Vallius

I'm usually pretty random with rocket names, but I try to theme them at least somewhat for the planned mission. For example, my first rockets to the Mun are the Mun DANE class. I almost always give my space planes some kind of X-# designation though--because heck, every spaceplane I make is experimental.

Wow, it is a Merry Christmas indeed! I hope you guys at SQUAD are actually enjoying the holidays--you've been working super hard for so long you really needed a break.

I've playing 0.90 a few times now, and I just thought I should share my overall thoughts on career mode (default normal). Favorite Features: So far, I'm loving Beta than Ever more than any previous version! For the first time, KSP feels like a real game (the oxymoron isn't lost on me). I finally feel like I'm running a program, not just a science-grind sandbox. Now there's a reason for me to choose one kerbal over another for a mission! It's about time that it makes a difference to take either Jeb or Bob. The new editor tools make it so much easier for me to make good looking vehicles (I still get my ailerons upside-down though--Is there an easy way to know which side is 'up'?) My favorite new editor widgit is the i-box. Can't tell you how nice it is to see some basic info in stock, especially now that it's really easy to go broke. I noticed that the contract flavor text has been updated. Whether this is from Fine Print itself, or more a part of the overall upgrade, I appreciate the variety. I feel weird saying this, but I love the fact that probes have been nerfed. Seriously, if they cost different amounts of money, they should have different capabilities. It feels like science has been scaled down at least a little--it absolutely needs to be with so many more options, but maybe that's just because it's harder to go places. Things that could use work: Aerial surveys are really hard to do without aircraft parts--am I the only one who thinks they shouldn't be available before we've at least unlocked jet engines? There's a shortage of good contracts to get a space program off the ground early on (I'm playing normal), this becomes especially problematic since we need like 1 M funds to get the basics for a Mun mission. (At minimum, almost certainly need to update VBA, Astronaut Complex, and Science lab to level 2). Granted, the Mun mission shouldn't be easy, but there really should be a few more better paying contracts so we can get the cash for them. I agree with others that have suggested that we ultimately should have a few more tiers of buildings. It's literally hard to get far off the ground when the minimum upgrades cost so much. (Again, this in itself isn't bad, but we need more contracts to get money). Pilots seem OP relative to the other 2 classes. There's very little motivation for me to send up Bill or Bob alone on missions when they can barely do basic piloting. Maybe this is intentional by squad to reflect space programs in our world, but I really think there needs to be at least a little cross-over between the three classes. The current system, to be more balanced would require that only scientists can run experiments, and only engineers can EVA. Since everyone can do science, and everyone can EVA, I think all kerbals should at least be able to learn the ability to hold attitude. Either that, or make the other two classes more powerful. Now that we have multiple Biomes, I'd really, really appreciate a non-cheaty way to map them. Maybe this could be a scientist specialty with a camera part? The editor tutorial absolutely needs to be redone, or at least a more advanced one should be added to talk about how to use the widgets (and maybe action groups too). This community is amazing but not all new players go to the forums.

Thirded! (If that's a word?) It would be awesome if I could search for vessels by name. While SQUAD is at it, I'd really appreciate it if flags didn't count as flights. It's always mildly confusing that I have 38 flights, when only a dozen of those are active probes, stations, or manned vessels.

Tracking Station? Go! Action Groups? Go! Launchpad Evacuated? Go! Dangit Bill and Bob! No, you're supposed to stay inside the vehicle! SQUAD, we are GO for launch. Waiting on your mark!

Great, we finally got Jeb? Okay then... Discombobulator Combobulated? Go! Motivating Kerbals? Go! Capcom? Go!

Flight control? Go! Range Control? Go! Elevators? Go! Kerbals? --wait, what!? Get me Jebediah! Over Intercom: Attention All personal! Locate Jebadiah Kerman! Okay, while we're waiting... Um, correct end pointed towards space? Go!

Fuel? Go! Life Support? (Not applicable) Oxidizer? Go! Engines? Go! Navigation? Go! Staging? Go!

