panzer1b

Now im not gonna pretend to be an aerodynamics expert or anything, and i know KSP stock isnt perfect, but at least most things that would have worked IRL will fly in KSP to some extent. Thats why i like stock KSP aero, if you make something look semi plausible it will work, and stock KSP still allows some degree of sci-fi creativity (not quite managed to make a SSTO cruiser/carrier class capital ship yet but im working on it). As for the floppy rocket problem, i have to say ive never actually had to deal with it. The trick is to not make very tall things and use as few parts in the stack as possible to keep it structurally rigid. That and moar struts never hurts so if its really wobbly and cant be redesigned, place struts in the right spot and it should be better flying.

Frankly i think a planet surface/texture overhaul is the best idea, with parts being second runner up. The reason i didnt put cloud mods in despite being an avid user of my custom EVE configs (in my sig if you are interested, very good performance) is that the one and only reason i use cloud mods is because of customizeability. Granted, i think its more then possible for the stock game to provide customization for cloud textures and colors and stuff like that, i think its fairly unlikely for it to be implemented with more settings then just on/off and perhaps a few texture resolution options. Id much rather have the laggy thing that is EVE and be able to actually customize my own universe then be stuck with a higher performance (and its also doubtful that it can be done in a way that is considerably less laggy then EVE) stock cloud mod that doesnt let me change the cloud layers if i feel that there are too many or too few of them or i just dont like the textures for whatever reason (or as my mod does, make the game look like something out of a sci-fi movie). Planet textures/terrain overhaul is one thing that i think most of us can universally agree to. The stock textures are utterly crap (obviously repeating square tiles for kilometers on end), and while some find it adequate, even the stock terrain is a little lacking of the finer details like caves, super thin valleys (yes i really want to do trench runs with my starfighters), ect you would expect in reality (or any sci-fi movie that involves landing on a planet). Oceans have notorious tile syndrome more so then the land, but given that only 3 planets have them, land is a priority (and only laythe's ocean is absolutely unbearable to look at since its tiling is atrociously obvious). I kinda wish that @SQUAD would pull the textures out of those bloody sharedassets##.assets and put em in a folder structure like everything else so we can (just as we can and do with the parts by editing their respective .dds textures) edit them and replace them with textures we prefer. That would be a good start, but ideally id love to see more variety, less tiling issues, and overall more fine level detail. That and PLEASE fix the bloody texture seam bug, its been around since 1.2 beta came out and its seriously driving me up the wall with rovers being sent into orbit or just exploding after driving over em... As for part packs, while i really like the new (yeah i know we will never get em stock) porkjet rocket parts mod they released a while back, its not like the current rocket parts (besides some absolutely horrific and broken colliders) are not exactly functional. Yeah they clash art wise with the plane parts, but at least they dont look that terrible if you actually like the concept of "found lying by the side of the road" junkyard rocket parts. At least they are consistent in that regard and do technically function, but ill say i definitely would support a parts overhaul as well. That and KSP has gotten to the point that a few minor (and major like those nasty texture seams that showed up in 1.2) bugs are all that is really left that i care about besides the visual aspect. I know there are plenty of features they can focus on, but personally, there is just none that id probably end up caring for or even using (life support seems to be quite popular, and most likely will never be turned on for me period as i gave LS a thorough shot and found every version of it i tried tedious and not fun to deal with).

Kinda sucks that i wont be around to see much of any of this since i have finals coming up next week and pretty much most of my time goes to studying/finishing projects. As a bit of a side note, am i the ONLY one who sees much more promotional stuff and way less progress of game development? Perhaps im just used to the old ways back before the dev team meltdown, but it really seems that too much effort is being spent on stuff that isnt all that critical to actually developing/fixing/improving the game recently. So many critical bugs that dont seem to get as much attention as they deserve... This is seriously game-breaking, and while the civilians living in the southern AKS minmus outpost are quite intrigued at the new land features popping up all over the southern parts of minmus, they dont exactly approve. If this isnt fixed soon i think ill be forced to start building every single new tank/rover with a short range RCS booster for small jumps (would also help when i "accidentally" drive off a cliff's edge at 60m/s and then land facefirst into the ground 10km away)... Hopefully we will get some solid progress after Christmas break is over. There is just way too much stuff that needs to be fixed...

