mattinoz

If this is the case shouldn't Squad just person up and say no 64Bit for now. We tried it's not working, we can't fix it and save everyone some grief we are going to stop offering this version.

Well they could add all three while adding the first one.

Wait.... from this thread. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/51388-Things-I-Never-Knew Any planet on an incline plain has a reverse axial tilt... So you could hack tilt Kerbin by just inclining everything in the kerbalverse by the reverse of the tilt you want Kerbin to have. Sounds like a completely Kerbal way of doing it to me.

Why not the Apollo way? Rover in a can. Small cargo bay, rover folded in half. Astronauts used winch and levers to lift the rover out in the low gravity. Edit: Sorry forgot to add... Yes please to cargo bays and faring for stock rockets.

I like It... The other day it was mentioned the Challenges Forum here was the way to extend the game past the storyline. Which had me wondering if the couldn't be a web tool to write contract mod files. Then as well as posting a challange you could post a contract file to go with it. Which would also work for your idea of making personnel challenge files. Though to me it sounds more like a Grants program instead of Commercial Contracts? You write a grant. ie Where your going to go what your going to do while there, how much in seed funds you need to get off the ground. Then a formula in the computer that decides the overall value then break that up and make you an offer you can accept or reject. (Just like a government department but much much faster) You couldn't just be a free to write your own contract but still most space programs in the world today run on grants not contracts so why not have an option in KSP. I guess for balance if you set your seed funding to high for the overall value you might get knocked back or knocked down. Seeing your writing your own mission then the penalties should be higher than normal contracts and the time frames much tighter. Still could be a way to get back to the fun when you get stuck in contract grind.

Couldn't they add satellite as a craft type in the rename options. Then once you hit ok on the rename control is Handed over to the agency and contract completes. That would also mean we get better filtering in the map views and no more exploit.

Well the Devs have been rounding out the low end tech of the game. So it would make sense to now round out the low end of the parts and give some love to the .625 parts with more tanks, engines and options.

Sounding rockets are great fun and the sort of thing the stock game really should have in the low end.

Wouldn't moving the admin building so that it's forward of the science complex in the gap to the tracking station solve the problem just as well? Better still allow us to not ever build the admin building and move contracts that gap. Oh and remove any surplus roads while they are overhauling the models it's odd how some have strange ring roads from day one, while others develop sensible ring roads during the upgrade path.

Didn't the developers say that all the plane parts were going to get overhauled? Mk2 and Mk3 have been done in spectacular fashion so that would leave Mk1. Mk2 seems to take clues from the Blackbird, Mk3 is very much the space shuttle and both of these sit in-between the rocket parts of the same Mark. I wonder if the new Mk1 parts will be smaller more oval so they would work more with 1 or 2 .625 meter engines instead of 1.25 engines. Which in turn would require a whole range of tiny size engines to work with. Maybe wishful thinking but I'd like to see a range of conventional engines and more in the tiny range.

love It... Would suggest either level 2 & 4 space tourists could be engineers for third party companies? Contract would be to put engineer in stable matching orbit with one of their satellites for some period of repairs.

Kerbals don't eat, drink or breath. Not to mention the ground is highly explosive, fuel just appears as required. What do they have to fight about that would require the forming of countries?

That would be good. Thinking instead of stars each specialty could have it's own symbol then that symbol could be used with there name.

Couldnt they just use the renaming function and have you set the craft type to satellite name feild could even be auto filled with a name from the contract. Only then would the contract be completed and you loss control.

If not a barn then to me the lowest tier could be an old abandoned airfield with just a runway, hanger (SPH), other old buildings for Crew, Contracts, Science with a tracking station is no more than an old school antenna. This would need an option in SPH to launch vertical on the runway but have it highly weight and length limited even as the SPH gets to upper tiers. VAB, Launch pad and Admin building would be empty fields and have no function till first stage is built. That said I liked the idea of the Barns it was just the execution that needed work.

Not that I've done empirical tests but I found the best part of going slow was the boost to reputation. Which gets you better contracts down the line and avoid the more troublesome test contracts.

There are only two things that irk me about the new buildings? - I don't get why some buildings have the full perimeter road from tier 1 but others don't. -Admin Building - The only reason to spend money upgrading seems to be that it looks out of place if left tier 1. It would be good if there was a tier 0 so this building could be left un-built.

Two suggestions for the mix one for each. A higher level Engineer should give continuous information about the craft. So that the Fuel tabs gives readings in more directly useful fashion. Battery life reported like a laptop does time to charged/time till run. dV remaining by stage or burn time by stage. Higher level scientist should be able to compile a report of "whats currently interesting". So basically an action group that checks instruments then trashes reports of zero value.

And there should be visible fishing line to hang the craft from the top of the screen. Maybe that could be level 1 simulator?

Applies pretty well to architecture as well.

I do believe it was Voltaire who said this but he was quote someone as well. also this one but not sure who to credit it with as it goes back a long way and goes along the lines of... "Ideas are just the multiplier of implementation" Good explanation here http://sivers.org/multiply

Given the description I can't see the reason to take an engineer anywhere other than rescue mission or maybe a long mission with lots of seats. Not unless it's a sub-skill of pilot or scientist.

In the mean time could you use a Mk2 Cargo bay like a baseball catchers mitt? Just cover the bottom with stacks of ladders to grab on to.

To me it wasn't so much direct control from the tracking station. More that as the tracking station improves the computational resources it has to anticipate what the probe needs to do to get where it's going improves. Similarly as communications improves the further it can send updated programming. So the probe cores all improve because they have better ground support not because they get better memory or a faster processor. It could be combination of the two in each size have a basic and advanced cores. advanced cores can handle situational factors like landing and reaching orbit but all the cores get better at following the planned manoeuvres as the tracking station updates. I like the idea that the "skill" of the probe would drop with distance.

I think it would be good if engineers had their own auto generating action groups. so things like -extend/retract solar panels So if your building a multi-part space station and have an engineer on board they'll automatically merge all the solar panel controls for all the parts of the station in to one control. Would also be good if something like KAS became stock but tied to having an upper tier engineer on board to go and connect the parts together.