RatchetinSpace

Posting a video? I think Mariner is a good name

Laythe definitely. The presence of an oxygen rich atmosphere almost confirms autotrophic bacteria in Laythe's oceans. O2 is a pretty unstable molecule so overtime it reacts with surface metals and silcates, that's why Mars has virtually no Oxygen in it's atmosphere, it's all reacted with the surface. The only reason Earth has significant oxygen is because it is constantly being replenished by photosynthesising organisms. I say ALMOST confirms because there MAY be a chemical process which maintains oxygen in planetary atmospheres but so far we've found no such process naturally in our own solar system.

You've got IR working? I haven't managed to get IR working in 1.3+!?!? In answer to your question...I don't have an answer. However there is a nifty little mod called Trajectories that really helped me with returning spacecraft accurately to the KSC: It gets my rocket back to the KSC pretty much bang on everytime, and it's also useful for aerobraking.

If they could make barycenters work, the Duna/Ike system might be a binary. According to the wiki, Ike is about 1/16th the mass of Duna, whereas Charon is about 1/10th the mass of Pluto. I don't know if this would result in a binary system but it seems close to it! I don't know if they would/could make binaries work though. Fun fact: Duna is about 4x the mass of Pluto but is 3.7 times smaller in diameter!

Squad was founded before tablets were even a thing, KSP was never a tablet game. KSP isn't your typical game, in contrast to most games KSP is very CPU intensive, which is probably why GTA is running fine on your PC but not KSP. That said, I have no idea where you heard KSP is easy on computers, anyone who's played KSP will know that the game requires computer resources. I also don't know where you got this idea squad was trying to make a quick buck...they've made one game, and are working on their first expansion, when did they try to rip us off? Sure, the console thing has been a bit of a nightmare, but a company needs to make money or there is no reason to continue development, and I don't think the problems on console are a result of cheap rip offs, rather the console version is a relatively small subset of the community in comparison to the computer version, and squad is a small company without many resources. They simply can't afford to allocate a lot of time to what is ultimately a small portion of their revenue, you've seen how long their updates take to release (The updates have taken between 6 and 12 months).

I think Laythe is supposed to be an analogue for Titan. Haumea could be cool, but I'd really like to see a Saturn analogue (with a massive ring system) and a Triton analogue (a large geological moon travelling retrograde). If they ever add geysers and volcanoes then I'd love to see an Enceladus analogue but maybe that's pushing my luck.

Mars is far more suitable. Venus' surface is essentially hell, 92 bar atmospheric pressure, a day lasting 1176.5 earth days and an equally long night, sulphuric acid clouds and hellish temperatures. We COULD make a floating city to alleviate some of those problems but access to the surface is essentially required if a civilization on the planet is to become self-sustaining (mining ore, etc). Mars has decent gravity, good day/night cycle (24.5 hours), and reasonable(ish) temperatures (not lead melting). Another big advantage Mars has over Venus is an abundance of water. Water is pretty much essential for all human endeavours and so a good supply of it on Mars is important for both agriculture and manufacturing processes. Ultimately, the only thing Mars is missing is a magnetic field. If humans can build an artificial one, we can heat up the poles to release the frozen CO2 and being thawing the planet, melting the subsurface ice to create oceans, introducing subsurface bacteria and creating an ecosystem. Venus COULD be terraformed, but fixing things like the slow rotation and hellish temperatures would require more advanced technology than what Mars requires. The only issue I see with terraforming Mars is the lack of Nitrogen in the atmosphere which is important for plant and bacteria growth, as well as filler for providing atmospheric pressure. Does anyone know where we could get Nitrogen from on Mars?

I know you can see Eve, Duna and Jool from Kerbin's surface, you just need to look out of a Kerbal's window and point in exactly the right direction (it's a lot easier from LKO as you can point the window in any direction). You might be able to see the other celestial bodies but I've only been successful with the above three (and Minmus and Mun of course).

We have no-idea what the price might be, but I'd be willing to pay $20-25 for it. We want this game to have continued development for a while to come, and the more we spend the more development we get.

Can someone PLEASE make this, PLEASE

The Joolian system would definitely have to be re-arranged. Experiments with the Principia mod (adds n-body physics) show that Bop and Vall get kicked out of the system quite quickly by Tylo.

@KerikBalm Do you feel good now?

