pandaman

Yes, the idea of two variants, one as it is now, and the other able to re folded but at a higher technical, heavier and more expensive is the better solution IMO. Using monoprop as hydraulic fluid to get it to inflate is a neat idea too.

This^^ If you forgot to add a docking port to your station put a 'claw' on your refuelling tanker.

Both my shuttles differ from the STS format of a single large tank. They each have 2 drop tank/boosters above and below the shuttle itself, this makes balance far less of an issue.

I've built, and use a couple of shuttles, one mk2 that gets 6 tonnes to LKO and a mk3 that can lift an orange tank and I quite like using them both. Downsides though... One is time, you need to actually land them, so if your RL game play time is limited then this can be a factor, but in sandbox you can just 'pretend' you have landed them and delete them if not crewed, or you are just a heartless ba####d. Another downside can be that they can be difficult to design and fly, which is also part of the fun, so....

Yup. Me too, they just fall over gently and rock about a bit. At least they stay there - unless they are on a slope then they can just roll to the bottom and settle there. At first I thought it was flags planted pre 1.1, but I had it happen to new ones too.

It look s quite large, I suspect it's terrain textures, but it looks quite regular so it may well be worth dropping a lander or probe on or near it to see if anything shows up at ground level or if you zoom out a bit. Next time I play (and remember) I will rustle up a simple Mun mission and take a peek, no harm in checking it out.

With all due respect, no 'product' is ever perfect, whether it's computer software, a car, or a simple garden spade. Sometimes the imperfections are down to oversight, errors, or necessary compromises in design. But sometimes limitations are imposed by the materials available to make them, and sometimes the severity and consequences of those limitations are not apparent until the product is released. Apart from the very complex nature of 'any' decent computer game or software, which makes it virtually impossible to find and eliminate all bugs anyway, KSP uses Unity as as one of its core 'raw materials', if that has imperfections then they will inevitably cause issues with the product which the dev team can only work around.

I get your point and frustration, and yes I did feel that release was a bit rushed towards the end, and another week may have helped, but it also may not have. So no, I don't feel that taking a break is the wrong move. Apart from the fact that a lot of the outstanding issues seem to be Unity based, and so largely out of the devs hands, other than finding workarounds to reduce the problems, staying at the desk longer may well not achieve anything worthwhile anyway. Add to that the fact that they most likely did many very long days running up to release, and just after it, trying to fix stuff they need to recharge their batteries. A couple of weeks away from the intensity will give them the chance to refocus, take a step back, come back fresher and maybe be able to approach the issues from an angle they couldn't see before. I don't believe that any of them will forget about KSP and its problems while they are away, they are deeply involved and it will be on their minds all the time, but the change of pace will allow them to ponder over things without the same pressure to get immediate results. Which, hopefully, could give us 1.1.3 in a little while with better temporary fixes to the Unity based problems until they can be resolved at source.

The 'concept' of the barn and other 'repurposed' agricultural, or perhaps industrial, buildings as a tier 0 starting point makes a lot of sense... "There's an old farm near the coast on the equator that looks like it would do, there's a shabby old barn and some sheds already there too that we can use until we get more funds." The aesthetics, and especially the details, of whatever style they use, will be very subjective as to what looks right. Personally I'm not unduly fussed as to the style, whether I like it much personally or not it won't affect gameplay.

I thought it may be a better idea to have the 'profession' linked to the traits rather than the name as I think it's done now. Randomised to ensure variety, but weighted along these sort of lines... Higher bravery and stupidity more common for pilots. Lower stupidity and bravery more common for scientists. Medium on both more common for engineers.

True, but if you know where said turd is you can at least remove it. If you can smell it, but can't find, it all you can do is try and stay out of range, which takes trial and error, until you can get a location. And then there can always be more than one turd, with the smell of the nearest masking the others.

Wherever they put new planets inside the orbits of the current outer planets there is bound to be at least one player that suddenly finds themself on a collision course, or inside the planet.

Assuming its a possibility at some point, I'm not sure it would be 'wise' to change the axial tilt of the existing bodies as it could possibly screw up saves and missions in progress. But if and when they introduce new planets etc then yes bring it on!

@Overland I was just thinking yesterday, and wondering how you were getting on with your amazing trains with the new wheel physics. It seems that my concerns were valid.

A big YES to stock Dv readouts. That said, I don't think just integrating KER, or any other mod, is the right approach. Squad need to ensure that its right and accurate for starters, or face the wrath of disgruntled players.

Yes subs are no problem now. Full ore tanks make good ballast weights and Jet engines and rockets work normally too, which is not exactly realistic, but it does at least mean you have some form of propulsion.

I agree there, I really don't think it was removed "just because". I'm sure it's because it either just didn't work after the U5 change and got overlooked or left out due to bigger issues, or there's a reason why it can't be made to work easily. Never mind, it's not a huge deal overall, just slightly inconvenient difference between this version and earlier ones.

That is actually quite a neat idea. I think it could be surprisingly useful.

Yes, I'll echo the sentiment here. Enjoy your well deserved break, and come back fresh, alert and ready to squash more bugs. I guess the wheel and landing leg issues have really been hard to deal with as it's not really a 'bug' in the traditional sense, in that from what I gather it's main issues are Unity functionality related rather than something that you can 'fix', all you can do is fudge it with tweaks and band aids until such time as a proper Unity solution becomes available. I feel your disappointment and frustration at not being able to address it as well as you would like.

Yeah, I raised this in the 1.1 thread when I noticed it didn't work anymore, and as I hadn't seen it mentioned anywhere I wondered if it was removed or just broken. It's one of those small things that's surprisingly useful, it helps a lot with the difficult task of keeping the tracking station organised.. Hopefully it will get resurrected in some form before long.

Yes I like this. In theory I suppose a probe core could also be programmed to perform these too, but it is nice to have actual pilots being able to do stuff probes can't.

Now that is a neat idea. Not a game changer, but a very nice extra touch.

I'm quite lucky in that I've not had any of the crashing problems several have mentioned. Yes I found wheels and landing gear 'different' and experienced some of the issues raised, but I'm simply avoiding doing anything too 'serious' for the time being and just enjoying pottering about preparing for the day... Yes, I agree that Squad need our support and understanding, and by and large seem to be receiving, whilst they get things sorted out, but I can also fully understand the frustration that many are showing. It's fine, and often beneficial, for those experiencing issues to report and discuss them, but angry rants alone don't help.

Overall I think vessels would look best in the 'traditional' mostly white colours, but it would be nice to be able to change it if I wanted. It would be good to be able 'colour code' ships by giving them different coloured radial tanks etc.

Quite a neat idea. Maybe a right click menu option would be better than a hotkey as it's not likely to be something you do in a hurry very often. I don't think it's something I would use much myself, but I can certainly see how it could be a handy feature, especially if you want to get a 3D print of your ISS replica..