klgraham1013

Yes. I know. It's sad. Some people actually want it, though. edit: I added a picture, but ObsessedWithKSP already posted the gallery. So, I removed the picture.

Squad should really look at this.

Full releases don't have placeholder graphics. I think it's safe to assume we'll get our IVAs. Kappa?

I enjoy the customization this "problem" brings to the game. I understand the concern though, but I wonder if we should be calling for game optimization, rather than new or different parts.

I think some are making this more complicated than it needs to be. Just add a single part to appropriate sizes that, when attached, create a bond similar to attaching nodes in the VAB. I'd suggest a "port" for 3.75 and 2.5, as those are the main candidates for large ship construction. I wouldn't mind a male, female style, to add a bit more thought into the process.

I should contribute to the actual conversation. I've been building aerodynamic vehicles for quiet a while (yes, FAR), so it probably won't be an issue.

I prefer "Returning the Crazy."

I'd argue aerodynamics should have been dealt with long ago. I also don't think the first real balance pass should be part of the release update, but, then, I'm not a developer.

Anyone else enjoy looking at Kerbal history in Final Frontier? Maybe it's just me. I like this idea though.

I agree with check boxes. I don't agree that realism necessarily makes the game harder. Specifically the things you mentioned: life support and re-entry heat.

I'm not sure if we know anything as of yet. I'd love to hear from Squad about this.

I deorbit near everything. ...but, I do play with no take backs, so occasionally something finds itself in orbit.

That sounds overly complicated. Not difficult, mind you. I'll have to try this out and see for sure.

Yeah. This should be fixed. I've run into issues with it as well.

I don't know what code they're using, but whatever's going on now seems much more complicated than "plant the flag in front of you." Then again, look how they're determining classes.

Anyone watching Manley's Interstellar quest knows how useful this would be. I do a lot of orbital construction and would appreciate a way of connecting two parts with out the instability of docking ports.

I was generally aiming that comment at both parties. I apologize for taking "Though this thread might be proof that statement is wrong." as implication that there may be something wrong with this thread as a whole. Perhaps I'm jumping at shadows. Though I am somewhat proud of being at a whole new level. Onward and upward as they say.

Don't spread lies about me. - - - Updated - - - By placing the dv readout in the difficulties menu, it implies that dv readouts are for casual players. For, surely, the more hardcore would play with less information. At least, from a new players point of view. I would prefer a realism menu. Especially if they're keeping an option for poor aerodynamics. We could even throw life support and RemoteTech in that menu as well.

I think I built the biggest rocket I've built to date. It didn't get past 10km. Then I went on YouTube to learn how to play.

I am a fool for expecting relevant information about a topic to be at said topics website. Thank you for informing me.

I run about as many mods, but have made restrictions on parts to stay under the 32bit ram limit.

This is all I ever wanted from this ordeal. - - - Updated - - - Explaining a bad idea doesn't make it a good idea.

...nope...

I've considering making a long post on my opinion of career mode, but there's a part of me that wonders whether the Suggestions and Development forum is even being considered. I think there may be evidence to support both sides of the argument, but the fact that I'm even asking it does not bod well. Here's the thread TriggerAu made and here's the original Reddit post.

I actually like the idea. If someone at Squad already follows space news, why not relay cool news they've come across to the community?