BradicusPrime

Addon Version Checker has a feature to copy mod list to clipboard. No links though. - - - Updated - - - CKAN can do a mod export, but it's in metadata format. Still though, it has all the names there to copy/paste if you open it in notepad.

Okay, yeah, that was alpha and most of beta. But we're talking about a finished game with missions and objectives. A finished game that also includes a sandbox mode where you can just ignore things like reality if you so choose, but maybe that's not what's going to bring people in after 1.0, or keep them playing. Frankly I find sandbox to be boring after a couple of years.

Yes, but that's really true. What's the point in playing if you're guaranteed to always win? At that point it just becomes masturbatory, and really isn't in the best spirit of the history of space flight.

1) I can definitely agree that the current planets need more fleshing out. Especially the almost complete lack of civilization on Kerbin. 2) The hardest part is probably the initial node, which then cascades down to all subsequent nodes, but I doubt there's any space agency that does things anywhere near the way the Kerbals do. I am of the fortunate few who can run two monitors and develop live mission profiles and do DV lookups and calculations for transfer windows, but there really needs to be some way to visualize this ingame(without mods). Not everyone is good at math or has the patience to slog through all of that when it could be easily accomplished by a mission planning aspect and a few mouse clicks. I believe inclusion of such a system, even if it's only available after upgrades or research, would greatly increase the accessibility to the game. I have bought probably a dozen copies of the game during Steam sales and given them to friends, and the number one response is the daunting learning curve, having to learn rocket science in order to calculate fuel costs and trajectories. Several gave up altogether after a dozen tries to get to the Mun left them stranded halfway or on the surface. 3) Random part failures can and do happen in real life. The definitely should be part of the game. Again, as I already stated, this can scale with the current ingame difficulty options if you want to live in a utopia. I'm not saying every mission should have catastrophic failures, but there should definitely be the possibility, and an encouragement for planning redundancies for the possibility of disaster recovery. 4) Life support is a major concern for any manned space flight. As it should be. It's one of the main reasons our own agencies have focused more on unmanned missions in the last few decades. Also, TAC LS is only complicated if you want it to be and get all fancy with the recyclers. Otherwise it's a fairly simple in/out system. I believe a basic form of LS could be easily implemented and rolled in with the current resource collection work. 5) Weather conditions of course would be somewhat predictable, as much as they are in real life, and things like windspeed might scrub a small rocket but a larger rocket could handle it. It's a small realistic risk factor, and a judgement call. Maybe Jeb could handle the flight, but the rookie sure as hell can't. Honestly, what is the likelihood that Kerbin is blessed with constantly perfect weather, never has any accidents, the people don't need to eat drink or breathe, and yet is so sparsely populated. I think you can see how I believe some of these should come together to add a realism aspect to the game, and I really believe they should be base game. A farming game without droughts or washouts or blights isn't very realistic and quickly becomes too predictable. I would like for a dust storm on Duna to knock out a few solar panels and require maintenance work. The LS, failures, and weather would add reasonable and realistic difficulty and engagement, especially for EVA work, and the mission planning would make certain aspects much easier for beginners. Less time futzing around in the VAB and rough testing on the launch pad only to find out halfway there you're hosed(and actual consequences for leaving your dudes floating in space to die as a reputation hit), more time in missions getting things done. I feel that the learning curve difficulty is mostly arbitrary nonsense and not actual engagement, and these things will fix (most of) that.

