BloodDusk

FAR will happily make your Kerbal terminal speed +200 m/s. In my tests, falling from about 4 Km high, they reached 285 m/s.

After some testing. The Kerbals have to be standing up, otherwise, they die. If they land anywhere else other than on their feet, they die. FAR makes the Kerbals behave more like they should be, but increases the terminal velocity drastically, to the point that you can see aerodynamic effects on the Kerbal. How the Kerbal land doesn't make a difference on FAR. They die both ways.

The main issue with trying to reproduce these things in said gaming conditions is that is not possible to change the one thing being changed whilst testing without relying on tools like Hyper Edit to keep the conditions exact. You could save, However, some mods can break saved games if the save was made before said mod was installed. But sure. I can test that.

But that's one guy specifically. You could say the same thing about Mikhail Kalashnikov. He wanted to do farm equipment and things to help people instead. Sure, these people had their past haunt them for the rest of their lives, but trying to sugar coat everything is a bit dull. At least give people options. Plus, these types of weapons have other uses besides military use. For example, bombs are used in mining, which is a mechanic present in KSP.

Probably just people like Scott Manley, HOC, etc. test these things.

I would volunteer for music making for KSP as well, but, music seems to be a secondary feature. An extension to that would be different musics for each biome.

Since the introduction of a working multiplayer model using the Dark Multiplayer mod, multiplayer is a planned feature for KSP, much like other mods that introduced other features and now are part of the main game (i.e. Subassembly Loading, Fairings, Listing of vessels, EVA, etc.)

Which is weird. Cargo bays should be in the 'structural' category instead. I think procedural wings would be the next thing, especially considering that some wings don't match well with other wings.

You all know that the only pc that can run KSP properly is a maxed out Music Computing CoreMC: -2x 18-core Intel Xeon E5-2699 2.3 GHz -1 TB RAM -26 TB SSD -3x nVidia Quadro M6000 GPUs Then maybe you can use all your mods without crashes.

Since when we stopped using weapons in KSP? We're just using missiles and stuff that would originally go into ICBMs, warheads and fighter planes, bombers, etc. for a different purpose. A screwdriver remains a screwdriver, even if you hammer nails with it.

Why it shouldn't be changed? It doesn't for purposes of this forum. Adding FAR will qualify the game as non-stock. They're bad. Much like some new mechanics recently introduced to keep people from making mistakes (i.e. 'Cannot activate engine while stowed'). And, if something like that has existed for several versions already, I don't think a new aerodynamics model will solve it. Cause, this feels like a lackluster solution to not include Kerbal parachutes in the game.

So, killing Kerbals is okay as long as you can't see them becoming a puff of smoke. Since when KSP become a SWJ game? Keeping this makes as much sense as justifying keeping the stowing mechanic mentioning elsewhere to keep people from making mistakes. Kerbals have been dying from 10+ versions now. Why change it? Adding FAR doesn't count as a valid test variation, because mods can change game mechanics.

As long as your reentry speed is not that high, I can replicate that free fall from as high ~98Km and it works as prescribed. When I first started mucking with it, I tested various different heights, increasing the height little by little.

Couldn't find a single cargo bay in my stock game.

Well, thanks for reminding me to not post any other bug reports in the future. Thankfully, it was on the first post I did in this section, so not much time was wasted on my part.

Then explain how a Kerbal can slow down his own fall to 30 m/s?

When every other body affected by gravity does not exhibit this behavior, maybe? Maybe add parachutes instead, since the deceleration is almost the same?

Cargo bays. I mean, you get all fancy on the space plane/shuttle parts and...you didn't add any cargo bays?

That is correct for CUDA, but not for PhysX.

I hope they don't. Console ports are never made well.

Well, I mentioned this when I introduced myself and on one of the challenge posts. This is done on stock game and works on any altitude up to about 92 Km. I didn't test all possible outcomes but, It works landing on water and land and, as long as your Kerbal's feet is facing down, it seems.

Something else. If you don't have a nVidia GPU, CUDA and PhysX are offloaded to the CPU, which is exactly the same as what we have now.

Considering console port...Maybe it's time to consider making a dedicated engine for KSP?

Aww...A funny thing would be if the big words ended up spelling 'When the next version will be released?"

Maybe some physics calculations could be offset to the GPU? No, I'm not talking about CUDA or PhysX.