Rocket In My Pocket

You'd likely have better luck asking in the respective mods release pages.

Might be a touch too far in the other direction lol, but yes; it is very clever!

Lol, where's your sense of humor?

What's the unifying design guideline of the new parts? "Boring-snooze-fest?" KSP is a game, it's a fantasy representation of the concept. It doesn't have to adhere to anything it doesn't want to, including real world influences. How boring would gaming in general be if no one ever designed anything in an exaggerated or stylized way? What we have now is very nice 1:1 technical representations of parts, what we used to have is someones "idea" of how the part should look. A stylized, personalized, characterful design with quirks. KSP rockets may have been mismatched, but they were eye-catching, they looked great in screenshots, bursting as they were with creativity, fantasy, and imagination. All I see now is a bog standard NASA CGI reel. Anyways; it's fine that we don't agree; different people like different things. I suppose I can always hope for some future texture options that harken back to the glory days.

If it's directly above the relay dish, it may just be some sort of weird visual artifact from the ground station itself.

Everyone is going to have their own opinion about what "looks good", but little green alien Kerbal ships shouldn't look carbon copies of real life human ships. I'm not against a visual "redesign" but this was a pretty unimaginative direction to take it. The parts just look boring and uninspired now. I mean, where is the artistic flair? The personal touch of style? The creative spark? The new parts are all cold, sterile, and lifeless. Maybe that appeals to some people? I certainly don't like it; I miss my junkyard rockets, that style was what defined KSP for years and years. I'm not being a stick in the mud, and hating on it just because it changed, I was very excited to see them revamp the textures, I just assumed they were going to keep the games visual identity mostly intact while doing so. I've tried to avoid complaining about the Making History DLC, but I think the march towards real life influences started there, and now all our parts look like real world copy cats. If you like that better, then I'm happy for you, but to be fair; we already had tons of mods for people who wanted true to life looking rockets. I mean it's not ruining the game for me, I'm not gonna stop playing, but; I just can't even get motivated to screen shot my newer rockets, I find the authentic looking parts to just be very boring on a visual level.

I'm incredibly disappointed by the entirety of the new part line up to be honest. Why exactly did we throw KSP's entire unique look out the window in favor of boring, lack luster (Unity's fault more-so but still) attempts at photo realism? Why don't they retexture the Kerbals to a nice shade of "human tan" while they're at it? KSP used to have personality, it used to have a visual identity, I could pick a KSP rocket out of a line up of 3D rocket models easily. Now it looks like every other space game on the market. We won't even get into what a pain sorting through several dozen parts that are all "nondescript white" is, it's like no one who worked on it took five seconds to understand why something like different sizes of decoupler or fuel tanks were all different colors/paterns before. As my grandfather says; "Before you remove an old fence, you should ask yourself why it was ever built in the first place." This new look is technically superior sure, but it has a supreme deficit of character, soul, and charm.

Well of course it's possible, it's a video game, anything is possible; an engine could run on anything you want, and produce any amount of thrust at any wieght you desire. You can even edit all this yourself in the part .cfgs. But, let me get this straight; you want to make the NERV (already one of the best engines in the game) lighter and more efficient? Are you under the impression that the NERV works the way it does in game because of "real life logic?" I'd like to introduce you to my friend "game balance." Also, welcome to the forums.

Yeah, "enjoy" is a strong word. Tolerate? Put up with? Accept? Sure. Lol.

I've often thought about (and dreaded) making this suggestion because I know how complicated and nightmarish these sorts of things can get but; Does anyone think there is room for an unofficial "Community Balance Patch" mod? Now the reason I said it's a nightmare is that these things can get really political; it's all well and good if we all agree a part needs changing but there is likely to be several "camps" of thought on this for any given part. Then there is the question of who get's to be on the "committee" of people making said balance patch? How do we decide who represents the "community?" Won't we invariably have a camp of people who outright hate it and decry it no matter what it is or how it's shaped/framed? You can't please everyone after all. Anyways, I know of several other games that have community balance passes, or community ran versions of the game essentially. (Xenonauts comes to mind as a good example.) In many cases (as is the case with Xenonauts) the community "fork" of the game is actually better and has for the most part completely supplanted the base game. I think the entirety of the KSP parts line could really stand for a complete, comprehensive balance pass. Not an overhaul, not reinventing the wheel, but fixing anything that the majority of the community agrees is glaringly wrong. I'd love to see Squad to do it, and maybe they will eventually but it's easily within our power to do it for ourselves, if we could find enough common ground to base it on. Which is a major issue, KSP is like ice cream, you can have vanilla, sure; but there are thousands of different flavors. A large group of people wouldn't even be interested in a stock balance overhaul because they don't play stock in the first place lol. Then you have the stock purists who would refute anything mod based. Finally, those actually interested, most likely won't agree on what to change and how. So idk..bad idea or what?

