I can tell you this, I want a Kerbal plushie just as bad as you do [15:42] <@HarvesteR> := [15:42] <@Capt_Skunky> I think everyone does [15:42] <@HarvesteR> hehe [15:42] <@HarvesteR> we\'re looking at easier stuff first though, because things like bespoke plushies require quite the investment [15:43] <@HarvesteR> you can only make it feasible if you produce thousands of them, which means we need to be sure thousands of people would want one [15:43] <@HarvesteR> so we\'re probably going to get started with simpler things, like T-shirts and such [15:44] <@HarvesteR> but no estimates on that right now... [15:44] <@Capt_Skunky> <kHurtiZ>Please would you move the Nav ball to the right? The centre has the rocket, and the navball tends to obscure it, whereas there\'s masses of space over to the right. Other UI suggestions: the altimeter should be close to the velocity indicator (as you often need to see both figures at the same time); and also add Pe and Ap indicators in the main flight screen. [15:44] <@HarvesteR> The UI is in for some reworking, and pretty soon also [15:45] <@HarvesteR> I also dislike how the navball obscures the view, but at the same time, the navball is the most important instrument on the UI [15:45] <@HarvesteR> so we\'re thinking up some ideas to improve the general UI layout [15:46] <@HarvesteR> and more immediately, I want to add a UI Scale optino to the settings, because I do think the UI is too large right now, and also a UI transparency option [15:46] <@HarvesteR> as for moving it to the right, that\'s where the crew avatars are, and it\'s not a very immediate focus area [15:46] <@HarvesteR> the ADI on aircraft cockpits is centered for the same reason [15:47] <@HarvesteR> but most significantly, we will add a system we\'re calling UI Master Modes soon [15:48] <@HarvesteR> basically, the UI instruments would each have several modes in which they could operate [15:48] <@HarvesteR> the navball, for instance, would be toggleable between surface (current), orbit, and maybe something else [15:48] <@HarvesteR> the speed reading toggles between surface, orbit, and later target-relative [15:52] <@Capt_Skunky> <witeken> 3) HarvesteR, what do you like the most at KSP as a game? Building rockets, missions or finding bugs(xp?)? Or something else? 4) How many devs get full time paid for full time developing KSP? [15:52] <@Capt_Skunky> Trying to move things along.. quite a few questions in the queue [15:54] <@Capt_Skunky> I think Harv has stepped away from the PC... sit tight folks. [15:58] <@HarvesteR> sorry I was on the phone [15:58] <@HarvesteR> back now [15:58] <@Capt_Skunky> I figured as much [15:59] <@HarvesteR> well, just to finish up on the UI thing, the idea is that each piece of the UI would be configurable, and Master Modes then would act as a preset [15:59] <@HarvesteR> so you could quickly alternate between Flight mode and Docking mode, for instance [16:00] <@HarvesteR> If you\'re familiar with how Photoshop has its \'workspaces\', the idea is more or less the same [16:00] <@HarvesteR> now, about the other question [16:00] <@HarvesteR> the thing I like most is finding things that surprise me... things that weren\'t programmed explicitly [16:01] <@HarvesteR> like the wings flexing with C7 parts [16:01] <@HarvesteR> or how coming into the atmosphere too quickly can actually break a ship into pieces [16:01] <@HarvesteR> or names like 'Generick Kerman' [16:02] <@Capt_Skunky> <markodash> can we get a thick atmosphere monn/planet ahead of the full system release? it would be a change of pace from the normally airless bodies [16:02] <@HarvesteR> oh [16:03] <@HarvesteR> well, yeah, I don\'t think we\'d be able to release the entire solar system in a single update [16:03] <@HarvesteR> because our terrain system still has no support for things like gas giants, or ring systems [16:03] <@HarvesteR> so we\'ll probably start with the rocky planets first [16:04] <@HarvesteR> and yeah, those will have several types of atmosphere [16:04] <@HarvesteR> the venus-like planet would have a thick atmosphere [16:04] <@HarvesteR> the mars-like one would have a very thin one [16:04] <@HarvesteR> should make for some pretty interesting flying there [16:05] <@Capt_Skunky> <NovaSilisko> is the ambient light going to stay as-is, or will it change depending on celestial body? (airless bodies have none, atmospheres have some) [16:05] <@HarvesteR> that\'s already more or less implemented actually [16:05] <@HarvesteR> there is already a system in place to vary the global ambient light based on the vacuum colour and the colour set for each celestial body [16:05] <@HarvesteR> right now though, it\'s very subtle [16:06] <@HarvesteR> but it should be cool to have a reddish-looking desert planet, or a purplish looking one [16:06] <@Capt_Skunky> <witeken> 5) Will there come a more interacting tutorial? [16:07] <@HarvesteR> we will add more tutorials later I think, as they become more necessary [16:07] <@HarvesteR> as far as more interacting, I\'m not quite sure what that means [16:07] <@HarvesteR> we do plan on having training missions though [16:07] <@HarvesteR> the SFS system allows for one-off instances, and those could be used along with a tutorial to create a training mission [16:08] <@HarvesteR> you could potentially start from orbit, with a ready-to-go spacecraft [16:08] <@Capt_Skunky> <Aegrim> Will they ever make a cool launch animations effect, with the smoke flying everywhere during ignition before the game takes over and the rocket flies off [16:09] <@HarvesteR> definitely. The smoke trails and particles system is long overdue for an overhaul [16:10] <@Capt_Skunky> <BrownFox> Harv, how are you planning on developing the in-game economy? Part prices already exist; how about ways of earning coins? Perhaps in-game \'X-Prizes\', asteroid mining challenges and things of that nature? [16:10] <@HarvesteR> well, the original idea was that you\'d earn money from doing flights [16:11] <@HarvesteR> but we do have other ideas too [16:11] <@HarvesteR> you could, instead of earning money and spending it directly, be assigned a periodic budget [16:11] <@HarvesteR> that would make more sense if KSP were a government program [16:11] <@HarvesteR> if you see it as a private program though, earning money through missions makes more sense [16:12] <@HarvesteR> but I think in the end we\'ll probably go with a middle-ground approach, where you\'d earn not just money from missions, but generate interest in the space program from achieving goals [16:13] <@HarvesteR> and interest could result in more money, through sponsorships possibly, or something of the sort [16:13] <@HarvesteR> all that remains to be decided though [16:14] <@HarvesteR> but the initial idea is that money will come from doing flights, and doing flights will cost money... if you do it right, they will make more money than they cost [16:14] <@Capt_Skunky> <cBBp> did you ever thing kerbal would get as popular as it has when you first started on it? [16:14] <@HarvesteR> it\'s a weird feeling really [16:14] <@HarvesteR> sometimes I felt good about it, and expected good things from the game [16:15] <@HarvesteR> other times I felt like I was working on something no one could possibly like [16:15] <@HarvesteR> it\'s been a roller-coaster ride of personal opinions about the game [16:16] <@HarvesteR> one thing I can say for sure though, I definitely didn\'t expect the game to get this big this fast. [16:16] <@HarvesteR> The state of the server is proof of that [16:16] <@Capt_Skunky> <witeken> the whole community knew what update 0.15 would be focused on. Can you give us an idea where 0.16 will go about? [16:16] <@HarvesteR> well, it depends a little on what we can actually achieve for 0.15 [16:17] <@HarvesteR> we know what we want to add for it, but from that to actually getting those features in, there\'s quite a lot of work [16:17] <@HarvesteR> but ideally, after flight planning and docking, the next big thing would be making the Kerbals themselves more present in the game [16:18] <@HarvesteR> so I\'d very much like to add EVAs then [16:18] <@HarvesteR> but we\'ll see [16:18] <@HarvesteR> it also depends quite a lot on which base features still need implementing to get there [16:18] <@HarvesteR> and we don\'t know that until we start planning the actual update. [16:18] <@Capt_Skunky> <Ascensiam> When will the sun become a solid object that can overheat ships and supply a small variety of dangers? [16:19] <@HarvesteR> pretty soon, if everything goes as planned [16:19] <@HarvesteR> but we are not planning on adding a physical surface to the sun though, only a visual one [16:20] <@HarvesteR> you\'ll be vaporized before you even get close to it, so there\'s no point in having a collidable surface [16:20] <@HarvesteR> I can say though, that I\'m pretty happy with how it\'s shaping up [16:20] <@Capt_Skunky> <Byter> how many moons will saturn (or katurn) have? you cant add so many of them...it would be a 'orbital mess' because the map view would change your orbit all the time...and: is there still a free-flight mode without credits and missions and that stuff? [16:21] <@HarvesteR> I can\'t say for sure just how many moons we will add... that is the kind of thing we judge by feel [16:21] <@HarvesteR> but we want to have a large enough amount that you can explore for quite a while [16:22] <@HarvesteR> at the same time though, there\'s no point in adding 300 bits of rock that look exactly the same [16:22] <@HarvesteR> we want each celestial body to be unique in its own way [16:23] <@HarvesteR> about the free-flight mode, that will never go away. Missions are not like game 'levels', they\'re more like quests. [16:23] <@Capt_Skunky> <NovaSilisko> is there any precedent or preferred 'backstory' for the game? alternate universe/dimension? alien construct like some have proposed? [16:24] <@HarvesteR> well, not in a very formal sense... The Kerbal universe is not in any way linked to the real one, and I wouldn\'t like to set down a very rigid storyline either [16:25] <@HarvesteR> games to me are not about telling stories... for that we have movies, books and tv [16:25] <@Capt_Skunky> And comics [16:25] <@HarvesteR> games to me are about creating worlds the player can experience [16:25] <@HarvesteR> and from that, he\'ll create his own stories [16:26] <@Capt_Skunky> <witeken> What do you do in the weekend? Do you read the forums? Typ a few lines of code? Or do you just do private stuff/play KSP yourself? [16:26] <@HarvesteR> hehe, I usually try as hard as I can to forget I have a job [16:26] <@Capt_Skunky> ROFL [16:27] <@HarvesteR> and I really need to check myself from going into the forums or doing game-related things... I could very easily get sucked into working through the weekend [16:27] <@HarvesteR> and then burning out the week after [16:27] <@HarvesteR> getting rest is as important as the work itself really. It\'s like braking before a corner [16:28] <@HarvesteR> you might crash if you don\'t [16:28] <@Capt_Skunky> <cBBp> any chance we will see a game supported animation system that works like sounds or effects and is universal between parts? [16:28] <@HarvesteR> yeah, we do want to add that as soon as we can [16:28] <@HarvesteR> for that, we will probably have to create our own animation system, and that\'s not a small task [16:28] <@HarvesteR> but it is something we want to do [16:29] <@Capt_Skunky> <Causeless> how about weather? how will any weather systems work, not just for Kerbin, but other planets? [16:29] <@HarvesteR> weather is another feature I\'d very much like to see [16:29] <@HarvesteR> although first, I\'d like to at least have a cloud system in [16:30] <@HarvesteR> the cloud system would allow us to have clouds over Kerbin, and possibly a basic form of weather, and if done right, it would also enable us to create gas giants [16:30] <@HarvesteR> or planets completely covered by clouds, like Titan