The configs are compatible for 1.0 or later, but you most likely will need to install EVE separately from this mod and then just install the "scifivisualenchancements" folder into gamedata after removing boulderco folder (that has stock EVE configs). It should be fairly trivial to get to work with older versions of KSP, but if you have any more issues ill compile a 1.1.3 version (itll take me like 5 mins or so)...

I believe that in an inherent EVE bug, and the only way i know off the top of my head to fix it now is to increase cloud layer density and give said clouds lower alpha levels as to keep the overall thickness similar, concealing but not exactly eliminating said effect. Reason you dont see it much if at all in mods like SVE is that they have either highly thick particle layers (clouds), or in the case of the dust from that mod, the alpha is so low that for all intents and purposes you can barely see the dust anyway. Ill be sure to both update this mod with the new textures ive been working on as well as take a good look into possibly fixing this bug (or at least lowering its effects) once finals are over. For the next 2 weeks the little if any freetime i get goes entirely to playing games and relaxing, modding, despite being quite enjoyable in its own way imo, isnt exactly as relaxing as blowing up starships in KSP and i kinda need the rest/sleep to do well in my classes...

The only practical implementation i can think of is something akin to an easter egg with a few buildings bunched together (something like the pyramid one but looks like a bunch of modern buildings). Its not really hard to do or anything, but it seems that graphics in general are not something the new dev team cares about enough to bother implementing anything from clouds to better looking parts to a few city like easter eggs... Gotta check if the city mod was updated for 1.2, that mod was incredible, but last i checked it was for like 1.0.5 or so...

I used to love DMP, sadly there are too many sync bugs right now to play it properly with anything but the most basic of interactions. The game either crashes, lags to the point of like 5 FPS max, or krakens out with things like craft duplicating themselves or the infamous bug when docking to anything that is actively controlled by another player. As for the graphics overhaul, i think its safe to say its completely and uttery dead in the water until a few years from now (if ever). In case you guys havent heard, the rocket part revamp has been shelved by squad, and from the little recent dev info i know (of which half is rumors and speculation), i dont believe there is much effort going into any graphics overhauls. Guess the "artists" are being put to good use designing useless promotional crap like "plushies" and other things that at least on a personal level, i couldnt care less about. Makes me kinda wonder what direction the company is heading in. the only thing thats sure certain now is that we have 1.2.1 and it works and we have enough mods to fix most of the broken stock things so its not that bad even if the game stops being developed right now...

Ive always been in support of procedural parts. Less resources and less clutter in the menus. You can still implement it exactly the way it is now by setting certain sizes they can be (with something like a cheat menu option or cfg flag that allows free size choice). Not to mention that their use will drastically kill part count issues on many designs (why do i have to have 30 wing panels just to make a single wing that could easily have been made with at most 3-4 procedural parts). And yeah, no reason not to implement em... Its very unlikely but i remain hopeful that someday we will get procedural parts that work well in stock...

I think it would be a good idea for stock to implement lighting sliders so people can configure their game graphically as desired. Right now everything from ambient lighting to sun intensity is a variable that can easily be altered with a mod, but itd be great to have this capability in stock as a graphics slider. I would love to have slightly increased solar intensity but a decrease to ambient lighting (which makes the game look terrible, hard to play without ambient light adjustment or planetshine which lets you edit that) would be nice at least for those of us that like a challenge landing in pitch black and makes the lights actually a useful piece of equipment so docking in pitch black isnt suicide. Same thing with the skybox, it fits the stock ambient lighting scheme kinda, but itd look cooler when its darker imo. That said, its really a subjective thing as to what level of lighting is ideal. How about it @SQUAD, do you think allowing users to custom set things like ambient light level, sunlight intensity, and skybox brightness using sliders in the settings? Would go a long way towards customizeability and would make everyone from reality nutjobs (turn the ambient lighting to something like 0) to streamers (want to have higher ambient light so viewers can see jack at night) much happier and would remove more mods from the so called cant play without category...

