_stilgar_

If I was game developer/publisher that would be exactly how I would do it. Custom made giant red button (with a lock, so it won't get pushed accidentally), that triggers release on Steam and other services. You could do launch party and stream the giant button pushing. Oh, it could also trigger confetti!

Have you considered playing with reduced money/science/rep rewards?

Or Tomorrow if you live in Australia or Asia. Or maybe even Europe. That's why I like buying games from Paradox. They are in the same timezone (Central Europe) that I live.

Science still has use even after tech tree is completed. You can convert it to money or, more importantly, reputation. And reputation is always nice. Just use Kerbnet in Biome mode, you can see all the places when many biomes meet.

1. It's fun to drive on other planets and moons. 2. Sometimes when you land in an area when there are many biomes, it's easier to drive to them than to fly to them (and it doesn't use that much fuel) 3. Sometimes on rescue missions it may not be easy or possible to land near the survivors, so land when it's flat and send a bus for kerbals 4. Some new contracts require you to go to one location and when you get there you get "now get to that other location". Very easy with a rover, hard with a rocket.

Well, it's not going to be released why America is still sleeping...

I have the same problem, X52-pro is virtually unplayable. I've also tried playing with simpler Saitek Cyborg Fly-5 and while it's a little better, it's still better to pilot things with keyboard. This is weird, because I remember I used Fly-5 in 2015 and it worked quite nice. Mad Catz bought Saitek and then they went bankrupt and sold Saitek to Logitech.

No, landing with normal view and quickly switching to IVA and back. That's how I do it

That reminds me, what's the conversion factor for LF only? (for NERV/jet ships) ? 200 ?

Thanks!

Does it also work for solid boosters and xenon tanks?

They wear EVA suit WITH A HELMET while walking on surface of Kerbin. I'd like to think that Kerbals are just that extra careful.

The game has both of those, but for some reason, in IVA view only.

It's simple when you have simple rocket. Add boosters with different ISP, different burn time and staged halfway through and it stops being simple.

Even worse, the "how much fuel I have" is misleading. You see that you've used half of the fuel, so maybe it's time to go back home, but then you have to remember that you still got most of your dV. At least they could put a logarithmic scale on the fuel left gauge.

Delta-V readout would be nice, but... when I tried KER, all the data it provided, it almost made the game too easy I can calculate the delta-v by hand, but I wish the game would just tell me the dry weight of my rocket. Right now, I have to write down the full weight, drain all the tanks, write down empty weight, calculate delta-v, refill the tanks... and then, during Mun landing, notice that the lander has no fuel because I forgot to refill that one tank...

Few months ago there was a dev diary about Mobile LaunchPad. I haven't seen the part in any of the previews, so I guess it it's this pad, spawned as part of the missions. They mentioned autoleveling as a feature and those legs look like they would adjust themselves to the terrain. But I thought the mobile launchpad was supposed to be foldable into 3.75m or 5m part...

I guess people from Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia should just assume release will be on Wednesday... The same way Kerbal Weekly is on Saturday.

In earlier versions of KSP deployed parachutes clipped into each other. It looked weird. In 1.1 or 1.2 (I don't remember), Roverdude added "fake collisions" to parachutes - they would deploy at angles, so they would appear to repel each other, like real parachutes would. I think this settings is for the fine control of this mechanism.

You should report this to bug tracker. Devs may not see your post here.

Yes, DLCs by definition shouldn't be necessary. If they are, then the game developer is cutting parts of the game to get even more money. Expansions by definition expand the game to add even more stuff or things to do. For example, I would have no problems if ISRU or CommNet were added as DLCs, as they add new things - but the game was fun enough without them. But, we got them "for free", so yay, more stuff for us! No, you should only buy DLCs that add stuff you want. Sure, you can also buy expansions you don't want, just to support the developer, if you feel like it, but it never should be an obligation. I like to point to Crusader Kings 2 as an example of the DLC model done right. The game was published in 2012, they probably planned to make 2 or 3 expansions if the game was a success. It was a success, it now has 14 big DLCs (I'm not counting portrait packs and things that don't change behaviour of the game), 15th is in development and the game is still actively supported now, in 2018, 6 years later. Even without DLCs, the base game evolved into much better game, but it was only possible with the money Paradox got from paid DLCs. I wish KSP had the same amount of support CK2 has. Well, the problem is that "false" groups people who will buy MH regardless of those parts and people who won't buy it. Yes, I remember that. Good developers listen to the players. The best developer listen to the players, but know that they don't have to do everything players wants, because players themselves really don't know what they want. And people who are fine with the game often don't go to the forum to post things (the vocal minority problem).

Why? Just because you want them? Making History is missions + parts pack. I don't care much for the missions, but I'll be buying the expansion for the new parts. Those parts aren't necessary to play the game, you can do anything without them. If Squad added parts to the base game just because people want those particular parts, there would be no reason to buy the expansion - and the expansion pays for continued development of the game.

1.4 have mesh switching now. Engines could have different variants.

2.5 capsules have probe control point and higher tolerances, so they are better than just 3x mk1 pod. Mk2 lander can also have probe control point, but yes, it's too heavy even with that (you can add PCP for 0.1t with RC-001S)

It's a feature, not a bug. It represents the fact that the "engine part" for jet engines only represents part of the engine and the rest is hidden in the part you attached it to. I belive that in beta 1.2 they wanted to add visual representation of that part of the engine, but players didn't like the way it looked so they removed it.