Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'discussion'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL





Found 54 results

  1. There were plenty of discussions about life support on this forum already. From my understanding, community is currently divided in two major groups. First one argues, that life-support will be a cool mechanics to add into the game, and another argues, that it's not necessary. The major disagreement between these two groups lies in will life support be too complex to have. But the thing is - complexity of life support is almost entirely depended on the way of implementation. There might be countless amounts of parts and resources, required to keep Kerbals alive, which truly might be too complex, and might be just a single part called life support with only 2 resources inside - oxygen and snacks, that drain over time, which is no where near "too complex". My point here is, that there is no reason to argue whether it will be too much for the stock game or not, while we have no idea of the shape on life support, that will or will not be implemented into the game. I want you guys to think about it from a different perspective and be open minded. While discussing possible improvements in KSP 2, a lot of people have talked about how sending a manned missions before drones makes very little sense(i'm talking about the missions that are at least "get to orbit" complex). I agree. Original Kerbal Space Program does not represent the level of complexity included in manned missions, compared to unmanned ones. There was no point in sending reconnaissance and testing missions to your destination. First reason for that is, that all the information about celestial bodies, necessary for the missions, was already available in the Tracking Station. It can easily be solved, by removing all the info from tracking station, and integrating process of collecting said data into the progression system. Necessity of observing the Mun(or any other celestial body) with telescopes, researching acquired data, in order to calculate size/mass/orbital velocities, and sending probes to it, in order to clarify data, instead of blindly sending Kerbals roughly in the direction of the Mun(or any other celestial body), without any idea what will happen, should be essential and even fits well with the concept of progression system through missions in the "Adventure Mode" PC Gamer article talked about. The second reason was, that in KSP 1, in order to send manned mission you only need 3 parts. Crew module, fuel tank and the engine(You don't even need the parachute these days! Every Kerbal has his own!). For the unmanned mission however, instead of crew module, you need drone core. But that's not it. You also need a power source, to keep it running. Solar panels, fuels cells, RTGs, you name it. You also need a decent battery reserves, for your probe to not die, once it enters the dark side of any celestial body. And don't forget about antenna! You have to keep your up-link with KSC in order to control your vessel! Do i even have to mention necessity of relay satellites for the deep-deep space missions? All of that makes unmanned missions 10 times more complex, than the manned ones, which is precisely the opposite of how it should be and how it was and is IRL. And this can be solved precisely with introduction of life-support. Necessity of having to put oxygen tank and supply of snacks on your rocket, can be the answer on why you maybe should pick unmanned mission over the manned one, for a simple survey, that can be done autonomously and Kerbals are not even necessary for. Inability to produce snacks and oxygen for kerbals in mid-flight, while being able to produce electricity for the probe with solar panels, can be the answer on why you maybe should pick unmanned mission over the manned one, for a mission to a distant destination. Importance of sending unmanned survey missions also benefits from presence of life support, because of ability to measure the temperature/radiation levels/gravity/composition of the atmosphere, in order to use that data to understand, can Kerbals survive there and which type of life-support will they need. And have you noticed how i mentioned temperature/radiation levels/gravity/composition of the atmosphere? That's right! All the science experiments, from original KSP now suddenly have AN ACTUAL PURPOSE, other than just collecting some magical science points, that will unlock new engine for you, which once again fits very well with announced progression system through missions. And since we are talking about progression system through missions - life-support can enhance even that. Think about how you would have to perform test-flights with experimental hardware in order to develop more advanced life-support systems. Don't tell me it won't be fun. Some examples: When you start your game you have nothing. * After you complete your first high-altitude flight and discover, that there is very little oxygen there, you unlock a oxygen cylinder, like the ones, that divers use. * When you complete your first sub-orbital flight and experience zero-G for the first time, you unlock tubes with food for your Kerbals, so you can actually feed them in zero-G and perform flights, that are longer than just couple hours. And so on and so on. Possibilities are almost limitless! And suddenly replicating X-15 flights now also have a purpose! In conclusion i want to quote myself from my post about career mode. KSP is the game all about challenge of getting to space. If you are already enjoying original KSP, you definitely will enjoy new challenges of getting to space in the sequel, once you master them, just as you already mastered the challenges of original KSP. Don't be afraid of complexity. And remember, that this won't be boring by definition, but can become boring only if designed poorly. And just because it can be designed poorly, doesn't mean it will be. Having said all that, i am certain, that life-support will be a good addition to KSP 2, and i have faith, that Nate Simpson and all the guys from Intercept Games are capable of implementing it in the way it will be fun. EDIT And don't tell me how Jeb Kerman, orbiting Kerbin on a Space Chair with scuba diver oxygen cylinder attached and some chocolate bars in his pocket, is not in the Kerbal Spirit.
