Tw1

That's quite the impresive fail.

Too long on Minmus.

Well, that's a pitty. Who doesn't like a few struts in place?

Yes, but why bother? Give the player the ability to use their own head when choosing these things. No need to baby walk anyone. If someone decides they want to try fling something at Jool when they only have limited parts, why stop them? They'll soon learn if they can or can't

Running a space program with only fuel from space? Try it and see how long you can sustain it for.

Well, that could've gone better. Flying upside down gives better views, and better reception. Structural failure! Come on lifting body physics, do your stuff! Even landed it safely. Cool kerbs don't look at explosions. Then again, running away screaming lessens the effect. All in a days work for a kerbal Looking good!

Downloaded craft. Did not resemble images on box. Did not function as desired. Also, box contained bobcat. (Are you sure you uploaded the right one?) Here's one I made:

Not quite sure what you mean. IICR, the little markers which show where other things are can be seen through the ship. Or maybe that was only ones you have set as a target.

I do agree with you about the KR-2L- it looks big and powerful, and its description even says something about it being a lifter engine, plus there's the fact you can't stack the KS-25x4. Not so sure about the ion engine. Really, ion engines would never make sense as lifter engines, but ion planes are fun, and there are theoretical atmospheric ion engines out there.... Perhaps a balance could be achieved by adjusting it so its thrust at 1atm was the same as its old thrust. Then we'd still have some planes and things, but it would still be pretty limited.

IDK, I like how in ksp, EVA is easy, and you don't have to worry about that. If they did do that, I'd hope the amount of monopropellant needed is very small.

Agreed. Rovers are useful when you want to go further than you can with just the jet pack. On low gravity worlds, RCS vessels are a good option. (Or reaction wheel hoppers) IMHO, the Mun is marginal- a well designed rover can be useful, if you design and drive with a little care. Giving rovers a use would be better done by adding in some things to investigate while you're on the ground. They sort of have a use in base making, and doing those survey contracts too. The crazy abilities of kerbals is part of the fun, but I do think they should be nerfed a little. It's nice that they can fly around quite well, but having them be more likely to survive outside a pod than inside isn't quite right. Except maybe if you're really lucky.

I like that they have a fair amount of delta V. It's not enough to do a lot with, unless you're very careful. Their non-fragileness makes them even more useful than probes at the moment.

Yes, sounds to me this could be used as a feature too. If this is the case, the real problem is KSP's lack of on demand asset loading.

IDK. Sure, kerbal could become a franchise, but I'm not sure this is the sort of thing I'd like to see out of it. The tech tree and collection grind are some of its weaker features, IMHO. The strength of KSP is that it's you against physics, and if you can tame them, you're able to achieve things. With a more realistic aerodynamics model, and a more detailed planet to explore, it could work, maybe, but it seems to be it would be a poor cousin to KSP.

I agree, this is a problem with the insta-scan. It prevents you from doing things that realistically, should be options, reducing immersion. Plus, it doesn't clearly show you why you need to be in a polar orbit. KSP is good at teaching people about space exploration because it shows, rather than tells. The arbitrary-seeming polar orbit requirement is telling, not showing. You don't see the relationship between inclination and ground coverage, or the relationship between scan time and the planet's rotation. I have to agree with both points. Leaving it low resolution, but giving it a very wide field of view would open up the possibility to get info from flybys, or scan from other inclinations, but remove much of the waiting during time warp. One reason scanning in other mods takes so long is the limited field of view. It shouldn't be too broad though, and have some distance limit, or the advantages of a polar orbit with be completely negated. Plus, planning around time should be a thing in KSP.Not in the form of making the player sit there and wait, but making them schedule. A little waiting isn't so bad. We already time warp to get to launch windows, and so we don't have to wait weeks for spacecraft to arrive, and that doesn't seem to be a problem. IMHO, the game doesn't need to be a constant rush of activity, it can be nice to just sit and watch sometimes. At most scanning will take a few minutes, but you don't want to sit through the scanning process, you can go do something else. I sort of both agree, and disagree. Some things would make sense if they just collected data as you went along, but others should have player interaction. One about KSP that makes it more appealing than orbiter is it's not just a flight simulator. In KSP, you're able to get out, and hop about on another world. IMHO, there should be more to make it feel like you're actually exploring other worlds, and investigating space, rather than just being the driver. Plus, it can add another design challenge, if you need to get the kerbals near to the experiments to collect the data.

I think there could be a much better way to set up the game than "career mode" vs "Science mode" vs "Sandbox mode", etc. Rather than choosing a mode, when starting a new game, you could choose which parts are active. Each element could be toggled, so if you don't want tech tree, you can turn it off. This way, you could have just contracts, just science and tech tree, sceince without tech tree.... It would need some limitations so you don't end up needing money, but have no way to earn it. If you turn of science collection, but do have contracts and tech tree, contracts would need a lot more science reward. This mechanism would let them add more features like time based budget, ground exploration, life support, etc, that not everyone wants, but could add a lot to the game for others. Each possible combination could be given a name of its own if they really wanted.

That's odd, I'm sure I can recall some buttons in KSP that did do this...They'd stay 'pressed' when active. Maybe they where part of a mod. This is a good point though. Some other parts do show their state in the words next to the buttons. Perhaps the part you're controlling from could show 'active control point' next to the button.

IMHO, Eve has lots and lots of that purple form of quartz in its sand.

Depends. Do you mean church type songs, or listen on the radio type songs? IMHO, the two should not really cross, church type songs need to be signable by groups of people who aren't necessarily good at signing. Though some of my pentecostal friends may disagree... With church type songs, my long time favorites would have to include, Shine, Jesus Shine, My redeemer lives, I also quite like some of the imagery in Indescribable In radio type songs, I quite like stuff by Relient K, switchfoot, and the older stuff by Newsboys. There's some good newer stuff, but I haven't been paying enough attention to recall any names.

Very useful, too, if you want to colonise. Keep your stuff spread apart, and you can build large settlements with minimal lag, as long as you remember to keep stuff out of the in between zones.

Yes. Back in the day, I used to leave the debris from various failed launches, experiments, ground tests, etc, lying around the space center. It gave it a lovely industrious, activity filled feel. However, soon lag arrived. Once I cottoned on to what was happening, I made a special rover to go and clean up. Though, if there was some sort of museum building you could save them to, the physics need not be loaded, cutting out most of that lag.

Have two asteroids? Reconfigure ship as needed?

I did it before we had stock claws, but there's this:http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/51724-Back-to-0-19-and-recovering-my-very-first-Mun-Lander

Same here. https://xkcd.com/1106/

I've found a picture: From the looks of things, shedding the engines during one of the latter stages would give even more detla V for reasonable thrust. Edit: Found the definitive album: