*Aqua*

To me none of the demonstrations look realistic. 0.1 t blocks don't just fly sideways, when a 25 t ball drops on them. The sheer mass of the ball should press the blocks so hard into each other that the increased friction should prevent any great movements of them.

In mathematics not everything is easily understandable. Have a look at this formula: x = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... (infinite times) So what's the value of x? 1? 0? We can't decide. But we can still make calculations with this formula. Now look at that: 2x = x + x 2x = (1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ...) + (1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ...) 2x = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... + (1 - 1) + (1 - 1) + ... 2x = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... + 0 + 0 + ... 2x = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... 2x = x? or what about this? x - x = (1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ...) - (1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ...) x - x = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... - 1 - (-1) + (-1) - (-1) + ... x - x = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... - 1 - (-1) + (-1) - (-1) + ... (nothing changed, it's just to show the colors) x - x = 1 - (1 - (-1)) + (1 + (-1)) - (1 - (-1)) + ... x - x = 1 - 0 + 0 - 0 + ... - 1 x - x = 0? But that means x must have the value of 1. But we already know x can be 0, too! Crazy, I know! Edit: They use this formula in quantum mechanics. There the value of x is 1/2. (That's even more crazy!)

Why Tuesday? Is Monday a holiday over there?

AIES has a lot of probe stuff in it. It adds - don't know - 5 or 6 probe command modules and of course other modules to complete that. It's worth a look.

Thanks for your answer! I think I get it now. It's about exploration (and a little bit about how to pay that). Will there be some kind of plot? Or is it basically like a sandbox with all kinds of interesting stuff to explore and discover? Or a combination of both?

This game sounds interesting. But what is the goal of the player? KSP is about putting stuff into space while figuring out how to not explode all the time and run out of fuel too soon. And your game? The description remembers me of some sort of an economy game (mining ore to make money to mine more ore to make more money etc.).

Thank you for your quick answer! Didn't knew that.

How will ARM be delivered to the players? Does it come via the DLC mechanics in Steam?

Disguise is a major point in military tech. Those lances will be easily spotted. And because they are easily spotted and are a great threat they'll be the first targets of everyone. Imagine you'll spot a troop of 10 soldiers and a mech. You have a heavy maschine gun, effective against infantry, and a 'big bang' bazooka, effective against mechs. You can only strike one target. Which one will you choose? Most people will choose the mech. It's easy to spot, moves slowly* and are therefore easy to hit. * Don't expect mechs to run at 100 mph. That will never happen. Ever. If the mechs of the future are only 2-3 meters tall, then I'll reconsider how useful they are. 10 meter tall mechs are just cannon fodder.

I would just shoot a projectile with a huge amount of kinetic force. If the impact happens in the upper torso or higher up, the mech will simply fall over. It then will take time for it to stand up again. In this time at least 3 tanks or rocket infantries deploy their guns to finally destroy the mech. Just the size of a mech is a handicap. Meanwhile the Japanese... Look at the weaponary! And don't smile or you'll rip apart your surroundings! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KuPDQ8H3qM This thing does exist! Really! Costs about a small 1.3 million US$.

The claw must have some kind of joint or hinge. If not I don't know how I can line up a ship with the asteroids CoM. If I don't hit the right spot any applied forces will make the asteroid spin instead of changing its velocity. I'm curious what Squad has in mind about this.

When will Unity 5 come out?

Magic

I'm not really sure if fusion reactors are the right energy source. Can they work for hundreds or thousands of years? That's what they need to do. This is the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator. Look at how complex this thing is. If there is a malfunction somewhere you'll need months to disassemble it. I don't think this is acceptable. For interstellar travel we need something much simpler. I'm not sure what that could be.

I mean both sets. Have a look at that: I can't distinguish the chain links in the lower half. This shouldn't happen in broad daylight. Maybe dark grey or 50% grey is the color to go.

That's a good point. I believe in one or two hundred years is will be quite normal to have cyberimplants in our bodies. If it's possible to transfer a human mind into a computer we'll be almost immortal. Then traveling for a thousand years to the next star isn't a problem anymore. So I choose ion drives powered by fusion reactors. Ion drives are save. They do not tend to self-destruct on a wimp and even today they are robust enough to work for months. Continuously. Which other engine can do this? Fusion reactors needs maintenance every few years, so a ship needs several of them. They provide enough power to boost the thrust of the ion drives to reasonable levels and they seem to be safe enough - behind a lead plate. Unfortunately they are quite complicated. The more complicated things get the easier they break.

The tracks are too black. I think it will be problematic to see them in the game. It can get quite dark and even in lamp light black will be black. Remember: We perceive black because we can't perceive black. Nevertheless I really like what you do.

Your command module is rotated by 180°. Rotate it by 180° and you won't have swapped de-/acceleration keys. It easily happens in the SPH.

Ah ok. Then my English skills are worse than I thought. My bad.

I don't think the current science system is per se a bad system. And I don't believe the proposed 'achievements science system' is better. Why should we get techs for just going to a specific location? Did some alien craft lost a part in space so it can be grabbed by Kerbals? That doesn't make sense. The question is: How can the player steer what to research? This can be answered easily: People get better by doing stuff. The more they use or do something the more they think about it, try to optimize it and have ideas to make it work by using a different approach. So instead of using a science currency or grabbing techs laying around somewhere I propose a learning-by-doing system. If you are using a lot of small rockets you'll get small engines, small tanks and other small stuff. If you are flying huge rockets you'll get the orange tank and the mainsail. If you'll land on planets without atmosphere you'll get landing gears. If there's an atmosphere you'll get parachutes. If your rockets break apart often you'll get struts. And so on. The details of this system will have to be worked out by the devs, e. g. how many uses of small decouplers are needed before you'll get bigger decouplers. Should scientific advancements base on the number of uses of parts? Or is the using time (in minutes, hours, whatever) a better indicator? Or a combination of both? Or something other? There is a lot to think about.

They said they are in the last step of the development - the testing phase. I guess it'll take at most two or three weeks until release. But that's mere speculation. It'll be released soonTM.

Bowling! Excellent idea!

I would guess gimbals are controlled by some kind of fuzzy logic. At least that's what is controlling automatic transmissions in cars. I study applied computer science and all I yet have to do is to write my master thesis. My teachers always said 'Take pity on those poor engineers. They have to calculate derivations all day long while you only have to pick an intelligent algorithm to let it do it for you.'

Infernal robotics is compatible with the career mode. The text on space says:

Thy called them docking washers