thenbagis

HaversteR... I think this sounds really great and as you said has some authenticity about it. Your "science" rating very much reminds me of "Technology Readiness Level" or TRL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_readiness_level) [which could easily be changed to Kerbal Readiness Level ;-) ] I have to say that you incorporated some sense of risk associated with low TRL parts, that would be really make it "authentic" Thinking along those lines... that the first time you "fly" a part, you have a higher chance of a random failure. Each flight afterwards the risk goes down. Also adding a single new part to other parts you have already flown would have a lower cumulative risk than a whole rocket of new parts. This would incorporate a real sense of authenticity by for example... If you say "I'm going to build a lander and fly it to the Mun on it's first flight" you might have a lander leg refuse to extend and have to abort the mission. But if you were to take it to Kerbin orbit and test the lander out in orbit, you'd have a real low chance of failure. This would also allow us to recreate our own "Apollo 13" moments. :-)

Frankly, I think this is exactly what discourages the dev's from participating in the forums. HarvesterR was very kind to answer your question and then you change the headline to try and get more attention. Nevermind the fact that... KSP is in development, things are going to change... people want updates sooner and people don't want updates to break saves. Something has to give; you can't have your cake and eat it, too. I do give the dev's credit for trying to clump save breaking changes together into single updates, rather than breaking saves with every update.

Thanks for fixing it!

Does this explain why when I click on aLeXmOrA's post "KSP Forums and SpacePort are back..." on the right side of the main forum page, I get this message:

If you've gotten the hang of Kerbin orbit, getting to the Mun, and getting into orbit around the Mun.... but just struggle with the actual landing. I'd highly suggest the use of F5 (quicksave) and F9 (quickload). Hold F5 before beginning your descent to the Mun, if you crash, press F9, rinse and repeat. It'll save the frustration of having to redo all previous steps, every time you crash.

I suggest watching this series. You don't have to follow it 100%, but it definitely helps give a summary of what you need to do to land on the Mun. Watch the alternate way to land on the Mun, it's easier, because it removes the horizontal velocity component and you're less likely to hit the surface and start tumbling. I've since found that my easiest landing technique is somewhere between her two methods and using RCS thrusters to completely remove the horizontal component.

I'm new to KSP, but I tend to agree with those that say: - Polish Finish IVA and Planets Work bugs out Code optimization (help us with slower computers)? - Usability features A VAB that splits payload and launch Mission control / flight planning - is this video a hint? basically, getting closer to a released game, than adding features. Features can always be an "expansion pack" or "mod" but these underlying things are needed to be a releasable game.