Spoilers for .26!

[Franklin]

so in essence, some structure to encourage unmanned missions to bodies, then unmanned lander missions to bodies, then manned missions to bodies, in that order? I like that. It's how I play usually anyway though.

For sure. But really I'd just like a reason to visit planets more than once (or in the case of Dres, once), because we all know the planets are dead and empty and the same, so we're all just sight seeing as it is.

Corrosive atmospheres, exotic formations, raging weather, weird signals from our diagnostics, a body that's heavily magnetic? The planets need to have more life to em, which could make science fun.

[gutza1]

Wait, since they are overhauling planetary biomes, and Maxmaps said that the art team was in the middle of a giant art push in a dev blog, (this may sound crazy) so what if new planets are coming in 0.26?

[Rowsdower]

Nice, but this is probably getting locked in a few minutes.

No "in b4 da lock" here. No locks here unless the thread gets crazy or off topic. And not that you may need it, but I'm confirming that bit of info in Max's tweet. So sayeth the man, himself.

[Aethon]

I thought they did say they wouldn't add planets before "finishing" the existing ones. However, this is all from my memory, which isn't that reliable.

I agree (), this was the last official stance I heard as well, but with biomes done, what's left to call a body finished?

[gutza1]

I've noticed a more important thing, though. Squad finally noticed their aerodynamic model sucks! They started to dig into the code when they introduced the cargo-bays, and they indicated they don't like how it looks. So, maybe they'll remake it for 0.26... Imagine the hype for that! I don't expect FAR in stock, but NEAR-level aerodynamics should be done, at the very least.

I agree that FAR is too complicated (this is Kerbal Space Program, not Human Space Program), but the aerodynamics system in KSP should behave like an approximation of real life aerodynamics.

[Rowsdower]

Wait, since they are overhauling planetary biomes, and Maxmaps said that the art team was in the middle of a giant art push in a dev blog, (this may sound crazy) so what if new planets are coming in 0.26?

You'll see the fruits of their labor in 0.26, but no, it's not planets.

[Franklin]

I agree that FAR is too complicated (this is Kerbal Space Program, not Human Space Program), but the aerodynamics system in KSP should behave like an approximation of real life aerodynamics.

I'd argue few here could do the Pepsi challenge between FAR and NEAR without going into the aerodynamic analysis tool in the VAB, which most who use FAR never touch.

NEAR still has aerodynamic dis-assembly, although it's far more forgiving than FAR's.

[Alshain]

NEAR style aerodynamics would be perfect and then mods, presumably a reduced version of FAR, could add the rest of the difficulty. I just don't think it's going to happen after the recent Rowsdower comments that mentioned it might happen after scope completion. This is getting a little off topic though.

Back to the topic. For the biomes, I hope this gives at least a little more rover purpose. Rovers seem to excel on places like Duna, but there's not a lot of reason to take them there.

[Sirrobert]

I've noticed a more important thing, though. Squad finally noticed their aerodynamic model sucks! They started to dig into the code when they introduced the cargobays, and they indicated they don't like how it looks. So, maybe they'll remake it for 0.26... Imagine the hype for that! I don't expect FAR in stock, but NEAR-level aerodynamics should be done, at the very least.

Nah, they already knew. It was just never a priority

[regex]

So, maybe they'll remake it for 0.26... Imagine the hype for that! I don't expect FAR in stock, but NEAR-level aerodynamics should be done, at the very least.

It'll be 0.27 at the earliest and I also agree that a NEAR equivalent would be just fine for stock.

[MisterFister]

First of all, why the haterade on FAR? I have always considered it a must-have mod, as to several YouTubers. I'm not judging, I'm legit curious what the opposing view is.

And with respect to biomes, I won't deny that this IS cool, but I've been using CustomBiomes at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/66256-0-24-2-Custom-Biomes-1-6-5-27-Jul for a while now. That said, I do admit that there's not much need to expand beyond Kerbin/Mun/Minmus right now, unless you play a modded tech tree (BTSM, KSPI, etc.)

[Sandworm]

Squad is becoming more and more predictable, more and more like a standard software house. That isn't a bad thing. It's progress towards a more structured approach to development.

More art = new look = new youtube vids = christmas sales drive.

[SkyRender]

I for one am glad to hear that biomes are coming to the other bodies in the game. It's pretty disheartening to go all the way out to another world and only be able to get one set of science results from the entire planet/moon.

[Engineer of Stuff]

What?! .25 isn't even out yet!

[Fiddlestyx]

It says "expect" biomes on all bodies. Not confirmed.

[Aethon]

after the recent Rowsdower comments that mentioned it might happen after scope completion. This is getting a little off topic though.

Yikes. I'd like to throw a bucket of water towards this ubiquitous fire we keep burning around here lately. I originally posted this in the .25 Discussion thread but I think it was overlooked.

Max said recently:

"Hey now, let's not go nuts yet. As I tweeted afterwards, it's not something for 0.25, but it's something for the future.

