Alshain

I split quotes by quoting twice and removing the excess manually. Trying to use the 'features' of this disaster of a forum software is just going to leave you frustrated.

Not all cargo needs to be detachable. Why are you assuming that? A cargo bay is for placing items that are not aerodynamic or hiding things that you need access to later. Goo containers are not aerodyanmic and they do affect aerodynamics. Having thermometers and barometers hanging off your craft stick out like a sore thumb and can be irritating for those of us who like to build good looking planes. None of that needs to be detachable.

The OP's request is for a cargo bay, not more science. You can clip things in cargo bays now, it doesn't cause an issue. Why would you think that adding a new cargo bay would change that? Radial science parts are not 0.625m either, they are often smaller. You are making up problems that do not exist. Furthermore, you are making them up about a mod request. If you don't like it, you have no reason to be here. Nobody is asking for your opinion, the OP wants a cargo bay, I would like one as well, you have no right to tell us what we want.

A what? A what? Ok, but that isn't what we want or need. Yes, one of those ways is a cargo bay. You do realize there are cargo bays in the game right now that do not summon the kraken right. They are in the utility section, you should try them out, they are pretty cool. All we want is one that looks good with the Mk1 series.

Maybe, yes. But not now. Unless it's something built into Unity that they can knock out in an hour. Cities is a Unity 5 game, but it also has a lot less problems than KSP.

It shocked the heck out of me, I seriously didn't think anything like that would ever happen. You can see it here at around 57 minutes. https://www.twitch.tv/ksptv/v/84374107 As far as game modes go, I just want a finance mode that starts with the the entire science tree unlocked.

No need, this is an Alt-F12 option in 1.2. That's right, HyperEdit has been at least partially stockified

It doesn't matter where the problem lies. It makes the game worthless either way. Ultimately Squad made the decision to release it like that and because of that decision many of us either don't play anymore or play older versions. It was a very bad decision. What's done is done though. No point in dwelling on it now, we have to look to the future and hope 1.2 turns KSP into a game again.

It's for small science. Occlusion isn't an issue with cargo bay doors, they phase right through stuff. Structural fuselage works for batteries ok, but if you have to access what is in them, it no longer works, unless you want to do the weird camera clipping thing.

Don't tag everyone in creation like that. If people want to make a mod they can come here and find the thread themselves. That's incredibly rude IMO, at the very least it's an internet faux pas.

Not as vast as you think, one is just tall while the other is long. You would have to build a big enough plane vertically and then re position it, but that is the very reason why the controls for the SPH are different. You don't typically build up in the SPH. So there is no reason for the mouse wheel to move the camera up and down. It's on the Shift key because it is a less used function. Not so in the VAB, it is a very highly used function there and so it is on the mouse wheel. You also don't need to pan in the VAB, like you would on a plane. So holding the mouse button pans in the SPH but zooms in the VAB. It's just more intuitive that way for the things you would normally build in the SPH.

So what if it is cheaty? It's his game, he can play how he wants. There are plenty of other mods that add strange and interesting things to the game. Would you like to fly a ketchup powered hamburger to the Mun? Here you go:

I've been asking for this for at least a year. I've had some that came close, but the textures weren't a great match. I wish I knew how to do modeling, I'm just not good at artsy stuff.

It depends on where you have the AN/DN are and the actual inclination, but an inclination change could completely eliminate chance of contact.

Strangely enough double tapping to stage is often an accidental feature (what most call a bug). It's been around forever, it's just not predictable. It's really a bit irritating.

Random failures have been repeatedly discounted by Squad as something they would like to implement. I wouldn't expect that to change any time soon. The problem with them is there is nothing to learn, there is nothing to overcome, it's just one minute you have a mission and the next you do not. Given the complexity of some missions, this would be pretty devastating and not a very fun mechanic for most people. I too would like to have KIS and KAS mechanics, but that is more for construction or possibly collision repair than random repair needs.

You missed my edit

Photosynthesis... though it's not light so... Snackosynthesis. How do you think they keep from running out of air?

Fluffy doesn't mean they have negative mass.

I vote Splunge.

But it has less mass. That is the issue.

But it is user adjustable. If you click on the VAB, you just chose VAB controls. If you click on the SPH, you just chose SPH controls. The two areas are otherwise the same and you can do the same things in them. Fun Fact: this wasn't always the case, symmetry modes used to be locked to the building, the SPH could only be mirror and the VAB could only be radial. Those were dark times.

I complained about this back when it was the Fine Print mod. I got ignored. It is very irritating if you need to move around to the other side of your orbit to tweak the position of the Ap or Pe to meet the contract requirements and end up hitting the Mun. The only choice is to wait for the Mun to pass before completing the contract. These contracts shouldn't give you orbits that intersect the path of a moon within range of it's SOI. It could be easily fixed with an higher or lower inclination.

You are not in disagreement with everyone. I have yet to see one of the massive overhauls that have been posted that sound like they could make the career better. The biggest problem there is, is that some of us want the game to hold our hand and tell us what to do, and others of us want to choose what we do. I am in the latter camp, but neither are wrong... just different. I choose not to do surface base building and ISRU because that doesn't interest me. I don't want the game to punish me for not enjoying that sort of thing. The problem is the two ideas collide and cannot exist at the same time. The current method more or less supports my preference, while those who want the hand holding through programs can't be satisfied with it. The contract system we have now could use some tweaking but it's perfectly fine... if you are of the same mindset as I am. If you are not, you probably won't enjoy it. Unfortunately there is no way to please everyone, and I seriously doubt Squad is going to significantly alter the way it functions now. Now, as to your changes, some of them sound interesting. As mentioned I would not like to see anyone forced to complete a mission before doing something else, so your second suggestion I would not like. However, the third could theoretically be done without it. The game keeps track of world firsts already, some parts could be limited to certain experiences... but it wouldn't be required to be done if you didn't want the part. Most importantly, it would be basic things most people do (like getting to orbit or landing on the Mun as you said). My fear is that Squad might take it too far and require you to mine x amount of ore to unlock y part. Unless you were unlocking ore mining parts, that would be unacceptable.

Let it? Squad wanted it. Harvester said very early on that he wanted KSP to be available on as many platforms as was possible. The move had nothing to do with higher orders or money offered, it was the plan all along..