  2. Welcome to AemerFactory Cinematic Thread. Here i post some video i made in my free Time. There mostly based on French and European Space Program. Real mission, alternate history or canceled. I only a beginner for this kind of thing. Advice and tip are welcome. Here the first one, the Airbus Adeline concept for Ariane 6: Here another one feature Ariane 543C concept for a Moon mission: Thanks for watchings.
  3. So, how do you think multiplayer, a thing we've all (or some) of us wanted in ksp for some time and are now getting in KSP 2, will work? My idea is that there might be a create server thing and after you create a server you can invite players to the server and build with them in real time. Maybe there will be a space-race mode where you can play against someone else and try and beat them to the mun or another moon or planet. But that's just my idea, what about you? (Edit: I guess this has now turned into a discussion thread, you can express your thoughts about the addition of multiplayer)
  4. Figure I would get this particular topic rolling With lots of modders using custom categories, we're starting to bump into each other. Is there interest in establishing, similar to CTT and CRP, a Community Category Kit (CCK)? If so... What categories are you currently using? How are you placing your parts in those categories? (Paging @Angel-125 and @Nils277 since those are two off the top of my head where we may have conflicts). Discuss [Heads up - will move this to a proper release thread, but here's the current Github link for interested parties :)]
  5. Made it for my multipurpose (training, stunts etc.) jet, the K-36 Terner. Comments appreciated:)
  6. It seems like the great big Mars colonization discussion has leaked inside threads that are not really intended for it, so I'm making it a seperate thread. Mods, feel free to merge.
  7. So, I just finished watching the first episode of the new Star Trek series, Picard. I thought it was quite good - I was half expecting a lens-flare riddled explosion-fest like Discovery, but they seem to have mostly avoided that, perhaps because Patrick Stewart is on the team. I'd like to hear the first impressions of everyone else. Discuss away! (moderators, I haven't seen another thread like this but if one exists please do merge this into it )
  8. Hey. KSP has just updated (version unknown, date 12/05/2019) together with the launch of Breaking Ground, but a lot of things are still amiss. I made a list of points I'd like to go over here, some are bugs, some are suggestions, some are slight rants from issues that have been present since the game launched and have been not given any attention yet. 1) Show game version number at main/settings screen: when reporting problems we are having to resort to giving the date and hoping you guys can at least figure out which version KSP should be updated to by that given date since there doesn't seem to be any way for one to check exactly what version number he's running. This is a very important feature for bug-reporting and is present on pretty much every game. 2) Explanation for new features added (I'm not talking about Breaking Ground itself, but the "free" update): so, not only a performance calculator has been added for the VAB/SPH, but a lot of other small features as well - such as a new option to toggle "same vessel interact" in the VAB/SPH, for which the game doesn't care one bit to explain. This issue will lead into the following 3rd issue that is KSPedia (will talk more about it); it doesn't seem to be properly updated and, even after painfully scrolling through the document (as there are no table of contents for you to jump to) I could not find mention of any of some new features there (part because I may have missed it - there are literally 175 pages - and part because they aren't there) We also have the training scenarios there in the main menu that are pretty much abandoned. Updates came and gone and seemingly nothing new has been added to the tutorials in regards to the features that have been added with these updates. 