Sasuga

Issue: Right now, if a node is far away and I pull on it a 'little' it might make a very big change to the Delta-V or Burn-Time... While making an identical motion with my mouse on a node that's close up might make a small change in Dalta-V or Burn-Time. Recommendation: Place a proxy-maneuver-node (a proxy for the maneuver node) in the lower right hand side (next to the nav-ball) for the node that a user has made the focused node (the last node that the user has clicked on and is 'open' for editing). The proxy-maneuver-node, or remote control, would have all the same six symbols as the maneuver node and allow the user to click and pull on those symbols the same why they would on the maneuver node. Some advantages to this would be 1. It would make it easier to adjust node, especially those that are far away from your available perspectives (or at least current perspective) and 2. Pulling on the various controls that always begin in the same location on the screen when you begin to use them, would allow players to get a better feel for the node control and become more adapt at fine tuning them.

I'd like to be able to drop a node and then focus my camera on that node. If the node vanishes (like if I close the node out) then the focus should (probably) just pop back to the thing it had been focused on before... Or, perhaps the camera can stay where it is so one could more easily place a new node in that area, and there be a button to return focus to your vessel.

Right now, there's this handy feature that if you left-click on the AP or PE, it keeps the extra-information (like when you mouse over it) displayed, even when you remove your mouse pointer from it. Awesome idea, except making a node is also a left-click thing. There have been many times when I've tried to left-click on the AP or PE and kept getting the option to make a node instead. (And plenty of times when I've tried to make a node, but couldn't for various reasons, but that's something for another post I supposed.) So, Squad, if you could make the right-click on the AP and PE do what the Left-Click does right now, I would be elated and think that was awesome.

Kind of missing the point Apature, but thank you all the same.

Right now the command module controls the ship's changes in position through, "Magic". You can't just magically move a ship the way the command modules do right now. The reason they had RCS ports is because they had probably planned on using that to change the ship's orientation, but as mentioned above there was a bug. Personally, I'd prefer it if the command modules used RCS instead of, "Magic" to maneuver... And really, since the movements could come from the command module it wouldn't be much different then now. Of course, the command module having RCS fuel now... Where would it stick it? ... And would it have a magical, infinite amount?

10... 9... 8... 7... 6... 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... I accidentally set my display settings way too big, and I couldn't reach the apply button to change them back.

I was just attempting to find how to do it, and found this forum thread stating that it isn't in (except in mods) and such. I think it should totally be stock, after all... Isn't sending pictures back to Earth what probes do for us in the real world? Probes would be so much more useful if they could take pictures/map out planets, and help us plan missions. This would be extra useful if each the planets and moons in Kerbal had different surfaces each time we played... But I'd settle for satellites being more useful. I'm going to look for that SCAN mod.

I get that the white space suits look more like NASA's space suits and everything, but then this isn't NASA's space program. I think the white suits look very well done, they have a lot of detail and I can tell a lot of work went into them. I really do appreciate the effort. However, I like(d) the orange space suits. I think the orange with green for one popped. For two, it wasn't a color I consider boring (white). I hope in the final product I/we could choose our jumpsuit. Maybe let us paint them ourselves. I'd be happy with a choice between the new white and the old orange.

I've been playing KSP for about a week now. I love this game! Sadly (for the Kerbals) things don't always go as planned. I had a hard time controlling my rocket and burned up too much fuel in the atmosphere. I thought I'd still get to the Mun and back, but it turned out I didn't have enough fuel to get out of Kerbin's orbit!!!! These are my attempts to get back to Kerbin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id0vyGv4-2w&feature=youtu.be

I like the idea of a vehicle being recovered and that vehicle being reused. Parts collected should be stored in some magical, infinite warehouse for the player to disassemble and reuse. No refunding of money. You bought it, you own it... until it falls apart on you. I think SS engines should have an amount of Dv just like non-SS... As SS engines should be reusable as well. You use a SS Engine, you drop it on the land it breaks apart and blows up... whelp, now you're out that money. You drop it with a parachute and it lands softly, or drops in the water and floats... Now you can recover it and reuse it. Sell it, get the money back? To who? ... No. No reselling, no money back. You've not got an SS Engine. What will you do with that SS Engine? Store it in a scrap yard somewhere, where it might one day get reused? Reuse it now and over and over until it finally gives out? Use it again and dump it so it blows up this time? - Either way, no refund. You've got an SS Engine now... What you going to do with it?

