I feel a little forced to give my 5 cent in. I think, the OP is referencing to this post: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94774-What-s-the-secret-feature?p=1438984#post1438984 So I'll try to justify my guess a little: Until (including) v0.24.2 we had these types of objects: dynamical (not on rails) and destroyable - Vessels (including asteroids and Krebals) statical (on rails) and undestroyable - "undetailed" Planets and Moons, "hard" Objects (like Easter Eggs, KSC, Island Buildings etc.) statical (on rails) and undestroyable - "detailed" Planet and Moon - Kerbin and Mun (I take them out, because Kerbin has KSC and detailed landscapes and the Mun has a procedural surface) semi-static (because slider in settings) - visual (no interaction besides looking at it) - scatter objects (trees, rocks) With 0.25.0 two change occured. 1) Obvious change Some statical objects are now destroyable, hence dynamic in at least one dimension. There must be a query that askes "Is this first object beeing hit by a second object that has a speed times mass greater than x? If yes change the state of the first object." This code is certainly reusable for other interactions between dynamic objects (e.g. vessels). If this is the case, it must be possible to ask "Is this planet hit by a Kerbal? If yes, change the state of the surface and add footprints". I leave open if the result is modelled by a texture change or by applying a change in the collision and surface mesh. 2) not so obvious change The textures of two planetary bodies have changed in visual behaviour. First Kerbin, second the Mun. I guess, those both static objects are the only objects that have different surface implementation than every other body, as Kerbin is the oldest and most detailed body, and Mun is the only body with procedural craters. I theorize, that the change in the texture behavior has something to do with the behaviour of other static objects like the KSC. If this hypothesis is true, than this behaviour is a result of the implemented collision behaviour, thus it migth by reasonable to claim: billateral interaction between all objects in KSP is possible, and a static object can react and change to actions from dynamical objects, which may open the way to features like I guessed in my post, referenced above and by the OP. I admit, that this is hypothetical, but from a software architectural view, my conclusion seems valid for me. Even if I leave open the precise solution or possible ways of implementation.