|
What's the mod that allows you and your pals to link up and see each other's missions? My Google-fu is failing me, and I thought it was on the OP but no dice.
|
# ¿ Mar 11, 2015 18:12 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 18, 2024 00:50 |
|
haveblue posted:Kerbal Live Feed? That's it! Thanks. For some reason upgrading to 0.90 turned into a complete reinstall, including all my mods.
|
# ¿ Mar 11, 2015 18:34 |
|
I just shot my first probe to Jool last night, using the planetary alignment calculator. It says it will reach Kerbol AP (Jool encounter) in 3 years. Is that right?
|
# ¿ Mar 12, 2015 21:09 |
|
haveblue posted:The only wrong way to intercept is to not intercept. And yeah, flights to the outer planets do take that long. Okiedokie. I guess I'll work on my Duna lander in the meantime!
|
# ¿ Mar 12, 2015 21:25 |
|
My Science Truck rover is almost complete! I'm using a drone core for control, and I've managed to screw up its direction somehow. Before, W moved the rover forward. I took it back in the VAB after a test drive, made some tweaks, and now W is reverse. It's not a huge deal but it will make controlling it a little counterintuitive. I tried tearing it down and flipping the drone core 180 degrees but that didn't change anything. Any ideas? I did take the wheels off and put them back on, is that the problem?
|
# ¿ Mar 13, 2015 16:47 |
|
I've fallen back into KSP in a hard way. And last night, safely touched down on Duna. Now I have to figure out what to do next. A couple of interplanetary newbie questions: is 2250 DV enough to take off from Duna and make it home? Or is this now a mission in need of rescue? If I'm building an interplanetary explorer that will stop at various planets, is there a good way to calculate how much DV it takes to go from say, Duna to Eve? I noticed SOME of the pages on the Wiki list this, but not all, and the DV chart that looks like the London Underground is decent only lists to and from Kerbin plus moons, not planet to planet. Is there an infinite amount of science you can store in a command pod? (IE, if I take a ship around the system and do experiments at each stop, will I eventually run out of storage space?) I launched a few fuel tanks to practice docking before but I noticed that, even if I used docking clamps, the engine I was using to get them up there still used fuel. Is there a way to tell a stage "only suck fuel from this tank, not the one I'm trying to put into orbit?"
|
# ¿ Mar 18, 2015 16:43 |
|
haveblue posted:The docking clamps have an option to disable fuel crossfeed in their contextual menu. If it's stealing the fuel through parts that don't have that menu, you'll just have to remember to transfer it back from the booster tank before cutting the engine loose. Cool, thanks for all the info. I thought for sure I had disabled the crossfeed on my previous missions but it didn't occur to me to just transfer it before dumping the launch portion. Derp. quote:This is what you need: AWESOME, thank you!
|
# ¿ Mar 18, 2015 17:02 |
|
I basically want this out of my rovers:
|
# ¿ Mar 18, 2015 22:35 |
|
haveblue posted:That's what I *want*, but I usually get this: We need comets to land on.
|
# ¿ Mar 19, 2015 00:28 |
|
Nothing like FINALLY orbiting a probe around Gilly only to be knocked out of orbit by your own drat decoupler.
|
# ¿ Mar 21, 2015 15:57 |
|
I've managed to dock small things just fine, and small things to large things, but I cannot dock two large things together to save my life. They just turn too slowly and seem to either miss each other or smash into each other. Is there something obvious I'm missing? Or just practice, practice, practice?
|
# ¿ Mar 24, 2015 20:44 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:Take it slow (especially on the approach), take it careful, and add more RCS thrusters or reaction wheels. Wait, does adding more than one reaction wheel matter?
|
# ¿ Mar 24, 2015 21:36 |
|
Supraluminal posted:More wheels provide more torque, so if your craft is really slow to turn more wheels might help. They can also be a liability when you start docking lots of stuff together since the center of mass changes so much, though. Hmm OK, I've got a command module, a science module, four really big engines / fuel tanks, and then a bunch of smaller extra fuel tanks and some landers I want to add later. So with four reaction wheels per module...