Not necessarily. What would need to happen is that each piece would have to know which module owned it. When setting up the commands, the player would have to select the piece (as they do now) and the command module, and then set up t I think the easiest way to do this would be to have a list of available command modules in the Action Groups Menu. If there's only one command module, the list of command modules could be hidden, the Action Groups Menu looks the way it does now to reduce clutter and confusion for new players who are just figuring out the action group menu. If there's more then one command module, a 4th column could appear to the left of the Action Groups column with a list of the available command modules, listed in the order they were added to the vehicle, and then the player can select which command module they want, then the action group they want, then the piece they want, and then the commands they want. To make the list easier to understand, and to deal with the naming issues, the player could name each command module and the list could display the names in the list. Also, the vehicle could be named whichever name the command module in charge has. =-=-=-= As far as how hard it is to program, well I don't know anything about Squad's code at all. So, I CAN'T REALLY speak to its difficulty or anything... but, as I've used Unity on a daily basis I know I could program it in a game similar to Kerbal Space Program. - I know the engine can handle it. - But knowing the engine can handle it doesn't mean that it wouldn't require a lot of rewriting or something on Squad's part. - So, in other words, it could be a feature they could add with some solid planning and a day of programming, or a feature that would require a complete rewriting and add a year or more to the project. ... My experience in game programming makes the think its somewhere in the middle, but hey, again; I haven't seen their code. =-=-=-=-= I haven't personally experienced the issues that the original poster has expressed, but I can see how they're a hassle. I totally support this feature request/idea. I think it belongs in this game, and I hope it gets put in.

I've just got started on Kerbal Space Program, but looking around I see there's quite a few 'old pros' out there now. Folks who've been playing this for quite some time. They know every nook and cranny of the Mun, Minmus, Kerbal, and all the rest. That's fine and good for them, but I fear that I'll know every inch of Kerbin myself by the time the game is finally 'released'. I'm both wondering if and suggesting a remake of Kerbin before release, or as I began to type this a procedural generated Kerbin. That way, while the planet is very similar the actual biomes of the planet would be different. ... Of course, then the thought went to that each planet could go that rout. So, Suggestion, Question... Either/Both?

I picked up KSP when I saw it finally had Career Mode (Actually, the name "Career Mode" didn't catch my eye, but seeing other people play it and how it worked did.) Since there's a resource of money, and with contracts being the only way to get money (and thus a finite resource), I of course was doing everything I could think of to save money. The first thing I did was to strap parachutes onto my stages, so they would drift down to the planet and be collected up to be reused later. After all, our real world space programs used to do that. However, I was sad when I got back to planet and found that all the little bits that had safely landed on the planet were gone!? So, I tried several other things, and then watched a video by a very popular KSP YouTuber, and saw how I could recollect pieces if they had probes or cockpits, and then only if I kept the camera (more or less) focused on them (the range is the real issue) until they reached the ground. So, I'm sad. =-=-=-= So, my question, as the title asks: Does Squad plan on making full recovery possible (without attaching probes or command modules to everything)?

I had thought of a budget idea as well. Basing the budget on reputation also makes sense to me. The rest went in one eye and out the other, so I'm not going to support or speak against it. I'm in no hurry for this to get implemented, per say, but I think a budget makes sense for a final product in this sort of mode.

I'd like a planet that's in a polar orbit over the system and comes around very rarely. It'd be neat if its orbit line only showed up when it was with-in a relatively close range, so that it's hidden (sort of, as once discovered to be in the game every forum and wiki will have it) the rest of the time. Still, until it shows up its orbit line doesn't show, and once it leaves past the outer planets its orbit line disappears.

Maybe the wires are just hooked up to the batteries when they're slapped on, that's what I always figured. I never thought of them as a separate storage that moves the energy into the main storage. I think they just expand the pool of energy storage.