Honestly, I don't know how it works behind the scenes short of making assumptions, but yes; what you propose makes sense. So did setting them all to override fix or help the issue on your end? Not a problem, glad to help!

Just tried docking and undocking these two: Worked fine, no hiccups, no bounce, nothing broken. Even with a combination of wheels, airbrakes, and landing gear. 140 parts together, 31t, which isn't crazy but it's not small either. Here's a second, heavier test: 250ish parts, 234t combined weight. Very small jump at both noses when undocking, no damage though; didn't even lift the front wheels off the ground. (Both tests are at default "auto" spring/damper settings.) Final test, very small vehicle docked to huge vehicle. This didn't go very well with all small wheels, and although there wasn't much bouncing or being thrown in the air, all the wheels broke when undocking. Same when I moved up to the largest wheel type. So..bug sort of confirmed? UPDATE: Work around potentially discovered: Simply turning all wheels off auto and onto override but not changing any settings fixed the issue. I'm thinking the issue is similar to what OP described, but it's the "auto spring setting" trying to re-adjust itself that is causing the real problem when docking a light vehicle to a large one. Can anyone else replicate this fix on their end?

Scaling it up would just make all the most boring bits of the game (time warping, waiting for things to happen) longer while leaving the interesting bits pretty much the same. Not the best use of the dev's limited time/resources/potential for a game that aims to grab the casual audience. (We don't have cute little bug eyed green men for nothing.) If @Snark says it'd be time and work intensive; I am VERY inclined to believe him.

Not saying it's perfect or that Squad is faultless certainly. I'd be all for an overhaul of the game's parts balancing, I think we've needed one for awhile. I just don't want it to be decided entirely by real life logic. I don't see the current probe core weights being as serious an issue as your Crew cabin example though. They all weigh considerably less than manned solutions and so fit their game play niche nicely for the most part.

Needs more TIE fighter roar.

Is it an excuse that Tetris can only be explained via "it's a video game" or would you like to explore the logical explanation for falling randomly shaped blocks in a rectangular field that disappear when they make a line? Video games gonna videogame; that's really the greatest thing about them, they don't have to adhere to real life logic, physics, or sensibilities. Often times, the only driving force is the "meta" of gameplay balance; which I assume is how the probe cores got their weights. Not based on the actual weights of the materials that we can assume make them up, but by assigning a value that "felt right" and "played right." If you want to argue that they don't feel right or play right in a game meta sense then I'm totally willing to discuss that, so long as your sole reasoning isn't "Because; real life." If KSP is a rocket science "simulator", then GTA is a driving "simulator", lol. (Anyways we always seem to disagree on this sort of issue, but I don't take it personally, and I hope you don't either. )

Welcome to the forums! First off, the Dv to Duna can vary greatly depending on "when" in a given year you go. I'm talking thousands of Dv here. The Community Dv map is a fantastic tool and all, but it assumes you know well enough to be going at the right time. So your first step is getting Transfer Window Planner and plotting a transfer to Duna.

Kerbals are more like a humanoid fungus/mold/mushroom than a traditional animal/mammal. They just don't need any of the things we do.

Because it's a video game and the number was decided upon for a large number of "gamey" reasons. Videogames gonna videogame, KSP is not a simulator. (Also given that Kerbin is roughly 10 times denser than Earth, wouldn't anything made on Kerbin with local Kerbin resources also be roughly 10 times denser/heavier?)

I like Pullers for the added stability, you just have to get far enough from the asteroid with an "arm" or clear it's width with engine sponsons.

Well, he definitely ain't using that plane tomorrow I can tell you that! Lol.

You forgot the rest of the saying! "If you can walk away from a landing, it's a good landing. If you use the airplane the next day, it's an outstanding landing." -Chuck Yeager

This^ A bunch of wasted resources/development time on a feature that likely wouldn't even live up to CKAN, let alone surpass it. Modding support is best handled by....the modders themselves, what a surprise? Lol.

Yup, I assume because as a mod it's considered to be a "derivative work" or Squad just doesn't care enough to go after them. However, here on the forums, you will definitely get in trouble for sharing Squad files.