Your Suggestion for Smallest Change Causing Greatest Improvement

[scy]

Settings.

Make it possible to turn music on/off from anywhere in the game.

Make it possible to set key bindings from anywhere in the game.

Get rid of the "docking mode" controls (at least I don't see any point in it).

Better default keys. E.g. make W turn "up" and D "down" for rockets (I tested this out a while back and couldn't believe how much more intuitive it was; it's even okay for planes). And some better bindings for translational motion  e.g. I use J/L I/K ;/P for left/right forward/backwards up/down.

[xtoro]

Mine is simple. Have the stupid navball be visible by default in map view! This is especially annoying when I'm manually flying, and before takeoff, I forget to switch to map view and make it visible. So during flight, as I'm actively controlling the craft, I switch to map view to see my orbit path, and I lose control of the ship because the navball isn't showing... Then by the time I do my panic clicking to show it, I'm pointing straight down at the planet...

[Wallygator]

Single Click a previously placed part in the VAB pops up a dialogue for choosing radial or linear translation. Double click deletes part. Click and hold to remove part and drag to new location (maybe harv's gizmos will address this?)

[Locob]

box selection.

sometimes it is so hard select a distant craft, or one on the surface.

[bv1]

Mine is simple. Have the stupid navball be visible by default in map view! This is especially annoying when I'm manually flying, and before takeoff, I forget to switch to map view and make it visible. So during flight, as I'm actively controlling the craft, I switch to map view to see my orbit path, and I lose control of the ship because the navball isn't showing... Then by the time I do my panic clicking to show it, I'm pointing straight down at the planet...

I heard somewhere that Squad did this because they don't want people to be flying by the map view so much. Well, what do they expect? That's how they teach in the tutorial!

[Slam_Jones]

An "undo" button in the VAB and SPH.

I hate putting something into subassembly, or trying to click a new part, and having half the ship come off, requiring me to re-orient it, snap it back in place, repair connections, etc. etc.

[Laie]

An "undo" button in the VAB and SPH.

I hate putting something into subassembly, or trying to click a new part, and having half the ship come off, requiring me to re-orient it, snap it back in place, repair connections, etc. etc.

The next time that happens, try CTRL-Z. You'll be amazed.

[Twinkee]

In VAB / SPH : Mouse wheel scroll between pages when hovering cursor over parts list

[Master Tao]

Directional stack attach nodes so that you can only attach parts like decouplers to things above the top node or below the bottom node. This would end the decoupler-placement dance.

[kujuman]

"rewrite entirely KSP from C# to C++ for 64bits and multi-threading support"

I'll show myself out.

As well you should. KSP is already multi-threaded. I'm taking bets on if this myth will die before/after the heat death of the universe.

More seriously, I'm not sure if I've already responded, but having CoT, CoM, and CoL indicators in flight would be invaluable for debugging shuttles. Additionally, I'd love a gimbal range indicator.

Behold my mighty MS Paintâ„¢ mockup!

[Wanderfound]

I didn't include my one suggestion when I started the thread, since I want the thread to belong to the community. Now that it got going, though, here's mine:

Change: Make some career contracts require landing multiple kerbals at once.

Why: Right now, there is no incentive in career mode to send more than 1 kerbal when completing exploration contracts. This means that there is no incentive to use the Mk1-2 pod or Mk2 lander; these heavy parts necessitate larger, more complex, and more expensive rockets. Requiring landing multiple kerbals at once would nudge the player into designing and flying with the larger parts.

That one is already on the way, thanks to the soon-to-be-stock Fine Print mod.

[bv1]

That one is already on the way, thanks to the soon-to-be-stock Fine Print mod.

Oh really now? Awesome. I haven't downloaded Fine Print yet to see what kind of changes are on the way. I'll be happy so long as there is some real incentive to use the larger capsule in stock career mode.

Well, I guess that means that I need to pick a new suggestion!

Change: Make the staging screen altimeter show altitude above terrain when in surface mode.

Why: Facilitates landing, especially for people whose computers are too crappy to render shadows.

I think that this is one of the easiest changes they could make. I'd imagine that someone could bang out the code in under an hour.

[Wanderfound]

Oh really now? Awesome. I haven't downloaded Fine Print yet to see what kind of changes are on the way. I'll be happy so long as there is some real incentive to use the larger capsule in stock career mode.

Once you get into it, Fine Print will be giving you contracts to set up a 10 Kerbal plus Laboratory base on an E-class asteroid. I don't think you'll have any trouble finding a use for the bigger rockets.

