Ruinsage

Upon further examination of the "babies" i have found that they are simply wreckage from the parachute vessel attached to the asteroid, my mistake

So, I just landed my first asteroid on Kerbin, only class c, but hey, it was going to impact, so I thought I would make the landing a little smoother. First attempt landed in the sea (guess what, it sinks) Second attempt was perfect, but I didn't anticipate the bounce, so it destroyed my command pod with all three oranges. So that's another quicksave reload. Third time's the charm, and the asteroid rolled about a hundred meters or so before it settled down. It did spawn two small babies, which i didn't really expect. I would be very much surprised I was the first to do this, so who else have landed an asteroid, and who has landed the largest?

Well.. I just finished my Asteroid Retrieval Mission So I guess I landed an asteroid on Kerbin.

By "clearing the neighborhood around it's orbit" they mean collected the gas and smaller rocks in path of the orbit. This is a major part of planet formation, which is why it's a credential for being a planet. There's always going to be crap floating around in orbits, if the orbits had to be perfectly clean, nothing would be considered a planet.

Id like it if there were less focus on biomes, and more focus on different objects on the surfaces, like different kinds of rocks. They would be impossible to spot from orbit, but easy to spot with rovers.

Thanks for voting everyone, and please continue to do so . I'm lad to see that the poll seems to have reached the point where I can make some conclusions from it: People want probe functionality, which I get, as it is also the functionality i miss the most in KSP Rovers have yet to be mentioned, but a fair amount of people have voted for rover functionality and unmanned surface sampling, so maybe SQUAD should look into that as well? My station functionality suggestion was stupid (sad face) A lot more people wants change than the amount that want's things to stay the way it is. I hope someone from squad sees this poll, and that they have a discussion about it UNLESS some of the functionality they plan to implement with contracts makes probes, stations, bases and rovers needed in the game, in which case a science overhaul is less needed, and just something that would be nice whenever they have the time for it.

But space stations are not "something for nothing", and should absolutely not be in the game either. At some point or the other, keeping kerbal in space indefinitely is going to become expensive, and keeping the space station powered would require a massive solar array. There are lots of ways to ensure that building space statons are not the easiest way to gather science, but maybe the most interesting.

While I'm glad to see that the vast majority of the poll (so far at least) agree with me in science right now needing an overhaul, i'm a bit puzzled to see people wanting more incentive to use landers that can return back to kerbin. Right now, landers are the only choice for gathering science, unless a return trip is almost impossible. The vast difference in bringing back all data, and transmitting it back makes it practically useless to do anything but bring it back, and that is simply neither realistic, nor fun (at least not to me). I like the design aspect of the game, so spending all my time designing landers, and literally nothing else, is boring. I want to make deepspace probes, manned mun bases, duna space stations and more. And right now none of those are useful, except for being interplanetary fuel depots (I say again, BORING). I am not saying that manned lander missions should not be the most rewarding missions, they absolutely should, but right now they are more or less the only option, as everything else just provides so little, because the absolutely largest source of science is soil samples, and everything else give so little when transmitted. Also, as it seems I have not been clear enough on the issue, my suggestion for the space station mechanic would not gather science from the surface, so you would still need landers.

