Kerbart

The mod looks & feel awesome. My only suggestion, in line with the previous posts, would be to update the introduction of the pod. It is so complete that it does make you wonder if you're missing the "corvus heatshield" and "corvus decoupler." Just stating that heatshield and decoupler are not missing, "use stock versions or kw-rocketry if you like" would be enough. I don't think it's a big deal they're not thereâ€â€the mod is awesome as it isâ€â€but it does take the guesswork out of it when you're putting your first corvus-equipped rocket together.

Unless I totally misread the docs last time (a assumption I will not dismiss too eagerly) this looks like a major update with tons of new properties. Atmospheric flight now seems to expose a lot of properties (like terminal velocity -- so a kRPC script can throttle back where needed) AWESOME!!! Is there any way to determine the longitude (and lattitude maybe too)? I'd like to use it to time re-entry for landings at the KSC.

In the souposhere it would have been enough. I think Squad is just trolling us...

I heard them mutter “Since the 1.02 update it's impossible to launch space ships properly!â€Â

This idea has been toyed with for many decades. My main objection against it is: why bother? By the time we have them in working other we'd have controllable fusion reactors, after all (another "never coming to fruition plan")

There are many issues to 1.0 but I don't think "impossible to launch" is one of them. It helps if you always, from the get-go, built "realistic" looking rockets and applied a "realistic" launch profile (ie no sudden 45° turn at 10km). If you're used to massive pancake-style launch vehicles that spend part of their flight at a 45° angle of the current flight path, then yeah, it's pretty hard.

Maybe not in most cases, but if you encounter a retro-orbit around the sun, that is definitely a big deal. - - - Updated - - - I don't know. I don't walk away from missions that earn me 200,000 or more at a launch cost of less than 50,000 (and that's for a two-for-the-price-of-one rescue mission) One can never have too many Kerbals, after all.

...aaand we've gone full circle In the past, soundblasters came with a joystick (gamecontroller) port that doubled as a MIDI interface.

Have you checked the moons of Jupiter? Same thing happens there. And your wishes about realism have been granted: solar panels ARE lacking further away in the solar system and RTG's really DON'T cut it for large power demands. Welcome to deep space exploration!

Well no, but I don't build ships that way. But that'd be the reason the designer put a spoiler there, I'd guess. I do put fins on the top of my boosters. But that's for a different reason.

I like the idea! The current pods are a step up but no reason why they shouldn't be complete ships, maybe with an engine missing. And maybe as an easter egg an abandonded large cargo freigher, the Mary Keleste?

If the asteroid existed before the contract, and after docking (clawing, same thing) with the asteroid, could the contract interpret it as "it already existed before the contract was created?"

I vaguely remember doing something stupid once, like put a Kerbal in a command seat and then getting them on board through Manifest (this was many versions ago). I also ended up with Kloned Kerbals. The problem solved itself because the klones invited their friend, good ole' Kraken, to the station as well.

It's to prevent the ship from flipping during launch. We're all very familiar with that mechanic.

This class of designers has a golden rule: “for the love of god, don't make things PRACTICAL†as that would somehow destroy the purity of the design. We have some workstations at work for graphical design work. Beautifully designed machines. Since they're not approved for our (locked down) network, we'd have to get artwork on and off these machines through sneakernet (USB sticks). Of course, these beautiful pieces of stunningly impressive design have the USB ports AT THE REAR, because heaven forbid the front would be corrupted with two practical USB ports... I bet that at one point there was a discussion on the design of this space ship that went like this: "rocket engines? Oh no, those are ugly. We'll leave them off"

"And I'm telling you what to do" Bro, don't go there. I bet you don't like it to be called bro? Good. Now you know the feeling of this "friendly advice" that is just a disguised "do as I tell you". Well, to be fair... Squad was attacked for things that hadn't happened yet, and that according to (some of) the community was a really bad idea. And they did it anyway. And it turned out to be a really bad idea. Do you give your dog cookies for destroying your furniture, and tell him "good boy?" Because giving positive feedback when negative feedback is needed as not friendly and supporting; it's downright damaging to the receiver of the feedback as well, as they're not learning. Yes, there's beating the dead horse. And eventually we'll get over it. But when it's repeated time and time again that introducing new features without real testing is plain dangerous, and the game ends up in a state that could have been prevented with real testing, then don't expect those who are passionate about the game to shrug and say "oh well, that's water under the bridge now. Should we really tell them awesome release, bro's! Attaboy! because that well magically tell them don't try to do it like this again? I'm guessing, but I dare say that saying don't try to do it like this again gets the message of don't try to do it like this again better across than good job! attaboy! You seemed to have forgotten to add the part in red, so I added it for you. I don't think most critique in this regard was listed as I know it better; it was more listed as these are generally accepted best practices in software development that are blatantly ignored. There's a difference between "claiming to know exactly..." and "nobody does it this way unless they want to fail," especially when the delivery was exactly the failure that was predicted. Would that include an overly friendly tone that is actually quite condescending? Unless you actually meant rude and insulting, then yes, that should not be done. But harsh? How much different is brutally honest? Sometimes that's the best medicine.

Little green men with bulging eyes, I'm willing to accept that. A planet 10 times as dense as earth, I'm willing to accept that. Converting hydrogen into deuterium? Really? Where'd you get the neutrons from? Fusing a proton and electron into a neutron? If the ISRU can do that why bother mining Helium 3?

Oh boy. You didn't get the memo?

Good point. Given that it's supposed to be derived from a defective docking port, you wouldn't expect it to cost multiple times a docking port.

I'm sure they'll return, but the dev team is on a break after the 1.0 release, I think.

Can you think of any modern game that has GAMEBREAKING bugs that are discovered WITHIN TEN MINUTES of gameplay? Not being able to launch and not being able to re-entry are pretty big things. It's not like you have to play for hours, line up things perfectly and even then only when the stars align something odd, but minor, happens. No. This is experienced players who know how to do things, trying the most mundane and ordinary actions in the game, and being confronted with them not working. If it were call of duty it'd be like not being able to reload your gun. If it were GTA it would be like not being able to get out of a car. If it were Five Nights at Freddie's it would be like not being able to close the door. And these games are NOT showing those kinds of bugs. It's irrelevant that two (TWO! they couldn't get it right the first time!) fixes were out in a week. The game was released in an unfinished state. That the critiques are forgiving is nice, but it's beyond sloppy that 1.0 was shipped like that, and it's not that they couldn't--they just decided to ship it like that, knowing that the bugs were in there. That made the 1.0 release a big celebration for Squad, but not for their community. Really, I think we deserved better.

Even without cinco de mayo, and regardless what we think of the outcome of the process, getting to 1.0 must have been a mad rush and I'm sure a detox period of one or two weeks would be beneficial for the devs, the game, and thus for us.

What's wrong with the stock 3.75m shield?

Tourist flyby's have to be prograde. No free-return fly-by for you!

You can cheat extra money through the debug menu and refund whatever you paid for hiring your next victim kerbal.