The issue with the crafts bogging down the game isnt new, but i do believe it has been exasperated by the resources and heat code which if i am not mistaken performa some calculations on vessels that arent actively loaded. Now in terms of resources this is a good thing as we dont have to babysit every single refinery, but everything else i think should only be considered when a vessel is actively controlled to save on resources. Still, my limit in a game is around 30 actual flights that arent debris, its enough that i can do large scale stuff and offers fairly ok performance wise provided half of those dont exceed 500 parts. But yeah, it is worth mentioning that excessive flighst does cause a considerable loss to performance so avoid it if possible and id also set the debris slider to ~100 max unless your gameplay revolves around collecting stuff from debris or whatnot. 100 is fine for me as it lets me salvage wrecks from battles, but doesnt make the game lag to death either.

I have alot of experience with weapons (lets face it, i play this game as if it was any other sci-fi combat game but with the ability to custom build your armor/weapons) so ill try my best to help you out. I cannot be certain what is wrong without a craft file, but here are a few tips i can give you with stock sepatron missiles. The first thing you can do to make weapons fire more straight is to use spin stabilization. The idea is to have the sepatrons angled sideways by about 1 tick, and make sure to use radial symmetry so that the sepatrons are not making it fire sideways. This isnt essential, but it helps alot when your ship is moving slightly (its very hard to get a ship to be 100% stable using the stock SAS especially if its very heavy and low on reaction wheels). The next best thing you can do is to avoid long stacks of weapons. While the compactness is very tempting, it is both a bad practice in the armor department (easier to degun a ship with less hardpoints and long stacks of missiles one after the other), and it makes the weapons less accurate. The issue is that the first few shots will wobble on the stack and make it more difficult to aim them, usually resulting in minor spread which is exasperated if the missiles are not spin stabilized. Finally, make sure you do NOT use regular struts to attach weapons to teh ship. From my experience struts will 90% of the time result in the weapons veering off to the side when fired. If you absolutely must use struts to attach a wobbly stack to the craft, use the autostrut feature which doesnt seem to make missiles fly sideways as often. Also worth mentioning is that you should be using radial symmetry when constructing sepatron missiles. It should be obvious as to why, but occasionally even i forget and end up with unuseable weapons that fly sideways when i accidentally used mirror symmetry. Anyways, if these tips dont help, please upload your craft so i can take a look at it in more detail then the screenshots show.

Pretty much any sci-fi that involves space travel and preferably massive capital ship battles. Given that 90% of what i do in this game is build and design warships that fire stock weapons at each other and usually end up as debri clouds after eating enemy fire, kinda fitting if i do say so myself. Aside from that, whenever im in the mood to play a game that actually lets you build whatever sort of space or land vessels you want to i play KSP. Only reason id play anything else is when im in the mood for RTS games (KSP lets you build tanks and mech suits and such, doesnt really work as a RTS though), or when i want to do multiplayer combat. The day KSP releases actual good multiplayer or we get a good MP mod (we had KMP and stillk have DMP but those are too buggy to be considered functional MP mods) is the day that im pretty much going to drop 90% of my multiplayer combat games and start playing KSP instead...

HEdit is still useful, if only for the resources and autoland feature. Resource editing is crucial when dealing with anything that alters its CG (pretty much all my SSTLs). Landing is not something i have too much use of (since you can emulate most other planets by disabling the drag fully and setting the gravity multiplier accordingly on kerbin), but it is nice when i want to "automate" mass vehicle deployment and cant find the time or effort to actually land 20 identical tanks using identical landers. Land a couple and then HEdit the rest as it gets boring with too much repetition. Anyways, it would be nice to add a very basic "land vessel" feature to the game. At its most basic something that teleports you to a inputted altitude at a set of coordinated would be helpful. Also would be good if it oriented you so the landing legs or wheels are facing downwards (you could probably use the average of the impactor vectors of the landing legs or wheels on the craft, given that most vessels have all the landing legs aimed in more or less the same direction and itd deposit the craft at least roughly at the right angle each time (at the bare minimum it shouldnt result in upsidedown vehicles).

I absolutely hate steam workshop since it makes it impossible to obtain mods (legally at least) without owning said game on steam itself. Given that many people own the game from the store or through 3rd parties like gog.com, steam workshop, despite convenience, is a very bad idea that will only split the community even further. While its unlikely for all mod devs to instantly switch to steam workshop, its likely that at least some of them will go workshop and not bother uploading mods elsewhere, and some will not bother with steam workshop (which will likely end with some people not using mods at all if they are on steam and assume the workshop is the only method to obtain mods). Its not that steam workshop is inherently bad, but until it allows people to download the mod files and install them without owning the game on steam, i have to say flat out no way to steam workshop for KSP.

