Random Tank

Oh yeah, no doubt; it's said that it's even too small to be a Brown Dwarf... I meant purely from a scale point of view, supposing that most other celestials in KSP are about 10x smaller

Interestingly, most planets in KSP are around 10x times smaller than their Real-Life counterparts... apart from the Sun that is! Our Sun in real life has a radius of a whopping ~696,000km; KSP's Sun is a not to be ashamed of ~261,000km. This means that KSP's Sun is is only ~2.4x smaller than its real life equivalent, making it actually pretty sizable! The only issue is that the Sun's visual model doesn't scale properly; once you get to lower altitude than Moho, the Sun's model stays the same size, meaning that even when you're 2km above its "surface", it doesn't look any bigger than Jool... Its collision and the kill box are the right size though, just not the visual model. I wish they'd change this, as I like Sun-Diving, and would like to see the sheer scale of it up close

Aircraft Carriers.... IN SPAAAACCE!

Literally everything in this game. All AI is inherently Evil, and I know that MJ would attempt to kill my Kerbals and ruin my space program if I let it anywhere near it... Besides, MJ is really inefficient by the looks, so I'd wanna do it myself anyway.

Because FAR (= Master Race), I start at 500m.... 700m if my TWR is lower, and then keep going till I'm flat at about 30-35km. Stock air sucks, so I don't use it, so I don't have a gravity turn for it.

Yeah, he's just used that part mod, and switched Kerbin and the Mun's textures and heightmap to the old ones; why else would he have made this thread yesterday? A not bad troll... I guess... Probably done it just to get rep

I'd like to play with debris, but I have a bug with my main save that deletes all debris as soon as it leaves render range, even though I have persistent debris turned up to 250... Dunno what does it, though I have a lot of mods, so I bet one of those is the cause! If I could have debris, I'd get rid of most of it, but leave the occasional piece, just for immersion and a sort of throw-back to older missions; a little challenge to try and think "what mission was that from?"

I consider it a waste if my Rockets I'm ditching or returning to Kerbin have over 100m/s of fuel left, but I build them for optimum efficiency, so that's usually rare Depends how you play of course

I love the idea that all the stock craft have these little faults... You can go through them and point them out, like here's the rockets: Ion-Powered Space Probe: Has no-where near enough power production to keep the Ion running for a decent period of time, so has to do short bursts or constant low thrust to actually get anywhere; it also needs a launch stage to actually get into orbit, as it can't do it itself. Kerbal 2: Generally useless; can only go up to just over 3km alt, and no-where else; has an insane amount of MP for it's RCS thrusters which are nearly useless in Atmo. Needs a launch stage to actually get into orbit, as it can't do it itself. Kerbal X: Even though it has asparagus, it's nearly useless as the LVT-30's have so little fuel to use; the Mainsail does most of the work. Surprisingly, not only does it have enough dV to get into orbit, it even has enough to and land on the Mun, but not get back Orbiter 1A: Not bad in space, can get some decent fly-bys, even to Duna.... as soon as you add the fuel lines from the main fuel tank to its engines that it is currently missing; without those it's going no-where! Needs a launch stage to actually get into orbit, as it can't do it itself. Rover + Skycrane: The Rover actually functions quite well; the Skycrane, not so much... it doesn't have the dV to land the Rover on the Mun (unless you bring something extra to de-orbit it, and even so it's very tight), and of course it can't gain orbit by itself... It can happily land on Mintmus though, and add one extra Oscar-B and it can land on the Mun! The Skycrane itself doesn't actually have a Probe Core, so ditching it after landing can be interesting Space Station Core: Not bad actually, does what it's supposed to do... though anything that stays in orbit can be considered to be a station, so that isn't a hard goal to achieve. Needs a launch stage to actually get into orbit, as it obviously can't do it itself. Super-Heavy Lander: Not particularly "Super Heavy" with that awful TWR, and it loses quite a bit of dV because of the angled engines; but it can land on pretty well anything, you just need to make a rocket to get it there, and it needs a launch stage to actually get into orbit, as it can't do it itself. Also, its RCS is actually completely imbalanced, and has waaaay too much MP on it. Two-Stage Lander: I quite like this craft, it works well; it has enough dV to land on ANY body (yes, even Tylo), and even has enough to get back into orbit around any body excluding Laythe, Eve, Kerbin and Tylo (and obviously Jool). The issue? Well, obviously it's lander, so it something to get it into orbit, a transfer stage, and something to get the pilots back to Kerbin; and good luck docking to that without any RCS... Z-MAP Satellite Launch Kit: Gets a sat into orbit... shame said sat doesn't have a battery, so it dies at night. The launch stage works well though, and would be useful for the Ion probe or the Skycrane if they were any good... its TWR is pretty insane though, the staging could use some work! Gotta love em

