CaptRobau

Makes sense. I have a suggestion, btw. Sometimes the description or name of a part doesn't contain the words it's most commonly associated with. A lot of the solar panels for example don't have the word solar in them, even though people instinctively would want to search using that term. Same goes for 'ladder' for the Mobility Enhancers, nuclear for the LV-N and so on. My suggestion would be to have a simple tag module, which adds a term that Part Search could then look for. Would something like that be possible?

Kinds of like black jet engine. Aside from that it looks really good.

Glad you like it. The popular Share-A-Like Creative Commons always works for me.

It's acceleration, not gravitational force. That's what the gravimeter shows. It makes sense to see acceleration Gs on the navball.

I made a toolbar icon that you can use, free of charge. If you want to include it, all I ask is a credit. If you don't like the icon as it is now, I could change it from a banana (get the reference?) into something else (burger, apple, cookie, cupcake, etc.) no problem. I have more than enough free time on my hands and I like to keep my vector graphics talents sharp. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23500849/snacks.png

Saw the simple toolbar icon you were using and had some spare time, so I made a more visually appealing one for you to use. A credit somewhere is all that's needed for that, if you want to use it of course. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23500849/tbbutton.png

Would it be possible for there to be a pod bay, with doors and attachment nodes attachment of pods or custom craft? IXS Interstellar showed how awesome such an interior cargobay is.

Would it be possible to externalize some of the logic values for determining system generation, so that non-coders can change how some of this plugin works?

I've only heard that dev remark in response to procedurally generally generated systems. As in everyone having planets that look completely different and are in quantities and relations to each other that are different from other players. This approach would keep the identities of Duna, Jool, Tylo, etc. but change a few of the specifics so that not every save is identical to the previous one. This thread made me think about discovery and the unknown and that's put me in the camp of pro-procedural generation. After playing so long, this game has just become far too predictable. It used to be fresh and exciting to venture out there, but now it's just same-old-same-old. The elements of the game that are still dynamic remain fun though. Parts can be fitted together to create infinitely different designs, so that remains fun. Contracts are fun because they also have a lot of combinations. I think (semi-) procedural system would be a great thing. Imagine starting a new safe, going to the map view and seeing a whole lot of orbits beyond or interspersed between the orbits of the standard planets. You can select them and get some basic info, but the specifics are missing and the planet texture is very blurry. So you send up a telescope to take some better pictures. It improves the quality a bit and you see that the rocky planet has a massive landform at its center. But what is it. You build a probe and send it out there. Once you get there you realize the landform is a giant crater with a solitary peak in its middle. Your probe is out of fuel so you can't investigate it further. So you outfit a manned expedition and send a lander to the peak. On the peak you find a solitary Munolith. Currently in KSP, such a thing would only be possible once. Either you do it yourself or you have the experience spoiled by a Reddit post. With a procedural system you could have such moments time and time again. Awesome moments couldn't be spoiled (since there would be infinite combinations) and if someone wants to see it for themselves, people could just get the seed number and put that in a box when creating a new save. KSP would not lose any of its cohesion. A good comparison is Minecraft. That has procedurally generated worlds, but those worlds have elements that are recognizable for everyone. Desert temples, villages, etc. are all recognizable even though they're in different places for everyone. Biomes have certain looks and are instantly recognizable and have rules that transcend the procedural nature of every save (grasslands don't have trees, jungles have ocelots in them, etc.) KSP is Minecraft where there's only one level. Its an immense level, but you always start in the same place and nothing ever looks different. Minecraft would still be cool without procedural levels, but the variation allows it to transcend cool and step into awesome. recognizable situations

Indeed. A Mk3 cargobay only fit for 1.25m parts would only be used for aesthethic reasons and in some fringe cases where you just need a bit more clearance on the top and bottom.

The biggest reason is orbital decay and the effect it would have on your missions. Do a timewarp for a mission to Jool and five spacestations would deorbit in that time due to gravitational forces. That's not fun at all.

So does this allow plugin developers to write plugins or part developer to write plugin-like changes?

Terraforming and impact craters are not the same thing, although one could use the latter to aid the former. That being said, I also don't think the deformable terrain is on the list. It's just a tough thing to do and as such few games have it. The current engine setup is far too static for such a dynamic feature. It'd require quite a big rewrite. My money is on upgradeable buildings/broken parts. Expanding/improving KSP would add another goal in career and breakable parts would add interesting repair gameplay.

I'm pretty sure CubeSats are designed to burn up in the atmosphere, due to their low orbit. Orbital debris is only a problem in the higher orbits, where natural decay would take years or decades for a satellite to deorbit and no longer be a possible creator of additional space debris. The only thing in the orbits of CubeSats are a few other CubeSats and since they all deorbit within weeks, months or maybe a year there's no siginificant space debris problem there.

This is genius. I agree with the suggestion to make it search in all categories. In this case it'd make sense to have clicked the categories end the search and allow you to continue with your VAB work. Also a X to click on in the search form would be also be a great feature. Deleting the search can be annoying. Additionally I suggest adding a new part module that allows you to add tags. Often the parts have fanciful names that make looking for them hard. The Telus Mobility Enhancers could be given the tag 'ladder', the Photovoltaics the tag 'solar', Solid Rocket Boosters the tag 'SRB' and so on.

With the extra funding SpaceX can reach man-rated much faster meaning less reliance on Russian vehicles, which is probably the reason for betting on the two sure deals.

Is there a way of browsing all mods?

Beale I downloaded the latest and noticed you hadn't yet added an extra attach node on the bottom of the ATV engine, as you had announced before you'd do. Just a friendly reminder so that you won't forget I also noticed that a lot of your engines don't show fuel gauges when activated. No doubt a result of your copying the cfg code from similar stock engines as a base to work on. It's annoying not knowing what the fuel level is. To fix that, just add DrawGauge = true in the section that defines the fuel. For liquid and oxidizer, liquid is the only one that needs it gauge drawn.

Luckily lots of gif are now being converted to HTML5 through sites like gfycat. Saves on size and is more versatile.

I just watched the video and stuff is simulated at distances greater than the 2.5m simulation bubble. Was a mod used to extend this or something?

Thank you for fixing the off-centered madness.

You can determine the science boost. If you make it less than the stock science lab, you can balance it out.

A few suggestions: -For the Salyut parts, make them be able to do crew reports and make the largest one a science lab. -Make all cargo parts (Cygnus, ATV, Progress) science containers. That way you can load up experiments for transfer to Kerbin (Cygnus especially works great with the TKS parachute below the docking port) or a science lab for processing.

Cool clamps!

Just downloaded the newest version. Really impressive. I'm missing a second node on the bottom of the ATV engine, which would make it easier to fit in a 0.625m docking port (to string ATVs together and make a space station).