[Twinkee]

An additional parts "category" for fuel tanks.

[Alshain]

An additional parts "category" for fuel tanks.

That has been announced for 0.90.

I already suggested mine earlier, but a simple addition would be to make a targetable "home" marker for KSC so you can get the general direction when flying planes or when attempting to land from orbit without having to set your own flag.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Alshain

[bounding star]

Basic functionality of deadly re-entry

This will give people an incentive to not use pancake landers and instead use things that resemble real life landers

[herbal space program]

Instantaneous Tank-to-tank fuel transfers! I know that better fuel management options in general might be too much to ask for, but the way it's implemented now is just appallingly slow, especially if you start getting into high part counts. I've put a big, complex Jool 5 mothership in LKO and I'm trying to refuel it now, and at the low frame rate of this 2,000-part monster it just takes FOREVER to transfer the fuel over. I spent 2 hours on there this morning and got less than half of the fuel tanks I need to fill topped up. And the RCS? Fugeddaboudit! I suppose the devs may feel this is cheatsy somehow, but I'd be OK with it if you have to do it through the physics engine when you're under acceleration. The way it is now, the tedium of doing something like what I'm doing is just excessive.

[Red Iron Crown]

Instantaneous Tank-to-tank fuel transfers! I know that better fuel management options in general might be too much to ask for, but the way it's implemented now is just appallingly slow, especially if you start getting into high part counts. I've put a big, complex Jool 5 mothership in LKO and I'm trying to refuel it now, and at the low frame rate of this 2,000-part monster it just takes FOREVER to transfer the fuel over. I spent 2 hours on there this morning and got less than half of the fuel tanks I need to fill topped up. And the RCS? Fugeddaboudit! I suppose the devs may feel this is cheatsy somehow, but I'd be OK with it if you have to do it through the physics engine when you're under acceleration. The way it is now, the tedium of doing something like what I'm doing is just excessive.

That's an interesting idea, I hate the tedium of fuel transfers, too. How would you handle cases where not all the fuel is meant to be transferred? Like when moving fuel around on a plane to keep the CoM in a desirable place.

[herbal space program]

That's an interesting idea, I hate the tedium of fuel transfers, too. How would you handle cases where not all the fuel is meant to be transferred? Like when moving fuel around on a plane to keep the CoM in a desirable place.

Oh, that's easy! Just turn the little indicator bars on the tanks into active sliders like they are on the tweakables, which let the user set the distribution. IOW, when you pull the slider on one tank down, the one on the other tank goes up. Better still would be if you could alt-select any number of tanks and then grab the slider on one to fill all the others, but I guess that's crazy talk.

[Red Iron Crown]

Oh, that's easy! Just turn the little indicator bars on the tanks into active sliders like they are on the tweakables, which let the user set the distribution. IOW, when you pull the slider on one tank down, the one on the other tank goes up. Better still would be if you could alt-select any number of tanks and then grab the slider on one to fill all the others, but I guess that's crazy talk.

That's....brilliant!

Honestly, I don't see the gameplay advantage of slow fuel transfers. There are very few scenarios where transfer speed matters, and those are edge cases for the most part.

[hazarada]

Remove lower sim parameters per T in physics warp. If you're computer can't handle the sim at full parameters at x speedup on y craft then the craft must be complex enough to be unusable with the warp anyways.

Also, button to toggle the use of RCS by SAS (so RCS would be used for manual movements only, not wasted by the perpetually wobbling space ship)

Edited November 22, 2014 by hazarada

[TinfoilChef]

Oh, that's easy! Just turn the little indicator bars on the tanks into active sliders like they are on the tweakables, which let the user set the distribution. IOW, when you pull the slider on one tank down, the one on the other tank goes up. Better still would be if you could alt-select any number of tanks and then grab the slider on one to fill all the others, but I guess that's crazy talk.

While I admit that Those slider bars are far better than not having them at all, I would love an option to shift+click one and enter an actual number. Sliders are far too imprecise.

[arkie87]

Default, the game should not let you time warp past a maneuver node. It should either stop a set amount of time before (1 min) or an amount of time equal to the "burn time"

[Wallygator]

When a piece of debris is terminated, it is replaced by a debris "Cloud" whereby a vessel can possibly be impacted when it is within a relative range. Debris clouds cannot be accurately tracked.

[Wallygator]

The CoX indicators in the VAB should remain radially static with respect to the camera - thereby allowing more accurate assessment of CoX placements.