cantab

If you want to use driven wheels: Plenty of weight per wheel, to increase traction. Lightly loaded wheels will skitter and slide and won't go as fast. A decent sized chassis. Very small rovers are liable to pitch and roll too much because the suspension can't be configured. Remap the rover controls so they don't conflict with the torque controls, this is really important. Set up a gamepad if you can, I find long drives *so* much nicer with a controller than with a keyboard. Do have some decent torque, so you can land in a safe orientation after jumps. Don't use a flimsy lander can for the Kerbals! The aircraft cockpits are good, and external seats do pretty well too. Finally, relax. Driving isn't as quick as flying, Take your time, chill out and enjoy it. Downthrust is an option, but if you're going to use thrust maybe you're better flying. By using landing gear and thrust you can go faster than using driven wheels, but don't forget excessive speeds may be unsafe.

It's not too bad - not like the three-Kerbal pod that is an awful lead brick, so bad I try and avoid using it at all. But it's still not the first time we see the "game balance" in KSP encouraging players to spike the part count which makes the game show up its shortcomings, ie lag. IMHO Squad should really look at the part balance, and go with the overall principle that one large part should be better than lots of small ones. I also feel that the tech tree should reduce the extent to which large-size part are buried in higher nodes; I see no reason the player shouldn't have all the 1.25m rocket tanks from the start for example.

A preliminary note: To do this I'm going to have to make some stuff up because Squad quite reasonably don't make everything about their business public. This thread is not the place to argue over whether that stuff is right or wrong. Just enjoy the story. In the role of Squad... We are not in as good a position as we would like. We rushed 1.0 out for business reasons and it had a bunch of problems that have persisted through to 1.0.4 and that's annoyed many in the fanbase - though we know there are those who will seemingly be annoyed whatever we do. 1.0.5 has been an improvement and is still in afterglow of the release hype-er-nova but that's going to cool. Existing players clearly want the game to run better, with fewer bugs and less performance, but we believe that sales will be boosted more by cool new features. Sales of KSP on PC are slowing and we suspect it might be meeting saturation but we hope we can still reach more people. 1.1 was supposed to be a big deal for the existing players, but that's been delayed and delayed again. That's why we brought out 1.0.5, but there's only so much Cool Stuff it could have with the engine limits. Looking forward, on the programming side of things, we need to make a decision soon: Do we bring in new coders? The existing team are clearly having trouble porting KSP to Unity 5, but there's the adage that adding manpower to a late project makes it later. NathanKell has done good work but he's not quite what we need. Getting Flying Tiger to work on the PC version is a contractual and legal mess and that's a non-starter. In the event we opt to hire one or more new developers with Unity 5 expertise. We hope that with strong management from our new producer progress on the coding side of 1.1 will pick up, but we worry that maybe we've got too many people trying to hack on the core code. The code really wants a decent refactor to make it easier to fix bugs and add features in, but there just isn't time to do that, that's a job to kick into the long grass. This is critical because we also need to look at the visual side of things. Parts we have covered; any of Porkject, Necrobones, or Ven will do a great job of overhauling the rocket parts to a high standard. We also develop some art style guidelines for them to try and improve consistency. We expect much if not all of the parts overhaul to be done for 1.1. The planets and the environment are a bit trickier. There's been a lot of great mod work in that area, but somehow we feel it would be better to have our in-house artists work on it. Call it a gut feeling. This work will take longer and it's not likely to make 1.1, but probably 1.2. Unity still limits us and the newly revamped planets and moons are set to look awesome, but any player who spends a bit of time will realise they're still as samey as ever. But this doesn't really matter - the *gorgeous* screenshots sell the game. This revamp may be our last chance to reconsider the size of the Kerbin system, but we leave it as it is - it's familiar and while it may cause some gameplay oddities, changing it would cause more trouble not least wreaking havoc on saves and player craft designs. Then there's the big one: multiplayer. Because that is a whole untapped market of potential customers, who so far have seen that KSP is single-player only and turned away because of that. After KSP 1.1 is out, we need to devote a lot of efforts to getting multiplayer in. That will mean that the bugfixes and performance improvements the existing fanbase want will be slower coming, but the boost from Unity 5 can be ridden on for a bit and we hope to keep a steady incremental stream of updates coming. In the longer term we need to decide where we want to go as a company. Mojang's approach of keeping on refining their single big title then selling up and retiring without money worries worked great for them, but we don't know if it's right for Squad. Maybe we can come up with some new games instead. That is a question for the future though. A concluding note. This is not necessarily what I, as a player and fan of KSP, want Squad to do. This is what I would do if I was in charge at Squad. The chief "conflict" as it were is that we existing players aren't directly making revenues for Squad, it's the possible new customers who are. Hopefully others can appreciate this.

nu-uh

Nope. It's not any computer game.

None of the above. And we had politics already didn't we?

Haha. Not war.

A better, or at least different, EVA suit is a nice idea.

Ooops, sorry for the misadvice. On checking, yeah, a socket FM2+ motherboard will support FM2 and FM2+ CPUs, but a socket FM2 motherboard will not support FM2+ CPUs. The slightly older 760K is an FM2 processor, but it's water under the bridge now and the A10-5800K will offer virtually the same CPU performance.

Victory for Team Minus. Subject to ratification ...

Down to -99 nodupe

Resuming from here, I keep derping. Down to -97.

Down to -99 - - - Updated - - - above nulled, derp

-87 (-) - - - Updated - - - above nulled, oops

-97(-)

-97 (-) C'mon, reinforcements needed!

-97 (-) It was assumed to be an error. As a revert attempt it was off-by-one anyway.

-96 (-)

-95 (-)

-95 (-)

-95 (-) id.

-95 (-) I did

-95 (-)

-95 (-)

-94 (-) Nonsense? THIS. IS. MINUS!