I have to say my top from your list would be redoing the stock planets because some of them are literally atrocious (especially the god awful stock textures) and lack low level surface details that make a planet actually interesting to explore. Its not that the current planets are unuseable, but itd be so much nicer if they had more low level detail such as canyons, trenches (so we can have starfighter dogfights while dodging terrain left and right), volcanoes, mesas, ect, and id also love to see at least some attempt at making a few synthetic constructs on kerbin and possibly another planet (even a few rectangular buildings with basic textures on them is better then nothing, so we can at least have the feel that kerbin is alive and not everyone lives inside the KSC). Second option is also good, although what id really love to see stock is something akin to extraplanetary launchpads that allows you to set up a base at a location of your choice, and provided you bring enough materials to said location, lets you build and launch ships from that base. This would make interplanetary gameplay much more fun because you can kinda colonize a planet and then set up a mini KSP onsite allowing you to use IRSU or delivered payload to create ships on the ground.

This is one of the many reasons i dont really play anything but sandbox (im not gonan get into the unrelated ones as itd take half a page). There way the stock tech tree is done is pretty much forcing you to go down a very specific path and severely limiting your freedoms. The other option is to farm the crap out of the kerbin system, but frankly farming in any game is nothing more then booring (at least for me) so i choose to avoid it, and thus, you are fairly limited in what you can actually do as you progress because the tree is designed around a very limited progression. Now with mods, ill say career is better, still not my thing but at least its not mind numbingly boring like stock farm it or progress down a fairly specific path until you get to the late game which is nothing more then sandbox with contracts (might as well make up my own imagined contracts at that point and play actual sandbox mode in whatever way i choose to). I agree that antennas should be fairly easy to unlock, since they are relatively low tech anyways and all larger antennas do is cut down the part count (trust me, its not exactly fun or realistic to have 10+ small antennas when trying to go to anywhere in early career). I really think itd make more sense to just restrict the relays themselves so people have an incentive to use the concept of a droid control ship (although that would requyire unlocking the 2 probe cores that even support that feature earlier). Not only that but i really think that unmanned travel should be much earlier in teh tech tree then manned since logically you would send probes before you start sending out suicidal volunteers. Makes sense from both a realism aspect as well as a gameplay aspect so why not make probes and such more attractive and useable early on? A bit off topic, but i think it would be much better to have probes be less limited so that they can at a bare minimum respond to WSADQE controls. In reality you can program any routine into a spacecraft and have it execute that routine (barring some sort of program error or exploding engine, not that we'd want that modeled in KSP anyway) nomatter where it is located and regardless of whether it has a signal or not between home base and itself. I never understood why block WSADQE, at that point you might as well make it impossible to control at all. Always thought that it would be the best system to have out of signal probes loose everything but basic SAS, basic throttle on/off (i like what they did with the 100 or 0% actually), and WSADQE controls (essentially a slightly limited version of what we had in the past for controls). Until then, i think ill stick to disabled comms systems, all it does is annoy me and make probes useless. Allsoing this level fo control would simulate the ability to have a sort of pre-programmed routine but manually executed by the user, at least until we get actual programming capabilities in the stock game...

I can always return it to 1.0 levels, might be a good idea to give laythe and kerbin a tad more contrast but ill do that once i have all the new textures finished and implemented and i usually leave touch ups till last minute. I still need to make a very thin cloud coverage layer for duna (i always envisioned duna as something with very few actual clouds and thickish dust storms on the surface that were not continuous) and possibly a upper layer of kerbin (reuse texture here) if it doesnt end up a performance concern since kerbin perf is a utmost priority, given that most of us actually launch at least 50% of flights from kerbin. Also for anyone interested, this is what i made the duna storms look like when in full force. I made sure to balance it well with some very thick and almost opaque clouds but something around 50% actual coverage of the planet surface (so you dont end up swimming in dust storms the entire time you are on duna, but its common enough that you actually get to experience the nightmare of trying to land in this sort of thing, the second picture doesnt show but i actually tore my engines off since i couldnt really see where the ground was and i burned too late). Also worth mentioning is that teh storms are very minimal with just a few grazing clouds near the surface at higher elevations, you only see this sort of insanity in the valleys and lower elevated areas.

