i.be.Reese

I've been a B9 user for a while now, and I want to start a new career mode game. Does anyone know if the space plane fuselages in B9 are shielded in deadly reentry? If not, how hard is it to hack the cfg to make it so?

It depends on the type of science. I think I remember reading that crew/EVA reports and samples can be transferred between vehicles, I'm not sure about experiments from the science parts though. My Question is: If I do some science in orbit worth say 10pts, transmit it home (with the transition penalty) for 6pts, then land safely am I awarded the missing 4pts on recovery?

I think that Mu said you'll get that, he did a major overhaul and they are shipping some of that with .22 and some with .23. As for me, I want to see more career mode development, specifically missions and money. I would love to see a system where at any given time you have 3-6 mission offers on the table, each with a different cash reward. As you complete them new ones would become available (e.g. Good job landing a probe on the Mun, now put Kerbal on it!). This would preserve the choice in KSP, letting players focus on what they find fun (Interplanetary travel, Mun bases, space stations, exploring Kerbin, etc.). All of these missions would give tangential opportunities for science, so your flights would really start to feel goal-oriented and science wouldn't feel like science for science's sake.

I think that discussions of changing the tech tree based on the logic of a realistic Kerbal universe are going in the wrong direction. The decision to start with or without probes should be made by the first commandment of game design: Games are for fun, anything detracting from fun detracts from the game. While breaking realism can steal from fun by taking people of the immersion, I don't think that's a problem here. This debate reminds of Scott Manely's interview in squadcast #1: I think that quote by somebody who knows a hell of a lot more about the science of space travel than most of us really captures what makes KSP fun. KSP isn't a simulation. It's not a game that covers your desk in manuals and asks you to be perfect, its a game that covers your desk in doodles of rockets and asks you to be creative. What draws you to KSP? Are you here to learn about orbital mechanics and space history, or are you here because of the adrenalin and excitement of landing on the Mun in the demo? KSP is a game that is fun because it feels fun, it is that emotional connection that makes it great. I think that while serious long-time players might have a lot of fun starting with probes and simulating the space race, if we really want a new player to see what makes KSP great in their first hour of play they need to start with manned missions. That said, I'm sure that if you disagree with me there will be a tutorial on how to re-order the tech tree within 12 hours of the .22 release.

The other day someone posted to reddit the idea that the science system would be better if part unlocks were tied to accomplishments (e.g. better jets after breaking the sound barrier, etc.). One of the comment threads turned into a pretty interesting discussion of the underlying game design principals behind the decision to model science as a generic currency. Since this debate comes up on the forums pretty often, thought I would link to the thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1ocy0t/generic_science_currency_no_how_to_science/ccr3cuo

I suspected that might work, thanks for the link!

First, I'm not sure if this is the right sub-forum for this so if not let me know where to go. Right now I'm playing a significantly modded steam install of the game (.21.1). I'm really looking forward to starting a new save for career mode in .22 and know steam auto-updates, but I also would like to still work on the sandbox projects I have now without worrying about save and mod backwards compatibility. Does anyone know of a way to legally have separate installs of .21 and .22 on the same machine, each with their own mods and saves?