The thread is unlocked and it wasn\'t your fault it was the lack to talk about that caused it.

Don\'t feel bad, it really wasn\'t your fault. This is what happens when people converse. They go off topic. Not only that, but that thread should\'ve been locked the MINUTE the target release date was missed. The community already had nearly run out of stuff to talk about in relation to the update, and postponing the update with so little new news didn\'t really help.

I\'ve made a irc channel on esper.net at #KSP_MPmod, everyone. I\'mma just going to haul my ass and start working on a roadmap of things we need doing, then we\'ll be able to start. I\'ll probably need to talk to trbinsc about the team, but don\'t worry - no-one will be removed. We just need a bit more organization if this is going to move forwards.

You go to level 94, and you see several people on the same thread of the KSP RP Forum. Why they can\'t just talk to each other, I will never know.

I was planning on adding a 2m to 4x 1m, a 2m to 2x 2m, and a 2m to 4x 2m, but they aren\'t a priority atm :/ Today I got distracted and tried to a (landingleg) cargo clamp thingy, but animations are playing havoc with my mind. Perhaps I\'ll do one with that fancy multi joint plugin that\'s the talk of the forums... I\'m going to work on decouplers and engines next (2m fission torch anyone?), then perhaps some radial bits, including in-atmosphere shroud panels that just stick to the side of the drag prone truss sections, and also function as radial decouplers. I\'ll do a truss link the same diameter as the pod, but longer, and perhaps do few pod variants (a more lander freindly version, and a 1.5/1.75/2m one). Then I\'ll have a stab at a launch vehicle, which can be used with the pack or on it\'s own as a heavy lift vehicle, and will probably feature a heavier version of the fission engine, and 2-4x1 adaptors of it\'s own (possible with 1m engines to match, possibly not). Then I\'ll do those adaptors And then, I\'ll do smoothing and textures. Oh, and I don\'t think I\'ll smooth the girders, just tanks, engines and such. I sorta like the cleaner edges =P I\'m very indecisive, so this probably won\'t be quite the order. The idea is that these parts will be about 10% more efficient than stock, not haxxor territory, but a little further up the tech ladder perhaps.

