mattinoz

Omg OmG Omg One Direction are doing the new sound track for KSP.... and the engines will be nicknamed after the lads.

Surely the door should be closed anyway for dust protection of critical systems. Well except Kerbin has no wind to blow the dust in anyway.

Maybe not given this is the linked thread in the "What not to suggest" thread.

That is nice work. Very much looking forward to these Mk2 parts.

I agree something like this could make life easier as things get more complex and you end up with multiple rings of craft and trying to place items on the inside stage but then again it's a balance thing. Instead of adding another organizing scheme could you do something like this more simply using the current staging system? Thinking add a checkbox to each staging widget so that when ticked the stage would ghost out and not except new parts. If you turn off the stage with root part then the closest visible part could become temporary root so that it all moves together.

I always thought the hardness of Kerbin's oceans was due to the lack of wind to make it choppy and lower the surface tension.

I'd say the Torque rating should be dropped lower as well so that it really is only enough for a lander. Like the Cockpits* it could be biased in the most useful direction for a lander as a further distinction between it and a capsule. *Then checks the wiki and thinks I must be going insane as I was sure all the cockpits had biased reaction wheels but it's only the Mk3 and Mk2 drone core. Still may be they should.

One thing I think should be considered now that SAS is a embedded in the pilot should control of reaction wheels be decoupled from the sas switch. The pilots course directive controls should always active and work with control surfaces or engine gamble then have the option to turn on the resource consuming RCS and/or reaction wheels separately.

To me I'd tie it to the Building Tier level. Early on in the game when the time factors involved generally are short, the part are small and light so easy to handle time moves 1:1. As the building goes up tiers you get heavier, larger more complex parts being moved around then the time scale adjusts to be also the mission times are getting longer so the whole time scale of the game just stretches out but the timing on windows more critical. So if you scale with building tier you're also scaling with the players experience in the game. To me is there is nothing in the game that valves time or puts pressure on time to encourage planning and thinking about what is coming up. Then again if they do this then there needs to be tools in game to flag transfer windows to plan for. Sure there will be lots of way around it like revert to saved and things that should add to the sense of achievement like building up your own library of stock lifters and designs that you can then use with on time cost. Then you could do both. Building tier , 1x, 2x, 5x, 10x, 50x Game hardness 1x, 2x, 3x, 4x Times the two together to get your game speed. Sure at top level 1/2 hour in VAB is close to two weeks but with the size of craft you can build at that time that's still pretty reasonable.

I think there could be an alternative to construction time to make time spent on the base matter. Facility Warp Level. Basically as each time a builder levels up then time runs one warp setting faster while in the facility. The base warp level would be the average of the building tiers. So it the VAB as you get larger heavier parts then we can still put them together lego style and tweak them up but the time that passes still reflects the complexity, so a complex craft in a high tier of the VAB might take 1/2hr play time but a day or two in game time. It also adds value to keeping subassemblies and your own pre-made craft around and organised. Also encourages getting the most out each tier of the building. To me that would be much better than a roadblock. It adds both value and pressure to the time spent building craft.

Best quote I heard about SimCity was along the lines of "in the end what simCity really simulates is itself not a city" Is it a game well most games have an end game neither KSP or simCity do. To me KSP is a sandbox. It has physics but they aren't real so it can be fun without having a degree in rocket science. They are real-like so anything I do learn about the real life situation will apply.

What is that guy doing with so much Pizza in space?

I wonder if Squad just decided that the KSP community has gotten to big for it to be a public beta. They did put out a call for more experimentals a few months back, I'm wondering if they are doing 0.9x releases on a short cycle to just the experimentals teams so they can get more directed and controlled feedback during the beta.

The Sounding Rockets mod is almost what you describe. The nose cone can hold coarse somewhat but no real steering, but you can build stages and fire them. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/102502-0-90-Sounding-Rockets!-Start-small-Dream-big!-0-1-1-2014-12-24 Makes for a fun hour or two in the early game and would make great stock addition. ;-) ;-) Seeing as roverDude is doing a bit of hanging around with Squad it seems.

I think some time after the Apple Watch.

I agree I do find it odd that sand landings aren't a lot harder in KSP than landing on a top notch runway. And taking off from sand is not only possible but almost easy, especially on a planet with little sign of life to compact a decent surface. I'm hoping the new "Drag" model will account for this both by increasing air resistance drag of putting the wheel down and also adding differing amounts of surface resistance drag based on the surface your landing on and how likely you are to sink into it, dig the wheels in and end the flight in a more comical KSP fashion.

I'd add one more hinge part personally... -One time Hinge, is folded for launch when activated moves into final position and locks. Could have the advantage of being cheaper, stronger and earlier in the tech tree.

I'd have to check console for the exact number of game crashes but it would be 100ish. Lucky for me game crashes seem to happen just when I realize all hope is lost for poor crew.

Welcome aboard and always remember to engage SAS*. *sorry all I could think of it's hardly "to infinity and beyond" but it is more Kerbally

I once visited a small island of Papua New Guinea for work, their dirt runway was in far better condition than the starting runway at KSP.

Depends what Squad decide is the starting point of the storyline. To me it should be earlier than the current starting point. So Need/Good- -Tiny Engines full range of engines in the .625 range including Jets, a Nuke, Aerospike, Rapier Some come earlier in tech tree some later compared to bigger sisters. -Tiny Tanks to match above. -Tinier Engines & tanks - Basically sounding rockets mod -More Science parts. Pick any well known probe and I should be able to replicate the science parts of that probe. ie. Voyager - Cameras, IR Spectrometer, Plasma Detectors, Cosmic Ray, Low energy particle detector, Magnetometers,.... -Hinge and expanding parts. So Cargo can be lower out of a Cargo Bay then get cargo to expand.

I think from what the developers have said it's more "System Ready" more than "feature" ready. I'd imagine the next few releases will bring more and more features on top of those systems in order to scope complete the game.

Having used AutoCAD I'd suggest KSP does more aiding of design on a computer.

Would be good if Satellite contracts were also progressive. Once you have one Sat in orbit the same company could offer contracts to put more sats in to the same orbit equally spaced. Have agree it seems like a lack of parts as well for Satellites and stations seeming very useless once there.

I was under the impression the parts welding mod used a switch in the craft file. To me that would suggest it's something Squad have thought about so fingers crossed it can be may to work to the point they will bring it in to stock. To me they already have an ideal interface for welding - Subassemblies. So after upgrading to a suitable level if you drop a group of parts to make a subassembly then the parts would weld into reduced number of parts. It would aim to get to one but anything that decouples, moves, controls or jettisons would stay as a unique part or at least from one of the nodes at each 'end' of the part(s) in the subassembly. Me I just hoping they where waiting till after 0.90 seeing it can now handle parts sorting and finding in a much better way.