3) KSPedia: I have made a post about KSPedia removal back in April (here: but it has apparently received ZERO dev attention on it. I won't bring up all the points I made there here, but pretty much everything discussed there is STILL present and/or important. The sad fact is that with the removal of the KSPedia from the console version we have pretty much traded a relatively functional and intuitive helping system for a poor .pdf file that's quite literally comprised of a series of screenshots of the KSPedia screen, featuring NO table of contents, is all messed up with pages of different sizes (check page 162) and one can't even tell what has been updated or when (although, funnily, as stated by "UomoCapra" back in March, 27; one of the reasons for this change was so that KSPedia could be more easily updated - yeah, right). I mean, honestly, take a look at this mess!: The two main issues we therefore require fixed immediatly in my opinion (regarding KSPedia) are the table content and a marker/line/changelog list in the start of the document that shows new players exactly what has been updated in the document; having a KSPedia version number here would also not hurt, as I'm typically clueless on whether I have the last version already or if it has been updated. 4) Altimeter AGL/MSL toggle: Is there a radial funtion for toggling this (like we do with the landing gear)? There's a blank option at the 10/11ºclock position when oppening the Action Menu radial which could very well be used for this. Having to move the cursor with an analogue stick to click on the altimeter is painfully annoying. 5) Slider bug: has been present ever since the game came out on consoles, never fixed, never cared for. Two ways you can notice this are by trying to increase a parachute's spread angle to 10 (unless you're extremely lucky you'll end up having to move the slider up and down over fifteen times to get it to 10, more often than not it will go up to ~9.6 and not reach 10); and by trying to select how many sides you want a fairing to break into after it's deployed, in this case you can't select natural numbers like in the PC (that is: 1, 2, 3, 4... nº of sides), but only decimals that make no sense (like: 2.147 number of sides, or 3.879 - you get the picture, how would a fairing break into 2.147 sides?). 6) RESET stage letters are blank (*minor bug): in the VAB on the bottom-right of the screen where there should be the letters "RESET" with an orange background for you to reset the stage orders back to default doesn't have these letters anymore, only the orange background. It left me wondering what that was for, so I clicked on it and messed up my stages, no big deal though. 7) Vertical coloured bar beside kerbal in EVA shows "no text": possible bug? When going EVA we now have the Kerbal portrait on the bottom right. To the left of the portrait there's the vertical bar (which is used to show G-Force/Fatigue when the Kerbal is in a craft), in this case the bar is coloured up to half and, when hovering the cursor over it, it shows (NO TEXT). 8) Allow for time slow down (like a time compression, but opposite)! One of the main issues I have while playing KSP on consoles is having to move the cursor, especially because performance is usually suboptimal and you have to click on that tiny science part while everything is shaking. A very helpful workaround that I came to suggest more than a year ago (and obviously received zero dev attention) is having a system that slows the game down. Now, this system is already present, every time you open the radial menu the game goes "slow-motion" and performance is a LOT better (since the game has time to calculate everything). Therefore, being able to activate this slow-motion mode outside of the radial while being able to move the cursor and interact with modules would be extremely helpful! It would also be helpful when you're managing experiments/crew in a space station/planetary base, since the FPS drops significantly while near these two and it's close to impossible to properly move the cursor and click on the parts you want to.
  9. Everyone plays KSP differently, and some of us play it with different controls or devices completely! So tell me, what do you use to play KSP with? Some use a normal keyboard, others use gamepads, like an Xbox Controller or even something else. In the picture below is an example of what most would use, so tell me, what do you use to play KSP? Why is that? Tell us all below! Option A: Keyboard Option B: Super Nintendo Entertainment System styled PC remote (This is a thing) Option C: Xbox Controller Option D: (Other) Gamepad Option E: Joystick Option F (not shown): Anything else! Please tell!
