Audiopulse

Wow, those look pretty - I cant wait to see them finished!

Heres another possible approach. Parts themselves "level up" by usage. Parts often used on ships would eventually improve in their stats. Get lighter, more efficient or even gain new abilities. As a result you would have new reasons to redo missions with parts you havent used much before, to improve on them. You might even have a reason to do some simple orbits or moonshots to prepare for a larger endeaver you had thougt of.

You know what? Youre right - I made you the display of what was troubling me with certain attitudes I experienced around the forum lately while your comment was a lot more harmless than it ocurred to me last night. There is a group of people acting like I described and one of those made a rather idiotic demand in this very topic. It got me angry enough to fire my missiles at the wrong person. My apologies for that. I think its rather creepy youre going through my Forum-history just to formulate a good comeback. Dont do that.

Because this isnt ponyland where you get your wishes granted as they come. KSP is the way Harvester makes it - if bits of the game dont follow your perception of how you see fit, well, then you can either manage or not buy the game in the first place. That sounded harsh and its most certainly not satisfying for you to hear, but you totally disregarded the reality and simply stated 'what you want'. And sadly, youre in good company with that. For some time now the perception has shifted and there are those who see the game as theirs, while actually Kerbal Space Program is Harvesters brainchild and only his. Paying the price allows you and everyone else, including me, to play KSP, but we do not own the Project. KSP will always be different from what we wish it to be, because to be perfect everyone would have to code it for himself to suit his unique needs. Now, of course there is nothing wrong with stating what one wishes, however, the last decision lies in squads hands. And that has to be respected.

Hey, Im pretty sure its been said before, but you guys should get together with the Kethaners about Mineral-scanning. I would love to have one Interface for all scannable Ores/Materials instead of several - it would make everything more streamlined. Either way, still a pretty awesome mod. I wish I had more time to play some KSP again.

Colani is a famous german designer who made a lot of rather flowing designs for all types of things. I just stumbled over this webpage: http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2008/05/extravagant-designs-by-luigi-colani.html which also happens to contain a Spaceshuttle of some sort and thougt I would relink that here for others looking for inspiration.

Pardon - what lights are those? They look nice.

Thank you - KSP has always been a wee bit underdeveloped in terms of lights! On another note - your Nick sounds familiar. Have you been modding for other SciFi-games in the past? Freelancer for example?

Ah, hm - well - I didnt know myself. Thanks for sharing. Youre not the only one who didnt notice.

Reading this... "Eat ALL the Kerbals!!!" Made me chuckle

I went a little poetic the other day and thougt about a comment someone made a while back. That person said he wouldnt really like how everything about the Kerbals is all silly and goofy and that he instead prefers a more serious approach to his flightscenarios and rocketdesigns. Well. I dont mind either - so far I simply tried to make stuff happen and was good with it, but somehow it irked me after reading this and I wondered how Kerbals really are like. If everything is "found lying by the side of the road", who made it initially? Who came up with the blueprints and mathematical solutions? Rockets made with 50% duct-tape are certainly funny to think of, but once were a wee bit more serious about the matter: That wouldnt work - some serious work is necessary to get our contraptions air- /spaceborne and I dont see how a race capable of reaching space-faring technologylevels is incapable of feeling sad about tragic losses to their ranks - which has to mean they, despite all wonkyness, do try to avoid deathcases and failing Rockets. All this and more lead me to the following conclusion: Kerbals are an incredibly ingenious race capable of developing new technologies almost on-the-fly. Their only way of coping with the large influx of new developments is by live-testing with often only basic safety-measures. That in turn is only possible thanks to the Kerbals outstanding physical capabilities. They can endure a lot before breaking down and even then have regenerative abilities beyond what a human couldnt even dream of. Maybe that is because they didnt develop from apelike life-forms like we did, but rather had some prehistoric ties to Kerbins Plant-life. That would fit their healthy moss-green skintone. Moss, by the way, can be chopped into the smallest pieces and would still grow back, if the conditions are right. I envision Kerbals as a genuinely kind-hearted race, being very connected to plants, the sun and living itself. Always diligent and busy they would only have very little "sparetime", as all the work they do is actually what they enjoy. Furthermore I see them organised in a somewhat caste-like society, where those castes would only mean a field of craftmanship or science, a Kerbal has devoted itself to - not a set of social limits and taboos but more like a job. Somehow I dont think large Metropoles (like New York) are very Kerbalish - instead I imagine them living in small cities at max, mostly even larger towns only where the Inhabitants are very interconnected. This is a major factor to how the Kerbals can be so efficient in development and (eco-friendly-) industry. Whole towns/cities can sometimes be dedicated to a field of science/craftmanship. Taking all we have so far we can even draw a picture on how their cities could look - In my Idea they have a lot of plant life (Affection to plants and sunlight) and open roads (which are less in the well sorted manner you see in the US, but more like the old cities in Europe. Reference: https://www.google.de/mapmaker?ll=49.580557,10.627384&spn=0.020953,0.060425&z=15&utm_source=mapseditbutton_normal&lyt=large_map_v3 ...hope this works)with broad sidewalks in front of buildings with very open fronts. Most Kerbal buildings have Cafes (if they have coffee - I vote yes!) or Workshops being open at any time. We 'know' Kerbals are attached to technology and arts and thus they have a lot of such places to meet and dispute (Somewhat alike to what the italian culture was said to be or still may be) Even if a structure doesnt really have a need for anything like that - their architecture would still promote open frontfacades (Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iwan) as this is just one of the main features of kerbal architecture mirroring their strong community-spirit. Kerbal Cities often dont grow so much in surface-area but rise in height quickly, making them look like a smaller mockup of high-rising cities on earth. Our Kerbals can maintain this buildstyle thanks to their astonishing stamina as that leaves them with a larger pool of resources and possibilities. Bac9s hit on the Kerbal Space Center (which is hands down beautiful ) fits so well I see it as the basic style of Kerbal cities: Strong geometry for the basic shapes, large windows, warm tones and sometimes lots of white, large flat surfaces. What I would finally add is some ornamentic and some decorative additions to the city-builds. Patterns you would often see could be Voronoi and Penrosepatterns as well as Art-deco. How that could exactly look I dont entirely know myself yet, but I know I would like to make some sketches on that, soon. Well, thats it so far. It was kinda fun thinking all this up and I hope you enjoyed reading this. Be my guest if you want to pick up here and add your own thougts. Should your Nickname be "Harvester" - I bet you even have a ton more to say about our favourite aliens.

