jcraft

You can still include the part in the mod for people that wish to use it, after all part can still be there just for looks, but functionality can be moved completely to toolbar.

That's great . Thanks for answering. I'm aware of this method. I was simply wondering if we will be getting part-less version of KER as like I said in my previous post - how it currently works its rather redundant with all the toolbars being around .

Are you planning to make part-less version of KER? Since we have great toolbar functionality both in stock game and available via mods, requirement to put KER part on the vessel to turn plugin on seems a bit redundant.

There is a simple solution. After contract is completed launched satellite simply vanishes from the game.

It looks like author simply doesn't realize that debris is not recovered automatically when you recovering your active vessel and it must be done separately (from tracking station). Recovering science from debris worked, so I don't see a reason why doing same thing with funds wouldn't be possible.

Kinda. Idea of contracts/earning money/dealing with reputation existed in KSP lead dev head since infancy of the game, far before MC mod came into existence.

I'm not even surprised by this, every part that was added lately fits this "style": reused, more or less modified models of other stock parts and mediocre texture work. Unfortunately Squad currently lacks proper content designer (Nova left, B9 left and Claira is apparently still hired but we didn't seen anything made by her since... forever) and that's why we getting parts looking like this. Generally I'm happy that we finally getting bigger parts into the stock game but Squad really needs to hire some talented content designer. Fast. (and fortunately it looks that they are currently looking for one)

Why is it matter so much if said DLC is FREE? And besides, it is no longer in DLC form - it will be integrated into the stock game. (LINK)

From the latest news (and also this) it looks like NASA pack will be simply an another update for KSP, and not a separate "mission pack" as it was planned before. Besides... it is free, so it doesn't matter in which form we would get it - but full integration into the stock game is more preferable of course, and fortunately it looks like this is what we getting.

Seems like those "core game modifications" will simply arrive as a part of NASA pack...

According to the Maxmaps they already changed form of it to be part of the stock game and not a separate DLC pack: link to source of the quote -> LINK <-So I dare to make a assumption that we going to get asteroids and all the awesomeness surrounding them in 24.1 update

Well, it is possible to get 0.15 version from some certain "bay" but it is not exactly legal (not that anyone would really mind it as this version is ancient and you already bought the game anyway). So it is up to you...

Been playing KSP since 0.7.3 (but joined forum on some later date), well... "playing" as launch rocket few times - see how high it can fly - quit game - come back next version, there wasn't really much to do in KSP back in these days - true fun with KSP started when they added planets in 0.17 and most importantly docking and maneuver nodes in 0.18 (two best updates KSP ever received).

I'm not sure what you actually expected from this feature - dynamically generated missions seem like perfect fit for the type of gameplay KSP is offering.

Interesting, I never considered it to be hard, quite the opposite - actual docking is giving me more problems than rendezvous process (thanks to lack of proper docking camera in stock game, trying to dock in third person view is rather inconvenient).

My first docking is a rather boring example - first thing I did in 0.18? Tried to dock, of course. Armed with theoretical knowledge of "how to dock" from 0.18 Squad pre-release stream I designed two simple vessels - put one into 100 km Kerbin orbit, then launched his docking-optimized brother and tried to rendezvous - surprisingly I managed to dock successfully at this first try. It wasn't efficient for sure - I wasted too much fuel (but still have enough to return both vessels to surface), but it happened without any surprising rapid unplanned disassembly along the way. To this day I always scratch my head when someone says that docking is hardest thing to do in this game... well, for me it isn't, but definitely is always exciting .

Quite nice idea, such a shame we will never see it as a part of KSP (well, in stock version at least).

I'm also used to it, but same thing I can say about aerodynamic model, all kerbals looking the same or rockets being too wobbly - I'm playing this game since first public release (0.7.3?) so it's all became a norm to be - but that doesn't mean I don't want to see changes. That seems a little too far-fetched to me Yes, I'm aware of the fact that it is possible to edit kerbal names by editing save file. But it would be much more preferable if game simply generated random surnames, or at least gave me possibility of changing kerbal name while being in game (like in XCOM for example).

I never was a fan of fact that last name of all kerbals is simply "Kerman" and I would vastly prefer to see it generated randomly just like the first names - what is the point after all - if we giving them all same surname we can simply remove it completely and leave first name alone. What everyone else thinks about it? Better to stay with "Kerman" or replace it by random generated last names?

While adding science-gain adjusting slider would be nice idea, ultimately it doesn't seems to be a good solution to balancing the tech tree - in my opinion what we need in this case is not less science to get, but more advanced tech nodes to unlock - tech nodes that would require substantial amount of science but in return give really advanced techs like upgraded nuclear engines or even fusion drive at some point. Science system needs simply much more things to unlock - no less science to get.

Earning money is not that far away - everything what we heard from Squad lately suggest that next big update (0.24) will focus mainly on money and means to earn it. So there isn't really a good reason to implement a somewhat placeholder feature like that at this point of development as it would end up quickly replaced by more robust system.

Well that is what I have in mind by saying it is "unintuitive". I really hope that Squad will figure out a way to balance between gameplay and some logic - because for now this balance is completely on "gameplay" side and in some cases my brain just want to melt by just thinking about it (like in thermometer example you brought up). As I stated in previous post. When money will come in to play - there will be good incentive to land in KSC area. Good point - but I don't think it should be translated into the game mechanic in a way you're proposing. If I have to lose resources because of my sloppy landing that can be used to do research then they should be lost in terms of real game mechanics not some science bonus/handicap: - I landed on the north pole - I must spend good amount of money to recover vessel so I have less money to do research - I landed in the KSC - money is not required (or just some small amount) to recover vessel so I have more money to do research Judging from Squad plans - it will work in a very similar way to what I described: to unlock parts you will need not only the science points (to unlock tech nodes) but also money (to unlock certain parts in the unlocked tech nodes) - so spending more resources on vessel recovery will slow down your research.

Problem is - some people want to fly they ridiculous contraptions without trying to make them aerodynamic.

This is what Squad is planning, or at least it WAS planned to be that way. But if they do it like that it will suffice as for giving player a incentive to land as close to KSC as possible. Adding science bonus (or handicap) dependant on landing location doesn't seems like good idea - after all, what's the difference where you land? Are the rocks you brought from the Mun for some reason should be more valuable for your scientist if capsule landed on KSC roof than in the grasslands? Science system is already unintuitive right now - and it should be made rather MORE intuitive than LESS intuitive. Your idea unfortunately makes it less intuitive... at least in my opinion.

Exactly. Current idea is scrapped - but the general concept of resource mining can return in the future - at least in some simple form that gives player possibility to refuel crafts without needing to haul fuel all the way from Kerbin.