boomerdog2000

Short answer: You only need the one pod. Long answer: As long as the samples are from 2 different places (2 separate biomes, 2 separate moons, 2 separate planets, etc.) you can store as many as you want. Theoretically you could store a sample from every biome on the Mun and Kerbin and every planet/moon in 1 command pod. This also applies to EVA reports. NOT however crew reports. You can only have one of those per pod, but since you can transmit those for full it doesn't really matter.

Which is the same as having standard size parts.

No I don't. Many of the problems mentioned above relate to terrain, (ocean lag, lag on timewarp changes in orbit around a body with the new terrain system, low FPS when looking at the horizon, long scene transition times between space center buildings). Procedural docking ports wouldn't really work because each one would be a different size and none of them would dock together. Landing struts don't really make sense either, since those of us that build planetary bases would lose our height standard. I could see procedural ladders rather than the individual bits we have no cut down on part count but we already have the retractable ones that function quite well, so that seems unnecessary.

Apparently mine is also building small. I just realized that I have 2000 delta-v in reserve on all 3 of my craft returning from Jool, with only 300 or so required for intercept. And I was worried the entire mission if I would have enough...

More like something I never thought to do. If you're doing an interplanetary burn and have an intercept that relies on 2 maneuvers, one you're doing now and say an inclination change later, you can burn the engines from map view and hold the second maneuver node with your mouse, which causes that maneuver to update to your current orbit every second. Instead of burning, replacing the maneuver node, and then tweaking its values. Not too useful for larger burns but can help with little tweaks you need to get an intercept.

No it's not, much like mods it is a temporary solution. I was merely suggesting something that would get him approximately the same functionality without waiting for the devs.

I thought sub-asemblies couldn't have the root part in them, since then they would have to be saved as their own vessel? Without this the game would have to save each ship that you want to reuse as its own vessel in the VAB, which could potential crowd that menu quite a bit.

I believe the gameplay and parts groups up there are in the "already suggested" or "what not to suggest" lists. Custom music can be done by muting the in-game music and playing whatever you want. Texture packs can be done with the Universe Replacer mod. Most of the lag on Kerbin is caused by the ocean. There was a thread around with a nice fix if you don't mind going into the settings.cfg file.

Was it still converting kethane at the time? Since I believe KSP does not do too well with instantaneous changes in the center of mass during acceleration.

I believe he was referring more to the crafting aspect as a "whimsical oversimplification," since what some people can do with redstone is just insane.

Career mode is still in its infancy. The biomes on the Mun and most likely the planned biomes on other planets and moons provide much more science than the biomes on Kerbin. I can't tell from your post. Are you against biomes in general, or just the idea of biomes on Kerbin giving science? Because I believe the science rewards for near and high above Kerbin are also much higher than from landing.

Agreed. Only question is should the title be "factor-able" instead of factorial? I was fairly confused when I saw factorial.

I think the point of the revert flight button is since we can't test our designs before launch, the launch is the test. If the test fails you can go back and fix it without penalty.

I feel like being that far from the sun and with the surface area of Jool the plant wouldn't be able to sustain itself. Funny idea though. Personally I prefer the kraken answer.

Wouldn't only about two of those be fixed by procedural parts anyways? Some RAM usage and maybe some loading times. The rest generally have to do with terrain, or buildings and such.

Doesn't have anything to do with the higher gravity does it? Also this guy did a very well thought out test of what the new landing legs can handle. They are a bit weaker than you think. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/53664-New-Landing-Legs/page9?highlight=landing+legs

Yep although with the standard "it is more likely to randomly explode this way" disclaimer.

Mine is generally just convincing myself to do an interplanetary mission. I've only now done my 2nd Jool mission, my 3rd Duna mission and my 1st Eve mission (just a flyby with a landing at Gilly, don't want to get too crazy).

Generally I go with Greek gods or stars I like. Antares and Artemis are the most common, with Mk. whatever version I'm on at the end.

Of course won't this cause significant problems in space since your center of thrust will be misaligned with your center of mass? I believe the space shuttle engines had a very large gimbal range so they could realign with the rest of the ship once the fuel tank and boosters were dropped.

.22 has encouraged me to go to new and interesting locations to unlock science. I had my first Gilly landing and return, with planned returns for my current Vall, Pol and Bop missions.

I generally double or triple check the delta-v numbers before any interplanetary mission and always have twice as much space as I have kerbals for long duration missions. It can make ship construction a bit more annoying but I refuse to stuff my kerbals in a pod for 2 years.

A 3rd option would be send up a ship with a second pod and EVA the kerbal over. It would leave the pod but rescue the kerbal. You just might want to rename the pod debris before leaving.

I don't think he was talking about autopilots. He's saying you'd have to plan your maneuvers according to your real life schedule which sounds quite annoying to me. Imca, any time the devs spend on one feature is time they can't spend elsewhere. It is a very fine balance they have to strike.

Planning maneuvers ahead of time does no good if you have to turn off the game, for real life issues. Punishing the player for items they have no control of seems a little harsh.