I just read the OP, thanking the staff about the option to try the game for free - referencing to the Demo at the state of the old KSP 0.13 You know, this is something I just felt should be really thanked for, because its something that promotes a better behavior in the Game-business. Im so fed about DLCs, Special Editions and Pre-Purchase Content. It really disgusts me how things turn nowadays and I long back for the old times when you either had your copy of C&C 95 or you had not. It even seeps back into the Indie-scene again where Kickstarter became a standart. Those get X, while those dont or only for Y amount of money - I miss a straight focus on things: The game for one and the (playing) Customer on the other. I just detest the feel of being a monetizing instrument when I see the latest Trailers for the newest DLC of Borderlands2, hyping themselves and making jolly fun of a Pack that adds another 10 whopping levels for those who pay the prize. People like me, sticking with the basegame ultimately having doubts whether we really own the game or got scammed with a demo for a full-price-title. Its like overcomplexing things from simple "Pay X to get Y" to a full fledged Stockmarket where you can all too easily end up with a trashcan full of digital hats instead of a fun and well-made game. Thanks for being not like this, Squad, thanks for having fun with what you do and entertaining me since 0.8. I love how you go about the Kerbal Universe and the way you share your ways with us. I dont understand everything of it but its interesting nonetheless.

I just listened to some Jazz on Youtube, when I came across a certain piece at 33:00 approx. Just out of curiosity - does anyone know where KSPs musik comes from? Who made it?

I have some criticism with yargnits Tech-tree - I didnt know where to go with this so Im posting it here. I started of with his tree because of his argument "Planes before Rockets" - I think i will hardly have much reason to build and fly planes once rockets are somewhat mastered, so there it goes. The thing is though - I found myself research rockets rather quickly again. Getting into them appears much cheaper and to get the science for those nodes I had to rocket around kerbin, harvesting all places I couldve gone by plane. So once I reached the Flight-nodes there wasnt much left for me to discover with plain flight which made the whopping price of 2x 60 science hardly reasonable. And theres the next thing - I dont see why basically Wings and Wheels/Jetengines are separated in two nodes? Both alone hardly get you anywhere. A jet without wheels cant properly land (Starting/Landing Planes is what most of the fun about planes is) when a Jet with wheels but only tiny wings/ailerons ... well - I couldve used such Jetcars at the very beginning, but not that much later when I reached the flight-nodes. Theres other things later on - like two ladders taking up a node for 60 science. Why would really want to buy these? The only reason to have them would be Planes on Kerbin - in space or on low-grav planets like minmus and the moon i can easily jetpack in. Well now - one possibility could be me having made a mistake and still being with the default tech-tree, while I merely think I would play Yargnits tree. If that is the case and you recognised the the default tree by my descriptions - let me know. I dont want to look at the revealed Tree on Page 1 too close. I dont want the fun of discovery being spoiled for me.