Agreed, but they can't shift to highest level while there is still a falcon 9 and top secret spaceplane on the launchpad. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the hurricane shouldn't do any serious damage due to the face the whole facility is essentially built to be rocket-proof?

I'm not saying every few kerbal days! That really would be annoying! Even if every station could last 10 years, that would mean during my Jool mission I would need to boost a single LKE station 3 times, meaning with my current setup (2 Stations) I'd need to perform 6 maneuvers in the middle of my Jool mission. I think that's a bit out of my way. Perhaps if there was a system that automatically counteracted orbital decay if you had fuel and an engine on-board the sat/space station, where the fuel would slowly drain overtime instead of your orbit. Once the fuel was depleted then the normal effects of orbital decay would carry out.

This is not of concern in real life, and I don't think it should be in KSP either. You might be imagining something like, this: After all, that's what movies (and unfortunately a lot of science books) make asteroid fields look like. In reality, asteroids are literally hundreds of Kilometers apart, the chances of a spacecraft running into one is quite small. But the picture above is doubly misleading. It makes the asteroid belt appear as a distinct region where each asteroid is evenly-ish sized and evenly-ish spaced apart, but the reality is far more complex. This picture from Wikimedia shows how mass is concentrated in the asteroid belt. As you can see, Ceres, the dwarf planet visited by the Dawn Spacecraft is a single asteroid making up 40% of the mass in the belt. The next two largest, Vesta and Pallas make up about 5-10% each, and the rest are much smaller. So the asteroid belt is really a few large asteroids and then a lot of tiny ones. That is why Dres is where it is, it is kind of the KSP equivalent of Ceres. As this excellent image also demonstrates, the asteroid belt is not very cleanly defined, but is very chaotic, only roughly positioned between Mars and Jupiter. It doesn't have a clearly defined edge and position as many people have been lead to believe. Now I'm not shooting down the idea of an asteroid belt of some kind. I think the devs could borrow some of the code from the Near-Kerbin-Asteroids and apply it to the Dres solar orbit. Every now and again, a mystery object could appear there for you to track between Duna and Jool, then the player could choose to fly out there and check it out, but asteroids shouldn't be a threat to spacecraft IMO.

While it adds an element of realism from a gameplay point of view it will just be annoying. For instance, some of my Jool missions take upwards of 30 years, by the time I get back all my LKO stations and satellites will have decayed and burnt up, and it is NOT fun to constantly have to go back to them to boost them up while you are off on your Jool mission.

This Or maybe 'magis boosters' or 'Quam durum potest fieri?'

No, I don't expect every computer to run fluid mechanics ;). However I think a weather system in KSP wouldn't necessarily have to involve the complex mechanisms behind real simulations. I honestly don't know what the impact on computers would be, personally I don't think it'd be out of the scope of regular KSP physics, but I addressed that in this old thread (don't bump it). Anyway, that's my take on that. I'd like to see some actual evidence that weather calculations would seriously hamper performance, at least in theory. I'm no coder, so any insight from programmers would be great.

We need weather, surface experiments, geological features, etc on existing planets, stuff to do when you get there, but I would like a gas giant with rings and moons. Personally I would just really like an enhanced experience on the surface of bodies, and currently no mod effectively characterizes the planets imo (Visual mods do somewhat with clouds)

I've been playing this game for 5 years and I'm still not even close sick of kerbal faces, especially when they're plummeting to their inevitable doom.

I +1 this

I've seen something like this in a mod, where the asteroids spawn as untracked objects in orbits around Jool. Maybe they could be invisible until you sent the Sentinel Telescope there and then you could track them in the tracking station like regular asteroids (although instead of intercepting Jool, they could just orbit Jool).

I do like this idea, I don't know how it would fit with the aesthetic of KSP but balloon missions have been proposed by NASA:

One or two more planets in the Kerbol system? Absolutely. FTL? No. As mentioned above and countless times before, it just doesn't make sense. KSP is based on current or near-future technology and our current understanding of physics say nothing with mass can travel faster than light anyway. Plus an FTL drive would break the game in sandbox. There are plenty of mods out there if you want FTL or extra star systems, but I don't think these things belong in the stock game.

I'm sorry, but adding not a sonic boom sound when passing the sound barrier isn't being picky about realism, it's being correct. If the KSP devs added a sound that played when you past the sound barrier it would make a great physics game look like laughing stock. If you read the physics discussion in this thread you would understand why it is so dumb. Also this thread is like a month old.