|
Well, finally managed to land a plane without destroying anything. Maybe it went so well because I wasn't aiming for any landing strip, just the plains somewhere west of KSP. All the new stuff is great, it's a good challenge working inside the limitations of the lower tier buildings. But the tech tree still makes very little sense in some areas, I hope it'll get a major restructuring at some point. I've never used any mods that change the tree (because I hate managing mods, will have to check out CKAN later), but I've generally liked those where the tree more clearly branches out into specializations: Huger rockets, tinier rockets, planes, planetary exploration, science stuff.
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 00:43 |
|
|
Count Roland posted:Do they deploy automatically? I always set mine off manually. Yes. You can trigger your chutes way outside the atmosphere and they will automatically half-deploy when your craft hits the atmospheric density configured for each one, and full-deploy when you reach the radar altitude configured for each one. There is usually never any reason to manually time your chute deployment, just let the game do it for you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
I am actually sort of short on cash. Or maybe spending wrong. I've researched all the way through basic rovers, Mainsail, Mk2 plane parts etc, and my VAB is still at level 1 and limited to 30 parts. I don't think I'll get any real stations or bases built before doing that VAB upgrade...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
Okay why are the tiny fuel tanks together with tiny engines so poo poo? Compared to RCS at the same scale. Satellite weighing 155 kg without propulsion added. Add an Oscar-B fuel tank and LV-1 engine, you get 787 m/s of dV and TWR of 1.55. Instead add an FL-R10 small inline RCS tank and two O-10 radially attached monoprop engines, and you get 2678 m/s of dV and TWR of 7.77. Those tiny fuel tanks SUCK. By the way, those O-10 engines have the same Isp as LV-1 but weigh 3 times as much. The only difference is that the small FL-R10 tank has much better fuel capacity. You would still get similar numbers (apart from TWR) if you used regular RCS engines rather than O-10's: 2398 m/s with two inline RCS ports with Isp of 260s.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:A big part of beta is rebalancing everything. We literally allocated someone in the team for that singular task. Like, that is his job til Beta is over. Here's looking forward to a grand tech-tree shuffle in 0.91 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
I've definitely also had some odd breakage with 0.90, mainly relating to switching in and out of map mode while piloting a ship. It gets into some neither-nor mode where I can't see my ship, can see the planets, and can't see orbits. If I leave to the space center I also have trouble entering buildings or accessing the right-click boxes for them. Quitting to the main menu seems to get the problem to go away, however. I'm not sure if any mods are involved. There's also an annoying visual glitch when I enter the VAB, with the UI being all over the place, but it fixes itself before I get control. (Entering the VAB, SPH and tracking station scenes in general have some performance issues, very non-smooth.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2014 12:28
|
|
|
uXs posted:The contract for achieving orbit disappearing if you get into orbit before you accept that contract is kinda bullshit. Punishing you for doing well doesn't seem like a good idea. It might really be a good thing is you simply automatically got the "launch a rocket" and "obtain orbit" contracts auto-accepted at the start of a new career game. Maybe even special-case the obtain orbit contract so it yields more if you finish it earlier, or fold the height record contracts into it to yield partial completion bonuses.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
I just discovered that quickload does not reset the position of celestial objects. If I save with a ship somewhere, then go fly it somewhere else, fail massively and reload, the situation will be different. The solar system will have everything at different positions than when I saved it. Has it always been this way?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
"Do test at some site" contracts are fine and all, but pleeeeeeease give me a distance-to-site readout somewhere!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 11:38
|
|
|
But if you use the "rover base" block and stack a probe core onto that, then your navball will be aligned upwards forever, meaning you can't actually see the waypoints on the ball. It's also hard to judge how much further you actually have to drive to reach a survey site, since your only way to see your own location in relation to the site is on the map, which has low resolution terrain and a limit to how far you can zoom in.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
I have a probe on a hyperbolic trajectory out from Kerbin. But when I control a different craft and view the map screen, that probe shows as having a regular elliptical orbit. Do I risk my Duna probe actually just making orbit if I don't babysit it out from Kerbin, or is it just a rendering bug? Edit: Named savegames are available from the Esc menu in the space center view.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Medicinal Penguin posted:When you get contracts for the "Base that holds x Kerbals", do you have to have all the Kerbals in there, or just that number of seats? I assume it counts pod seats, research lab seats, cupola seats. Are external command chairs counted? You just need that many seats, they can be all empty. I don't think external seats count. Also, seriously be careful with those hold prograde/retrograde/target/etc SAS functions, if you do anything that upsets the location of them you will spin out of control. Let me make a concrete feature request on that: If a targeted marker moves too quickly (e.g. more than 10 degrees in one second) then automatically switch the SAS function to something else, "stabilize"-mode by default. But maybe try being smart, in a way: If a different marker just happens to be right at the current heading switch to that one, if it's supported by the pilot/probe.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:What you are saying is, you want the game to magically know how you are intending to fly your craft, instead of you selecting the proper SAS mode? More like not completely screw my heading if I overshoot a burn by 0.1 m/s, or if I forget to switch mode before changing control to a different docking port.