3Dave

Yes, the mod community for this game is awesome. Keep up the awesome job guys!

Yup, Bethesda had Valve remove the paid mods and refund all those who purchased. But the fight has more or less destroyed the Skyrim modding community for the near future, and its spilled over and created tension in other modding communities like this game. I hope we can all take the lessons learned by Bethesda to heart and move forward to find a fair and equitable way to compensate quality mod creators for their hard work while still preserving the fun, open, and community driven nature of PC game modding in general

this mod usually takes a day or 2 to update. unless they have been actively working on it with an early test 1.0 client like some of the other mods. =)

Noticed this too, luckily i held it steady long enough for the main burn to be over before i lost it and it flipped. perhaps a CoG issue with the pods in the new aero model?

3 Cheers for Squad!

For those of you who have it on steam, go to your downloads tab and manually update. 1.0 is LIVE!

Not sure i understand where your coming from with these feelings. Up until a few days ago the thought of selling mods would not have crossed any of our minds. So why do you suddenly feel like rage quitting? Its not like you have been fighting for the right to sell mods for 2 years and are burnt out from the struggle. this is literally a 3 day old debate. The skills you have developed while creating mods are very valuable. You can get a job with a small indie game developer, even if its just a revenue share payment model. or you can do what i did, and start selling assets on contract (if your artistically inclined). Its best not to focus on what you have already done and demand payment where none was originally expected, but find out how to leverage your current skills into a pay check. Just calm down and dont worry about what people say about modding in general. This is still a very raw topic based on a totally different game/mod community and people are throwing around emotions instead of thinking through the issue. I was guilty of this at first as well but i have sense moderated my thinking a little.

I think the main issue here is that you are comparing mods to actual stand alone software products. Your coming from the angle of a regular developer, not a hobbyist making a mod script for a game on the side. I'm fairly sure that all modders have a day job, since it would be impossible to make a living off of mods given the current prohibition on selling them/donation only. For some they may be amateur/indie game developers wanting to make something to showcase their skills, or they could be professional software developers like yourself who just want to see what they can do with their favorite game on the side as a personal project. If you look at things without your business goggles on, it becomes clearer. I have put myself in an industry that depends on selling digital assets in the form of 3D models to game developers and animation producers, so i understand where your coming from. But I also have created mods before for other games, and im not sure if im just strange, but i never looked at mods as a source of income. To me they are a source of fun and challenge without any external requirements or expectations. Would it be nice if we could sell mods? of course it would, it might give me incentive to create some parts packs for KSP using my considerable skill. will the lack of ability to profit from mods STOP me from making a mod if i was so inclined? No, it would not. The only thing stopping me is lack of need. The existing parts packs cover pretty much anything i can think of/want to see.

Slightly off topic. But this is exactly why I shifted my entire workflow to open source software (3D artist, I mainly use: GIMP/Blender). When Adobe started shifting toward their subscription based model I said NOPE. Ive never agreed with autodesk's EXTREMELY restrictive licensing on Max/Maya, and the assets created with them, at any point, so I was a VERY early adopter of blender. But I was a Photoshop user and license owner. They lost a long term customer with their excessive grasping for more and more money for not much more product. And yes, I donate to the projects of both blender and GIMP, because I dont believe in freeloading if I'm using the product to make money.

Well, of course they will need to examine the mod beforehand. if the mod is paid, it technically becomes DLC for their game, and represents their game. But the FULL burden of the decision should not rest on the single party of the developer. As for the reasonable price issue. Mods are what keep games alive LONG past their expiration date. Look at skyrim, I still play that game, because of mods, i can completely change the game and greatly enhance replayability. If i had to spend 20-30 bucks each time i did that, i would not do it NEARLY as often, or at all. however, 99 cents or 2 bucks ect, would seem a reasonable price to pay for *SOME* mods, if they change quite a bit. The danger with KSP is that its been in early access for 2 years already. If suddenly all the main mods people use to enhance the game and provide that replayability factor were to go on a pay to play format, it would seriously hurt the games future success. As most of the people that will be interested in the game have already bought into the beta version, and its our word of mouth that spreads interest in the game. if we get bored and stop playing now, Squad loses a ton of free advertising and has to start from scratch building a new player base with sales and expensive advertising.

