SlinkyMcman

I'm impressed that you didn't clip through the part at orbital velocities, how big were the crafts?

Building a multithreaded physics engine(and it's associated UI for dev) isn't a simple task. Do you know if there is a way to do multi-threading in Unity as it is now?

Landing Gear

Good news we're at the very least going to get a .625 rotor in the next expansion, in 2 weeks! Hype Copter! So many common requests are gonna be craftable with robotics, I have all the stoke.

Then you wouldn't get ships that explode into each individual part.

Try using the BZ-52 Radial Attachment point, https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/BZ-52_Radial_Attachment_Point it's pretty useful better then the cubic octagonal strut in situations.

Time's have changed Our parts are getting worse They won't obey their physics They just want to fail first Should we blame the government? Or blame society? Or should we blame the images on our screen?

Docking Port Alignment Indicator on the Nav Ball(and a heading for high lvl pilots/cores), An alarm clock. Torque, in the DV info. Then I don't won't need mods. This would be built into the alarm clock of course.

what if it was unlocked as the last tech in the tree worth like 5k science?

My brain filled it in as a "fab four" but that may have already been taken for something else.

Yeah you gotta be sure to empty them first, or 'you're gonna have some problems'. I haven't yet figured out how to both use them as a booster and a structural element, that's probably the dream.

I build mine symmetrical about a ray. With one side dedicated to propulsion, and the other for docking smaller craft. I use standardized multiport couplers that are designed to mate to its mirror, these are considerably stronger than just docking ports, especially with tearing and bouncing. Docking ports are like stronger struts abuse them in the VAB, but don't undock um if they're on the same craft. Empty kickbacks are pretty good Terminal arms. This is my Jool4 mission, it was my main LKO starport for a couple kerbal years, each piece being <20t dry weight, I launched most pieces with t2 VAB/pad. This is going to refuel at pol/bop and then spend the rest of it's life as my main Laythe starport. This is the replacement station. Val flew it to space solo. It is my largest launch. This is the OG station proof of concept, with color co-ordinated guide-in lights for precision docking. It had a hat similar to the Jool4's but it wiggled apart.

Reputation.

Given the console galaxy background upgrade, there is a non-zero chance that adding some clouds are already on the to-do list since visual updates are clearly something the devs are prioritizing. This is the sort of thing that could definitely be optional for lower gaming specs, and probably is well within reason for intel graphics. As for people wanting fixing bugs to take priority over visual upgrades, I think that may be a false dichotomy.

pics or it didn't happen

What if every one hundred years they asexually reproduce a clone, named Twoey. Jeb Twoey Kerman. These would constantly be asking to be fed, and if you don't install a particular* LF mod, they will cease to work properly. Since they are plants from outer space, they would have to also get a piranha plant re-skin.

My Universal set up. I try to avoid using "toggle X" functions because they tend to get out of sync with the other actions. 1. Solo Operations 1 2. Solo Operations 2 3. Science 4. Shut Down Solo Operations. 5. Docked Operations 1 6. Docked Operations 2 7. Activate Air Breathing Engines. 8. Activate High Thrust Engines. 9. Activate Transfer Stage Engines. 0. Shut Down All Engines.

"New Launch Sites With the History and Parts Pack you will also have the ability to launch your crafts from 4 additional complexes: the Woomerang Launchsite, the Dessert Complex, the Island Runway and a brand new Mun Launchsite, not currently available on PC!" A way to unlock? More single player(campaign) content? Build a Mun base with quests? Given the mission creation tools from the first DLC, I wouldn't be shocked if they put a dedicated quest line for making an off world base.

Isn't landing supposed to be the "fun" part?

I am under (probably false assumption) that rocket legs float your craft above the surface, different from how static parts sit.

To be fair I'm not entirely sure what I'm talking about at any particular point either.

So i think really the solution for sliding around would be to implement variable friction quotients depending on the speed of travel and increase joint strength slightly to compensate(I read the wiki on Stribeck curve). I started using airbrakes as landing gear and those are even more slippery than the real thing. But implementing a whole system purely as a workaround for bad landing gear seems like a mistake, just fix the gear. Your idea to suspend physics calculations for the ground/gravity would be a fantastic way to implement permanent installations, with the height above terrain taking precedence over altitude when loading in, you wouldn't have to do physics easing in on the craft, since some amount of clipping into the surface would be fine, and may even help with the structure's immersion. The problem I see is Kraken attacks when you hit remove the parking break and your vehicle is floating or underground, because the world changed on it's own. Never allowing a craft to un-park would be a fix, but it isn't really what you're looking for(or is it with the Duna base?). The docking port problem seems easy, just give parked crafts alignment precedence over all other craft types. I started doing some science with save files may be back with some results. It probably shouldn't be super difficult to implement some sort of pylons/gear that lock your location.

Since the terrain is a computed property based on a bodies elevation map and a variable sample rate, this would cause all sorts of different issues. Static terrain features in game are clipped below the surface to hide the jankyness of the implementation. I think the way landing gear is currently coded is Kerbal's best attempt to do exactly what you want, it's just really hard.

I terms of doing something novel, and polished, and fun, KSP is definitely top 10. Requiring making something new is something that, necessarily limits candidates,( ie Odessy is way more fun than 64, but 64 is OG, so makes the cut instead of all others). So far as I can tell there is nothing that even comes close to the scale that Kerbal encompasses (even wow railroads you for content). And Kerbal doesn't even have Newtonian Physics. Also Kerbal is pretty kinda the only game that is *Hard without being a platformer, or chess(Starcraft is bullet chess mixed with dexterity challenges). They kinda stopped trying to implement a competitive AI in the newest CIV, I don't even know how you would implement a decision tree for the new quest based tech trees(plural? like why two different tech trees) other than just hard coding the tree for each different Nation. My Top 10 in Alphabetical Order: AI Wars Civ 2 Donkey Kong Country 2 Doom Echo Kerbal Mario 64 Myst Starcraft BroodWar World of Warcraft

First time doing a rendezvous with the Lvl 1 tracking center. It was practically a miracle when the craft broke the load in barrier, . .