Ernest3.14

Thanks for the response! Now I can rest easy Thanks for maintaining this mod, and awesome to hear about AirPark functionality!

A lot of my mods are installed manually. That said, CKAN is great, and I'd love it if @JewelShisen would add it to CKAN. I think the reason people are nagging about this is because there is a version on CKAN right now (for 1.0.5?) and @JewelShisen hasn't really given a reason not to add it. There used to be this mod that let you park in flight.

^ This. The cancellation of resources is rather irritable, and now this interview that seems to make it look like the Kerbol system will be the only one, and then multiplayer... Idk. Admittedly, it does seem like 0.23 is a rather small update, but then again I have no idea how much time was spent on optimization, so my intuitive feels may be completely off. :/ Ps.: Many of us here on the forums are programmers, and have a general idea of how much development is going on (especially modders).

Ta-da! http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/forums/13-Add-on-Requests-and-Support

But then there's the argument of the later saves are broken, the more people that are unhappy.

I think by robotics, the "Already Suggested List" is referring to parts like this. Anyhow, this is planned

Yeah, the poll wasn't worded very clearly... Of course I want better aerodynamics! But I also want resources hint hint

This seems like one of those "good-to-have" features that will come when the game gets polished up.

^This. There was a very well thought-out thread on this a while ago, idk what happened to it though. Whenever the devs get around to implementing it they should take a look at that.

This. We may just be overreacting.

Resources. Everything that can be said about its importance has already been said.

So we've finally agreed that we want an official in-depth explanation? Good. As EDU was mentioned earlier: I think resources could be made an important part of that as well, so I don't see why it was dropped in favor of something confirmed (and repeatedly stressed) would not be in the core game. I don't care if the devs change their mind because something was actually a good idea/doable, but again, an explanation is needed.

After reading through the previous 191 posts, all I have to contribute is this: "cancelling" resources (whatever that may mean) is a rather significant decision, and it is obvious that some of us have different ideas about why the devs chose to go down this path. All I would like is an in-depth blog post about why the devs chose to do this. After all, if procedural craters deserved a post, then resources surely do too. Especially if what the community perceives as the developers' intention is a misconception.

But landed parts already don't have physics, right? Like, they're on rails.

Planned feature.

I feel like all discussions about signal delay suffer from the mindset of realism vs gameplay. We've already compromised realism (some might disagree) for the sake of gameplay, in that Kerbin is much smaller than Earth. However, there are still limits, as in it's still difficult to launch ridiculous-looking ships. In the same vein, we should at least consider signal delay: maybe make the speed-of-light in the Kerbal universe very quick, such that it doesn't become a significant factor until somewhere outside of Jool. I think signal delay is an important of a "thing" as to merit an implementation in-game (just like realistic physics is), but we don't have to make it inhibitive. Plus, you can always send Kerbals. Of course, this should come with a primitive programming system, or unmanned probes would be impossible. Line-of-sight should also be required for control. tl;dr: Make speed-of-light really fast so it only becomes an issue when player is ready for it.

But if the new part has a different mesh, where would things be attached?

The Apollo rockets have plenty of struts. They're just inside the fairings.

Robotics/moving parts is on the what-not-to-suggest list?

I second the 0x time warp part of this suggestion. Maybe even 0.5x, 0.33x, 0.25x, etc.

http://semver.org/ You're welcome.

Tweakables!

Possible names: library, laboratory, data center...

1. Resources. 2. Money+missions. 3. Tweakables and/or procedural parts. 4. Extended IVA. 5. Aerodynamics. 6. Moar planets, parts, science!

IIRC, there was a "criticism" thread that amounted to this exact same argument/discussion. It's in the archives now, though, so I can't find it. It was a couple hundred pages long though. Does anyone else know what I'm referring to, or knows where to find it?