boomerdog2000

The point of the tech-tree is not to tell you how to use the parts, merely to introduce them. The job of telling you how to use the different parts falls to tutorials which we have none of yet since the system has just been introduced. More like they give you the pinewood derby kit (granted without the instructions so you have to google those for now), then once you manage to do some stuff with the pinewood derby car they introduce RC car parts, then go-cart parts, then car parts. They don't tell you how to use any of these yet, but the system for giving you the parts slowly does work (it does need balancing however). The idea of multiple color-coded science types sounds cool and might fix the issue of having zero science specializing (like we have now) and having too much science specializing (like most peoples suggestions seem to lean towards). Combining this with the idea of choosing the science that goes into science bays and such could work nicely. You wouldn't add any more parts, just swap out the Mystery Goo or items in the Material Bay to give you red, blue or green science.

Wonder how the kerbals feel about that? "Well we have to go remap the Mun because all of its topography changed overnight."

A nuclear reactor's weight will probably take away the benefit of an ion engine. Transmitting data perhaps they could be useful, but I've got some ships out by Jool using the Gigantor arrays and they haven't had any problems.

I think there are a few glitches in the biome system in a few areas. I got an EVA report from above the Mun's poles when I was above the equator with almost zero degrees inclination.

That seems kind of sad. Don't get me wrong I know what you mean. I don't really pay attention to the sunrise unless it's over some new planet I haven't been to, and I don't like that. That we can get used to something looking that cool and take it for granted seems a little sad.

We already have nuclear RTGs. Without utilities that actually draw the power to warrant a full on nuclear reactor there doesn't really seem to be a point.

Agreed. Since most of us aren't rocket scientists, we do things wrong. Fixing that problem generally involves either a new rocket design or different maneuvers while in space. Having to launch an entirely new rocket just because some tiny thing went wrong seems more tedious than useful.

Exactly. The entire point of the tech-tree is to introduce parts slowly. With the current system new players see 1 fuel tank, 1 engine, 1 capsule, 1 parachute, which cuts down on the initial confusion considerably. Any confusion left over now is because they expected to see decouplers and other parts since that is what they've seen before. Then when they get the next node they get decouplers. This makes them wonder what decouplers are and how they work. Granted, without tutorials it may be difficult for them to figure out what those parts do but the principal still stands. It is only designed at the moment to limit the initial number of parts available to introduce them to new players.

Completely agree. The tech-tree is for introducing parts. Presumably the mission system will be designed to encourage players to challenge themselves to gain more money to afford larger projects. Now on the OP. 1. EVA reports, and gravioli detector depend on the biome that the ship is flying over as well. I do think more experiments that are biome specific from orbit would be cool, but this could be a balancing issue. 2. Once you gain the original 4 science devises from pre-.22 you gain significantly more science that can only be done on the ground. 3. This could be a really cool idea.

Agreed those take a little too long, but at the same time if it doesn't take some amount of time people will probably complain.

That's a good idea. It doesn't need to be too wide though, since if you optimize your orbit you can achieve a full scan fairly quickly.

Laythe near/high space boundary seems to be 200 km.

In my most recent career save just kerbal engineer and kerbal alrarm clock. Normally in sandbox I use kethane, B9, mechjeb, fustek, crew manifest, and TAC fuel balancer, isa mapsat and chatterer.

This has been discussed before over and over again, and is on the what not to suggest list, but the fact still remains, the 64 bit version was very unstable so the devs are waiting for Unity to update to 64 bit. I believe the the Linux 64 bit version works so feel free to try that.

I refuse to lose any kerbal that I have the power to save through quickloads. If they are going on a one-way trip it is because the return vehicle is right behind them.

Only if you had an absolutely perfect circular orbit. Since we are human and can't do that they shouldn't be jumping around some much. On the other hand it was made by humans who aren't perfect so it's allowed to be finicky.

Yeah I like the craters too, it makes you have to put some forethought into where your base is going to go and if rovers will be able to maneuver around. The only time I had trouble with it was when I landed my tall, thin ship on a crater wall, so that one is on me.

Yeah, if your orbits get too precise it also starts taking into account the difference from your ships control point I believe. It's either that or center of mass. So if you start rotating things get even worse.

Maybe you missed? Hit F6 accidentally? I honestly don't think they are going to implement something more than quicksave and revert flight. At least not any time soon.

Yep autosave and quicksave are independent. Quickload has nothing to do with the autosave.

You can tab through the planets? So I kept losing my maneuver node every time I accidentally clicked on a flag instead of Kerbin for nothing?

In KSP though if one of your engines cuts out, it is most likely a structural issue (engine/fuel tank separation) rather than an engine one and you probably have bigger problems at that point.

Ah ok sorry. Not that I've seen but I think my Gilly in map view and my actually Gilly were pretty messed up. It showed me a few hundred meters or so off the surface in map view, when I was landed on the ground in normal view. It may just be since Gilly is so small. most of the others seem to have reasonable values.

Actually gravity assists are easy too since your orbit after the flyby shows up normally. Say you're gravity assisting off the Mun. The part of your orbit that is affected by the Mun's SOI will show up around the Mun, so you can watch it and tweak that orbit using a manuever node around Kerbin easily. Then the part of your orbit after the Mun's SOI is back in its normal place around Kerbin.

What do you mean a refresh button?