The level of division and toxicity that just discussing this topic brings out is why its a bad idea. Its akin to the government passing a tax on breathing air. its been free for all of history, the very concept of paying for it is abhorrent and would trigger a bloody revolt. of course thats not accurate since games dont need mods to survive, but people need air to survive. just a little bit of exaggeration =). I might have come off a little too negative in my earlier posts. I will back track a little and say that i dont see anything inherently "bad" about "good" modders being paid a cut of profits for selling "good" mods. It might actually be beneficial to the community by encouraging modders to go the extra mile so that their product can pass the test to get on the paid shop. But thats ONLY if there is some sort of community review process for mods to be considered for payment. If it ends up as an app store type post-and-profit type deal where anyone can upload anything and sell it. Then it will get very ugly very fast. I propose that any such shop be operated by Squad themselves. To keep the profit share more fair. no 3rd parties (valve) involved taking a cut just for hosting. And it should feature community review for the paid section where the community can download the mod, try it out, then answer a few simple questions, such as "does this mod deserve to be paid for?" "how much would you pay for this mod?" etc. and of course, put a reasonable cap on prices, so we cant end up with $99 horse testicles.

The OEM buys tires from the tire factory to start with, so there goes your analogy. and wheel sizes are standardized, think of them like the programming language. You could have brought up aftermarket car parts, to be more accurate. but w/e. As long as the developer gets a cut, its fine. My fear is that it will lead to stagnation in the variety of mods being produced. Once it becomes a "for profit" thing, non-profitable mods will be abandoned in favor of what ever sells. Thats simple economics. Of course some mod makers will stay true to their roots and not want to complicate things dealing with paying royalites to every other mod producer whos code they used etc. So i guess its just wait and see if this is really the end of PC gaming as we know it or not.

Yes, dumped on the market the same as worthless mods will be dumped on the market just to cash in. The issue I have with it is more or less the same as fanfiction writers trying to publish their "work". yes, its creative, and yes, its difficult. but no where NEAR as difficult as creating the base product. All a mod is, is an extra script/model using the established accessible interfaces of the parent program. Its basically game development practice. If you want to get paid for it, grab unity or cryengine and start creating your own new product.

Lets hope Squad doesn't announce support for paid mods. Keen Software House (space engineers) recently just mentioned that they support the idea of modders being paid for their work. and the ratings on Space Engineers is already tanking on steam. Their forums are filling up with anti-paid mod rants. GabeN has forgotten the root of some of valves most valuable titles. Counterstrike and Team Fortress started as mods for halflife 1 multiplayer deathmatch mode. and grew into standalone titles of their own right. They would have never gotten off the ground if behind a pay wall, discouraging the main population of gamers from checking them out. I think the key to all of this is that mods are something people make for fun, which makes them unique and maintains variety in the mod community. when you introduce money into the equation, then the competition and trend following gets started, and pretty soon you boil down to 2-3 major mods, that do the same things, with slightly different packages, as everyone else has either quit the game because they cant make any money from it. or they just put out little piddly stuff thats not even worth the time it took to make it. I have seen this in action in the browser game market. and its a very ugly trend. infesting web portals with what ever type of game is popular that month. We do not want this in the mod community at all. If your a modder, and you have suddenly decided that you deserve to be paid for what you have been doing for fun for all these years. then i present to you the green eyed monster. prepare to lose your soul and hate your former love with a passion, and probably quit before too long.

So sad this mod doesn't work at all in .25 =(. Or did the R/T/G keys get changed? I see no way to edit the wings. Oh well, back to 1000+ part spaceplanes with strutted together wing parts =(

How about your center of lift? try attaching a wing in, 2x symmetry, to the side of the cargo bay and see if your CoL is offset to the right. I just want someone to confirm if it is or isnt related to B9 or if its something else causing the issue.

