Shna_na

Ah, that's much simpler to answer: Landing: Science recieved from experiments on solid ground. Splashed: Science recieved from experiments on liquids. Only possible on Eve, Laythe, and Kerbin.

True, it's a fantastic colour. The user below me will post a short comedic story about the adventures of the kraken in KSP.

Betwixt Thanks for putting it together, we should all do it as we add to it, maybe. Here it is now with correct grammar (I also fixed "Thus he squelch to eat the koalas, drank bleach" to make more sense): "Once in space there was a pirate named BaconMaster McShnazzlehauffer who went over to NGC 7032, where he attached twenty large koalas to his pendulous nose with eighteen staples/apples from Dres. However/ unfortunately, he stepped on luminous frogs. Thus, he squelched to eat - the koalas drank bleach. This killed several hamsters which were on top of the sun. This killed several Jebediahs while he danced to dubstep, causing him and Sophia to suffer horribly without Bill, who was punished by God For treason Against kraken Mcpuffin. Henceforth, trilobites tossed children emphatically under ground where they imploded into nothingness then somethingness maximus horse meat, loathing the Orangutans who postulated why they require boosters betwixt...

This challenge is not as much of a challenge as it is a display. It's essentially a community project in which you all create a land vehicle that looks somewhat like a life-like vehicle and post them here. For example, you may wish to build: A truck A car A bike (how?) An off-road vehicle (technically they all are, but by this I mean one that somewhat resembles a 4x4 or quad-bike) A mobile home A snowmobile A construction vehicle (bulldozer, one of those big things that carry debris in the back of them, etc.) A limousine Etc! Examples will be added as people make them. These "community vehicles" will be added to the list alongside the name of the creator. So what's the purpose of all this? Well, quite simply, I thought it would be nice to have a challenge in which the community work together as a whole rather than in competition. The best way to do this is through the construction of something that has no functional benefit and is crafted for aesthetic purposes. For this reason, there will be no competition of any sort here. No land speed records, no distance records, no strongest tower award, nothing. Just a bunch of great people making fantastic vehicles. You are in no way limited to creating only the vehicles that are listed above, and are even encouraged to come up with your own unique ideas. As with all things good, there are rules: No flight. Flight, in this case, is defined as leaving the ground for a prolonged period of time. Jumping is allowed, but gliding and powered flight are not. Which leads me onto rule 2: No propulsion. These vehicles must be safe for public kerbal use, and therefore must only be electrically powered. Ion engines also apply as propulsion here. The only way that these crafts can move is by electrical wheels. Exceptional circumstances can overthrow this rule, but they must be for very good reasons. Engines are fine to use, provided that they can't actually generate any thrust (must have no fuel/be disconnected from fuel). Stock parts only. Mods can be used provided that the craft itself is entirely stock parts. Things like Kerbal Engineer or Kerbal Alarm Clock are acceptable, as are any that will ensure that the craft can be reconstructed/downloaded and used by all. This is, after all, a community project - and what's the point in claiming it to be one if not everyone can use everything? Powered by RTGs. Solar panels can be used alongside this, but the craft must be able to travel at night. The only way to guarantee this is with sufficient RTGs. Part-clipping is allowed. But don't get too excited - this can be used for aesthetic purposes only. Using it to get RTGs inside RTGs or battery packs inside battery packs is abuse, plain and simple. To clarify: part clipping cannot be used on any parts that store or generate resources, all other parts are acceptable though. Despite this being a rule, you are not obliged to use it. The craft must prioritise aesthetics over functionality. The only functional requirements for the craft have been stated in the above rules. Screenshots are mandatory. You may post a reply in this thread without a screenshot, but if you have a craft that was created for this challenge then you must show us. Please, it's a community project. Generously apply common sense. If your craft does not look sufficiently automotive-esque then it will be disregarded as invalid. This is, after all, a challenge. Payloads are acceptable. If you see an opportunity to create a payload for your craft or someone else's, please do so. It will be moderated in the same way that all other submissions are and is just as much of a contribution as a vehicle. Players can submit multiple entries. You are not limited to one entry. A fair-use policy obviously applies here, don't post a ridiculous number of entries in a short space of time. Give others a chance, over-posting will result in instant rejection. If you update a craft, simply edit a previous post unless it is a significant change. It can then be regarded as a separate craft and therefore a separate entry. Rejection is not failure. Sure, one of your submissions didn't make it. So what? What's stopping you from making another? Do it, go ahead and improve your design. Design features may be imitated. Adapting or using an idea that closely resembles that of another player's vehicle is absolutely acceptable, there's no copyright here! If you do "re-cycle" another player's ideas, please give them credit and explain which part is similar. Constructive criticism only. Stay friendly, we want no arguments here. We should be a tightly woven community, not competing companies. If you would like to criticise another user's craft then please do so in a friendly and constructive manner. Tell them how they can make it better and what's good about it rather than bluntly saying that you don't like it. If you don't like it but don't know why, don't say it unless you're sensitive about it. Let them know that you can't quite put your finger on it. Let other players down gently and keep their spirits up - the more people making crafts the better! ​I think that's about all for rules. I may update the post and add more. If your craft no longer applies to the rules after an update then it is suggested that you change it. Please post your craft(s) in a reply with a screenshot (or album). If you wish for your craft to be downloadable, please feel free to upload it to SpacePort and put a link to your craft in the reply. Note that this is still a challenge, and the rules should be adhered to in all submissions. If a craft does not sufficiently meet the rules or raises queries about the current guidelines then it may be denied. As the original poster, I have the final word in all decisions regarding the validity of a submission. You may plead against my decision but if you are persistently disregarding my verdict, action will be taken.

