KerbalKon Announcements

[DominusNovus]

Coming back to this, is it safe to assume that there hasn't been any official word on any of the concerns? I hate it when developers are reclusive...

[JumpsterG]

Coming back to this, is it safe to assume that there hasn't been any official word on any of the concerns? I hate it when developers are reclusive...

It's not so bad. They don't take a hard stance on what will and wont be implemented, since KSP is still undergoing heavy design work. Here's some responses from Felipe (Harvester) himself on the recent changes:

Discussing Resources vs Mining and what was scrapped

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/61997-Article-KerbalKon-Announcements?p=844430#post844430

Discussing the reveal of multiplayer

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/61997-Article-KerbalKon-Announcements?p=844474#post844474

On another thread, he responds to why EVA fuel is not the same as monoprop:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/62465-EVA-Propellent?p=853691#post853691

And as of last Tuesday, what the team is currently working on:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/66082-Devnote-Tuesdays-The-Back-on-Track-Edition

We should get another Devnote Tuesdays update today or early tomorrow with more information on what they've been up to. These are posted every week as stickies in the Daily Kerbal subforum:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/forums/70-The-Daily-Kerbal

The Articles section of the forum has also had some content lately, reporting on interviews the devs have done:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/

(New articles do show up on the right hand side of the main forum page but it's easy to miss them or forget they're there)

If you already know of all these sources, sorry for the spam!

[DominusNovus]

But nothing new about mining, one way or the other, which is what I was asking about.

[csanders]

As for the excuse that forgetting a part on your rocket isn't fun, that argument falls flat on several levels. Firstly, pretty much everyone has some story of a forgotten parachute, or antenna, or landing gear, or batteries, or solar panels, any of which can render a mission a complete failure. That doesn't make them bad, unfun features. Secondly, if you're afraid that people won't even know that drills and such exist, that's a reason to improve the ingame documentation, not to throw out the plans for the feature. By tomorrow we'll have an R&D center here we can review science reports and whatever else von Kerman wishes to tell us. We'll have more capable part tooltips and tweakables to let us know more about the parts we're using and how they work.

Just the other day I was working on a ship, and moved some stuff around, and forgot to re-add the parachutes. Landing back on Kerbin without them, using only thrust, was a challenge and fun in its own right.

It's a feature not a bug, or something.

[JumpsterG]

But nothing new about mining, one way or the other, which is what I was asking about.

Gotcha. Didn't mean to patronize, just wasn't sure which concerns you meant and wanted to provide info for anyone else reading along.

Nope, nothing since the details in that first hyperlink, which is essentially: "We might still do mining, we don't really know when or how". I take that to mean they are not spending any time right now thinking about it or developing it; in lieu of other items on the To Do list.

Just conjecture, but if they decide it would benefit the contracts system, it could show up as a part of that in some way. Otherwise, I wouldn't count on hearing anything about mining until after the next round of changes (.24). It may not get revisited at all, which would be a shame by many people's opinion, but is a possibility since there are so many other things they need and want to work on also.

[Rowsdower]

But nothing new about mining, one way or the other, which is what I was asking about.

Sorry, Dominus. That question has been answered extensively through official statements and Felipe's posts linked up above. You're unlikely to hear anything newer than that.