Nobody

Could the people saying that squad has completely abandoned resources site the source for that? All I have seen from what the developers have posted is that they found the system they were working on to not be fun and put it on the back burner to work on other important features while they figure out how to better handle resources. There is a big difference between them saying that it will never happen and them shifting their focus to other things(so there is visible progress for customers to see) while trying to figure out what went wrong with the design. Look at how much people complain about the speed the updates come out for this game(some want weekly updates to the game). Putting a problem feature on the back burner while it is worked out would be preferable to most of the community to the alternative of waiting a year or more for an update because of the problems with a feature that was set in stone for the next version.

I have always thought a modular difficulty system would be a great addition. There are many mods like deadly reentry and life support which are popular enough that squad will likely add them to the stock eventually but would crank up the difficulty of the game to the point where new players could be driven off.

Expanded IVA would be very nice for the future but at the moment I would consider it a very low priority. The idea for different seats having different roles would go along with skills tied to the kerbals. So for example someone highly trained in communication would boost the transmission if they were on the communication station. Kerbals with high science points in the mobile lab would boost the transmitted science even more due to their greater skill analyzing it. The science seat would open an interface to all the science parts on the ship instead of having to hot key them or find them on the hull. When resources come you would want Kerbals skilled in the related areas in those seats for greater efficiency. Oh new part idea for stations that would go with this. Mobile repair bay: opens up into a scaffolding that clamps onto a ship/station to repair partially damaged parts. Trained mechanics in these seats would speed the repairs. Needless to say this would come with degrees of damage instead of the current working or destroyed system.

I think you found the reason why those things are taking so long. They assigned them to someone with almost no programing experience and then forgot to tell me about it.Yes development going to slow can hurt the game but so can going to fast. A rushed job will be buggy and unstable.

You are both right and wrong on this. You can plan all this with the stock game. There just are not any tools to make it easy and many players(myself included) are not interested in working out all the math involved themselves. The mod tools for doing things like that do all the math for us to make planning much faster and easier.

2 factors your missing out on are the speed of recycling and the cost/weight of the recycling parts. If the part can't make good air as fast as the crew uses it then they will die. If the parts are heavy or expensive you might not be able to make every ship fully self sufficient.You would be likely to see players put unmanned depots into orbit of planets they will visit a lot so a ship can trade waste for fresh supplies and then leave the probe core to handle the recycling while waiting for the next ship to arrive

The reason people are worried about new players and life support is because of how difficult things like rendezvous, docking, and transfer windows are. Life support would add a time limit to doing things like that would effectively make them even harder.My first rendezvous/docking attempt in Kerbin orbit took several days of game time to get things lined up.

Personally I think some form of stock life support should be added but as an optional difficulty setting so that new players who are just learning the game don't have to deal with the extra challenges it brings when trying to get a grip on the basics. I can see 4 levels of life support difficulty in the game. Level 1: Everything acts like it does now. Level 2: When life support runs out the crew hibernate until resupplied/rescued. Level 3: When life support runs out the crew hibernate for a period of time before dieing. Level 4: When life support runs out the crew dies. This would also work with the craft exchanges by having the life support it was designed for listed in the info so any ship that is shared will work in a lower difficulty.

I don't know how much cafepress charges but I know someone who does custom embroidery which may interest the developers. $50-$100 to design the pattern depending on how complicated and $1.00-$.75 per 1k stitches to do the actual embroidery(more items lowers the rate charged per 1K stitches). Adding a little chest or sleeve patch to polo shirts shouldn't be that expensive. Naturally the cost of the items and shipping isn't included so once you factor in those my friend's prices may not be that good for your needs but if you PM me I will send contact info.

Missions and the economy are planned for career mode. While details are still sketchy the first part of that should be added with the next update. One of the confirmed missions is the NASA collaboration to capture an asteroid. For difficulty that is something that has been suggested many times before. Personally I would prefer a modular difficulty setting where you turn on and off features for your preferred play style. Crew death restrictions Life support needs Reentry damage Economic settings ect

Something I have said before on funding. I think there should be 2 income streams for players when money is added. One is private contracts would be per mission payments(x up front and y when complete). For example a TV station wants you to launch a broadcast satellite into a specific orbit. The other is government budget that is paid in regular intervals but changes depending on what government issued mission milestones you are completing. Just time warping and waiting for cash would mean you not doing any research so your budget would get cut back to almost nothing.