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Part testing contracts come in two flavors: Activate the part in staging, or perform the Run Test action on the part's right-click menu. You can see which one a specific contract is, in the [+] Note part of the contract foldout. Booster tests seem to always be staging tests, so you need to set your craft up so it can reach the required altitude + speed before activating the booster. A good tip/trick for testing solid boosters is to tweak their fuel amount to very little or zero in the VAB, that makes them much easier to lift. But some contracts are just not reasonable. It's okay to reject those!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Do I have any realistic hope of launching Station Science stuff when I don't have access to 2.5m engines/tanks yet? Use the tricoupler to chuck three engines below it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Falken posted:Arsonide, what is the possibility of say a branching station contract? I think someone mentioned it in the thread. For instance, you put up a core station segment first, and then a second contract asks you to give room for another 4 crew, and then another for x amount of power generation, one for a cupola, one for x amount of monopropellant... And make those stations already put up seem more purposeful. You could perhaps also have low effort "supply"/"change crew" missions to a station. Best would be if there was a way to have passengers not under your control that you would have to send to and from stations/bases. Of course they wouldn't be able to ride in cockpit seats or give control authority of a craft, and killing them would fail their asociated contract (and give massive reputation losses.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 10:38
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I want better station contracts, too, but it’s worth noting that in the mean time, many contracts actually can be fulfilled by expanding a station. I tried that and couldn't get it working. I had an old station with 5 kerbal capacity (hitchhiker can + cupola), and a new contract called for a similar station but with a research lab. So I tried docking a brand new research lab to the old station, but it wasn't getting accepted as a new station.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:Woot. It works in pretty large steps by default. If you turn off angle snapping (C key) it'll move in pixel increments. If you do have snapping on, holding Shift will make the steps smaller. Also, remember to use F to toggle between moving in part-relative (rotated) coordinates or global coordinates.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
AceClown posted:I keep seeing those Kerbal Engineer computers in my parts list and I have absolutely no idea what they do. KER has an option to only enable the engineering functions on crafts that have the computer attached. In the pre-1.0 versions they were required, unless you used ModuleManager to add the Engineer-module to all your pods etc. I think the main reason they are still there is to make sure old craft files don't break.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
karl fungus posted:I'm curious: using only stock parts, has anyone figured out the smallest possible rocket to go to the Mun with? Smallest dimensions? Lowest weight? Lowest part count? Crewed or probe?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
You need to be very careful when landing in the ocean on Kerbin. The oceans eat everything, as you see, so make sure to touch down very carefully. The best is a combination of parachutes, powered landing, and strong attitude control, so make sure you have some fuel and control authority left. You want to hit the water at less than 4 m/s, and then be careful about tipping over since the top of the craft might then splash into the water and get eaten. So touch down slowly, and then use RCS + SAS to stay upright or at least tip over slowly. Or see if you can hit the "Recover" button before you tip all the way. But try aiming for land when possible!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 12:24
|
|
|
Small RCS barges is basically the way it's done. An important trick is that you can enable precision controls, by default bound to Caps Lock. You can tell precision controls are enabled because the arrows on the rotation force displays in the lower left turn from red to blue. When precision controls are enabled, RCS thrusters individually adjust their power and use SAS to compensate for center of mass, when you do translation operations.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I transmitted as much as I could. Have to go back and try again. All engines have an efficiency, measured as its specific impulse (Isp), higher specific impulse is better. The specific impulse of an engine typically varies with atmospheric density, so some engines may be better for atmospheric flight while others are better for flight in vacuum. The other parameter for a rocket engine is its thrust, which is basically how fast it can burn fuel. The thrust is how fast it burns fuel, the specific impulse is the exhaust velocity. The other factor in how much juice you can get out of a craft is the ratio of fuel mass to "dead" mass, or rather the ship's weight full of fuel over the ship's weight emptied of fuel. What's worth noting here is that sometimes using a lighter engine with lower Isp can be more efficient than using a heavier engine with better Isp, simply because the heavier engine would raise the ship's empty mass more than the improvement in efficiency makes up for. You can calculate your ship's dV (delta-V, amount of velocity change it can impair onto itself) with the rocket equation, but it's much easier to let a plugin like Kerbal Engineer Redux do that for you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 13:43
|
|
|
Metrication posted:Does anyone have any tips for how to do the burbin's knoll temperature test? I flew over in a plane and was taking temperatures over what I thought were the sites to no avail. Keep in mind that most of the contracts are randomly generated, site names, locations and all  But for survey contracts, take note of three things: Whether you are within the site (you get a message in the middle of the screen, "now entering <site>" and "now leaving <site>"), what altitude to do the survey at (above X meter, below X meter, or landed), and what kind of survey to do (temperature, crew report, EVA report, etc). If you're moving fast, it might be hard to hit experiment as you zoom past the site.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Robzilla posted:DDSLoader only works with mod's whose textures are already DDS, or using the DDS converter to change all the textures to DDS. Yes DDSLoader requirs you to manually convert the textures to DDS format. Meanwhile Active Texture Management v4 also works with DDS textures, but does the conversion entirely automatically. (Means it takes forever to load the game first time, because it converts all the textures, but after that it's much faster.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Can a command module hold multiple samples from different biomes? I have enough fuel to bounce around on Minmus a couple times before I head home, if I can grab samples from all. Yes. You can have multiple of the same experiment from different locations, and multiple of same location different experiments. You just can't have multiple identical location-experiment stored in one command module. But you can have multiple identical experiment data stored in a mobile research lab. Also, keep in mind that kerbals on EVA can pull experiment data out of science equipment like thermometers, goo cans etc., and move the data to a command pod. So you can land with all your experiments, run them, pull out the science, then ditch the heavy science equipment and leave for home with a much lighter vehicle.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