I like to have very light rovers - they're compact and easy to transport, as well as being able to reach higher speeds. The first place you'll take a rover (except maybe Kerbin) is Mun/Minmus. Chances are, it will flip. At the moment there's no incentive to bring a kerbal on board other than a little more science. Having an action like that previously mentioned in the original post would be more of an incentive to use them. Also: A wider base and lower centre of mass helps to keep a rover upright. The more you know

Required 10car

The OP is pretty much entirely things that are in "do not suggest". Random events/failures are a terrible thing.

Ah, right. So onto the EVA abilities: to flip or not to flip?

While I agree, this would mean starting on colonisation. That would be great, but not at the moment. The devs are planning the implementation of resources sometime in the not too distant future, they've got an agreement with NASA for some kind of asteroid landing mission, and they're getting career mode up to scratch. Having the RAA (I like that name) would be viable though.

That's a good way of putting it. That's also why I'm pro-boat. The reason that we need specific boat parts is to reduce part count as, essentially, optimisation. Where you would currently, for example, 30 parts to create a boat with the current version, this could be reduced to as little as 3 parts. Making parts isn't all that much work when you know how to do it, so it shouldn't take too much out of development time.

That's a great idea. Maybe there should be some kind of customisable or porcedural part that acts as a cargo bay.

Yes you can. It's probably easier than sending a plane or a base into space. I'd guess that it's probably on about the same level as putting a medium-sized rover into space.

False, but it would have been pretty awesome. I guess the Mars and Asteroid landings will have to suffice The user below me is yet to discover Mars One.

Yeah! It would also mean that you could create vehicles on Kerbin in an easier way: from cars to trucks, tugs to ships, etc.

I think he's referring to how Armstrong had to take the reigns and steer them away from some lethal terrain. That already does happen in the game - have you ever been in a situation where you need to change course? I certainly have: there have been several occasions where my landing zone is on too much of a gradient for it to be a risk worth taking and I've had to go all Apollo on that stuff.