I want this to be a thread for people to talk photography and show their work. Makes me duty bound to post first Some more of my photos, ones I\'m more proud of. Spoilered for bandwidth considerations

We don\'t talk about mission Monday-1... :-X

5 points for be a Master Rocket Scientist. 5 Points for have much posts. Min 5 points for MLP (I not talk about the Mobile Launcher Platform) =5/10

How bout you get on skype more so we can talk music =P

Appreciate the help, mate, I\'d really like to see this happen. I\'ll see if I can send a PM to the original author, and talk to him about this. Also, rocket2guns said, in the OP of that thread, 'Free and open for any use! Do whatever you like with it this is an open source project.'

Very nicely done, sirguinea. I love it. With respect to the whole structural integrity thing, I feel like I should mention that in a distant-future science fiction, all our assumptions are likely to be rendered irrelevant. I mean, it\'d be equivalent to a 12-th century blacksmith trying to predict the design of a mun mission. 'Oh, clearly it would have to be bird shaped, or else it couldn\'t possibly fly, and you\'d need some kind of pen for the draft animals, which you\'d use to power the wings . . . ' Hell, they have antigravity and inertial dampeners and force fields. We have no reason to believe they can\'t just magically shift the center of mass to anywhere they damn well please. I think they even talk about 'structural integrity fields' in the technobabble. Just read any futurism stuff from the 1920\'s and you\'ll see what I\'m talking about. The problem is that in terms of design, economics, and engineering, it\'s basically impossible to identify the limiting factors and natural consequences of a particular technology before it is invented. Maybe space ships will need to be compact, to maximize structural integrity. But then again, maybe materials tech will advance so far that we have ultra-strong, mono-molecular polymers, but the fusion cores that everyone uses for power have such massive heat production that spaceships need to be long and spread out to maximize surface area for radiators. Or maybe we\'ll have portable electromagnetically-contained black holes to dump our heat down, but we need a MASSIVE and uninterrupted power supply or else the damn thing will eat the ship, so we need a solar array the size of a small moon. Would that even work? exactly. Think nuclear submarines. Internally powered subs that can stay under for months or years without surfacing? In 1930 they would have called you an idiot for suggesting such a thing would exist within 24 years. 'Where would get its air?'. Predict space ship design in 2364? Best of luck with that. Not that I don\'t love a good try. Just don\'t expect to actually be right.

I think I know why the background is transparent. If you hop on skype, we can talk about a fix for it.

All this talk about probes, has anyone toyed with the idea of a star wars esqe probe? More specifically the type that slams into the surface instead of dealing with parachutes and engines? Would make for some interesting fire and forget landings.

So, I\'ve been pouring over the forums for a while now, reading a lot of posts, and posting myself from time to time. It\'s been fun to see what other people do when they play this game, the ideas they have, etc. However, I\'ve noticed something that bothers me, and that\'s the continual fixation the community has on violence. STOP RIGHT NOW, AND PLEASE DO NOT JUST SCROLL DOWN TO THE BOTTOM AND POST ABOUT HOW SANCTIMONIOUS I AM. I\'M A HUMAN BEING TOO, AND I HAVE A POINT TO MAKE HERE. Thank You It\'s just that I\'m a huge fan of science, science fiction, and something that I\'ve always attributed and admired about both of those is that they always talk about the end of our \'Romance with Violence\' that\'s been going on since our ancestors clubbed the first boar to death. I find it really annoying/disconcerting when a new ship/part comes out of the plugin and add-on department, and the first post is from someone who put guns on it. A few things I pieced together to show you what I\'m talking about: I was going to grab a few examples from the RP forum, but there were far too many and I quickly decided to exclude it. I realize that the forums are going to become some peace-loving convent (and I wouldn\'t enjoy it if it were that way). Does this kind of thing bother anyone else?