Try a combination of fairings (perhaps Procedural Fairings) to hide ugliness away, and Infernal Robotics to make things that can fold up during transport.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
two_beer_bishes posted:edit: also how do I calculate how much delta V I need for a specific orbit? I have a contract for a 28,000km kerbin orbit and have no idea how much fuel I'll need. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=000zDI2nmq8
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2014 11:29
|
|
|
Mr. Wynand posted:What about the curse addon installer? (or any other installer/updater that the community can collectively agree on) CKAN has most things that matter.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:From the devnotes: quote:KSP now supports up to 11 joysticks, each with up to 20 axes. I just hope they then add support for differential throttle assignments for engines at some point. And maybe even control remapping during gameplay.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 14:29
|
|
|
Tippis posted:The very conspicuous lack of one gender “was not an issue”, but now that it's in, “it has the potential to get weird”. Well, apparently some people see Kerbals as ungendered, some see them as male. But very few to none see them as specifically female. Obviously, lots are going to argue that they are ungendered currently so therefore it makes no sense to introduce gender. But since there is a significant group that sees them as male, that means there is in fact a potential problem that's better solved by introducing gender.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
haveblue posted:-We've forgotten what we wrote on that flag, send someone to read its plaque. Extension: - Environmental org is concerned about pollution by flags, they require you to remove that flag and bring it back (Kerbal taking down the flag would get "marked" as having to return for mission completion)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Regarding saves, you know what might be good? If each savegame had a unique generated ID, and also stored the UID of the previous savegame it was "based on". That would, if you never delete saves, allow you to reconstruct a tree of alternate timelines if you're a savescumming bastard.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
Kea posted:Right I need some help, I'm trying to explain why going into orbit with kerbin is more efficient with a 45 degree burn past 10km but my friend insists a straight 90 degree burn is better because "gravity drops off pretty quickly", I'm pretty sure I am right but not how to prove it? Keep in mind that making orbit is about going sideways, not upwards. You'll want to go as little upwards as possible, the only reason you even need to go something resembling straight up when launching from Kerbin is because of the atmosphere. The atmospheric makes it hard to get sufficient horizontal velocity early so you need to get out of the lowest part of that. However that will change from the next version when the aerodynamic model is replaced, and you should be able to follow a trajectory much more like that of real rockets. Real rockets begin their turn almost immediately, and they can do that because they're long, thin sticks which have quite little drag, so they can afford to spend more fuel going sideways earlier. tl;dr: Fuel spent going up is wasted to gravity and drag Fuel spent going sideways helps you make orbit
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Splicer posted:It would be nice if there was a stage between "fine" and "dead". Like, if supplies are running low you can s With kerbals having levels now, you could perhaps just make it affect those, a poorly fed kerbal works at a lower level.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Inglonias posted:... You can make your own tabs already. It would be nice to have the Utilities tab seperated, yes, but you can make your own tabs! That's a good workaround for now. You can make your own tabs already, BUT to display and select them you need to keep the full advanced filter interface open. Which is really annoying and only increases confusion.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
Dongattack posted:2: The game had a upper range limit on stuff where it got deleted or started behaving weirdly, has this seen some change/is planned for 1.0 or in the area? If you're thinking of the 2.5 km physics simulation range, it's being reworked for the 1.0 release. One of the recent dev notes talked about making it dynamic so stages dropped during ascent would all be simulated all the way to exploding on ground (maybe except if parachuted), and things might also be different between attempting to dock and when just cruising alone waiting for capture by another body.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
Dalael posted:Oh! Cool! Will they also make it so that loading all these mods does not take 5 minutes? I have maybe.. 30 mods installed (Thats what Ckan tells me anyways) and I can definitely go make a sandwich while I am waiting for the game to load. The 64 bit version is very unstable and prone to crashing and glitching on Windows. There's a reason Squad is removing the option for 64 bit again in 1.0, it just doesn't work. It won't improve loading times either. And yes, CKAN will automatically get dependencies for mods. That's half the point of using it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
Is there any word on whether the jet engine air intake balancing problem has been fixed for 1.0?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 00:43 |
|
|
Did the prerequisites for getting satellite missions change? I unlocked some probe cores, batteries and solar panels, and I don't get any missions offered.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 08:27
|
|