AbhChallenger

That is why I said in my opinion it is a bit too simplistic. A post earlier talked about skill letting Kerbals EVA out to implement changes to the engine. Yes on it's own it is not too handy to newer players as they would have to know how much delta V they need in the first place. Combine that with the Navigator Kerbal and you got some interesting gameplay. Especially if players can start to gather fuels outside of KSC. It may not be pefect but it is atleast a debate. "Kerbals don't affect parts" is not a debate. It is a statement saying "newer players need realism"

I can see KSP as a game for newer players rather than a "realistic" simulation forced upon them which few will accept. I can see that a new player having to alt tab to look at a wiki is not good difficulty. I can see how a few interesting deviations from realism can make the game part of KSP fun for newer players even if it is a bit of magic. I can accept that Squad can keep the simulation and game aspect separate if given a chance to improve their ideas instead of blanket "Kerbals can't affect parts" None of that makes me the one authority on the future of KSP. But I can tell you it is a hell of alot more "realistic" for the future of KSP the GAME than shoving realism down newer players throats.

On what? The "Hardcore" crowd already won this one. They got Squad to back away from a feature likely to not return to it until after 1.0 However that does not make them right on the future of KSP.

By that you mean leave the debate to those with tons of "experience" with KSP right? It is very simple. The vocal "Keep KSP hardcore crowd" is harming the potential of this game for newer players. Hard to call it a stawman when people are outright saying "Kerbals should not affect parts" So NO I will not excuse myself thank you.

I am lumping everyone in the same group. Because it is the same thing. If it were a simple case of the idea being too simplistic (Which yes it is) You would not have so many in this very topic outright saying that anything that touches engines or parts = bad. Let's say Squad has an idea for a Kerbal skill that can make maneuver nodes. A low skill will end up with a node to Duna that is over 2000 delta V and gets better but never as good as a handmade node. For newer players it would be a GREAT reason to build experience for Kerbals. However, people would howl saying that players should learn how to do it themselves. Why? Don't start with Realism because no astronaut in history had the call on the path a spacecraft took to the moon. Mars probes use burns constructed by computers years in advance.

The issue is Squad is "Listening" to the same crowd that howled over MechJeb. Listening to people who KNOW how to disable such features (Via a checkbox or mod) Instead of thinking about what might be fun for newer players to work towards. Newsflash. The fun part may violate the laws of physics. The fun part may involve Kerbal magic stuff. The fun part may involve something other than 30 windows of porkchop plots, protractors, calculators, wind tunnel data, etc.

No there are a few that can't accept the fact that Kerbal Space Program is not their new Orbiter or that Squad has not banned MechJeb. Or the few that think because a few 12 year olds learned space physics. Keeping the game hardcore will mean many many more will leave minecraft for KSP. Squad is on the right path. It is just a bit simplistic. But many think any idea of a bonus is Terribad.

It the game were just about logical. It would be nothing more than an addon to Orbiter. And look at how active that community is.

I can only hope that the developers keep newer players in mind with this system. And less of those who think MechJeb is the great evil in the universe. Engine modifications are a bit much. But only because it would end up breaking the same designs if other Kerbals are used later. Not because "OMG ItZ NOT RealisTIcs enough!!11" There are PLENTY of mods to make KSP "Hardcore" So it is sad to see people here against things that could encourage newer players to stick with it rather than say "KSP oh that game for people with calculators.. Nah ill go back to minecraft." Lets say a Kerbal develops the ability to "see" Biomes. People will howl that it is not realistic. But tell me. What is so unrealistic about a Kerbal learning how to read a map?

Saddening to hear of the hate for a GUI. Oh well. For now I will likely just wait on KSP 0.91 and what it will bring for aerodynamics and how the various control mods will adapt. Thank you for your time.

Thanks. However I hope you will not be offended in a NEAR newb's opinion. Which is. Because these modules have such an impact on the way craft control. In my opinion you ought to consider implementing some kind of automatic control system that is designed from the ground up to work with NEAR/FAR. Nothing too fancy. (Not asking for an FMS) but it would be nice to have MSFS style autopilot controls. I know there are those who scoff at the idea of an autopilot but for me it is a simple case of realism and time. Very few people in the future are going to be allowed to handfly a multimillion USD spaceplane into Orbit. And for time I rather not have to babysit a single craft over and over while I want to construct a station or ship in orbit. Just my opinion. I will attempt the Mechjeb module but I don't have much hope from what I am reading in that topic.

I know this likely gets asked thousands of times. However is there anything that can be done for automatic control of aircraft? (Mechjeb etc..) I simply can't use NEAR or FAR if it means I have to hand fly things up every single time.

A big congrats on your work making it to stock! MOAR spaceplanes!

Nice ride!

Fine Print perhaps?

If you have time. Could you also update the KW Rocketry as well. 5 meter parts!

What if we want a response from Squad on the record? Public, as customers?

I would like to see what they could do with Unity 5. As for features I still think that stock KSP needs to come with a better means to plan intercepts. It could be a minigame or even "Purchasing" "Windows" from the nerds of Kerbin that turn into precomputed burns if you get into the right parking orbit.

It is true that you can grind contracts to get to that point pretty quickly. However, To be honest that is not the way I would like to gain a majority of my science in future KSP versions. Biome and low res radar should be quite early in the tree to support those who want to go to the mun and other destinations to build science in my opinion. Then again the whole Tech tree is insane in it's current state in my opinion anyway.

Or tiger... I could go ahead and search the addons I download for it thus preventing it from ever running in the first place. Hell I don't need to edit configs or remove clones. I can say NOPE to this and to it's creator right off the bat. Edit: To clarify. I don't even want the code to check for the config file to run.

Why is Multispec so late in the Tech Tree? So far into the tree makes it more likely people (Like me) will grind contracts for science rather than landings.

I don't want to just "disable it" I don't want the files on my PC. It would be different had it been opt-in. I might have actually enabled it.

Sadly because of some of your statements. I am going to have to check the folders of every mod I install until you end this project. As a user all I can say is PLEASE stop this project. It is simply not worth the controversy and breaking of trust over the increased numbers you get with opt-out.

It is your choice to use curse or not. However, What about the community efforts to host addons?

Space Jam.. With asteroids.