I like the Armaggedon pattern \'cause it reminds me of the German howitzer... Getting involved in guard talk here... I collect Elysians so don\'t have many tanks... :\'( Nice rocket designs! Keep launching! ;D

In all this talk of necroing an old thread and asking around for people with the mod, I still never received a PM. I check KSP daily, just not this mod in quite a while. Reuped the link in the first post. If it goes down again, please PM me. I\'ve got some available time coming up and I\'m bumping this thread to see if there\'s interest in updating the mod to 0.14--give a holler if you want more brick parts!

This does make me sad. The next generation of America is probably going to be the worst. Our government is sticking to old ways, even when they prove to not work in this era (ala SOPA?). Like the video said, we cut the relatively miniscule budget for the final frontier, to let failing companies last one more day. And on top of all that, when we step up as adults, and graduate college, we\'re going to be handed the bill. This bill is not just the last generation\'s bill: it\'s the whole bill. We just keep borrowing and borrowing, killing our future to have a better today. I just want to say something to the government that is running this country: are you happy? Are you happy that we are taught to obey the highest bidder? Are you happy that your grandkids\' taxes will pay for your fat paycheck now? Are you happy that you have made what was once the world\'s greatest nation in to the laughing stock of the world? ARE YOU HAPPY THAT YOU ARE DESTROYING THE HOPES, DREAMS, AND FUTURE OF YOUR CHILDREN?! But I digress. What do you care? You have your cushy paycheck, your third Ferrari, and you\'re happy. Why should you care about the future of our nation? That\'s all that\'s important now, right? Instant gratification. We want to talk NOW. We want to eat NOW. We want to be paid NOW. But there\'s one thing we don\'t want instant: the bill. We want our stuff NOW, but we want to work LATER. I am a college student, and I feel relatively secure about my position now. However, I am genuinely terrified of the day I graduate, because then I\'m given the bill for the United States of America. *end rant

What did the fish say when the fisherman cought him? Nothing, fish cant talk.

Well, I have bought the game! Not sure what to do about my friend, will have to talk to him. Thanks for the warm welcome, guys!

Starting it up, will tell you when I finish. Finished, here are my thoughts: WOW. Words cannot describe how strong this feels. A nation\'s people rising up for something that doesn\'t even affect them. I have never heard of Kony before now, but his name will not die. If a 6-year old can understand what to do, so should the world. I have no money, but I will use what tools I have to spread the word. Every signature will now have Kony, every person I talk to will learn of him, and come April 20 I will cover my campus with his poster.

talk to some guy and say you have windows 7, he responds'dang that must be old as heck i got windows 95!' more of a FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCC

I\'m starting work on a deploy-able balloon part. I\'ve got buoyancy working, but I want it to work like a parachute (deployable). Does anyone have an example of how to switch meshes like the parachute module? [mod]Do not talk about decompiling the game. I will not give you a second chance.[/mod] ooh, I can help someone! this.staticPressureAtm & this.dynamicPressureAtm I\'m not sure if this is correct, but it seems to work for density FlightGlobals.getAtmDensity(this.staticPressureAtm)

No, .14x4 is ready to play. .14 will be out soon-ish. This isn\'t the thread to talk about it though.

Nah I just made them up, because I use pipes a lot I thought I\'d start a pipe factory for KSP, it\'s all completely unofficial though. Now I feel I should have a story with any new ship, it just helps add something more than the usual 'Here\'s my rocket' posts. Kigwig was just Bigwig at first, I added the K to make him Kerbally, so after that I added K\'s to Stanley and Rodger, the three are the only Kerbals working at Ker-Flow-Full pipeworks, a tiny competitor to Flooyd. Kanley is obsessed with pipes and even lives in a pipe in the yard somewhere, Kodger is obviously the brains as well as being a \'set in his ways\' traditionalist who vary rarely gets flustered, while Kigwig is enthusiastic and tries his best to run the place but really doesn\'t know how. It\'s just my little contribution along with the tiny ships, everyone else was making these huge rockets that took ages to get to orbit and slowed down my computer so I decided to see if a small rocket could get to the Mun. I thought I was doing well with a 15 tank ship until another player, Gruntzilla, showed me his 10 tank ship, after that I made the Little Sipper and the Munar Skif. There\'s talk of smaller engines and fuel tanks coming in the 0.14 release, I\'ll see what I can make with them