First off, I would post this under suggestions and discussion, but it somehow won't let me make a poll that way, so if it being here is an issue, move it to development instead. I don't like the way science works at the moment. I get that the old way, where you just send a probe and gather all the available science by sending it back by repeated transmission wasn't optimal, but the current model doesn't really work either, at least not for me. It greatly incentive's landers, but at the cost of probes and stations, which are both completely useless at the moment. But all of this is just my opinion, and I want to know what the community wants. So, as far as I can see, these are the options: 1: Science is fine as it is 2: Probes can scan from orbit, which can be transmitted for full science value (Like the kethane mod). 3: Rovers can take surface samples, which can be processed by the rover for almost full science value (like the mars rover). Kerbals can bring back surface objects, like small rocks and the like, which are hard to find from orbit, but a part can be used to tell if you are near one (which would make rovers useful, as they are a fast way to get around the surface). These would be worth a lot of science. 4: Stations gather science over time (let me finish), by gathering science from what is left of the total science pool in a given sphere of influence. So if it's in orbit over kerbin, it would gather all the remaining science from all the experiments in the sphere of influence. So this would NOT be a source of infinite science, or even a separate source of science, instead it's a way to gather the science you have somehow left out, because you didn't bring the science junior in orbit just above kerbin. Of course you can simply set this up initially to gather all the science, but that would take a long time, and it would be much more efficient to simply leave it in the background while you do something else. (it should continue gathering science while on rails) 5: A mix of the above

I hope they will redo science, to be more realistic and fun. I much prefer the way kethane works, with you having to scan the planet/moon from orbit. I'd love for science to be collected in that way, and not have to be transported back to kerbol physically. Surface samples still be the most rewarding, but at least you would have an actual reason to build probes. edit: Also, capsules should unlock after probes

Buck Basic Unit of Currency of Kerbals

I play with ferram and deadly reentry, so using the capsules is somewhat nerve wrecking, as there's a chance that I come in too steep or too fast, which would burn apart my rockets, or my chutes, destroying my aircraft either in the air or on landing. When I get far enough in career (just started from scratch with quite a few mods), I think i'll make a hybrid of the two, so I can control my descend more

You should get the alarmclock mod, and then manage several flights at once, so you dont finish a flight to the mun before you send the next one up.

Seems I was wrong, it was the memory that was the problem

Trial and error has shown that this mod is incompatible with engineering redux, which makes me sad

I tried the mod, but it keeps getting shut down when i try to enter hanger mono.dll caused an Access Violation (0xc0000005) in module mono.dll at 0023:10118d2a.

I feel that there is one key factor that people have forgotten in this whole debate: The new engines are not supposed to be a bigger version of the old engines, they are supposed to be heavy lifters of rockets too heavy to be lifted without asparagus designs. This, I believe, is because Squad is moving to a more realistic air resistance model in the near future, just as they have recently improved the joints. Squad is pushing for more realistic rockets, and asparagus rockets are simply not viable in the real world, so they made new rockets. In fact, in order to create a more efficient rocket in teams of delta-V per ton than the large new engine with the largest tank attached, you just need to make an orange tank, one mailsail at the bottom of that, and attach two Rockomax X200-32 Fuel Tanks with mainsails to the sides, feeding their fuel into the orange tank. This weighs almost exactly the same, and has a larger amount of delta-V. So you see, the new engines are absolutely not overpowered for what they are intended for, they are just not supposed to be larger versions of the old engines. For my other views on this matter, ill be brief: -The game should be balanced for career, so cost is also going to be a balancing issue when that is implemented. Until then there really isn't a reason to nerf the engines, especially not this close to the implementation of money. Saying the game should be balanced for sandbox is like saying that League of Legends should be balanced for coop-vs-ai. -Yes, they should move it further back on the tech tree, and I assume they will soon. -Research should provide better parts, just like how research in CIV provides better soldiers. Research providing larger but other wise identical parts is ridiculous. -You will still need the same skills, except for asparagus building skills. Don't whine about it, just move on. -I expect new parts of the larger diameter being made soon, hopefully something that will make station building useful. -No, mainsails are not obsolete, they are just used for smaller payloads. This will be more apparent when costs are implemented.