Even I can't say for sure.With how Mod friendly this game has been so far my guess is that Squad would take the path of FPS games. They would host a couple vanilla servers but most servers would be private servers where the individuals running them would control the mods running and restricting access to troublemakers.

To put is simply it is the potential change in your velocity. It is effected by the power of your engines, the weight of the ship, and changes in these as fuel is burnt as you fly.

Propperly repaired items would work as good as new but what the OP is talking about is more along the line of improvised repairs in the field which are more a case of 'Hopefully this will hold until we can get it replaced'. I think he was talking about the motors being harder to fix than the solar panels(Tape vs Welding). This would mean fixing an engine would likely take longer or require higher levels of engineering than something like a flat tire or damaged solar panel.A storage compartment full of spare parts and repair tools would be a great addition to this.

If your being overwhelmed by the number of parts start in career mode. That will restrict the parts available while you get back into the game and where the recent new content has been focused. Start simple and do science to fill out the tree for more parts. Trial and error will teach you how to build better. Don't be afraid to blow up some Kerbals since it is for the greatest of reasons 'SCIENCE'.

Colonization could be a solution to the problems that caused resources to be pushed back. One of the problems sited was that the game play around them was boring and if it worked like Kethane does it would be for many(driving a rover around for a while to fill up tanks then process them for fuel). This grind could be taken out of the process for those who don't want to do it by building a mining colony that is then landed on a resource node or near a cluster of them. Once established the colony gathers resources behind automatically over time with occasional missions to pick up a load or move the camp. A colony in this case would be a habitat module, processing plants, storage bins, and mining vehicles.

I am against the random dice rolls to see if a part fails. A mod for that might work for those who want things to go boom for no reason. Failure due to environmental conditions I could live with for example, having a planet with much higher atmospheric pressure than Kerbin could crush a mk1 lander can(description says it wouldn't do well in atmo) like a sub going to deep in the ocean. That wouldn't be a case of random failure but going beyond the designed operating conditions and encourage the use of probes to test the waters.

I agree that giving the option to have players in multiplayer control different Kerbals in 1 ship would be a great addition to the now planned multiplayer mode. While I don't think I will be using it much myself, I do look forward to the insane projects the more skilled players will do while working together. Top of the list for recorded madness is synchronized docking of craft(preferably with robotics mod to create joints).

I am pretty sure the drop your seeing is physics(gravity more specifically) kicking in and it is pretty important to the functioning of the game. When you build a ship in the VAB or SPH physics are not applied to the ship so when you move to the pad it has to get added before launch. If you add screen shots of the ships that fall apart someone might be able to help you find the design flaw causing it.

I don't think this game could hold up as a full movie at this point but I could see a series based in this game like Red vs Blue. http://roosterteeth.com/archive/?sid=rvb&v=more

Send out your crew in a rover and pull it off to the side of the runway. Then you can send your plane to the runway and have them EVA from the rover to the plane. As an alternative you can put a manned capsule onto the plane with de-couplers that you eject after moving your crew over to the seats.

There is a 3rd way to activate and deactivate liquid engines. Place them into action groups while in the VAB or SPH and the assigned key will activate or deactivate them. This is normally used for VTL designs or space planes that use jets in atmosphere and rockets when they run out of air.

Tweakables on EVA gear would be a great addition both on the fly power adjustments and VAB/SPH part alterations would add variety and increased functionality to the game. Options for VAB/SPH tweaks(adding cost and weight to the ship) Larger fuel capacity Nav system(you can see nav ball on EVA) In the event of hazardous environments being added to some planets changing the suits to better resist them(longer operation time). Tools for various EVA activities(more science from sample or enabling more complicated repairs). The tweaks during construction would be made to the manned capsules so you would get 1 basic suit per seat available by default. An option to remove suits should also be available for the event you need to go into a capsule and change suits.

The multiple versions I mentioned would be because of the different materials used. Aluminum vs Steel used to make the same part would have very different weight, strength, melting points, and corrosion resistances.

I can see environmental hazards on the surfaces as long as it isn't random. Parts would need ratings on how long they could withstand exposure to said environment and have durability that would degrade until it breaks. There would also need to be multiple versions of most parts for different environments. This would increase the value of probes since a disposable probe would tell you temp, pressure, and corrosive compounds in the environment so you can avoid sending parts on a lander that would melt, crush, or be dissolved if you took to long.