imasquare

@tseitsei89 Nice job. Looks like I'm going to have to add more rockets to my design...then add some more...and even more again.

Four man 70km @ 44.7s landing @ 24:12 Three man 70km @ 43.54s landing 28:14 I'll post the video for the three man time tomorrow. I've got to do some downloading overnight.

Going to be uploading a fastest for 2,3 crew (They're the same record aren't they?) before too long to reach 70km @ 43.54 seconds. Splash down is 27 or 28 minutes so no record there. Upload times are a pain...

With great difficulty I beat Cunjo Carl's time but not by very much Record for fastest time to space for one kerbal of 40.78 seconds. Splashdown 28:14 https://youtu.be/NrOPZLS4_dQ Because this time was so close to Cunjo's I ran a little kOS script to print out the mission time when 70km has been reached. CLEARSCREEN. WAIT UNTIL SHIP:STATUS = "FLYING". PRINT "LAUNCHED". WAIT UNTIL SHIP:ALTITUDE >=70000. PRINT "MISSION TIME @ 70,000M:". PRINT MISSIONTIME. Ok it should be uploaded now Wait how do you embed a video?

It seems like it is trying to render with the scatterer on Duna but instead I get a bunch of hexagonish artifacts that seem to be the Duna scatter. It works perfectly on Kerbin, haven't been to any other planets like Eve yet.

If it hasn't already been suggested in the past 100 pages. Mission parameter: Mass of the final vehicle achieving the objective or stage. Also the greater the mass of the final vehicle achieving, the greater the reward. Getting the reward to scale up could be interesting, as the greater the mass, the exponentially greater amount of fuel required.

Fractal, do you mind if I release bigger part.cfg files to provide 2.5m and 3.75m parts for people who don't know how to edit these files?

Hi Fractal, I'm looking for the part.cfg to modify for the B9 Aero style scoop, I want to make a 3.75m version of it to mate it to a 3.75m version of the thermal turbojet which...looks awesome when there are 5 of them ploughing you through the atmosphere at 800m/s. I find I had to scale up the fusion reactors as well. My reasoning is less to do with cheating and more to do with reducing part count so things are less floppy and explodey. It's been tricky doing all the spread sheets and keeping the scaling the same or similar energy levels. It would be nice if you scaled up all parts to 3.75m, or better yet 5m for when packing it with 5m nova punch parts. I don't really care if the graphics look a bit stretched, it would save me time and part count in having to do it myself and check everything every release...and knowing it's correctly within your scaling as well. Edit: Nevermind, it wasn't B9 it was warpAtmIntake. Still it would be nice to see all sizes up to 5m as stock delivery.

Hm, I somewhat like the idea of gates et el. Does anyone remember the gates from Mass Effect? How they had to travel next to them at speed for them to be slingshotted off another system. I was thinking something similar could be implemented, you fly at the 'McGuffin Gate/Object', and depending on your initial velocity/angle - you will then be sling-shotted off into a distance that may be logarithmically/square etc. proportional to these values. If you use the right values you can be thrown to a different star system near the target planet, if you're off a bit you may be on the outside, if you're off by a margin more you wind up lost...in space. The above solution would require skill in setting the correct apoapsis and burn times for the encounter with the 'McGuffin Gate/Object', it could be fun and rewarding, yet comical if you get it wrong. You're able to find these other star systems with 'McGuffin Gate/Objects' using the telescopes/radio telescopes you research on Kerbin, and they show up on a larger map of the galaxy/cluster etc. I think this may be able to keep the spirit of building simple rocket ships, but also expanding the KSP universe and keeping it fun. Although warp drives are a good idea, they don't seem to be in the spirit of what KSP is trying to achieve. Having said all of the above, as mentioned previously I would rather see FTL/other systems implemented in DLC.

That's the crux of it, well said. It seems that some people want super realistic simulations right down to the scale of atom interactions requiring a football stadium sized super-compute-cluster, whilst others just want...an approximate emulation that their humble PC can play. I'm not sure what Squad wants to deliver.

The short answer is, there is nothing wrong with your monitor, graphics card, game, installation or configuration. Rkman and The Right Trousers are correct. However this is a completely normal effect of having a large and wide FOV. It only seems strange as you have human eyes, and you're used to perceiving the world with a narrower FOV.

I agree that assistance with assessing the stress and strain during build and flight would improve gameplay experience, I had similar thoughts on this aspect of gameplay myself. After Squad has fixed the buggy physics emulation to the best of their abilities, I'd suggest Squad review this item. My thought is if the physics emulation is fixed to the point where ships don't wobble around so damn much we hopefully won't need this function so soon. I'm not saying this feature isn't needed, but there is a game play pain point revolving around the wibbly wobbly ships that tear themselves apart for no realistic or reasonable reason - that should be resolved first,

Everything may seem 'relatively trivial' even with known procedural generation techniques for planets. However it has has nothing to do with project management and the current list of deliverables listed by Squad. If the deliverables are finalised before schedule and the project is under budget - then Squad can look at this task and see if it's feasible with the remaining time and budget for KSP 1.0.x GA release. I'd look at scheduling this as a separate project that is a paid for DLC pack, development would be after KSP 1.0.x GA release.

There are some interesting discussions on physics, theoretical and otherwise. Would going to other star systems be interesting? Of course. If you want that I'd suggest you go and play Spore, it has some good 'space age' flight between star systems. Flight to other systems may be a possibility for a sequel, otherwise I don't see this project scope addition being practically achieved within the current time and fiscal constraints of Squad.

Some good suggestions to update the the art/model assets, I'd suggest the Squad team look at this after some of the major developmental pieces are completed and are near the 1.0.x GA release.