The lite version has no clouds for those that want to squeeze even more performance out of the game. Not really recommended if you can handle 1.1, but its there if you dont like to have clouds for personal preference or performance reasons. For extra performance (or if you prefer no dust effects) consider disabling the surface effects as well (thats enabled by default in the lite edition because personally i cant seem to play KSP without em , detailed instructions are in readme file). Also, if anyone is following im close to releasing 1.2 version which has custom made and much better cloud layers, much better duna storms (which are also nolonger present on the poles where there is snow thanks to a new texture that limits the effects to the equatorial region that is actually sand colored), and a few tweaks here and there too. Please bear with me while i put a few more touches on it (and fix bloody photoshop that died on me yestreday before i can finish it)...

The weapons are done with cfg edits only and thus are 100% stock compatible. The basic idea is to take any decoupler and change the %force to something above 100%. Now i will admit that it is something id rather not do (it feels a tad more cheap then my ion engine alteratiosn with integrated fuel and battery capacity+ablator to add the corresponding dry mass), but with part count being such a major pain to deal with i ended up using them simply because i have no choice if i want to enjoy the game to its fullest. That said, with all my testing ive come to the conclusion that properly designed sepatron powered ibeam weapons are still superior in firepower and damage dealing abilities shot to shot, but with over twice the part count (i can bring 2.5 pulse cannons as i like to call em for every 1 ibeam+4 sepatron missiles and have the same part counts). Im still of the opinion that they arent exactly OP given that you have 2 issues that cannot be solved using the decoupler cannons. For one, the ship firing said weapon gets 100% of the recoil and because of that you have to actually design the ship to be able to handle recoil (this may or may not affect where and how you can place weapons on the craft, for me ive had to reinforce the launch points on at least a few ships), and you are stuck with the ibeam velocity you build the craft with. The latter is actually a major downside from my experience because you cannot cater to multiple target types, you want higher velocities when dealing with very thick targets, and lower when dealing with fighters and thinner capitals, sepatron powered ones allow you to pick what distance you fire from and thus impact velocity, pulse cannons you get a flat velocity nomatter what you do (best bet is to go with omni-purpose mid velocity but you are still going to be too high or too low if you didnt modify them for every battle). The only real spot where i have to say pulse cannons are superior in almost every way is with tanks since you can be very accurate when you more or less facehug the enemy as the rounds get up to speed instantly. Might have to make a rule for tank battles akin to no shooting from closer then 50-100m if we even consider such weapons ok to use in the first place (myself im all for it as part count and they do have clear ups and downs). Based on preliminary tank vs tank testing, their lethality is incredible if and only if you facehug (or something like 10-20m) not because they are so inherently powerful, but because you can almost guarantee whatever you are targeting gets hit with the rounds. Past about 50m they become comparable to standard weapons where you are nolonger guaranteed a hit on target. Also worth mentioning is that the more powerful the cannon the more lethal it is to the user, ive had to tone down the weapons on my tanks a few times because they kept flipping the tank, tearing the turret out of its bearing, ect, so its quite hard to make em work right outside of the super low mounted hardpoint style ive used in my TDs so that recoil doesnt instantly flip you.