|
# ¿ Mar 24, 2015 21:49 |
|
Ratzap posted:One other thing which can screw you over is vessel rotation. If you're trying to dock two large ships, make drat sure both of them have no residual rotation left or you'll be chasing a moving target. Also note that if you are in a very low orbit, an effect can come into play whereby your vessels start to rotate on their own. It's because they're going round so fast and close to a body, some guy wrote a mod that tries to counteract it (might still exist) but I just got into the habit of sticking things together further up where it wasn't as bad. I tried again this morning and I think this was exactly the problem. My target was (slowly) spinning and I kept trying to correct by moving sideways and that didn't work out. I got super close, maybe 10 m away, and even though my relative speed was 0.8m/s, I was still somehow pulling away from the target, which I can only assume is because of the spinning. Then I sped up and rammed my target at 2.3m/s and everything exploded.
|
# ¿ Mar 25, 2015 22:45 |
|
Ratzap posted:Yeah been there. A few times when I started kerballing I ran out of RCS trying to get docked with this sort of poo poo going on. Rage flares, engines burn and hopes die as you try one last desperate crash while they're still close to one another. "Rageburn." This should be working why isn't it *BOOM* I ended up nailing it last night. I waited until the target's docking port was pointed more or less towards Kerbin rather than pointed 90 degrees to Kerbin and that seemed to cut down drastically on the spin. Took me a couple of tries to get the alignment right, but everyone on my bus ride home heard my cheer when I docked.
|
# ¿ Mar 26, 2015 13:56 |
|
Rainier Explorer is about to depart for the Jool system. Goal: to land and safely return Kerbals from all five moons and collect as much science as I can, then return the Kerbals and the experimental data safely to Kerbin. It seems I have two options - which is more efficient? 1. Aerobrake in Jools's atmo and circularize at a wide orbit, working my way in from Pol. 2. Same, but circularize much closer and work my way out from Laythe? My plan is to use the mothership to change orbits and insert around the moons, send landers down and back, then return the mothership to Kerbin with my experiments.
|
# ¿ Mar 31, 2015 17:00 |
|
haveblue posted:I'd love to see a picture of your reusable lander that can hit Laythe and Tylo. Cool, thanks! I built a disposable lander for Laythe (only the command pod will dock back with the Explorer, in theory) and a separate one for Vall, Tylo, and Bop. And I was planning on plopping a little science module on Pol that can just take off with RCS. The Explorer has 11k DV at a 200 KM Kerbin orbit, but that's before I attach any of the landers to it. I *think* I've calculated this right but it could end up being an enormous mistake. I did put a lot of extra docking ports on there for emergency refuelling if needed!
|
# ¿ Mar 31, 2015 17:39 |
|
immelman posted:Option 3: Split the ship into two just before Jool SOI. Part one Aerobrakes at Laythe and then heads off to Vall and then Tylo or Bop. Part two aerobrakes at Jool (or Laythe if you can manage it) into a Tylo Passing orbit, since your Tylo lander is going to mass most of your mission, no point lugging it around the Jool system. My ship was not designed for this unfortunately. Edit: it's kind of just a long cylinder with four huge engines at the back and a lot of docking ports to stick things on, and my two capsules to get my Kerbals home safe @ the end.
|
# ¿ Mar 31, 2015 23:50 |
|
But it's an efficient few hours of burn!
|
# ¿ Apr 1, 2015 21:56 |
|
Huh, turns out 12k DV isn't worth a rat's rear end if your TWR is less than 1, and your ship just slowly melts into the launchpad in a ball of flame.
|
# ¿ Apr 10, 2015 22:10 |
|
nimper posted:Just Add More Boosters So seriouspost: I'm trying to launch a big fuel tank into orbit to refuel a ship. It's 3 K-14400s together. I had six rockets that were also 3 K-14400s with the KR-2L attached, asparagus staged. Then separators, with a lower stage also of 6, with 2 14400s driven by KS-25x5s. That melted into the pad. I strapped 18 LR 1x2s to the lower stage, 3 on each. THAT worked to get me to about 10 KM, and when I ditched the boosters and lower stage, switching to my KR-2L asparagus'd upper stage, and my TWR dropped back to below 1, and I ended up falling. Any ideas on how to actually get this tank into orbit?