Rovers. Let's discuss them, shall we? So, at the moment they're in a pretty solid state, yes? I'd say so. But there are some features that would be nice to have for them that aren't in the game yet. While there's obviously the scope for more to do in EVA which will in turn enhance rover-use, I'd like to hear people's opinions on how they themselves could be improved. We'll start with a little suggestion or two of mine: Rover/Small Payload Assembly Building: I have mentioned this way back, and am unsure if it comes under "graveyards and suchlike" in the "what not to discuss" thread. But since it doesn't seem to be a taboo topic, I'd like to spout about it. A building dedicated to building small payloads or rovers would be great. It could have specialised tools and options to make construction easier, and an option for fairings (which I won't go into detail about - they are taboo) of some description. There could then be a test option, in which you can put your rover to the test on various surfaces, at varying speeds, and stress-test them. The .craft could then be saved into a sub-section of the sub-assemblies labelled "Rovers and Payloads". There's a lot that could be done with such a building, and I for one would greatly appreciate having it. Kerbal Interaction: Kerbals should have more interaction with rovers. At the moment, if your rover rolls, your rover is stuck. But what if kerbals could right it? I think that Kerbals should have the option to move a craft by hand - grabbing it somehow and moving with it in tow: whether by hand or rope. This would be a great feature, missions would be less stressful and Kerbals would have a point other than wheel maintenance and science. And it opens up the opportunity for towing crafts along the surface of a body (such as for base assembly or general recreation). This topic is open for discussion. Feel free to digress slightly, provided that it's somewhat related.

That's a pretty good point. It's not a random failure, it's entirely optional, so I don't see why this would be an issue. And I'd quite like more options for cinematics (not a high priority though - gameplayer>cinematics).

I know it says not to suggest some of these, but that's because they're coming at some point. The reason I'm saying them is because this isn't a suggestion, it's simply what I'd like to see in the next update based on what the Devs have mentioned. I'll try to be realistic: Payload Fairings The NASA mission (yes, that's coming in 0.23.10, but they've said that the two updates will be released nearby each other). More biomes on other bodies Enhancements to current biomes (in terms of science -at the moment you get as much science from walking a few meters to the grasslands as you do from going to the poles) Contracts Currency More parts (just throwing it out there because it happens in most major updates anyway) And now for the less likely stuff that may or may not have already been mentioned: Cost of Kerbals (and a Kerbal wage, maybe?) Stupidity and courage have an effect on things Payload assembly building In-game parts designer (basic for now, maybe just fuel tanks) Something to do with this whole asteroid landing malarkey (maybe adding an asteroid, or parts that are related to the mission) More science-related parts Disclaimer1: I am in no way saying that all of these should/may be included in the next update - but hopefully the majority of, if not all, of those in the first section will be. Disclaimer2: Things that have been said in this post are not suggestions but are predictions of what I believe the developers will be adding in the next few major updates, therefore I have broke no "what not to suggest" rules.

The Devs have already said that they don't want random events of any kind - they want all players to have the same experience in their own way. Reliability is a semi-random event that is determined by a % chance of something failing. It's enough of a random event for the devs to disregard and enough for most players (such as me) to be less attracted to.

Ouch, harsh. I'll be fair though. 5/10 +1 not cluttered or distracting +1 short and simple +2 a couple of original statements, I like the second one +1 I still need to change my system for it to work well.

False, until now I didn't know about it (link to ribbons) The user below me has made an addon for the game (.craft files count as addons)

Orangutans (yes, 10 char means 10 characters: the minimum number of characters per post)

6/10 = I don't understand hex +2 you learned hex +1 effort of using hex +1 not cluttered +1 nice ribbons +1 not cluttered or distracting

That's a valid point. My hat is now firmly tilted in accordance to your current position.

They might have planned ahead. They might have thought "Since we're taking a panorama, why not make a phallus on Mars?" and coordinated the rover's movements accordingly. Anyway, back to the thread. Trails are good. Anyone else agree?