klgraham1013

It's funny how, in the print business anyway, we actually have some say in the contracts we have. It's not a one way street.

I've always liked the idea of the player submitting mission proposals and the game assigning appropriate rewards. Might me a good end-game way of doing contracts.

Happy day, fellow veterans!

I think adding throttle controls to wheels is a great idea.

We need an update just about planets. There's so many amazing landmarks on Earth alone. Image what you could do with a solar system. ...and I'm not talking about silly easter eggs.

I have installs back to 0.24.2.

Ground scatter for oceans would be cool.

I give your imagination more credit.

This. Also hope you wanted a 2.5m engine with a big pylon on it, because that's what you're getting.

Why does the internet insist on extremes? That is not what I am saying, or have said.

This is never a good defense. "Game" is much to broad a term these days.

In that case, couldn't they just hire the modders who have already gone through the trouble?

Squad, just hire Cybutek already.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the doohickey examitron and the slippery slime test table. ...or the Hubble. That would be cool.

Ted just said they pushed it to 1.1 on the KSPTV stream. - - - Updated - - - Post #1 seems pretty even handed to be honest. Even the poll options at the time made sense. There's been some good ideas since that make the poll obsolete.

I've actually wanted some standalone OX tanks.

The continuing tales of invisible mass!

The lego approach to building was established since the initial release of KSP. I believe in a consistent design ethos. So, that's why I encourage the lego approach in KSP parts. Whether building in lego or molding in clay, it's all creativity in the end. - - - Updated - - - I've never understood the...discrediting?...of mods, because it makes craft harder to share. I would much rather have a 5m tank than hodgepodge something together in stock. ...but, maybe I'm less about sharing, and more about what parts can do for me.

If it provides safer water landings, I'm all for it.

I just couldn't think of anything better, because I'm not the most familiar with how such things work. - - - Updated - - - That's never stopped this forum from expanding on good ideas before. - - - Updated - - - In my mind, there would be a 1.25m and 2.5m "turbine". That's two parts. They would not clip into something, but be a discrete part. They would aesthetically fit in with their corresponding fuselage. (a big task considering the art inconsistency there is now) They could even be mainly round with small visual indications that there's an engine inside. So, let's say 2 nozzles, 1 turbine, and 1 intake per size. Not that much more than we have now. - - - Updated - - - Not in my view. This gives the "fun" crowd freedom, and the "realism" crowd the ability to set their own limitations. - - - Updated - - - No. It's computers.

In my experience, this is a common theme with Linux. I'm not going fanboy one way or another, but it's something that needs to be stated when trying Linux for the first time.

Some flight sticks won't work out of the box.

I would say, for simplicity's sake, have the "turbine" pull in intake air and create power, exhaust, or some such. The prop, nozzle, etc. would pull power and do it's thing. It would be irrelevant how much of one part you had compared to another. The part would just grab what was there, as engines do with intake air now. As a standard, I would say 1 turbine could supply 1 jet engine of the same size at optimal usage.

Because it's invisible mass. Anything that eliminates confusion for new players is a good thing. - - - Updated - - - The more I think on it, the more this picture from pizzaoverhead intrigues me: By simply adding an "engine" part to the "nozzle" and "intakes" we have now, it creates a world of possibilities. It could even work as intakes do now, and not necessarily need the parts in a realistic order. This would allow the "game" crowd to be as flexible as they want, and the "realism" crowd to set their own limitations. Prop - Engine Nozzle - Engine - Intake Generator - Engine - Intake There's some interesting opportunities there.

I'm 35. I know not of this octopus heresy you speak.