The Verne gun is a cannon capable of launching objects into space. While this would not be viable on celestial objects that have atmosphere, moons could potentially use these as a cheap way of launching either stored experiments, kerbals, or entire rockets from the moon to an orbit that leads it close to kerbin For example, you make a heavy rover and attach one of these to it. You then move across the moon and gather up as much science as there is. As you reach a new biome, you wait for the opportune moment, and launch the results of the biome onto a trajectory that strafes the upper atmosphere of kerbin. The atmosphere slows it down, and eventually the build in parachutes deploy and the science lands safely on kerbin. You then don't have launch another rocket to fly a new set of kerbals to that particular moon in order to gather research in that biome, you can just move along and gather more. After you have gathered all the science, you can just launch the kerbals as well, and leave the rover on the moon. As the cannon would impart large G-forces, it might only be able to launch the kerbals into orbit of the moon. If you thought ahead, you could have brought a return craft and simply have parked it in orbit. The kerbals can then simply fly home. I know this suggestion is a bit out there, and would be hard to implement, but I thought I would share anyways. Besides, people have actually tried to build these things, so why not?

I want to specialize in multiple deployments (like having 10 probes on the same launch, stuff like that). But unfortunately, there isn't really a reason to do this atm. And I often want to do it on manned launches because I hate loosing kerbals, and I cant rewind when I do this (also, it sucks to tweak a small part of your design, and then find out that you only brought along one kerbal, because it resets them after you revert to space center, after having spend half an hour on it. This game really needs more non-manned functionality

You could always buy the game for a friend or gift it to someone on the internet

Blackjack and hookers

I suggested something like this a while ago, glad to see other people thinking it would be a good way to do things. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65551-Another-use-for-the-mobile-processing-lab

Personally, i think people are wrong about why time based experiments should be implemented. It's not to force people to do something else while it gathers science, it's to check that you have put up a stable rig, which is something that is absolutely essential for science. It forces you to have a stable orbit that doesn't fluctuate in altitude, or a base that can keep itself charged through the night. So what if they fast forward, as long as they have a stable rig i don't see the problem. Let me put it into perspective: I was just at tenerife to take some pictures with the 80cm telescope for a university class. The telescope is located as high as possible to minimize interference from the atmosphere, which isn't really a surprise. What was a surprise though, was that they had brought white rocks to put around the telescopes, because if the rocks around the telescope were heated by the sun, the heat emanating from them could distort the pictures, leading to noise. This is how stable scientific measurements have to be. Not "oh hey, i launched a rocket up 500km, now i know everything about the space around kerbin, and how micro-gravity works".

I guess i have not been clear enough, my suggestion is not infinite science, its a lengthier version of what is in the game. The reason i want this is that it forces people to make functioning bases/stations, which is something we just doesn't have right now. And sure, you can choose to just milk it all, but you can also choose to make it a working base around the mun that you can dock all your mun missions with, letting you store the science with the station before taking it down to kerbin. In case i didn't mention it, there should be a max science per experiment, just like with all the other experiments. So you won't be getting more from it than from a round trip to another planet. I simply want a reason to make working bases and stations, and having the most valuable source of science take some time to finish can accomplish just that.

In total, just like with every other science part. You said that staying in the "mono biome orbit" was impossible for the objects near kerbin, but not for the rest of the planets and moons. I assumed that you meant hovering above the biomes, like the craters on the mun, which would be geosynchronous orbit. What i'm talking about is a circular orbit, with upper and lower orbit height inside some arbitrary limit. Nothing is preventing them from timewarping, but so what? Im not saying this experiment should provide many times more than the current experiments, which are all instant, just that it should be more realistic, because experiments take time. And for those of us who wants to build functioning bases and stations, this would create a reason to do just that. I don't see why this is such a big problem, and i even answered this question in the OP, because i know people have been complaining about every idea that involves resources over time. Frankly, i think letting the science parts drain from the total science pool (so to speak) over time is a much better way to do it than the current "lets instantly get 90% of the total science, and then have to send up a whole new rocket to get the last 10%. The only difference between my suggestion and the way it is now, is that my suggestion requires a more stable orbit for in-space experiments, and a more stable power supply all together. Heck, when/if they implement life support, this provides the extra challenge of keeping the kerbals alive while they experiment, which i would love even more.