|
# ¿ Apr 10, 2015 22:24 |
|
Splicer posted:Is it the fuel in the tank you're trying to get into orbit or just the tank itself? The tank is full o' fuel. The story is this: I built a really awesome 8-piece ship to head off to Jool (command module, science module, 4 big engines, and 2 landers). Everything looked awesome until I finally tried to leave orbit and the landers nearly tore off the side docking ports - and I realized that nuclear engines, while efficient, suck for trying to do an interplanetary transfer of something that big from a 200KM Kerbin orbit. So, my new plan is to try to fling all my pieces into Jool orbit and assemble my craft there. I could be going about this the wrong way, but I shrunk the command and science modules into one piece that's powered by 3x Kerbodyne engines. I managed to get it into a nice, high 700KM orbit but now it's almost out of fuel, and I was thinking I'd refuel it before I go. But if there's a different, better way to do this, I'm .
|
# ¿ Apr 10, 2015 22:35 |
|
Geemer posted:Why would you put it in such a high orbit before interplanetary transfer? Wouldn't the Oberth effect make it much more efficient to assemble, refuel and depart from a lower orbit? For some reason I thought the higher your orbit, the less fuel you'd have to use for an interplanetary jump (higher up, less gravity to worry about). Now that I've read about it that seems to be incorrect (higher up, way less speed to help you along your way). OAquinas posted:Yeah, fuel is by far the heaviest part of your launch in just about any situation, and here you are trying to launch massive amounts of it in one go. You'd be far better off trying to do 3 launches of one bigass tank each than lofting all 3 at once. OK, thanks. I may redesign the ship anyway so I have more overall final fuel capacity, but launch it empty, then fill it in orbit. Luckily I design my ships with lifeboats so my Kerbals don't have to suffer for my mistakes. Edit: Also, I'm playing on a Macbook Air from 2012, and it dropped to about 1 FPS when I was trying to move my large, multi-part ship, so this is also an attempt to make it to Jool in smaller pieces to avoid that problem too. Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 00:46 on Apr 11, 2015 |
# ¿ Apr 11, 2015 00:43 |
|
My desktop died. Yay! That means a new computer specifically designed to be awesome at running KSP! I'll be hooking this thing up to my TV, so 1080p is the highest resolution I need. That being said, with all the awesome graphics and effects mods added: - Is 8 GB of RAM enough or should I go 16? - This seems to be the best video card option, but it's been almost 15 years since my last PC build. Should I be looking for something else/better for KSP (and maybe Space Engine?) My other use is as an HTPC but I doubt there will be any problems running video on hardware like this. Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Apr 15, 2015 |
# ¿ Apr 15, 2015 15:33 |
|
PerrineClostermann posted:Get a powerful cpu. That's what bottlenecks ksp. Is this one good enough or does it need more boosters?
|
# ¿ Apr 15, 2015 15:36 |
|
In non-computer-building news, I managed to find an awesome way to merge my love of KSP with my job producing content for the Microsoft blog I manage.
|
# ¿ Apr 15, 2015 23:11 |
|
Maxmaps posted:Brian and Jesse are really cool dudes. Yes they are! Related: if you ever want free coverage from Microsoft, let me know. E: \/\/\/ I know it's a joke (and gently caress GG), but I want to be clear, I received absolutely nothing to write that story, would expect nothing from Squad if I did a story on them, and would never take anything to write a story without disclosing it. I worked in games PR for almost a decade so I take that super-seriously. I did this story because I love KSP and Eucl3D and stories like that perform REALLY well on our blog, so it was a natural fit. Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 03:15 on Apr 16, 2015 |
# ¿ Apr 16, 2015 00:44 |
|
How feasible is it to swap saves between computers? Specifically, between a Mac and PC? Like, can I play on my Mac on the bus, then copy my save files over to my Windows machine and continue playing those @ home?