  10. As the game has evolved, there have been many things that are commonly considered, or were once considered, impossible, until someone (often Brad Whistance or stratzenblitz75) proved them possible. Examples would be "no SSTO from EVE", "no SSTO from EVE sea level", "no orbit on only ions", "no SSTO to Tylo and back". What are some other once though "impossible" feats, and what are examples of them being beaten? I'll go first: "SSTO from Jool is not possible" This is a stock+dlc SSTO from Jool's lower atmosphere. (Admittedly a ton of part clipping) It has 17 RTG's powering 2 medium rotors with 24 of the largest fan blade each, giving it a top speed in Jool's atmosphere of 440m/s at 115km. Fuel is provided by 32 mk1 liquid fuel tanks clipped into the fairing, 14 big-s wings, and 4 big-s strakes. It has infinite range in atmo thanks to the RTG's, and can fly all the way down to 0 elevation, then fly back up to 115km. At the time of ignition it has an ISP of approximately 558s, with a local TWR of 0.294, but by the time it reaches local mach 1 it has reached a hefty 0.389 local TWR and ISP of 636s. After that point it's smooth sailing all the way to orbit, the low drag of the craft coupled with the high lift and the low heating of the Joolian atmosphere means that burning up is never a real danger, and it reaches a stable orbit with 452m/s of fuel remaining, 35 min and 1 sec after lighting the nukes. There is still obviously a lot that could be done to refine this craft, for example, we have 17 perfectly good RTG's lying around, why not use them to power a couple of ion engines? Likewise for the EC being provided by the nukes during the burn. More wing + more fan blades might possibly allow a higher prop flight ceiling and top speed, potentially saving more fuel/dv on the early stages of the accent than it hurts you due to the extra dry mass, or even enabling dropping an engine (saving a lot of dry mass). So the next question, with further improvements is Jool sea level -> Kerbin possible? 1880m/s or so gets you a Laythe encounter, from which you can setup a good Tylo encounter for a minimal dv transfer to Kerbin, then perform a gravity assist to lower entry velocity enough to survive on the next pass, or setup a KKE if you want to be extra cautious.
  11. So in interacting with a lot of people here I feel a fair amount of people would like the manner in which science is conducted in KSP to change. I'm hoping in this thread we could discuss new manners in which we interact with the mechanic of unlocking parts and how science experiments should be conducted In my personal opinion I would like to see greater involvement with experiments to a degree, and certainly more intuitive uses derived from them. I would like there to be an in game catalog that would update with data archived through experiments. This catalog would update and hold characteristics of bodies which have had experiments conducted on them. For instance, doing a barometer experiment could give a profile to the atmospheres density vs altitude possibly in the form of a graph in an in game wiki or even filling out the air pressure bar (that could previously be left blank) giving the experiment real practical use. Another example could be having a somewhat empty tracking station with only a few nearby planets tracked to start, then a telescope could be launched to track undiscovered bodies to find their orbits and other characteristics. All of these experiments would more actively engage players if there was a direct and usable benefit from them, though I still think gaining points to unlock parts could be a dual function. I personally think having multiple tech trees would be an interesting way to go, each with 1 type of science point. Possible different trees could be as follows: Command - new command pods and habitation facilities Propulsion - engines and fuel tanks Aerodynamics - wings, adapters, fins, etc... all things structurally related Ground - landing gear, rover bodies and accessories, Electronics - batteries, solar panels, science experiments, unmanned command modules, etc.. I would like to hear any ideas from anyone else, criticisms of those I brought forth or new ones of their own
  12. So raw performance aside, what I really hope to see improvement on in KSP 2 is a better, more thought out, career/progression mode. I feel like it's a general consensus that the current career mode is lacking in direction giving and any form of incentive structure. It's merely pick what missions so happen to coincide with your next science gathering mission is to get cash out of it. Any form of incentive to really build a base on another planet is absent aside from just self amusement and seeing how far you can really push yourself. Essentially what I'm getting at is there is a lack of necessity to expand and colonize. So career mode just comes off as sandbox mode with restrictions until you unlock all the science and have a huge wallet. Then its just sandbox mode, it doesn't really add much to the experience IMO. So I have made this thread to find out where everyone stands on this specific part of the game. Overall in the new KSP I would hope for a similar