Extra Hard? Who said anything about the game getting extra hard all of a sudden. Malkuth merely said that we cant really judge the difficulty yet because of the missing economy. But go on judging anyone elses view as mis-guided. Because certainly there is no way you could be wrong. And about those hardcore players - youve been around for half a year. How could you be talking about hardcore?

I dont think much of such systems, to be honest. They dont really add anything useful to the forums but bolstering the ego of those who have been around for a longer time or posted more. Sometimes people develop a certain boss-attitude with a high post-count which is why some boards even hid the Postcounter. Fortunately this forum is well tended so far.

I read the rest of the topic now. I should have never come here. I will now go and sit in a corner. Facing the wall. In Terror.

This may be old now, as the topic reached Page 3 already, but I felt an urge to comment on that. Where'd you get that from? Could it be that this is just your perception? SQUAD does sidetrack in general - and thats good! Have you ever seen how KSP started out? It was a 2D-orbiting-simulator. 2D. 2-dimensional. Without that sidetracking you would be playing a fun minigame instead of the KSP we got now. Sidetracking brought the Planes and Rovers. In my books they did a good job on aknowledging what is good for the game and adding it. This can go wrong, yes, but it is not. Next - I dont see why you even started about the schedule. Are you really asking for a halt of development? I would understand if we were talking about a barely playable game that needs to make progress to be enjoyable. KSP has been fun to play since 0.8, though, so why are you asking to stop adding fun features that work well with the game? The way I see it youre just measuring Squad/KSP to the standart-theories you have learned as a software engineer. Well, I am a Productdesigner. We do a lot of developing, too - often with careful "sidetracking".

Freelancer had those tiny little pebbles floating in space. They were nothing but decals - much like particles we already got with flaming out engines or the kethane-miners. Theyre basically a small 2d-picture thats always facing the camera while floating around/falling to the ground. I bet Harvey will have it this way. Most games use them for tasks like this one.

I remember when this topic came up - I also felt a little uncomfortable about some voices turning the OP down. In my humble opinion - regardless of whether one likes the looks or not - its a great thing to "research" for KSP. So you, too, go on - I dont know too much about the backgrounds, but its enough to be following with interest.

Totally agreed. Id describe the engines as coarse and grinding. If they were dinner, I would add cream I would not care too much about realism either. Considering youre often listening to them during long burns for minutes straight I think its more important to create a comfortable atmosphere than being correct.

Heya, for some time now I noticed something was changing about KSP to me. I am really looking for words here, but it appears I cant really stand the sound of the engines anymore. That surprised me myself a little - but it was an interesting thougt: Does it actually matter -how- the engines sound when firing? Would that really impact that much on our experience with the game? Well, looking at myself now - apparently so. Now Im curious what you people think. Has anyone else had these thougts? Or is it even the other way around and you actually enjoy the white noise the engines produce when firing? Thinking back I remember a similar case. Ive always been enjoying space-games and so I, of course, enjoyed a good bit of Freelancer online, too. During the countlyess Tradingruns I mostly relied on Liberty- and Bretonian Vehicles but at one point the circumstances forced my to fly a Kusari-vessel. Now - for everyone not familiar with Freelancer (Which should not be too many, here, really ) - Every one of the five Houses has its own type of Engine with its own set of visual effects and sounds. The Rheinlanders used some kind of plasma, Liberty had their fancy magnet-something-technology and Kusari relied on some kind of atomic drive which sounded somewhat like two metal-surfaces brushing softly on each other. So there I was, crossing a vast and empty space in some far-off system, when it suddenly jumped on me that I enjoyed the sound of my Thrusters. They had something meditational on them and made the whole, tedious trip less tedious. I ended up flying that brick longer than I had to, knowingly sacrificing some cargospace compared to similar bretonian Vessels, before finally switching back to my Trader-guilds line of ships. Now, last but not least, I presume the sounds are probably anyways still subject to change sometime in the future, but what do you think about sound in general. How important is it to you really?

Whats the status on the models right now? Are they going to be improved? The mod sounds godly, but the parts just dont quite fit with the rest, yet. Pardons, skykooler

Hm? You didnt ask the community for anything - and the staffers dont visit here every single topic every day. They spend most of their time working on the game, I guess. You might get their attention by either seeking contact with them directly, or your music is so good it stirrs up the community. Edit: after listening a bit into your tracks i think theyre not bad, but I dont know if they would fit KSP as they are. KSP is a rather cartoonish title with a good portion of humour and so on. By looking at your titles alone i feel the differ somewhat from that

Thats what I thougt and hoped