Matuchkin

So, after a long and arduous debate (two random short comments on a challenge thread), me and a vast multitude of forum users (killakrust) strongly and absolutely support ("Hopefully someone will get interested"- killakrust) the upholding of this thread (upholding- egotistically bumping it up to the top of the forums)... Seriously, though. I feel that this thread is incomplete, and before this thread gets completely forgotten, I would like to add more entries in here. I actually plan to add my own entry (sweet Jesus, finally) to this thread. Soon... Someday... Hopefully... I don't even know... Whatever... ?

Okay, nevermind, I read it. I'm an imbecile.

Oh, okay. Nevertheless: very good design. For some unknown reason, I have never seem the mk2 cockpit and mk3 fuselage used in that way. I think the wing design is based on the Concorde, am I correct?

Single Stage to...

Holy sweet cheezuz... Also, do you think I should get my challenge back to the top of the forums? There was only one entry (you), so I want to add some more meat to that thread before I let it die. It seemed that people had quite a lot of ideas that they were about to use, but the thread somehow sank into the spacecraft exchange's forgotten abyss...

Give it a try. They look like they would work in some way under FAR. First, try them out as they are, then you can adjust them. It's a nice idea.

Is this Realism Overhaul capable? Please, please let it be. The world depends on you, yanfret.

It certainly does. So. Your planes are completely amazing, and I would desperately like to see how they function in FAR. How did you manage to bend the K-11's nose downwards?

Wait, hold on, is that my challenge you're talking about? For one thing, you didn't land with no parachutes- you jettisoned them at a distance to the ground. Also, what is that craft above that you used? I don't remember that... Anyways, I respect you for being able to land something so tall onto a hill of any kind, but I may ask you how is this "spirit style"? MER-A was encased in a pod (I ignore the air cushions), and the bottom of the pod was jettisoned after the parachute opened, yet you had none of those in your video above. That was a great entry though.

Both of these ideas are very nice, especially the museum idea. In my opinion, the museum should be a collection of all the screenshots taken in-game, and the 3d models of all the ships ever used in-game.

Gelix, that was one of the points of this discussion. One of the main things I stated in this thread is that each of the facilities will be built from scratch, adding a sense of history to the game. However, it is possible to speculate on your other point, about being able to build facilities in other places around Kerbin. Some may argue that the game would gain more quality if that was possible, while some may argue that, after all, NASA is largely affected by the fact that the organization can not do anything it wants across the globe (why I mentioned politics).

That is Quito bad. The Bombay shouldn't get hit or the plane might Berne really badly. On the other hand, Wien it Bernes, the explosion would be really Nice. But there is a chance that the pilot would manage to Bali out of the plane. However, thousands of dollars would be wasted, so the pilot wouldn't want to Toky-obout it. Yeeeeeaaaah, apply ice to Berne... I am astonishingly bad at puns.

When KSP combines with BD armory and multiplayer, it will probably be the best war game on any market. Instantly, servers will get violent, and the whole Kerbol system will be filled with 'xplosions. Largest scale combat ever seen.

Kerman and Kotch? Shouldn't it be Keckler and Kotch instead? And isn't that a reference to a firearms manufacturer? Just asking...

Those other locations can have other interesting uses. Some locations, such as runways and minuscule launching facilities on remote islands/ deserts, can serve as test grounds for military projects (ICBM series, fighter series, combat simulation training projects) that can take part in the game. Meanwhile, other locations that are more public can serve as airports (NASA contributes to civilian travel, ya know) or spaceports. Also, Kerbin can be divided by simple boundaries that abide by simple politics. Flying over another "country's" airspace may give a player a penalty of some sort. Flying over military airspace boundaries in civilian aircraft will also bring penalties, as will jettisoning/ deorbiting ships onto other countries (skylab?), etc. That political aspect of the game may be way too overboard, yet I just added that for the sake of interest to make this discussion more interesting. 073198681. Really, when I started this topic I was mainly thinking of how to make KSP more interesting, so why not add politics into the soup?

Very well said, but the point of the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy is that it knows everything-about-everything, something that the human race has not even closely achieved. We do not even know as much about Proxima Centauri, our closest star, while the HHGTTG knows every single thing about the star. We know next to nothing about other galaxies, quasars, etc, as well as about stars only a few thousand light years away. Sure, the HHGTTG will look like a phone, but it will have to be quite a powerful one.

Sequinox, I do notice that one of the major aspects of KSP is the fact that KSC is "dumbed down," but I also see that the forum community is quite sick of using rocket part that were "found lying by the side of the road". It is probably time for the space program to take a more proffesional/ realistic turn.

That is an absolutely amazing idea. I love it. Also, how about actual politics in the game's career mode? Nothing complicated, just some penalties for flying over other countrys' airspace, etc. That would force a player to plan his launches more carefully, and more.

Name it the "rollin' thunder." ^fresh from the Ho Chi Mihn Trail.

Good idea, though that might be slightly too much.

Not a bad idea, forcing players to make choices... Yes, but most people here would like a story to this.

That is nice, if I understand your point. What if you could start building your facilities at any point in the game, based on necessity. That would give the KSC a whole new feel as it transforms from a dust heap with two buildings and a pad, turning into a massive spaceport over time. Also, about your point. That is a very good idea, as it will provide different spaceports for every KSP player, making the KSC an actual part of the game.

So, to sum it up, here's a nice picture of KSC I found on google images: And here is a map of the real life KSC (Kennedy Space Center) I also found there: Now, there are a few differences- more assembly buildings (not seen on map), more other buildings, parking lots (not seen on map), and the massive amount of launch complexes. Now, I'm not asking Squad to add that useless amount of launch complexes or buildings, but I believe that by being able to gradually expand Kerbal Space Center in that way over the duration of the career mode, we might be able to give the KSC a nice history. that means adding more individual buildings, miscellaneous constructions (parking lots, etc), and custom-made launch complexes to suit your rockets individually. 073198681. I`m afraid I probably went full retard here. Hope you understand what I`m talking about. EDIT, February 3rd, 2018: Wow, my username was really catchy back then.

And a new genius arises...

The skylon, anyone?