I believe there is room and reason for several point releases before 1.0. First and foremost, there has been a lot of major overhaul and rebuild work being done since 0.90. There's all kinds of talk about experimentals, but I think we all know by now there's a lot of kinks that only get found in the open beta process, as well as balancing and abuse testing. With all this work being done behind the curtain, there should definitely be some open stress testing before you go declaring it's a complete game. Additionally, there are several items I feel would be missing from a 1.0 release, that really should be a part of the base game. 1) Additional planets. The modding community has come up with ways to procedurally generate whole new systems, it should not be a huge hurdle to add new planetary systems to the base game in time for 1.0 release. At the very least, for a space faring civilization, the population of Kerbin seems fairly..... sparse. 2) Mission scheduling and flight planning pre-launch(setting maneuver nodes before even leaving the VAB, let alone the launch pad, saving mission profiles for multiple missions(think Apollo series, or standard resupply profiles)). I understand this game has always been very seat-of-the-pants, but I feel this is a bit of much needed structure, and would give an easy ingame function for calculating DV costs for mission profiles before you run out of fuel halfway there, and properly plan for transfer windows, as well as discover opportunities for flybys well ahead of time and include a little extra in the fuel budget for such maneuvers. 3) An expansion of repairable parts, and inclusion of random part failures. The beta game has had enough bugs that I've dealt with several Apollo 13 style mission events, but I would hope the 1.0 release is stable enough that these game bugs now need to be simulated as mission bugs. I'm not saying every mission should see a catastrophic failure, but parts will fail over time, and there are always manufacturing defects. I see this as an essential and realistic difficulty function that can be scaled or turned off via the already ingame difficulty options. 4) Life support systems: Once again looking to the modding community, there are already several proof of concept designs that can also play into resource harvesting. Jets and rockets run on the same fuel we do. In conjunction with repairable parts, getting an alert during mission planning for your Duna mission that your Minmus crew has suffered catastrophic life support failure and you need to immediately drop planning and focus on saving that crew would be awesome. Again, essential and realistic difficulty function that can be scaled or turned off. 5) Weather systems to go with the new aerodynamics and whatnot. Weather conditions should at the very least be simulated. Launch weather conditions are a very real concern, and scrubbing a scheduled mission due to weather risks and missing a transfer window should absolutely be a part of the game that encourages better planning. Effects on engine performance and visual effects like water droplets on wind screens or total whiteout blizzards should be easy enough to implement, and the random effects they can have on flight performance enough to force delays. You don't actually have to have wind, you just need to simulate the effects based on roving regions. Deciding to fly during a hurricane? Have fun flying with random forces acting on your plane. Again, essential and realistic difficulty function that can be scaled or turned off. Some of these may be harder to implement than others, but I believe they should all be relatively easily achievable before 1.0 hits, and absolutely essential to base game function, as well as building future DLCs and opportunities for the modding community. Frankly, I would consider a 1.0 release without these items as feature incomplete.

Interesting solution, I'll dig into that. Being able to designate separate pump groups for multi-use tanks is pretty crucial when using with modular fuel tanks that have like 10 resources in a single part. And while TACFB works alright for smaller ships, as soon as you start building interplanetary cruisers and mondo stations with 50 different types of resources and tanks out the wazoo it quickly becomes unmanageable. Goodspeed, on the other hand, is set it and forget it, and if you understand how it works it's much better at keeping your ship balanced automagically(especially in atmo). I keep both installed for now, but I'm working towards phasing out TACFB.

Would it be possible to set this system up to have different pump levels for different resources? Specifically using with TACLS, being able to pump in new Oxygen, Water, and Food, while removing CO2, Waste, and Waste Water. I can fudge it by making parts only carry certain resources, but I'd rather not go down that road if I don't have to.

Broke link. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/93759-ATC-Alternative-Tree-Configurator

I believe this HUD is available in EVA.

If you're looking to get rid of the 4 of the 5 variants of fuel tanks that came packaged in various mods and are completely redundant, then you pretty much have to go hunt them down in their folder and delete them manually.

There are a few wheel/rover modes that use "hitches", but they require mating male to female i believe. But it's still probably not a good idea to use them with KAS.

If you're looking to integrate something into RPM there is a list of plugins available on the release page. Tear into some of those to get a good idea of how to proceed.

I believe it had something to do with people not paying attention to whether or not there was actually any monoprop on the vessel before jumping out the airlock and ending up adrift. Not that they couldn't just make a little popup warning or something informing you that you're about to do something really dumb. I've seen mods that do the same thing before though, so it's doable.

Awesome, I was just going to look into making the same MM config today.

Better solution for newbies: After installation, when you go to start a new game for the first time, throw in a popup that STRONGLY suggests you play the tutorials, but include a small skip button in the corner for those who don't care(of course also make it a toggle in the settings so you can skip it completely if you're a really old hat and know what you're doing).