If you want an official stance on aerodynamics; We know they need work, however for the alpha stage we feel like they are sufficient. Not great, just sufficient. Once we actually reach feature complete, then we'll absolutely look into them, see what we can and should fix to get them to a proper standard. For now, the team has to work on getting features that don't exist to actually exist, before we get to getting to improve things that currently exist but aren't great.

Tl;dr: We know aero isn't great. We'll get to it. Just not in 0.25."

Emphasis is mine.

http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceP...ents_in_stock/

[Franklin]

I both love and hate how we always come back to an aero overhaul no matter what the topic is. We could be talking about literally anything and it'd drift back to aerodynamics.

[Wanderfound]

First of all, why the haterade on FAR? I have always considered it a must-have mod, as to several YouTubers. I'm not judging, I'm legit curious what the opposing view is.

And with respect to biomes, I won't deny that this IS cool, but I've been using CustomBiomes at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/66256-0-24-2-Custom-Biomes-1-6-5-27-Jul for a while now. That said, I do admit that there's not much need to expand beyond Kerbin/Mun/Minmus right now, unless you play a modded tech tree (BTSM, KSPI, etc.)

A lot of the non-FAR players seem to have a rather exaggerated view of FAR's complexity and difficulty. I suspect that this is often due to installing it once, launching a plane designed for stock (i.e. awful aerodynamic design), doing something silly with it (e.g. AoA 0° -> 45° in a fraction of a second) and crashing.

(enough of that, though; way off topic)

As they approach scope completion, more and more of the updates are likely to be about integrating equivalents of the most popular mods. SP+ and Enhanced Navball this time; Custom Biomes and who-knows-what next time.

The opportunity to put my Gamedata folder on a diet is one of the things I most look forwards to with each coming update.

[lincourtl]

I both love and hate how we always come back to an aero overhaul no matter what the topic is. We could be talking about literally anything and it'd drift back to aerodynamics.

Well, it's either that, or whether suicide burns are more fuel efficient than constant altitude descents, and the evergreen not-really-a-gravity turn discussions. That's the problem with this game. There's so little to fight about. ;-)

[sal_vager]

Lets keep to the topic of 0.26 please guys, all we know so far is that there will be more biomes, aero can and has been discussed elsewhere

[FleetAdmiralJ]

If they allow science to be used as a currency for other things that would greatly help. One of the original designs that we have yet to see is exchangeable currencies. Having more science just means you can use it to power your entire program.

My impression with the admin building is that exchangeable currencies is what they had planned on doing, and found it didn't work well, so that's why they're doing what they're doing now. So I'm not sure I would expect direct currency-for-currency exchange now. But I guess we'll see.

I thought they did say they wouldn't add planets before "finishing" the existing ones. However, this is all from my memory, which isn't that reliable.

One thing I did thing of is that biomes seemed to be one of the things they wouldn't really do until the game was close to scope completion, so maybe that's a sign that it's getting there or will be there as of 0.26 and we'll see more "filling in" in the future. Who knows, though.

I've noticed a more important thing, though. Squad finally noticed their aerodynamic model sucks! They started to dig into the code when they introduced the cargobays, and they indicated they don't like how it looks. So, maybe they'll remake it for 0.26... Imagine the hype for that! I don't expect FAR in stock, but NEAR-level aerodynamics should be done, at the very least.

Well, on Squadcast a while ago MaxMaps basically admitted as much. He suggested that maybe something like NEAR would be a good compromise, but it would be something they would have to look at closely because they didn't want to make the game to difficult for new users who may just recklessly build whatever rocket and hit go (which things like NEAR and FAR may not like as much as stock)

[r_rolo1]

I only have one word about the OP issue: Finally :/ It was about time . Now can we please get stock mineable fuel resources before kingdom come ?

[regex]

My impression with the admin building is that exchangeable currencies is what they had planned on doing, and found it didn't work well, so that's why they're doing what they're doing now. So I'm not sure I would expect direct currency-for-currency exchange now. But I guess we'll see.

Well, even if they don't do that I don't think science rewards should be reduced. One of the great things about KSP is how you can direct the flow of your experience, so if I want to get all my science from Duna, or Eeloo, or where ever, I should be able to. Being able to unlock the entire tech tree from within Kerbin SOI is not a balancing problem, it's a personal problem for people to overcome. It also makes it easier on new players to progress within the game, which I think is a fantastic thing.

[Franklin]

it would be something they would have to look at closely because they didn't want to make the game to difficult for new users who may just recklessly build whatever rocket and hit go (which things like NEAR and FAR may not like as much as stock)

Watching your garbage tower take off like a dog strapped to a vacuum is half the fun of KSP. I think kids would enjoy realizing not everything will fly more than we give them credit.

[Scotius]

I have a hunch that "big art project" will be about Kerbals Girl Kerbals, more detailed models, improved faces and expressions, new spacesuits. Maybe even reworked IVAs?