What is the point of careerplay?

[Warzouz]

Science game is a nice way for new players to discover the game bit by bit and have simple objective.

When I started playing KSP (beta 0.9), I tried the Career mode, but found it a bit overwhelming. I switched back to science and had a lot of fun.

As 1.0, I restarted a Career game. It's enjoyable, same as science, but you have to focus on fund efficient rockets and no just part or mass efficient rockets. I didn't play the game the same way and developed some monolithic recoverable stages instead of complex aspargus-style staged rockets.

In late game, all come to sandbox anyway. But that's part of the game. If career was too directive we wouldn't be happy because KSC is a game of "go were you want, explore what you want". I like how the game is more open in late game.

Sure there is room for improvement (XP system, contracts, more data, integrated curiosities...), but overall, career is what I expected.

[Dugeusclin]

Changing scenes causes ram-usage to jump?

Ok, I didn't know that. Nothing I can do about that then. Except trying to avoid to switch scenes (or be more aware when I do).

I read about a memoryleak, just didn't know where it was.

I'll try installing that GCmonitor and maybe see what is happening.

I'm a regular visitor of the helpthreads, reading (trying to understand) them instead of playing (which is a challenge in itself, because I have to learn new stuff again, constantly hitting walls ... I don't want to become a computerwizz to play a game though :-p )

The overclock is done with easytune (I'm not going to mess with voltages and stuff on my own (not enough knowledge)).

I'll try setting it to normal again and see if it makes a difference. (although the overclock is one provided by the manufacturer? (Gigabyte))

It doesn't give me any problems on Arma (2 and) 3 (which are the the actual reason to use a higher frequency) or other games (ClOD, Take On Mars, etc).

Maybe removing some dust (blowing it out is also a good idea, although I can't really see any dust in my case (I can't see in the inside ofcourse).

I have no debris, spent stages are dropped on a suborbital trajectory (the ones I missed, can't deorbit, I delete in the trackingstation).

I'm on day 14 (ingame), I hardly use the timewarp (max I've done is the 5th arrowwarp (x 1000?) for maybe an hour max, ussually to get a contract to complete or get to a node, always several/many contracts/missions at the same time (thank god for the alarmclock). First reasonable window to do a flyby to Moho (just a simple probe with some sciencestuff and basic sattelites and relay to Kerbin (flightcomputer will probably need to do the actual manoeuvre at Moho to get the sattelites into an orbit (may be out of range), not enough dV to get back to Kerbin (planning on trying to slingshot around Eve to make a return to Kerbin with some science (won't be timewarping, just doing other stuff until the alarm tells me when I have to do something)).

Probably (highly likely) this won't work very well, but this mission is allowed to fail (it's not a contract or anything, just early exploring).

Understandably, I'd like to have some degree of confidence that I can actually try this (so the vessel is not allowed to dissapear or blow up for no reason).

Uncertainty is part of the deal here, enough stuff can go wrong already.

Ok, yes, the title is misleading (didn't really think about that at the time, I was just venting).

What I mean is that I care less when playing sandbox/testinggrounds (just hyperedit the missing stuff and get on with it).

Using hyperedit in career is cheating (My game, my rules ;-) I could always imagine that the vessel got hit by some spacejunk, micrometeorites, radiation or whatever, losing some % would be normal, but it happens too often). A sattelite or whatever that doesn't work because of a designflaw ... too bad, pay more attention next time, or do more testing at KSC.