sewerbird

Most likely yes - new toys, better water, better heating. Pretty safe bet I'd imagine.

At the moment, enjoying 1.0.4 and playing career without too much thought to 1.1. However, I will be scrapping my save and starting over once 1.1 hits, with some new settings and changes - No 'Recover Vessel' outside KSC biome or Island Runway : If a pod falls in the ocean, I need to send a seaplane to retrieve the astronaut. Opposite side of Kerbin? Send a lift. This will incentivize some Kerbin-bound designs and make a few tricky scenarios crop up. - Network Mandate : By the end of the first year, the CEO wants to go up to LKO station, transfer to a transfer shuttle, orbit the Mun in a small station, land at an outpost there. Then come back the way he came. By the end of the second year, similar routes to Minmus and either Duna surface or Eve orbit must be built. - 2500 Science at-start : I've done the early science grind so many times in career, I'm going to let myself unlock the first tier of science at the onset to keep my enthusiasm up a bit. The early suborbital flights will still happen due to contracts, but it lets me ignore entirely doing KSC science and some of the early rehash. - 0 Funds at-start : Simple. - 60% funds, 60% science - KAS (chosen new mod to play with) - Construction Time (same as in 1.0.4) - Roverdude USI (same) - Permadeath Kerbals (same)

It'd be amusing if the mod was done such that, if used on the launchpad, it'd blow up just about all the KSC buildings.

Kerbal Construction Time and a life support mod can add an interesting new feel to Career Mode that I've been finding refreshing.

I did my first manned mission to the Mun in my new save with Kerbal Construction Time. Not really a big deal, but did a full set of Surveyor and Gemini missions before going thanks to the incentives of the time constraints. Been having good time!

Played around with it a bit - the two main factors in my attempts to orbit were 1 - It's a lot of rocket for such a light payload. I tuned the thrust on the boosters down to 50. 2 - The center of mass shifts quite close to the center of lift as the boosters approach empty (easier to flip!). I shifted the boosters downwards a bit with respect to the central rocket, so that the CoM goes 'up' the rocket instead of down as the side tanks empty. With a very 'meh' attempt at flying, I did get one wonky wobble but the rocket corrected itself quickly. Made 200x200 orbit with likely enough fuel to orbit Mun or Minmus.

Don't the mk2 fuselage parts have lift ratings?

I'm basically in love with my current spaceplane, the AeroFoo II - been flying it with cargo variants for a month straight now... I think it's real love! I have some videos of it in my signature, if you'd like to see

Whoa, this is actually super handy! I've eyeballed for the longest time, but never quite pegged how much of a difference in phase angle is affected between a 75km station-to-KSC and a 100km station-KSC.

My understanding is that Squad makes a touch more money off of their store per-purchase, so that can be a factor in your decision. However, Steam has sales on KSP occasionally, which can also be attractive, and has a pretty good track record so far as handling server load when a new version comes out. In terms of the day-to-day play, the steam version is literally the same game and folder structure (and thus ability to launch multiple KSP installs from-folder, like stock and modded versions), just located in the Steam apps folder directory. The value in having it in Steam is likely proportional to how many other games you have on Steam - although if you use Steam you can still run the KSP-store version as a non-Steam app. Basically, I can't think of any significant difference. I bought from KSP store back in the day, but transferred to Steam. Consider joining the unofficial Steam group if you do

I find I like to just use little stacks of pennies - carefully stacking until key depresses and stays down, then walk away for coffee/food/tv

As a stock spaceplane lover, the main thing I appreciate is the fact that I can throw something reasonable together quickly without tooo much fiddliness. I'll adapt to whatever changes are introduced in stock, but I don't feel much need for the update. It's hard to separate the fact that I'm just used to stock aerodynamics from any opinion I'd form of an alternative. I have tried FAR, but I hated how it made rockets to orbit easier and planes more fiddly.

Doing a spaceplane-only career save, a successful test usually only costs me a touch of fuel. If the test plane crashes and the kerbal dies, it happens for real - thankfully all my pilots (if not planes) have come home

I don't think you can arbitrarily change it - however, you may consider clicking on the various probe/crew/docking-port parts and trying to 'control from here' for a usable orientation.Surely one of the docking ports will be correct?

I took my AeroFoo Let's Play's flagship on the run. I race-fit it best I could, lowering fuel amount, bu totherwise keeping it the same as in my videos! Here's a recording of the 'STOCK Open Class' (mods are aesthetic) attempt: 6:38:42! <~EDIT!> I didn't read closely enough, it seems, though -- it's a gatecrasher due to the rockomax 45-7S afterburners. I don't think rockets ruin the challenge, but naturally it's your call - hopefully you enjoyed the video anyways </~EDIT!>