Realistic ISP! Nice!

Love that they put [PLEASE HELP] as if we wouldn't, and then put the thread in the wrong section... More info is needed! Screenshots would be best, but also: what is your craft periapsis, do you have any mods installed, are you actually going towards the Mun?

It's said that the average human will consume 5kg of Life Support (~0.5kg O2, ~1kg Food and ~3.5kg Water) per day to stay healthy, and another 3-4kg of water per day to keep clean. If you skip showers, you can work it out to just under 2 tons of LS per person, per year. With the water for general cleanliness and all the rest, it's about 3 tons; not THAT much really. I'm in the mindset that Kerbals, being smaller, would use less per day, maybe 3kg, so would only need about 1 ton per earth year. Though I like and use TAC Life Support, I think if evet a stock Life Support was added, it would make sense as just one resource, consumed equally.

Ow, harsh words there... Atypical? Compared to what??? We haven't observed any other system in full, only bits and bobs and the occasional planet... You can't say ours is atypical when Alpha Centauri could have 70 planets orbiting it, each one smaller than the Moon but with an atmo thicker than Earth's.... we simply don't know, and hence have nothing to compare ours to. For KSP, I'd rather see a lot of optimization and bug-fixing before adding ANY more planets.... Mods can add planets, just look at Kopernicus Core; but mods can't fix 64 bit, which would allow us to add pretty much as many extra planets/star systems as we want. KSP does share similarities with our System, but also plenty of differences too... (all with a big "that we know of" behind it) Venus has no moons, Eve has 1. Earth has 1 moon, Kerbin has 2. Mars has 2 moons, Duna has 1. Ceres has millions of roids and other dwarf planets/large roids sharing its orbit, Dres doesn't. Jupiter has 4 large moons, and thousands of moonlets; Jool has 3 large, 2 small... I think it should stay similar but different, I like it that way

While for us, people who have played the game for some amount of time, I agree this is just another number increase, it doesn't change what game we play... but for the new players, the ones that see the YouTubers playing this "new release" game, the ones that see it on steam with the "KSP: Now Officially Released!" banner, or the ones that have thought they might hold out on buying it until it's out, it won't look good. Yeah, they may be able to knock out a few of the big, annoying bugs that have been hanging around for a while now, but it's still not gonna play like a finished game, not for a while yet anyway; and this will hurt Squad, as people will play this "finished" game, see that it's still very buggy, and then won't recommend it to other people... Or, even worse, they'll start bashing the game for being too buggy, and then people will avoid it, and then they'll tell their friends to avoid it, and this is a really bad thing. Note why I said I think they should wait for Unity 5; not for bugfixes, but for removing the main limitations (like part count and number of mods) from the game; building a 300 part ship (which isn't a lot) and finding it lags when I pilot it does not make me think finished game. I say hold out for U5 because it is probably the most significant update to Unity in a while... or perhaps ever; its new features can help optimize the game, something it sorely needs... any by checking the polls, probably the most sought after improvement to worked on too.

I would've thought they would at least wait for Unity 5 to come out, then upgrade KSP onto it before releasing 1.0... That would basically fix the crashes due to RAM limit, and offer considerable help (in most cases) with the lag/low FPS caused by high part count ships, which I feel is the main limitations of the game, and the main reason why I think it's is far from finished. Also, while it's definitely not the worst update, from personal experience 0.90 is quite a bit buggier than 0.25; and the first (and only, which also speaks volumes) update of Beta being buggier than the last update of Alpha does not exactly.... inspire me with confidence about later updates, and the general quality of the final release. The game is fun (very much so) but I'd never say it felt complete, and that's something I doubt 1 update can change....

I don't think I'd want something as fancy or advanced as a nuclear reactor, but I wish there was a fuel-consuming generator of some sort in stock though; maybe something like a Hydrogen Fuel cell! It would consume LFO and produce power; I know you can do this with engine alternators, but it's not a very efficient way of doing it, and also they have to produce thrust to do it, which can work against you.... I'd just want a 0.625m or 1.25m part, about the size of a reaction wheel, that produces 5e/sec, and is earlier than a solar panel in the Tech Tree (in the node where you get your first battery); would be great for powering things through night cycles, providing quick power boosts or using up excess fuel

Welcome to the forums! If I understand what you're trying to say correctly, both of these features are already in the game! The direction of travel, as in where you are going, whether flying on or orbiting around a planet, is shown by the Prograde Marker; that's simply what it does! Around a target planet/moon you can focus on the planet/moon itself, by either double clicking or left click then clicking focus view; this will then switch to show your exact orbital path around that planet/moon as it will be when you get to it. You can skip to any specific time warp step by going up into the top, left hand corner of the flight or map screen, and clicking on the arrows that appear above the MET; the first one is x1 time, the 2nd is x5, 3rd is x10 and so on...

What little I've played of 0.90, I've found it buggier than 0.25... and my 0.25 is very heavily modded, and I've been playing 0.25 a lot longer. The main thing is the random-launchpad-to-the-face glitch, where the craft will randomly lose a few parts, or occasionally completely split apart, when flying in space or high atmo, and when you check the F3 menu it will say it collided with the Launchpad or VAB.... I never had this in 0.25 or earlier, but I have it every few launches in 0.90; easily solved by quickloading, but it's still annoying. So I dunno...

I don't like the 0.24 engine stats, as I feel it takes a lot of variation out of the engines... Plus, with the Mainsail and LV-T30, they are only useful when you have ONE. If you ever need to have more than one, the KS-24x4 and Skipper will beat them respectively. Here's my table for engine balance using the old 0.23.5 stats, and I use the Mainsail and LV-T30 as a basis for all changes: Rip it apart as much as you want, but those are the engine stats I use, and it makes every engine pretty useful, yet still varied

I hate the idea of killing Kerbals; in my entire time playing KSP (when not testing/mucking around in Sandbox Mode), I have successfully avoided killing a single Kerbal. I even play (though not for my entire play time) with mods such as FAR, DRE and TAC Life Support, and have Revert turned off (I have Quickloads on for bug avoidance) yet have still managed to keep all my little green dudes alive, in every serious save. Every Kerbal has the right to come home again.

I was thinking about this too... what will happen to my Kerbals? Will they all become Level 1?

I agree, it's massively useful... it's great for balancing asparagus engines when you do them in 2x symmetry, along with many other applications. I don't want to play without EE, and because of that, and other reasons, I'm still playing 0.25.

"Sending Kerballed missions is already more useful in nearly every application... lets nerf probes!" No thanks... it's alright modded as you can give Kerbals Life Support, making probes have the advantage of infinite lifespan, but until they add a form of (optional) LS into Stock, RT is just gonna make probes even worse....

Bug fixes, balance, deltaV display, improved water physics and general game polish/finishing. They wanna say the game is in Beta, and those are the things that should be done in beta... Plus mods can't improve the water or bug fix the game, so I'd consider that high priority.

The cake was a lie...