mattinoz

I'd add two facilities:- - Payload Building Just near the Spaceplane hanger could be same building just mirrored. Craft close by can be recovered into the Payload building refueled, existing decouplers reset and a new payload installed no existing decouplers or docking ports. Craft can then be relauched. - Sub assembly building Assemblies made in this building would weld into a single part that is updatable. so you develop up a libary of boosters and other subassemblies but not have then break out into multiple parts in VAB/SPH.

At its core KSP is a game of drifting in a black inky void. Yes just relax a little, not much is happening anyways.

Would you pay $5 for clouds DLC? If no, what is the business case for clouds to overrun all other development.

Why not have a button that will get you to the 3minutes out from next set node in say 5minutes and just work out warp needed to do that.

If it can calculate solar power on rails why couldn't it fudge a tiny tiny amount for orbital decay on rails?

Yes wedged in last minute because early development notes called it a tycoon game but always hampered by the insistence that you can’t require multi tasking like all tycoon games do.

I would guess more a DLC follow-up to making history called maybe "Making Funds" based on the current commercialisation of space if I'm reading the parts list right. Still DLC needs a new gameplay mechanic not just parts pack and behaviours. Like some sort of cargo delivery contract system with bidding against an AI for something or say players can upload a mission they have created with a deadline and cheapest completion within the deadline gets those funds with a profit margin. I mean just a complete stab in the dark for my part. Still I'd pay DLC price for that.

They seem to have resisted to date adding gameplay. Even if there is another whole mode dedicated to having no gameplay.

Given the amount of time I spend looking at back of the Kerbals head to line up with a target. I wholly support this.

I kind of do this by treating the current passenger modules as having a habitation version that only has half or a third the seats and they can't be used for launch. Would be good to have variations like that in the game so Jeb doesn't sneak in. Better still with habitation / life support mods like USI Life support these variations could have much better multipliers for how long Kerbals stay happy on long trips.

Very much like this. Would also add a nice addition would be either give transition parts a default size so they consistently appear in only one size or have extra groups for them.

Yet every thread about it doesn't slip quietly on to page 2 to be forgotten*. Instead, the same points get rehashed. People are set in their ways no new ground is covered and the discussion is hardly changing the prospect of it happening. *fully aware that saying this will bump the thread to the top again and all of the point apply as much to myself as anyone else.

Before 1.85 was a thing I always edited tweak scale to make it a think.. airospike in this size would be handy to.

Doesn't it come down to how much other stuff loads in response to loading the file more than the file itself?

MechJeb mechanical Jeb billed as all Jebs skills in an easy to attach box. But Jeb has no skills and is not allowed to have skills because people on the forums insist we use the box. Irony much?

Warcraft went a couple of decades without being multiplayer, not sure why time is a relevant factor?

Hehe yes, mechJeb can do it all but Jeb himself shouldn't be allowed to do anything. Do Kerbals have no sense of self-preservation? You if mechJeb was split up into various parts like a skills tree and kerbals could learn and do parts of the tree then there would be more reason to train and take them along to do their thing. Automating parts of the mission would become part of the skills of the Misson Controller (player). I support Kerbal empowerment.

At the end that was the problem, Batman's upbringing and backstory of extreme trauma made him very conservative. Tony Stark could make it work but it would crash a fair bit. Tony is flexible enough to work thru a little paradox to get to a solution. Still what it really needs is Bill Murry "It's ground hog day, again"

A more dry technical industry programme I use is powered by the same forums community does have a sperate upvote for the forums that i understand ties to their tracker.

Do you mean the stars for the thread rating or another tracker? If the later then no I did not.

If the whole craft is spinning wouldn’t the astronauts inertia mean they would spin with the craft and there would be not visual frame of reference to tell them otherwise. I’d assume the crew would spend most time in the habitat ring with trips to core only to get supplies or check on systems. By spinning the whole craft you don’t have motors or bearings to wear out or break, srill if issues spin the service tubes in the core and have a big zero gav playroom

Also, USI Asteriod Recycling Technologies ART has one as well. USI is basically stock in my book.

Would it need to rotate? Why not spin the whole craft on that axis and keep most crew out of the central core of the craft.

Not only have they been invented they far exceed the abilities of anything mere humans have made.

After all hinted long along Delta-V has happened so the Dev's are the only ones who know what can be possible.