Bilfr3d

This should be stickied. I know there isn't even anything on it yet, but this has great potential.

You know you can delete them yourself, right?

When is the update actually planned to be coming out? Does anybody know that information? Cause i am on the edge of my seat waiting for that update. I think it is going to be amazing, by the wait is absolutely KILLING me. I try to sign into steam as much as i can just to see whether the update has been released or not

I never even knew that... I'm going to try and make some bug ships now.

thanks. Ill give it a try with 4.3.4 first, because I already have that installed. if it doesn't work, then Ill get 4.2.2

Is there any specific version of unity needed for making the parts, or is it just the most recent version of unity (or any version for that matter)?

I love both the ideas. The strut ladder AND that little bendy ladder mod being added or developed. Great idea!

What mods? Spaceport is no longer alive. I can't see what your talking about. What's a boarding game? If you're not willing to lose that money for the development and ideas for KSP than why did you bring this topic up? It could be cool, yes, but it very unnecessary in KSP. Yes, orbital construction and planetary construction are available and playable, but they are mods. We? Not everyone likes those mods. I don't mind it, and this isn't thread isn't about orbital construction and planetary construction. It's about what you brought up on the main post - terrain deformation. If French is your main language, then why are you posting in the English section? I also find it amusing, that you haven't replied to anything I said ABOVE what you quoted on. Is that because I'm right? Are you just trying to evade talking about that, because you agree with those points? No. Rovers are not the goal of KSP. Are... are you thinking properly? Cause I don't think you are. The ground is not flat. The ground has tons of bumps, hills and the rest of it. For this, the science system would first have to be improved, than the roving system would have to be done. New parts would have to be made for drills to collect the samples. Than all the rest of the other things you suggested would have to be implemented. That wouldn't only affect rovers. it would affect rockets, planes and nearly all things in KSP. You would have to wait for good weather to launch crafts, making the game (possibly) less playable.

Are there any size limitations? Is there any particular direction we need to go, or do we just need to cover a minimum of "3770km ground distance covered" in the flight log?

I envision something like this: Completing a contract mission with a kerbal with low(er) stupidity and courage gives you more money, but increases the risk and difficulty of the contract (because your kerbals are stupid and don't have courage). But, if you use kerbals with higher courage, stupidity (wait, is it better if stupidity is higher or lower?? ) you woud receive either the 'normal' amount of money, or maybe a bit less, but the risk would be less and the difficulty would be less. I like the general stats thing too.

ROCKET SLED!!! Hook up a small aircraft to it, than Kaboom!!! Instantly going 1000m/s. Hook a small rocket to it, put on an optional big ramp thingy (to increase the upwards angle at launch), and BOOM! The rocket is nearly in orbit. Great fun could be found here, and I bet Jeb would love it

As KaBob said above, roving is already risky, with a high potential of the wheels just breaking and the rover tipping (or the kraken visiting you). I have played spin tires before, and the technology is great, but I just wouldn't like to see this in KSP. In fact, I would probably play KSP less if it was implemented. Procedural part destruction, yeah. As Javster said, if your part gets hit, it would dent. I would imagine there would be two impact tolerances, one when the tank starts to leak its fuel or gas, and one where the part then turns into a muddle of metal - the equal to a part exploding now. This would definitely make it more realistic generally flying, and it would require some more care and planning with space stations (and docking) and bases. Warsoul, I've seen you round several times with your horrible English and your attempts to make KSP a completely different game to what it is, mimicking starcraft, etc. The interests of development are chosen by the devs and the devs only. We may say we want something, but the devs may not necessarily implement it. If too many thing are implemented to make KSP seem like a mimic of another game (eg. starcraft), KSP may even be done for infringement of copyright. So if you want a game that has things from starcraft... well, go and play starcraft. Simple. If you want the technology in spin tires, go and play spin tires.

This is dead now. The link to the download is for spaceport, which is no more

Be careful out there, stay safe

Your not obsessed with KSP until you spend at last 10 hours a week on it.

multiplayer is on the what not to suggest list. Expect this to be locked

Wait, are you contradicting yourself? And you joined in Feb this year with already 1086 posts... something tells me i'm not the only one that's thinking 'troll alert' right now.

Yes unity does. You just need an SDK to compile against

This has been discussed plenty times, and nearly all times it came to the conclusion that mobile devices such as iPads, etc. just did not have the guts KSP required. It does sound cool, but its unlikely the devs would spend time at the current point changing code to make it playable on mobile devices. I'm pretty sure their current concern is the development on the PC.

maybe this should be forwarded to bug tracking...

0/10 never seen you either

BEER!!! I quickly run down to the storage area to drink ALL the beer. Everyone gets annoyed at me, and I go on a drunken rampage, smashing batteries, science equipment and storage containers... I eventually pass out, with my spew floating around the space station

Just a question... is using several small engines better than using one big engine?

I shall give this challenge a try... hopefully not failing others that I have tried.

can you have several distinctions?