beginning missions structure (progression missions) that evolves into a more practical business structure that coincides with learning more mechanics as well as their nuances. Also, I'd like a reason to go to other planets aside from the thrill of exploration. I feel that sounds callous, but without clear goals and no benefit for doing so, I personally feel less incentive to to make it to every moon in a system. Albeit once planets/moons are given much better terrain detail pure exploration will give a greater reason to go visit them. Basic progression mechanism: Learn how to assemble rockets and basic controls Advance piloting controls Learn to get to orbit Advance navigation skills in orbit (orbital rendezvous and reaching extra terrestrial bodies) Get a foothold on staying in space for long durations with orbital space stations and extra terrestrial bases Exploit unique natural resources to build from these new bases and advance the capabilities of technologies with new found resources (unique resources are required to build specific parts, thus incentivizing off planet colonization) Build from these outposts as a means of reaching further bodies which will, themselves, have unique materials to exploit, garnering reason to colonize them Perhaps this could be considered reality breaking of some sort along the logic of "What unique material could be hidden away on other planets that arent available to be manufactured on kerbin?" But if that could be put aside I really think it would make progressing in the game more meaningful and captivating. No longer is there simply a tech barrier wherein you visit the Mun, Minmus, and Duna with a variety of experiments and essentially unlock the whole tech tree, leaving the only incentive to be "go explore" as if you were playing in sandbox from the start. If anyone has any other career mode mechanisms or recommendations please share as I really feel this is the one place KSP missed the mark.
  13. So, what's the coolest thing you have done so far in Kerbal Space Program?
  14. So, what is your favorite ksp challenge that you have done (if any)? One of my favorites would be the Kerpollo Science Career in 9 Parts Challenge because of how it was an interesting idea for a challenge and I like doing challenges. What about you?
  15. I think kerbal space program 2 looks stunning. I like the idea of interstellar travel and colonization, but I am worried that we can't keep the freedom ksp 1 had. I would suggest some mandatory things to stay, like the nav ball and all the keyboard controls. Then I would suggest a Gameplay mechanic so we ca place Colonies ANYWHERE. First : launch a factory to the place you want to colonize maybe a beautiful hill or something like that. Second build construction rovers. Third plan your colony, like the way you build bases in subnautica. You can place without you materials but it will only be a hologram. Fourth collect resources, get them to the factory and the let it construct the colony. I would suggest that the modules are built instantly, leaving no room for any time delays that could add micro transactions. I only want to buy the base game and the maybe 2 or 3 dlc's but NO MICROTRANSACTIONS It would really hurt the game. But other than that I am SO EXCITED pls keep up you work!
  16. So, what new planets do you think will be in KSP 2? We know there is already the stock system, but it seems there will be even more planets and possibly stars to visit since it seems there will be interstellar travel in the game. I hope there will be a ringed planet system you can visit in some distant system away from kerbol, but what about you?
  17. So, what do you think the big feature of the upcoming KSP 1.8 update will be? 1.6 was a delta-v calculator and delta-v showing up in staging, 1.7 was a better and more precise manuever making system, called Room to Maneuver. So, what do you think 1.8 will be?
  18. So, what should I make a collab on? I had an idea of doing a collab on solar system exploration, in which every person would work together in a new stock sandbox (or maybe career) save to send missions to every planet and moon in the kerbol system. I'm sure if that would be a good idea for a collab though, so that's why I am asking.
  19. So its been out offically for 1 year. The DLC of Making History. Besides Using The DLC parts, why does almost no one use making history for making missions now? Is it not good enough, or does it have too many problems?
  20. I don't know why but it looks dead
  21. Would it be possible to make a mission in making history based on the Apollo 18 movie? It would be interesting if you could... but can you?
  22. Some areas in KSP feel like they were never finished and/or could use improvements. IVAs, for instance, aren't fully usable. There aren't enough indicators to show all the needed data. Aviation is another thing that's not fully developed. Of course, KSP is focused on spaceflight, but if we already have atmospheric flight, why not expand it? Things like fly-by-wire support and airliner type contracts could really help flesh out this area of the game. So, what parts of KSP (if any) do you think are not fully developed?