(1) Agree (2) Disagree - Although I think it would be nice if you were able to upgrade to some tech that told you your distance from the surface, like a laser measure or something that you could strap to your vehicle and get an extra readout. (3) I disagree. I understand why the poster above is asking for this, but I disagree. I think parts organization is important, but what I want is MORE PARTS! Lots of parts! The original poster above wants to clear clutter and build a spaceship of their own design, period. I get that. - I want to be a kid with blocks, slapping them together to build neat things. Also, I feel like the set parts are from different manufacturers. While of course we could get custom made parts, I like the feeling that "X-Company Produces This Model Part" ... and, "So how are you going to use it?" - Also, I love the feeling of, "Ooooowww, I just unlocked bigger fuel tanks. Muahahahaha." - While if I could build a fuel tank of any size, I wouldn't get that feeling. (4) The idea that solar panels might become part of a wing at higher tech levels seems like a really cool idea (if that's what they're saying, otherwise I still think its a cool idea and I'm going to say it.), but I don't think people should be able to turn any surface into solar panels as soon as solar tech is discovered. Blockly solar panels, then the ones that expand, like we have now, all cool as is. - Maybe I don't understand this one, but... Meh. (5) Totally agree! We should be able to set a default somewhere that stops the warp, or perhaps it stops the warp based on scale. Actually, the ability to set the stop time when we set the node would be perfect.

I already suggested a game mode that I called "Mission mode", but I think the name, "Mission Mode" might be more appropriate for the mode I'm about to suggest. In this new mode, players wouldn't have to worry about science and tech at all. They would be simply the designers and pilots, but this isn't sandbox, no. This mode would be a structured game play mode with mission objectives that come one after another. The player would be given a set of tools (parts) and given a mission objective like the contract. (Launch a rocket!) The testing of equipment like in the current Career Mode, with contracts, would be removed. Each mission would be something like: Launch a rocket; Get into orbit; Orbit the mun; Put a Probe on the Mun; Put a Kerbal on the Mun; Oribit Minmus, etc. Just like people generally do for themselves in Sandbox, Science, and I'm sure there are contracts for in Career Mode. The difference in this mode is that there's a focus on one single mission at a time. One objective. That way people with ADD don't get all distracted with trying to do 10 contracts in a single mission. Granted, the other mission mode suggestion is similar, since you can only take one contract at a time in that suggestion... but in this mode you don't even have to worry about picking a contract. Its all focused on achieving the next objective. I think this mode would be great for children, and people like me who have this OCD/ADD thing going on. I love the design process, the piloting, and they trying to achieve goals, but I for one need more structure (and the other suggestion I titled "Mission Mode" would be perfect for me. I don't feel I need this mode. I do feel the game does, for other people, particularly young people.) I'd love to plant my kids down in front of Kerbal and say, "Have at it!" And I while letting kids pick missions is great, having missions picked for you as a soft of longer tutorial is great too.

TheReaverOfDarkness - I think that a space station being built and then being outdated matches the real world pretty well. I understand what you're saying, but you might want to stay with science mode if you like to jump to advanced tech early. I personally am hoping for a slower tech experience with this mode. Also, I think that a space station being built and then being out of date matches reality pretty well, and the reason your first station is out of date is because of the science it gets you, right? It gets you a bunch of science and your little Kerbals now understand how to build a better station. Its like, "We built a space station, yea! Look at it, w00t! Man, I learned so much from building that station that if we could do it all over again it would be so much better!" Foot Note: I think the designers should try to strike the balance of fast tech and slow tech, for people who prefer different play styles, by creating different game modes and different options for the various game modes. - You want a fast tech game, and that's great! I want a slow tech game, and I think that's great too.