Maxmaps has merely stated that those expected 0.90's release tomorrow will be sadly disappointed. Cue ignition sequence....

KSP, the only game where every update feels like a countdown to a rocket launch, and for good reason.

So you want to have kerbal within kerbal? Talk about metagaming. Just kidding though. Having a sort of "simulated launch" would be extremely helpful for career mode saves. It would let us test out some of the more pricey rocket designs without destroying our programs if something goes horribly wrong.

Would such a limitation actually make KSP more fun? I think the rewards (when they aren't ridiculous) offered by a given contract already give players a good reason to keep their mission costs under control, at least on average. Plus the more efficient I am at fulfilling contracts, the more play money I get to have for my personal projects. Maybe the real problem is that near-Kerbin missions deadlines are extremely lax, allowing players to grab the money and ignore missions for a long time. Seriously, I should get only days to save a kerbal in orbit, a couple weeks for test contracts, and maybe 60 kerbal days to go to minmus and back.

Alternatively, maybe you shouldn't be able to cash in flag planting more than once per biome. Now that all bodies are getting biomes, perhaps the mission objectives could include that detail. This lets players still plant more than one flag, but forces you to at least move to a different location on the moon or planet before trying to grab another chunk of change.

My two favorite missions in stock are explore X, and about half of the testing parts missions. The former feel like the most complete contract missions, while the latter force me to get out of my design comfort zone to fulfill a zany objective. I'm less of a fan of testing contracts for old parts that cost more to carry out than I can get awarded for. Believe me, I try to bundle missions together whenever possible to save on launch money.

Good point. Obviously, we don't know all the details. I was just curious about how people feel, knowing that this is on the way to stock KSP.

I was just browsing the Kerbal Reddit and found the following link: Maxmaps confirms that Kerbals will soon be able to help pilot. How will this impact gameplay? What are the pros and cons of such a major change? Will this be playing out as a full autopilot, help landing or taking off, or just doing scheduled burns?

Even without cargo bays, you have to admit the adaptors will be extremely useful for integrating space planes into launch vehicles. Heck, I'd love to use the new MKIII just as a command module for my more epic interplanetary missions.

I wonder of any of Hugo's work survived this amazing revamp of the MKIII parts?

Amazing work SQUAD! Seriously though, don't work yourselves to death! Especially you, Harvester. Congratuations on your marriage, Rowsdower. The MKIII parts are magnificent, and I can't tell you how nice it will be to have those beautiful adaptors. I'm very interested to see what perks or abilities are brought by pilots on missions. @Ted, you attached your separatrons up-side-down. For the update name, how about either "Kerbin's Heroes" or "Kerman's Heroes"? I'd bet you're planning on going with "Beta than Ever" Edition though. Maxmaps, are you using stock? Since when did Kerbin have clouds in stock?

This is more of an issue with Sci-Fi space in general than something I specifically learned in kerbal. We agree that there is no real up or down in space. For people to walk through ships, there has to be some kind of artificial gravity technology, and it would have use the orientation of the ship as its frame of reference. In most shows, this same technology presumably cancels out crushing forces due to superluminal acceleration. So why would a 'tipping' vessel in space cause the people inside to crash around like they're on a capsizing boat?

[To be read in Yoda's voice] "Hmm... It seems that Master Deadpangod3 has lost the Universe. How embarrassing! How embarrassing."

Maybe this is why someone coined the term Aerospace Engineering--covers all the bases here.

As awesome and beautiful as the cosmos is, it's hard to beat Earth. It has a tremendous number of climates, lush with life of all varieties, a breathable atmosphere, and just the right resources to help a species make its start into the Universe. It's the only one we have in this star-system, so lets try not to break it...

According to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, astronauts are to be . This says to me that if astronauts meet aliens, they're our default ambassadors. If the aliens come to earth, I'd assume the UN Secretary General would be the least controversial choice to represent us. http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/treaties/space1.html