regex

I'm honestly on the fence about it. For me, a resource system in KSP has to involve active gameplay, not a lot of busy work or timewarping. I'd like it to be there but not be the reason I'm there. I'm not interested in massive infrastructure but would rather have smaller things, like maybe a tiny probe creating its own fuel after retrieving a core sample in order to return home, or maybe mining ice to help keep a base going. Kethane really hasn't done that for me yet and I don't think the earlier SQUAD-proposed system would have done that either (in fact, the SQUAD proposal looked incredibly tedious).

I'm getting this in Kerbin orbit. Does it have anything to do with the size of the Sun because I haven't done that yet.

I have to say, I really like your style NathanKell. I went to test my new 6.4:1 solar system and found it ridiculously easy to launch, maybe a bit harder than stock with FAR (4.5km/s or so) and that felt wrong. So I played with some atmosphere values to see if it was FAR but, naturally, it wasn't. Then I got to thinking and decided to check my planetary masses against yours because I suspected I did something wrong (I don't have a very strong math background...) and found that you hadn't set any. A quick check of your source code confirmed what I thought was going on. Are there any other pleasant surprises I should know about? Anyway, back to tweaking atmosphere values. Maybe I'll post my 6.4:1 scale Kerbin when I'm done.

Right, and that's what they are trying to avoid (as I understand it). My point is that Kethane is a perfectly serviceable resource system but it's not exactly fun (at the moment), and Harvester specifically talked about their resource system not being fun which is why they scrapped it. Hence my saying that I hope they don't model any KSP resource system off of the current Kethane mod.

The Kethane mod is a lot of busywork as well. It literally boils down to timewarping + waiting mechanics. This is not to say it's a bad or poorly written mod, just that it's not exactly fun. I personally got the impression that they're thinking in an entirely different direction than Kethane, and I certainly hope they do take it in a different direction.

Does anyone know what stream this was in?

It means jack squat to me, really.

Given the choice between resources and multiplayer I'd choose resources any day of the week, but I'm not exactly excited about either. I think SQUAD is on the right track about resources not being fun, though. The current scan->mine->refine paradigm isn't exactly compelling gameplay and even combining that with mixing resources for greater effect just adds busywork. I'm not sure what would be better gameplay, but I do know I don't care for more of the same. Anyway, multiplayer in favor of resources is a pretty bad choice, no matter how unfun resources are; resources open up more opportunities within the game.

Exactly. text

Well, they're lighter and take less resources (I play with a life support mod since, IMO, it's stupid not to). They're also not very "Kerbal" and that's one of the things I like about this game: the progression isn't human progression, it's Kerbal progression. This is "Kerbal Space Program", after all.

I much prefer sending Kerbals whenever possible. Probes are kind of cheaty.

Right, and what I'm saying is that it's already been abstracted into the electrical charge that every Kerbal uses. I can see how you might want a light/shadow mechanic, but it's not really needed.

No developer should ever set a release date unless they are absolutely positive that it can be met. Doing otherwise is just shooting yourself in the foot. If you think people are whiny without release dates just wait until a developer misses one.

I was afraid it would end up being a sort of "play with it until it seems right" thing, but thanks for the base line. That was the first thing I did. Thanks for all the hard work!

I've been playing around with a 6.4 scale Kerbol system and I'm wondering if the atmospheric values can just be multiplied like everything else? The scale heights seem way out of whack with your 10 scale Kerbol values...

Those features are pretty much mandatory.

I don't think that word exists in Whackjob's vocabulary.

I think it's hilarious that people get so bunched about that sort of thing.

Oh, you...

I'll be playing the part of Scumbag Steve (sans homophobic language, no reason for that) if people are stupid enough willing to open public servers. A little "PvP" never hurt anyone.

SCIENCE!!! (seriously? I can't all-caps "science" without some extra text? What the hell is wrong with this board?)

Well, in that case why not push for a fully procedural fuel tank system? I don't really think SQUAD wants to move in that direction, though. I imagine we'll see some other shapes and sizes of fuel tanks show up later in the game, especially when the aerospace parts get revamped, so I'm inclined to wait. We might also see this sort of feature a version or two down the line when/if they move nuclear engines over to monopropellant. That's not exactly a problem in terms of coding, but having it work in a fairly intuitive way might take some thought, especially if you want to keep screen real-estate usage to a minimum. Then again, it might not.

One of the life support mods should be stock. I prefer TAC LS, but any would work.

Oh man, they tightened up the GUI too, looks great!

Yeah, I don't agree with that, certainly not on the pad and during design it reduces the incentive to use differing parts. I'm sure we'll see what you want in a mod though, and maybe later in the iterative process. Why not make a suggestion?