|
# ¿ Apr 17, 2015 20:55 |
|
karl fungus posted:You won't be very happy if you read that YouTube comment section. What the gently caress is wrong with people. Also - I love that the "destroy craft" option in the Space Center doesn't harm craft that are literally right next to the one you blow up. Because my awesome dropship design for my rovers failed to take into account how the rover would actually, you know, leave the dropship once it lands.
|
# ¿ Apr 21, 2015 18:04 |
|
double nine posted:I need a new theme for naming my rockets. Greek/roman gods is played out, I'm tired of star trek/-wars characters. Anyone have good themes? I use fish. Once I get to the bigger ships, they're different kinds of salmon. I don't know either.
|
# ¿ Apr 27, 2015 22:09 |
|
I take it from reading the posts here that my 0.90 game is now kaputt and I'm starting over?
|
# ¿ Apr 28, 2015 18:29 |
|
Edminster posted:Yeah this has been absolutely the best money I have ever spent on a videogame in the nearly thirty years I've been alive. I remember scraping together the money and buying a visa giftcard shortly after they started accepting money for it. I'm 37. I saved up for a year to buy an NES when I was a kid, and I've spent a LOT of money on this hobby. KSP is the best money, the best value, the best return on video games I have EVER spent, without hesitation. I may have played other games for longer hours-wise, but KSP will eventually surpass them and I know I will never run out of things to do in it. Squad, you guys loving rock. Edit: you also managed to do what those hours in the computer lab playing MECC games couldn't: teach me something using a video game. Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 19:50 on May 1, 2015 |
# ¿ May 1, 2015 19:46 |
|
So can someone help me interpret my first scan from the M700? I used the SCANsat mod before to map things, but I never played with any of the ore / minerals mods, so I'm not exactly sure what's happening here. 2.9% of the planet is ore? And the purplish areas are more ore, while the pinkish areas aren't? Edit: Also, how do I look at the map my M4435 is making? With SCANsat there was just a button but I see no such button anywhere now. Peas and Rice fucked around with this message at 14:20 on May 2, 2015 |
# ¿ May 2, 2015 14:02 |
|
Is there any reason to actually transmit science data back (versus having someone bring it back?) I've always held off because you get a fraction of the science from transmitting, but it seems like it's more of an option now in 1.0.
|
# ¿ May 4, 2015 18:12 |
|
esquilax posted:I'm pretty sure that some of the current flipping issues might have to do with body lift. If you have a big fairing at the front of your rocket, deviating more than a tiny bit from prograde moves your center of lift way up to the top, regardless of where it was in the assembly building. This was my problem last night - anything I slapped a lander or station module on top of flipped the second I started my gravity turn. I didn't try fins (for some reason) but goddamn is launching way harder than it used to be. Or, I'm just relearning it.
|
# ¿ May 4, 2015 19:54 |
|
The one major bug I've seen so far is whenever I go EVA and touch the ground on Kerbin on any biome that isn't the grasslands, the water, or in KSP, my Kerbal sinks into the ground and dies.
|
# ¿ May 4, 2015 22:40 |
|
I still want a viable rover/hovercraft that can navigate on the liquid parts of Eve and Laythe.
|
# ¿ May 6, 2015 00:21 |
|
This weekend, I was going to try getting an empty fuel tank onto the water and seeing if it floats. If so..
|
# ¿ May 6, 2015 00:32 |
|
Are there any charts that show the changed Delta V for 1.0 / 1.02? Or will the old map be good enough? I want to build a "universal lander" that can touch down on any of the atmosphere-less bodies (and possibly Duna), plus the ship that'll get it there.
|
# ¿ May 6, 2015 14:58 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 18, 2024 00:50 |
|
Freudian posted:...You want a craft that can land on Gilly and Tylo? OK, maybe not Tylo with all the others. My thought was a reusable lander I could dock with a mothership and then refuel, but I wanted to bring a science lab along and hop around on the various bodies to collect ALL THE SCIENCE.
|
# ¿ May 6, 2015 15:38 |