  23. Using the mission builder what's your best ksp mission you have made, if any? (I have made a few myself, and currently working on another)
  24. Hello everyone! Put on your seatbelts, Kerbal Space Program 1.6: To Vee or not To Vee is here, and with it moar explosions and fun! With our 3rd major update this year, we are thrilled to continue with our goal of advancing KSP and improving our players’ game experience by delivering substantial releases. To Vee or not To Vee is filled with new features, beautiful revamps, a number of navigation tools, and a whole lot of bug fixes. We’ve also done some tuning work that includes stock craft improvements and the rebalancing and fine tuning of a number of Making History parts, particularly the engines. From the very beginning KSP has been shaped by the amazing community around it and we hope that To Vee or not To Vee serves as a testament to our appreciation of our players and our commitment to continue supporting, updating and improving our game. Let’s go through some of this update’s highlights: Delta-v per Stage and Delta-v Tool App Plan missions better and find flaws in your ship staging setup with this long requested feature that will let you visualize the Delta-v values along with a range of other technical data for each stage and the vessel overall. Plus, a Delta-v App that will allow you to see a vessels Delta-v information while you’re building it in different situations. No Kerbal will be left stranded now… or so we hope. Part revamps To Vee or not to Vee includes 20 fully revamped parts that have been optimized, re-shaped and re-textured, plus more than 40 color variants to make your craft look sleek and beautiful! Navigation Icons to Launch Sites A quality of life feature that will help stray pilots find their way back to any Launch Site or Runway. From the Map View players will now be able to activate navigation waypoints to get direction towards the KSC or any other launch sites. Helmets Off! You can now remove Kerbals’ Helmets, as well as their neck rings! But be careful, there is a reason why Astronauts wear Helmets for space travel… Click here to see an animated gif showcasing this feature. And much more! To learn more you can read the full Changelog here: =================================== v1.6.0 ============================================================ 1.6 Changelog - BaseGame ONLY (see below for MH changelog) +++ Improvements * DeltaV Readouts added to Stage Icons/Groups as well as DeltaV App. DeltaV available in Editor (VAB/SPH) and Flight scenes as well as a more detailed Debug menu option. * Stock and mobile launch sites are now navigable in all game modes. * Performance improvements for DV calculations that are used by Burn Indicator. * Recommended UI Scale for the current resolution is now checked on the Settings Screen, working the same as the mini settings where a not recommended UI scale will turn the text red. * Performance improvements for craft browser menus. * Craft browser menus now check for craft compatibility. * Added keyboard arrows navigation for main dialogs and menus. Highlight items with the directional arrows, Accept with the Enter and Space keys, and Cancel is Escape key. * Generate reflections of the environment to be displayed on shiny parts. * Improved part search in the editors to give more relevant results with short search terms. * Adjusted shadows from The Sun to be more precise. * Add new idle animations when the kerbal is standing in the ground. * The command parts now have an option to change their 'forward' direction in the PAW. * Kerbals helmet and neck ring can now be removed by right clicking the Kerbal while on EVA if it’s in a breathable atmosphere. * Automatic warp to next maneuver node now takes the player to a margin before the start burn time rather than the node itself. Said margin can now be overridden from the default 1 minute via GameSettings.WARP_TO_MANNODE_MARGIN. * Allow wheel spring and damper advanced tweakables to be set up to a value of 3. +++ Localization * Localize the phrase “Advanced Message App:” in the Mini-Settings dialog. * Some Community feedback for localization strings applied. +++ Parts Updated Parts (reskinned): * Mk2 Lander Can * 48-7S Spark * RE-L10 Poodle * LV-909 Terrier * FL-A10 * FL-A5 * ADTP-2-3 * Rockomax Brand Adapter * Rockomax Brand Adapter 02 * TVR-200 Stack Bi-Coupler * TVR-1180C