Right now I feel that players are able to gain science and tech way too quickly. I just saw a Scott Manley (I'm sure people here have heard of him, I've just learned of him, but anyway) video where he does First Contract in two launches. He's able to get over 200 science after his first mission. Now, I think the fact that people can do that is AWESOME... I also feel like if I don't do that, I'm some how losing the game. (Yet, I don't want to copy them. I mean, I might try the challenge, but now that I've seen it done I don't know how I can do my own and feel untainted by previous knowledge... that's a separate issue, and I digress [again]) So, anyway, that's great... in say Sandbox Mode or pure Science Mode. However, I'd like to have a mode that limits that sort of thing. After all, just because you can collect a bunch of data (in real life, which Kerbal isn't, but... Its the sort of game where 'real life' actually kind of matters since I'm told (you/the) dev's aren't going to put scifi stuff in) doesn't mean that data can be understood and put into application immediately. SO... SUGGESTION HERE: I'd like to see a structured mode that slows down science gain for players that choose to play in this mode, and force them to work with older parts and tech for longer. (Hey, you'd only go into this mode if you wanted it!) While it would be great if specific tech was tied to specific science experiments and data types, that for now the science being tied to contracts would be fun. So, to unlock a new type of engine, the player would have to perform a contract first. To unlock a new nose cone, another contract for that. Also, to prevent players from taking all the contracts at once and getting all the tech, only one contract can be taken at a time. Some contracts can give the player access to the tech right away, but they can't get any more contracts until they complete the one they have. Other contracts will be there to give players access to other contracts. EXAMPLES: Several contracts appear in the contract menu. One is to test a new parachute. The player takes the contract and the player gets access to the parachute to perform the test. The other contracts disappear/can't be taken until the Parachute contract is complete. This would give players access to the parachute right away, yea! However, until they complete the contract they can't gain access to another part. So, player does the parachute test and now the lab geeks want some Goo Data from Mun (or orbit, or whatever). The would then give the player access to the Mysterious Goo container. Yea! But, once again, until the contract is completed no other parts can be unlocked. After a while the lab guys decide they'd like to get some Goo Data from the Mun. So, they ask you to head to the Mun and bring back Goo Data. After completing the contract with the Goo on the Mun, the lab guys have another contract to take a Science Lab to the Mun (I forget what its called, the first white round science thingy you get after Goo.) So, back to the Mun! (What, weren't we just there!? Come on lab guys! ) and this time we've taken science from the Mun. Then maybe the science guys want to test transmitting data back from the Mun. This could unlock a new mission contract that gives access to probes, but they want to test how well the probe works from Minmus or something.) And so on, and so on... where several contracts are there for the taking, but the tech tree is only unlocked as the contracts are completed. This way, the player can follow the contracts and not worry about collecting every piece of science from every pond in the game... nor do they advance through the tech tree very quickly. =-=-=-= DISCLAIMER: I -LOVE- that the other game play modes exist, and I don't want them to be removed or tinkered with too much (please make them 'better'! - Yes - but I don't want to see Mission Mode replace Science Mode, or Sandbox Mode, etc.) I'd love to be able to sit down and play KSP through Mission Mode as a giant tutorial, to learn the game... but then once I've beat all the missions I could switch to Science Mode where I can design my own missions (as it is now) to unlock the tech tree and do my own experiments and challenges, but then when I feel like I've got more of a handle on the game, I can go into Career where I get to do it all gain with a budget. - I like to see added replay value in all games I play and own. - Thanks for the read, Sasuga

BACK STORY AND RAMBLING (You should probably skip ahead.) I've been keeping my eye on KSP since it first hit Steam. However, I only recently bought KSP after it got its Career Mode (and I was able to squeeze another non-sale game into my budget... I digress... - Its a great price! I'm just poor. Anyway,) because I like the objective based gameplay. Sandbox with all the parts is just too overwhelming and directionless for me. (I mean, I like Sandbox mode occasionally, its handy and should be kept in the game.) However, I found while I LOVE the idea of balancing science and money, what I was really hoping to get out of the Career Mode was ruined by the money. I could do science mode, get science and unlock the tech tree slowly, but once again I'd be without a rudder. I like having the game choose mission objectives for me, otherwise I'm trying to land on Duna on day one. It's just how I am. (And sure, I'm betting you can land on Duna on day one but as a new players I spend a lot of time just crashing on the launch pad and not doing stuff that helps me get the better equipment to et to Duna... and Sure, I know better equipment and all.. I need a rudder! ) So, I'd like a mode that's between Career and Science SUGGESTION STARTS HERE: Because I couldn't think of a better name for it, I'm calling it Experiment Mode. As the players would do experiments (planned by the lab geeks) to gain science. The players would take contracts that give only science and not worry about money at all. Same Contracts, Same Amount of Science, No Budget or Money.

I disagree about the number of contracts. However, I dislike how little time you have to take them and then a huge amount of time to complete them. I think the balance on time should be changed. I'd like to see the contracts sit in the contract place for longer, but then give you a shorter time to complete them. - Depending on the contract. For example, testing a parachute should maybe sit in the contract place for a month but then only give you a week to complete once taken. Another example would be the rescue mission. I love that its there, but it should be a short contract to both take and complete. The game is still early access however, so odds are they intend to change the contracts around and right now they just want to give everyone a chance to play with the contracts just like they originally gave everyone sandbox mode and so on.