I tried searching the thread to see if anyone had brought it up yet, im sure someone has, but search failed me and its 4 AM, so here goes: Yes, i am running FAR! Bug #1: the S2 narrow to wide-body adapter with air scoops simply acts as a major drag source and provides no intake air, planes cant even get past 50-60 m/s on the runway with it included. Bug #2: Most of the S2 wide-body parts have their CoL WAY off to the right if you try to attach wings to the sides instead of the very bottom. Ferram said it was most likely a collider issue with the models in his FAR thread. Again, I apologize if this has already been brought up by someone. I just thought i would err on the side of caution and speak up in case it hasn't! B9 + FAR + PWings = the only way to play the game as far as im concerned. i need you guys at your best!

This same bug has been driving me insane for the better part of the last 5 hours. I think more insane because no one seems to acknowledge it instead offering advice like "unattach the wing and reattach it." Which i guess worked for them, but not for me! haha! Anyway, whats happening to me is probably happening to you but you don't notice it. go to the SPH, load the plane design that rolls out of control. and turn on the center of lift and the center of mass display balls. 99% sure you will see your center of lift off center to the right a little bit. Ive done some experimenting with different parts, and i have found that it appears to be caused by, at least in my case, the B9 widebody 8m cargo bay. as i can disassemble the plane, remove the cargo bay, add in a regular tank piece, put everything back together, and the CoL is down the center. Can you let us know what your configuration looks like? specifically which part the wing is "attached" to. It might help in determining if this is a procedural wing or a B9 bug. however, B9 is a virtual requirement for any serious space-plane enthusiast, as well as Pwings, so id say its a very important bug no matter what the root source turns out to be! edit: upon further testing, i believe this may be a B9 bug with the CoL or the side attachment node calculations for the S2 widebody cargobay pieces. My CoL is offset by a lot to the right when i try to attach the P Wings to the side, but when i attach on the very bottom, there is no issue, CoL is down the middle. when attaching a regular wing section to the side, the CoL is offset as well. Can anyone test these three configurations and see if we can eliminate P-wings as the cause?

I may be late to the party. but to my knowledge only the very earliest real space craft were handled with manual controls. and the launch stage has always been automated, due to the fact that things are happening so fast and have to be so precice that no human could fly a rocket manually. IMO, not having atleast ascent autopilot in the stock game is realism breaking for the sake of making something needlessly complicated. spacecraft are some of the most advanced machines ever built. i dont understand why people feel its cheating to have computer controls when ALL real spacecraft have computer controls. Mechjeb already has limitations that mean you need to do many things manually if you have thin fuel margins. orbital rendezvous for instance. almost every time, MJ wants to burn 300 or so delta v to establish a higher orbit to let the target catch up before setting up the transfer node. flying this yourself can save you that 300 dV. you also cant trust the autowarp, especially for interplanetary transfers. ive had MJ crash more rockets into duna due to failing to come out of warp on time than i care to mention. also, on the topic of interplanetary transfers. MJ wastes more dV on those by demanding that you match planes perfectly before setting the transfer node. you can get a good plain by making small adjustments in mid transet that you will have to make anyway, instead of matching plains from the start. long story short: MJ makes the game closer to reality by offering computer automation, but there is still good reason not to use it for everything if you value fuel efficiency.

Also depends on if you plan to use mechjeb to automate some of the mundane tasks for you like orbital rendezvous. sure its fun the first few times, but once you know what your doing, it gets to be a chore real fast. plus no real rockets are flown stick and rudder, ever. For this reason i put my stations at around the 300km mark to cut down on extra transfer maneuvers. the extra delta v needed to reach the higher orbit is negligible unless your heavy lift upper stage/tug is extremely inefficient. you also get a very nice view at higher altitudes.

Hi everyone, first post. Cant seem to find a newbie modder posting area so I'll ask this here. Im currently working on a 4 way engine mount for spaceplanes loosely based on the air intake with engine mount from the B9 pack (except with integrated fuel tank etc. The problem im having is best illustrated by this picture: Having trouble finding any info on the web of how to solve this particular problem and get both parts to face the correct way. Just fyi, this is in SPH 2x symmetry in surface attachment mode. Anyone have any thoughts? im sure its something im missing in the CFG. hopefully not in the model itself because getting all that right took a good minute. haha. Thanks in advance for any advice!