MK1 Stack Tri-Coupler * TVR-2160C Mk2 Stack Quad-Coupler * TVR-200L Stack Bi-Adapter * TVR-300L Stack Tri-Adapter * TVR-400L Stack Quad-Adapter * Small Nose Cone * Aerodynamic Nose Cone * Advanced Nose Cone - Type B * Advanced Nose Cone - Type A * Protective Rocket Nose Cone MK7 Color Variants: * Mk2 Lander Can (New “Lander” and “Rover” color variants) * 48-7S Spark (New “Shroud”, “Truss Mount” and “Bare” color variants) * LV-909 Terrier (New “Shroud”, “Truss Mount” and “Bare” color variants) * FL-A10 (New “White” and “Orange” color variants) * FL-A5 (New “White” and “Orange” color variants) * ADTP-2-3 (New “White”, “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * Rockomax Brand Adapter (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * Rockomax Brand Adapter 02 (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * TVR-200 Stack Bi-Coupler (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * TVR-1180C MK1 Stack Tri-Coupler (New “White”, “Dark” and “Orange” color variants) * TVR-2160C Mk2 Stack Quad-Coupler (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * TVR-200L Stack Bi-Adapter (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * TVR-300L Stack Tri-Adapter (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * TVR-400L Stack Quad-Adapter (New “Black and White” and “Orange” color variants) * Aerodynamic Nose Cone (New “Black and White”, “Dark” and “White” color variants) * Advanced Nose Cone - Type B (New “Black and White” and “White” and “Orange” color variants) * Advanced Nose Cone - Type A (New “Black and White” and “White” and “Orange” color variants) * Protective Rocket Nose Cone MK7 (New “Black and White”, “Orange” and “White” color variants) Other Part changes: * Fixed the normals maps on the Stayputnik. * Fixed the normals maps on the Okto. * Fixed the visible texture seams on the Rockomax X series fuel tanks orange variant. +++ Bugfixes * Fix SAS on all probes in Sandbox and Science game modes to operate as per their config files. Game setting allows player to toggle SAS functionality on probes in these game modes. * Fix handling of docking ports and multiple nuclear or ion engines for DV calculation used in Burn Indicator. * Fix handling of stages with multiple engines and asparagus staging for DV calculation used in Burn Indicator. * Fix flashing Burn Indicator and display of DV when vessel are prelaunch. * Fix Vernor Engines now correctly use Liquid Fuel and Oxidizer on the Engineering report. * Fix all engines now say "Engine stops under: xx%", instead of "Flameout under: xx%" on their part extended info tooltips. * Fix Tutorials unable to proceed when the player has a part selected (attached to the mouse) in the editor scenes (VAB/SPH). * Fix fuel being drained from tanks when fuel availability icon is double-clicked. * Fix partially executed maneuver nodes gets the closest approach to the same orbit parameters. * Fix double quotes in stock craft descriptions. * Fix Contract/Parameters not updating for vessel ownership (such as rescue kerbal) when not in flight mode. * Fix Drills can operate and generate ore only when deployed and proper surface contact. * Fix Kerbal IVA crew mass calculation on crewable parts where user/mods have changed IVA crew mass to be > 0 (the default). * Kerbal IVA crew mass now reported in DV and Engineers report mass totals in editor (VAB/SPH). * Fix TVR-300, TVR-300L, Moving parts in symmetry works correctly. * Removed unnecessary horizontal slider in the mini settings UI. * Fix Summary window no longer appears empty when recovering a vessel with the UI scale at more than 150%, when in a non recommended UI Scale range. * Fix flickering of fairings in editor scene. * Further tweaked the sun behavior to stop it from dimming unnecessarily in the Jool Airbreak scenario. * Fix Intermediate Construction tutorial does not require confirmation when loading the required vessel. * Fix NRE is no longer generated when rockets crash on the Launchpad. * Fixed a shader issue that caused the Mk16 parachute to become transparent when within Aero FX. * Fix cost of fairings shells now is included with initial vessel load. * Landing gear LY-01, LY-05, LY-10, LY-35, LY-60 and LY-99 can no longer be the first part when you are building a ship. * Fix last part of interstage fairings not having correct variant applied when vessel is loaded. * Assigned the correct category to the cfg of