Megadeath

The technical discussion is beyond me, but from a purely aesthetic this appeals to me greatly.

I agree with the people who've said general base building, and especially terrain deformation, would be better. Deformation in particular opens up a lot! Change asteroid behaviour slightly, and we'll all have subtlety different planets over time. Leave crash craters to mark the epic failures alongside the flags for the successes. Grading that high ore area for smooth landing and better base building. Carve a canyon through the mountains for aerial races or to simplify a train route... With those things stock, I'd probably appreciate a terraforming mod built off of them, but as in life, it's an end game goal.

I'd certainly like to have something like this included in stock. That said, it's totally doable to use f5 and time warp as a poor mans version, right?

I would say that it's good enough in its present form, since it runs acceptably on my not-good laptop despite its complexity. That said, I'd celebrate if it could run better. I recall there was/is a mod that "welds" parts. If they're then treated as one part for physics, that can help cut the load right? I personally wouldn't want stock to weld my vessel into a single solid piece, since then it'd ruin half the fun of shoddy designs. Maybe between certain parts (capsule & heat shield, fuel tank & engine, etc) or something? Another question, if part count = bad, what's the rationale for so many fuel tanks at each width, varying only in height, as opposed to something more procedural, as I also believe is possible in mods? I realise this is kinda specifically what the OP didn't want posted, but I'm curious too and this seemed the most relevant place to ask.

I choose to interpret the op as surrealist performance art. As such, it is perfect.

I've had issues with the fixed gear and the reinforcing oscillation, but not other issues. Look forward to the future fix, though I play on a laptop that hardly handles it anyway.

Sure... But you'd just be making your own mod then. Why make it harder on yourself?

That's NOT funny. If you can't show respect for the dead, keep your damn mouth shut. This on the other hand was. Sure a lot of effort went into it, but it's funny when someone knocks down the house of cards they've spent all afternoon building. It'd be even funnier if they somehow wrecked it by putting a card in sideways, making it do a flip! It'd be just as funny anywhere, too. :s

Ah, far enough. I thought I'd done that in the past, but my memory isn't worth much and I'm away from the game. In that case, they're certainly features we ought to have!

I'm sorry, but I take it English is not your language? I didn't understand that. Could you try in your language and maybe another user who speaks the same could interpret for every one?

Yeah, this seems unnecessary and sorta problematic. I'd guess the reason it worked for the shuttle would be a more vertical ascent than descent profile, and aerodynamic shielding by fuel tanks, or the shuttle body? (I know nothing, please don't hit me!) That seems kinda too niche for stock. Optional ablator for the bottom half of space plane parts would be cool though... For a nose cone, fairing+heat shield sounds right. If the fairing base has poor heat tolerance, put it above as an additional shield!

I think I'm missing something. Isn't it possible to change craft type & name from tracking station? Isn't it possible too to "fly vessel" for the debris and do the same? Maybe a different craft type label would be good, but this hardly seems necessary to me. :s

Yeah, I wish things were different on this front too. More for 1>3>1 connections and similar, but other reasons too. Doesn't sound feasible though.

Yeah, pretty sure I'm not the only person setting up flags at both ends of the runway!

I feel the thread title doesn't accurately reflect the discussion. To throw my two cents in, I don't love career. The constraints feel a bit arbitrary, and the progression is a bad combination of too linear, and too vague. I think improving the contracts would help a lot ie; tighter deadlines, success in this contract leads to further development from the same client, NOT being asked to do the same thing 20 times by 4 different groups, etc. I think it's notable though that the real space race was driven mostly by outside factors. So add in random events or something? Stuff like a presidential promise of a Kerbal on the Mun, a never seen space agency put someone in orbit ahead of you, or this particular parts provider is in favour/disfavour. It could even just be flavor text, though I think linking it to optional career goals would be rewarding. @regex You know what opens up untold vistas of exploration and goal setting? An understanding of coding, or even personal development of the unity engine. Why not go do that, and be less of a jerk to people looking for a game in this particular glorious sandbox, and discussing it in the appropriate forum?

Lol! Yup, and there's another thing called lander legs! And other parts, called wheels! What we don't have (In ksp or reality really) is a way to turn easily generated and stored electricity into vertical motion. This might be too niche for stock, but I think it'd be a cool dedicated mod.

+1 To this idea. I personally don't know that I agree about the bells and whistles though. I don't think that I'm unusual in coming to the game with extremely limited understanding, and jumping in without playing tutorials, or watching YouTube vids. The simplicity of the system made it quick and easy to pick up an intuitive understanding of how orbital mechanics work. While it's just presentation of the same thing, I think numeric data entry across six fields, and intercept prediction/planning, would harm that. A simple button on the map screen to force a manoeuvre node would massively reduce stress for new and old players though. Personally I'd have the button generate a circularisation burn node, at Pe/Ap, whichever is next. Editable of course!

And now I have seen it. I play on very low settings, as the laptop I use can barely play the game. This does somewhat seem to reduce the effect, but I'm going to be noticing it for a while now.

The debate over distribution doesn't really belong here, and is a pretty poor greeting to the community for the op. As to that, as others have said all indications are development will continue a good while, and it'd be worth every penny if they dropped it tomorrow anyway.

It might be possible to use periapsis kicks to significantly reduce losses on an insertion burn (that's the departure, right?) but it seems to me that a low twr inherently means greater loss in the capture burn from burning longer before and after. I'm far from a rocket scientist, so constructive criticism appreciated. That's sorta the gist I'm getting from smarter people's arguments.

Oh frabjous day! It works! Boy, do I feel dumb. When I put the new dll in, I changed the old ones name, but left it in place. As soon as it was properly replaced the game and mod returned to seemingly perfect functioning. My most sincere and heartfelt gratitude IgorZ, for helping this bumbling fool.

Okay, so oddly, switched back to the old dll and got the behaviour remained... :S To add more description, using "y" near the winch also won't grab it, and "p" doesn't bring up the gui. Ctrl+k bought up the debug, but initially only as a little square, dragging it elsewhere on the screen expanded it to a full window. Will link the files below. https://www.dropbox.com/s/n6gcuneubuw1g0m/KSP.log?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/enwgkfpcciz8coc/20160625210810_1.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/0y41spe5uau2yjx/20160625210754_1.jpg?dl=0

Yep, context menu coming up fine for other parts. Wouldn't know how to make a video, but I'll look into that and give it a try. Since the context menus were working with the previous dll, albeit without the ability to grab, or eject winches, I might try switching back, and see if attempts to do that show more obvious trouble behaviour in the log. Indeed on a laptop, and definitely nothing special either. Doesn't exactly run kerbal great, but well enough to play. I wouldn't have thought the poor quality equipment should produce such a limited and specific issue, but then I'm not the expert. Is that what you're thinking? A search didn't turn up any extraneous dll files.

Removed all other mods, and started a new file to test. Probably should have mentioned the issue is persistent across all craft, and save games. Still unable to bring up a right click menu on the kas parts. New log file below. https://www.dropbox.com/s/pcib90zrqgnb25j/KSP.log?dl=0

Uh, oops. Can't get rid of that ^^^ Here is the ksp.log from the root directory: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vnvrf4sq8fiyvlt/KSP.log?dl=0 (Edited out; I forgot what month it is.) First time using dropbox, so I hope I've done that right? I'll try the logs console next time I run it, but can't right now.