Cosmitz

This may seem trivial but can 'important' missions, like first orbit/ first Mun visit etc NOT have an 18 hour or whatever expiration? I 'lost' the chance to complete my first Orbital flight since i didn't have it accepted and did something in the meanwhile that required me to speed up time. Having them 'permanent' like the records seems like a better idea or just give them the expiry as the duration they're available to be accepted. Also, the window is too damned small to show multiple contracts at the same time, especially the fidgity '300 to 500 m/s while at between 14000 and 150000' which you're trying to do at the same time as the 400 to 600/ 14000 to 180000 of another part. Also, currently as of 1.0.2, with the stock hangar and more or less tier 1-2 parts maximum, achieving orbit is quite hard, while contracts advertising orbits are common.. and that's coming from someone that has played some KSP before (way before, but still counts). Overall i have to say i like career, but i'd have some things flipped around on the research board. Struts, 'empty' structural components and pipes for example should be a lot easier to get. It's more a matter of getting locked in a choice of how to play instead of creative problem-solving with what you have on hand. Let's not even discuss planes.

Fresh roverer.. but adding an Inline Advanced Stabilizer to a rover... has weird applications. And then i turned on SAS.. Sure, i can totally turn those panels perfectly at the sun now with the new discovery of antigravity. LE: Funny thing is, if i turn it off, i lose the 'invincibility'

After my first succesful Mun landing, probes ofc, why waste good test su---astronauts, decided to cement it with a second one, which i got 16 km away, not bad. Most astonishing thing? Loading a save game with the struts extended while they're on I-beams makes them disconnect from the ship. Not one single problem for a rookie professional like me: I wonder if i can land on one single I beam. KSP doesn't have moon winds does it?

Tried this multiple times, would need around 30-40 more units of fuel each time to get in an orbit. I end up with bloated apoapsis more often than not. Later edit: Ok, got closer, but really, still need a few squirts of fuel to get my usable orbit, otherwise it ends up as a very long space-cruise.

I think i may have a small issue. Whatever i do, the RDV target list just lists Minmus. Even if i try to manually select another target, it switches instantly to "no target". I am pretty new so i may just not get something.

Hey, thanks for the greeting. I'm a stickler for the fourth issue, in the end, it is a game. Sure i can math, in the same vein i can not even start the game and giggle maniacally while i calculate thrust ratios on a notebook. Or not really. Just got the Engineer Redux mod and it's simple in what it does, just tosses stats at me like TWR/thrust/Delta-v, stats that you NEED to know when you're building rockets and for simplicity's sake, have them in front of you. I know what i sound like, i have favorite games of my own that i played to death and still get surprised what little usability feature that i didn't have and makes a world of difference gets mentioned by a pair of fresh eyes trying the game for the first time. Sure, i learned and someone else can learn aswell, but if it can be made better and easier to comprehend, it should.

Hello, Just got started with KSP after hearing a lot from it over the years. Won't bore, will just post some suggestions, and while i realise this game can be heavily modded these are aimed at making the core game more user friendly and better: 1) Make the parts screen easier to manage. For one, split parts into smaller groups, in propulsion have engines/fuelpods, maybe even types of fuel. It becomes an immense hassle to find parts. Also, while i love the lore of them, there should be some standards in regards to the size they have and their name. Something like R3/R2/R1 put somewhere in the name to mention how radially big each part is, for a small example. 2) Part info when you have it selected. I loaded up some models from the default folder and besides comparing their look to the ones in the parts list i could not see which part is what. I just wanted to take it down and understand how it's built. 3) Visible connection points. A screenshot illustrates it best, from Galactic Civilisations 2: All the red dots are connection points on the parts and the default 'facing'. For spherical items, they have a lot of them, but what this helps to do is you know where to point your mouse to clip parts to a specific point and not have to wobble your mouse around until the game recognizes that you want to ACTUALLY put it there. Sometimes to simply put another fuel tank below another one, in line, i kept getting tons of weird other placements until i finally got what i wanted. I understand the game is trying to translate where you're pointing in a 3D space by throwing a vector and the first intersection is what gets used, but the GC2 example above is a very simple way to do it. 4) More stats in the vehicle builder. What's the current ship's total mass? How much thrust does 'this' stage give out? I don't know enough-enough about the game to say which are important and in what capacity, but i really just felt i was slapping parts together without knowing how or why. I have three engines, should i add another one? Do i need an extra fuel tank? How long does will this engine burn with this fuel tank at max burn? Sure i can calculate, or run it to see, but having some stats makes it atleast tangible and gives you some numbers to have in the back of your mind and reference. 5) Faux wind-tunnel? Can i see where the biggest drag is on my ship and try to fix it before launching it? Goes with the above improvements. 6) Overlay trajectories in the 'normal' 3D view. This can't be so hard. While i understanding using the map to actually make trajectories since it's a fine thing, what's the issue with not being able to see said trajectory and whatever changes in in in the 3D viewer. While i'm sure in the end it's just novelty, it would make it easier for people to understand what's going on when they can actually see their ship physical facing and the relation burn has on their trajectory in real time. If nothing else, atleast show ship 'facing' in the map. This might also be more fun since you end up with something else to look at rather than a blue line and the navball. And that's about it so far. I'm still struggling on preserving fuel and getting a ship into stable 75/75 orbit with /enough/ fuel to make re-entry. Often i barely end up with enough fuel to make periapsis. Anyhow, this is perfect to play at work.