all engines. * Limited the amount of undo/redo steps in the editors to prevent excessive use of memory while building large, complex vehicles. The amount of steps can be adjusted via GameSettings.EDITOR_UNDO_REDO_LIMIT * Fix Vessel without name cannot be saved in the editor and no longer generates an error. * Fix part hover highlighting no longers shows from inside IVA or Internal camera. * Fix inverted interstage fairings not being able to activate when a decoupler below them has activated. * Fix KSC building upgrade text padding on KSC Building marker UI for scroll bars. * Fix potential NRE when completing an orbital survey. * Fix Words no longer duplicate on contracts. * Fix Burn Bar and Orbit stays the same when a new target is selected. * Fix An NRE is no longer generated when trying to select the last save game in the save game menu after deleting previous saves. +++ Mods * Call OnWillBeCopied and OnWasCopied for children parts when their parent is copied in the editor scene. * Variants can now disable animations and events. * Alternative control point orientations can be configured on ModuleCommand. * Kerbal Helmet check values are controllable via cfg using stock rules or an extra step by overriding code methods: CanSafelyRemoveHelmet, WillDieWithoutHelmet, CanEVAWithoutHelmet * Kerbals now EVA with a set initial temperature equal to “room temperature” - I mean they were inside with no helmets - can be reverted via GameSettings.EVA_INHERIT_PART_TEMPERATURE +++Miscellaneous * Personal parachute kerbal unlock level requirement is accessible for modders in the traits.cfg file and the requirements have been updated to: 0xp for pilots, and 1 xp point for Engineers and Scientists. * Stock craft have been revised so that they no longer use deprecated parts. The revised vessels are: Aeroequus , ComSat LX , Dynawing , GDLV3 , Ion-Powered Space Probe , Jumping Flea , Kerbal 1 , Kerbal 1.5 , Kerbal 2 , Kerbal X , Learstar A1 , Orbiter 1A , Orbiter One , PT Series Munsplorer , Rover + Skycrane , Science Jr , Slim Shuttle , Space Station Core , Super-Heavy Lander , Two-Stage Lander , Z-MAP Satellite Launch Kit ,Rocket-power VTOL , Satellite Launcher , Stratolauncher. * Kerbals who board a command seat will make the command seat the vessel reference point only when no other part has control of the vessel. * The flight camera near clip pane is automatically adjusted when in IVA to correctly display external visuals. 1.6 Changelog - Making History DLC ONLY +++ Improvements * Open mission menus now check for craft file compatibility. +++ Localization +++ Parts * The following LFO engines were rebalanced : Wolfhound, Cheetah, Kodiak, Mastodon, Cub, Skiff, Bobcat. * The following Engine Thrust Plates were rebalanced: EP-25, EP-37, EP-50 * The following Structural Tubes were rebalanced: T-25, T-37, T-50 +++ Bugfixes * Removed the text “Not played yet” from the tutorial missions buttons in play missions dialog. * Fix to remove the add button in the Modify Score and Change Score nodes if there are no more options left. * Fix Kerbals now appear swimming in the correct position on the water when spawning. * Fix undo function will no longer ignore copied nodes in mission builder. * Fix handling of engine plates and self-decoupling parts for DV calculation used in Burn Indicator. * Fix NRE in Mission builder : Changing the "Location" settings in the "Spawn Vessel" node with the described procedure does not generate an NRE. * Fix Localization description of craft Valkshod 2 on trouble in the Void mission. * Fix Localization name and description of craft Soy-Ooze 10 on Sally-Hut 1 mission. * Fix Localization name and description of craft SWM-94 Communications Satellite on Trouble in the void mission. * Fix Copying Spawn vessel nodes with specific crew creates nodes without crew so they are not cloned. +++ Missions +++Miscellaneous Kerbal Space Program 1.6: To Vee or not To Vee is now available on Steam and will soon be available on GOG and other third party resellers. You will also be able to download it from the KSP Store if you already own the game. As with every release this thread will be used to bundle all general discussion about the new version so that the forums can continue to actively host threads on other topics as well. CLICK HERE for the official release announcement for Kerbal Space Program 1.6: To Vee or not To Vee. Happy launchings!