[[1.1.2] Kerbal Attachment System (KAS) 0.5.8]

I must say, I'm still hanging on to KSP 0.25 because of KAS not being updated..:/

[[WEB APP] Ribbon Generator [1.1.2] [ABANDONED]]

I have generated some ribbons to place on my profile when I can edit my signature. Landing on Duna and Eve was.. though. Anyways, great program/app. I love the fact that the entire community seems to use it. GJ!

[What has been the most difficult place you've landed and returned a Kerbal?]

So far, it must be landing a manned rover on Duna with more than half fuel tank of the inbuilt-skycrane left.

[Why Duna is like Mars and Eve isn't like Venus ?]

Of course you can generate low detailed planets, like current KSP planets, with a simple algorithm and get whole galaxy with billions planets with different sizes, colors, surface roughnesses, and gas pressures. But I think that it would not be very interesting if planets lacks of fine details. Producing fine details, like weather, small scale topography, all kind of stuff on surface etc. is very hard. You must precalculate whole planet, which needs insane amounts of RAM and storage memory, or create details in real time, which means huge computing costs.

I prefer that Squad should develop current planets instead of create a lot of new ones which are practically similar except size, color etc. On every real planet there are different regions but KSP's planets have maybe couple of anomalies and couple of interesting topographic places. I have driven hundred kilometers on Eve's surface and there was not any interesting details. I would like to see rivers, lakes, stones, small scale hills, rains, sunny times etc. and take into account their effects to kerbals, vehicles (for example cooling, wet soil ..) instead of ten new detailless planets of moons. KSP have already small, medium, large and impossible celestial bodies. Easy, hard, and impossible places to visit etc. Plain planets and mountainous moons. Places with different atmospheres. In my opinion there should be more variables before increasing number of celestial bodies would be reasonable.

It is true that FTL can be limited to interstellar transitions. But game's current simplified physics model can not handle really different solar systems, for example multiple stars, twin planets etc. which would be interesting challenges to orbit planning. Other solar systems would be very much like Kerbol's system.

I really, really agree with what you are writing. When I read your text, I tried to imagine landing on planets with rivers and wet soil, finding the perfect landing-area, analyzing the planets, sending rovers, building bridges / bases in areas. Imagine if the developers added a new planet similar to Kerbin, and adding forests, rain forests, mountains, lakes etc, it would be fantastic!

[Why Duna is like Mars and Eve isn't like Venus ?]

I think they could have atleast changed the colors. I do understand OP at this point. It should be orange instead of purple, other than that, I kinda like it.