mattinoz

A set of mods could be a DLC pack if there was some commitment those mods in the DLC pack will updated to work at release data. "USI presents" DLC pack that gets delivered in the update with a switch on the game save to switch on the DLC pack would be real time saver.

I would think stock multiplayer would be a year to 18months of development with 2 or 3 partial multiplayer releases in that time.

I don't think you even need to alter the stats of control systems, just make the SAS smarter. Low stars use the overshot and correct code of the current game. middle stars start countering rotation before the mark to avoid overshoot. High star kebels who know how to burn a node, gear the initial rotation thrust to be at the node orientation just in time. Both systems would save resources without undermining the physics of the game. I know, I know, I remember the backlash of "autopilot" skills was almost as bad as the physics boost backlash. To me the later is completely understandable as undermining game play. However in the case of Kerbal Pilots I don't get it. Kerbals are meant to skilled but they are just ballast even in the current system.

Surely if pilots improved anything it would be handling and stability more than anything. Using skill and situation feel to tweak handling in flight.

It would only need to load the resources of the selected mods for that game so no slower maybe even faster as it would only load the mods associated with that game. If the addition means an on-demand resource loading system is part of it faster even still.

All of them via an in game / per save interface.

Having value in different styles is useful to co-op as well.

Sandbox doesn't have enough risk vs reward to provide a competitive environment for multi-player.

I thought the point of the compact versions would be to have cluster plates for building mix and match engines. Also would be great if higher level cluster plate allowed thrust vectoring to avoid using more expensive engines.

If we had Maneuver nodes that could be place on the orbit then those nodes aren't giving away the best transfer window but still give us a more visual trial and error tool for finding transfers in game. Give you could pretty much get a transfer anywhere. I don't see how effects the playful nature of the game just bring the errors more hands on.

Several of these will take multiple releases to do in any sensible fashion. ie Multi-player. So assuming Squad are want to commit to at least another year of development to get a workable multi-player system then there would seem to plenty of time for other features to be developed in parallel. I mean It's not like Porkjet or RoverDude are going to working on multi-player seeing their skills seem to be more sexy parts and resource mechanics would seem a waste to have them sit around along the way to Multi-player, then they could be tackling features to get people to play each release along the way. Assuming Squad even wants to continue development.

You might need to give me a week... or 4.

We already have part filtering so why would it be hard? Add button, pop-up compatible parts list, switch part. Simple

Yes but if the container consumer flow works better then it should be possible to do transfers by selecting one side of the docking port as the container and the other as the consumer then using the rules to flow between the two. Avoiding the need to select all the tanks on one side in order to fill them. I doubt it's coming this version but it should make it easier to make improvements in this area in the "future".

Well they have improved the fuel flow system for the next update. I'd hope something like this was on the cards for next time.

When RoverDude first started talking about Life support had the same thought... What about air? I mean every time the capsule opens all the air is lost then the Kerbal just gets back in like it's nothing. Or so I though. After a bit of research to try and put together a better argument I came across one very horrible fact. All the air in an average house when compressed and cooled to a very cold liquid could fit in a container about the size a of kettle. So imagining the capsule makers have down their job it would be a very tiny amount of space needed to store more than enough liquid air to refill the capsule on return a few times (I work on the assumption the kerbals in the VAB know where I'm going even if I don't). Yes but the air doesn't stay fresh, but this is the genius of USI-LS supplies they aren't just food they are just a combined mass of stuff needed to feed, water and oxygenate a kerbal. Still this is where API's are great, instead of writing a whole Life support mod to tweak one aspect of life support you could just have a mod that tweaks Air supply, If no air then Kerbals put on their helmets and strike after 3 days not a fortnight. The same could be applied to mental health aspects with another mod that tweaks if Kerbals are eating or over eating due to homesickness without the need to write a whole new life support system.

Simple answers are often best. Simple for us I mean, maybe not so simple for squad. Then again there are already one or two expandable array of buttons in the game so half the work has been done for another.

I'll always be in favor of life support in stock it's just something you expect you'd need to deal with in a space travel game and I'm happy to suspend that expectation on the grounds capsule designers are required to have x days of support built in to the capsule. So really agree with others that USI life support seems like the good model of how it works. No reason to make more complicated than that for stock. However stock life support should have API hooks to allow it to be extended by mods and make it more complicated. I don't just mean mods for recycling and resupply. Mods should be able to change if a kerbal is eating so they can account for illness or maybe they are over eating. They could just be grumpy and have a lower strike value. A suspended animation system in a future tech mod set could tweak the values to reduce resource consumption without grumpiness. Having a simple common core will make it easier to mix and match simpler mods to make really complex challengers.

Well if the drill part can be dropped it sort of implies there is also a canister part that could be replaced by a Scientist Kerbal. Allowing both surface and core samples on kerbaled missions and in multiple places. While a probe mission might only get a material sample that is a mix of the two.

I'd guessimate given the relative size of the bay to Astros shoulders that bay is about 700 to 800mm square and fairly thin at about 150-200. So relative to a Kerbal it would be a 0.65m part not a 1.25m part.

I have maybe thirty year ago silent service disks somewhere. That sure would be fun to play on my iPhone just need to work out how to insert the 5.25" floppy.

Games are about choosing one play style / strategy over another. A good game gives you many options and gives each a carrot and a stick. KSP just doesn't really provide any real distinction in style and adding that doesn't take away from your existing style.

In other words starting kerbalable is better as kerbals are meaningless disposable and their skills are valueless. Unlike tech or humans no need to worry about training or life just sit them at the top and watch them explode.

You mean you can't see them?

VAB/SPH is a magic land were time has no meaning that is why I think it's always day time.