Ser

Yeah, right. No one could perform better than a developer that isn't paid. Let's see how the community performs: how much time passed since KSP 1.2.0 release to KER update? FAR? Real fuels? Realism overhaul? A.S.E.T.? I don't in any way mean any reproach to the authors of those mods, and I can confess that I have my own mod that I only promise to update since 1.1.2. Just imagine: there are mods that community surely would want to be integrated to the open sourced KSP but there's only one person per some of such mods in the whole world that is able to maintain them. And this person doesn't owe anything to anyone. So making KSP open sourced means that there'll be no one to address any complaints. Is community ready for that? There's an example of a project with a source code obtained by community and continued development - the BMS Falcon 4.0. Series started in 1984, official release of subject version was in 1998, first mod-based community release was in 2005 and it is maintained up to the present day. It's still an epic and realistic game. So realistic that it gets boring time to time. Do you know how often it is updated? Its graphics and physics still feel like 2005, GUI... like 1984 1998. Let's return to KSP. If Squad performs so badly as you say, why would you need their source code? May be a better approach is to make your own open sourced game about space program? Choose the right engine, make right decisions, treat community right. But I'm sure that it would take more involvement than 12 hours per day and your wife yelling "What the hell are you doing sitting on your cheeks whole day? Where are the money to buy food and pay bills?" So it would not be free anymore. Then you'll need employees and choose a management strategy. And then gradually you'll get your loving community yelling "Why do you do all this crap? Give us moar parts! Or give us the source code and get off, we'll make everything by ourselves." So, I suppose, the only possibility that Squad would give away the source codes is the death of KSP as a commercial project, which is imminent if no miracle happens to Unity or the game doesn't migrate to another, more advanced, capable and expensive engine, and that would be the birth of KSP 2 (which we would have to pay for once again). As for communities, as the practice shows, they are basically capable to maintain their modifications based on existing engine, not so intensively and reliably as we all would want. Otherwise it is more feasible to create your own game. And if you want it to be good enough then it would cost enough. No miracles happen.

I haven't tried MAF but what I see from demonstration video it provides some arcade style mouse-driven flight. I'm lazy to plug and set my HOTAS up for KSP so I prefer Analog Control mod and will use it once it will be resurrected.

What could help in lowering your aircraft's weight a little is minimizing wing's toughness/weight. You'll need to fly carefully after that, without loading your wings too much, i.e. fly realistically. IRL some B737 tail rudders were stripped away just due to overload with pedal input. And of course, if real aircrafts had only keyboard input, they'd were torn apart before takeoff, IMHO (that explains unrealisic KSP aircraft weights too).

Forget that I mentioned you.

Sorry, wrong mention

As we all have made sure many times in the past, "better" is better than "faster" ;)

Consoles again... @chimpbone, What did you really expect buying a console version? That it will be already modded to the top? As for me I think that releasing KSP on consoles was a mistake. The game has just nothing to do with on consoles. I cannot imagine how anybody could play it with 8 button gamepad and even not speaking of number of buttons the device is an awful controller that requires helpers such as auto-aiming to be usable in games. And yes, lack of mod support which is a serious part of KSP. Now we all face the obvious consequences: frustrated console users. It's wrong to say that stock KSP is bad and that the developers have used modders as a free staff. Many people like to play stock KSP. I personally would hate the game if it had some stuff like BDArmory etc built in. KSP gives us a platform that can be used to alter the game in any way we like and that's great.

That's true. But I'm agree with @Azimech that it would be helpful for the devs to have some indication what really annoys the community. Unfortunately, you cannot see it from regular bug reports.

You do not need to worry. This is how MiniAVC (the version checker used by some mods) works: it looks at the version of KSP that modder has typed as compatible for his mod and if it differs from the current KSP version it starts to yell. But that not necessarily means that mod doesn't work with that version, it's just about the mod's metadata getting obsolete with a new KSP version installed. Some mods have yelled during two or three KSP versions and worked fine, so unless you have real troubles that's not an issue.

Seems like "heavy modded player" is in the second place at the moment. I've started as a "stick-to-stock as much as possible" player, but now I use about 40 mods and about 10 of them are in "won't play without" status.

Thanks! I've been a little busy to reply fast.

This mod is intended to simulate physiological effects of g forces, so physical and environmental ones are out of it's scope.

Doesn't dll from this link https://www.dropbox.com/s/m0awajz3uilyycr/NavUtilLib.dll?dl=1 work?

Thanks. 1.2.1 compatible version will surely be there. You see, this mod doesn't depend on FAR and AJE unlike me, so I'm waiting for them for even start playing 1.2. Since Ferram seems to be actively working on FAR, I hope soon the wait should be over. What do you mean "G vapor"?

@garwel, @Corax Forgot about the "Automatically update" option on Spacedock. The compatibility info updated to KSP 1.2.1.

Yes, it should work fine. Frankly speaking, I have never updated CKAN metadata manually because Kerbalstuff/Spacedock always done this for me. And I'd prefer not to waste time on figuring out how just to update metadata without actually releasing anything new. So I'd rather use that time to fix a reported issue and publish a new version, having everything else updated in a natural and consistent way.

@blowfish, Is the AJE version from KSP_1.2 branch worth a try with it or it's not advised? post edited to not spread rumors and cause modder's frustration

Chainsaw sounds brutal

Kinda offtopic here, but I can't agree with you guys. "Metal" and "sound" are quite opposite. The instruments to make Sound, sweet and pleasant as it should be, are Les Paul and Stratocaster (if not speaking of semi-hollow stuff). All the rest are just different variants of a chainsaw

It's clear that it adds some drive to the game, definitely a new part I think "UI Overdrive" would be clearer.

I'll definitely try it. You are a crazy guitarman, like I was recently, but I agree with people who said that more meaningful mod name and a clearer description is required.

@Speadge, I see now. I doubt I would do that.

I think @Daveroski is right in the part that complex mods are updated more slowly and painfully than little ones. And yes, there are mods those look like a several functions unjustifiably pulled together. And when they get abandoned noone wants to pick them up because it's a lot of pain to go through the entire mod just to get the basic and mostly wanted functionality back. On the other hand, the downside of modularity (besides everything said) is that the modular design wouldn't be perfect. And one day a modder will want have to rewrite the inter-operation between the parts once he finds that the design doesn't suit new requirements and that will break everything that worked before. So the compromise could be to make (when possible) many little mods that could be installed independently instead of releasing one big monster that does everything. As example, @Malah's quick mods and others.

Could you give a link to the video because Manley has lots of 'em

I could. But I can't avoid visiting astronaut complex. And what else shouldn't I do to avoid Vasya Kerman? Playing the game? I'm not saying that. "Vasya" is almost equal to "fool" when used in that particular form on purpose (like in our case: why not "Vasily" which would be much more acceptable?). The effect is following: Every russian would feel inconsistence when meeting "Vasya Kerman" in the game. Whatever it would cause laugh or frustration, the inconsistence exists because of 1. It's obvious that if it was chosen by the game's developers they would look through literature or the names of russian cosmonauts and chose "Vasily" 2. That means that some Vasya or, at least, russian found a way to build such an inappropriate form for the game's context into the official content, that isn't expected there at all 3. So KSP is used as a WC wall to leave "Vasya waz here" message, and that is disturbing. You see, "Vasya" is never used in official names in conjunction with surname as well as "Vasily" is never written on a WC wall. And KSP is not intended to have an atmosphere of russian countryside, is it?