Personally id defenetely disable it or not use probes at all (perfectly possible if you like to have kerbals to man your death traps). While it actually would be a very neat mechanic to have in combat, there needs to be a way to make it specific to teams and not so that 1 comms sat ends up working for both sides. If i had the time to spare id actually make a mod that could do that (team based comms system), but its something that im probably never gonna find time to do (i have enough mods i work on both for KSP and plenty of other games). In other news, ive finished a new set of 5 competitive tanks. The first tank i made took design elements from the hetzer (obvious upper hull is obvious) and actually ended up fulfilling a similar role to said hetzer in being very simple (80 parts), cheap, and low mass. I armed it with 2 quad heavy pulse cannons mounted extremely low allowing it to literally obliterate the suspension of anything that is in front of it, or if said tank happens top have any critical structural parts mounted down low, it will tear the entire tank apart. Also, while armor may be quite thin, its a unique design that takes advantage of extremely low mounting points making it harder to actually hit and keeping tanks from facehugging it provided they arent specifically designed to destroy this type of chassis. The next one was based on the hetzer lookalike, except for added turret and smaller front mounted cannons. The turret has a single quad heavy pulse cannon and the bottom has 2 quad small pulse cannons. Armor protection actually went up since there is the turret bearing which is fairly solid in of itself and it acts as a shield to protect the tank from critical hits that normally would have ripped the root part to shreds. After that i ended up making a heavier model, with better armor but more complexity. Sortof modeled after a T-34 hull with sloped armor all around, although in practice said armor is just aesthetic and doesnt even have any real purpose (there is nothing but the turret bearing at that height). because the mass of the hull went up i cut the firepower down from the pz-4 and armed it with new triple compact type pulse cannons (heavy in turret and light in hull where the MG would normally be). They work as well as the standard quad models used in the previous 2 but have the downside of spread leading to inaccuracy at long range and tumbling rounds (when fired the clipped rounds interact with each other giving a slight kick towards the side). Then i made 2 more based on the heavier hull, but tank destroyer style. The 4th model has identical firepower to the hetzer but it has the benefits and drawbacks of the above model's armor layout (stronger but more complicated). The last one has 4 quadruple heavy pulse cannons and there is literally nothing in existence that ive been unable to kill with 16 bloody rounds, both ground and space alike (thats what my SK-103 B corvette carries as its main armarment which is also borderline guaranteed to kill everything in the game). Ofc its 20T and almost 200 parts so its more of a heavy tanks compared to the rest. Anyways, ive finished optimization of the decoupler powered ibeams and ive found the perfect velocity to deal with the majority of enemy vessels (has trouble against fairing armor but thats kinda expected). Im probably never going back to sepatron missiles just because the pulse cannons can pull off a hair less damage but are 2 parts vs 5 parts per ammo (and can be stacked much more compactly if needed). Now to make a dropship that im actually happy with. Nomatter what i make im always unhappy with one thing or another, either too high on parts, too heavy, too little range, looks ugly, not enough armor, ect. If you guys have any tips with dropship design im all ears, one thing ive never made to a point i at least consider acceptable was a working practical and functional dropship to deploy tanks and other land constructs from orbit.

Given the smaller solar system and lower dV requirements its a matter of balancing and keeping any engine type from being so good there is no point to another. Despite being unrealistic, the extremely high dry masses of tanks and such is to balance the parts and make it an actual engineering challenge to get somewhere and not a simple matter of slapping a probe core onto a SRB and sending those 2 parts into the sun. That, and ions right now are kinda perfect (at least imo). They offer the best range for any engine, but come with the energy requirement (you kinda need to either spam solar panels or spam batteries, or if you are like me, edit the ion engines to have built in batteries so that i dont need to have 500 parts just for a ion drive), and the downside of fairly low thrust even though it is over 1000 times that of real life ion engines which can take years to perform a burn. Now if you do actually install RSS then you will need to have somewhat realistic mass fractions as you wont get anywhere using the stock parts, it just cant be done without utter insanity (ive actually tried it, got a satellite into LEO with a rocket that could have circumnavigated the entire stock solar system in the stock game). Still fun to try though...

Guess i need to update, been on 2012 for a while now... Thanks for the advice!

I know there was a mod (cant seem to find it right now) that actually made all the jet engines act more realistically. If you are interested in engine realism then i strongly encourage trying it out (ill edit this post if i come across it anytime soon). Otherwise, realistic or not, i actually like the stock rapier because it offers a different thrust curve then most other engines and it requires some engineering to make the best out of it. Right now the rapier is all about getting it above mach1 (easier said then done when you have a 40t SSTO pushed by a SINGLE rapier engine), but once above that it actually has the perfect thrust curve for what its intended for: SSTO craft (thrust skyrockets once you get past mach2 and really helps with pushing the velocity up to save fuel by not burning rocket mode the entire way up). That said, im no expert on the sabre engine so i cant quite say if it makes sense the way it is or not. All i do know is that the majority of real world jet engines have more thrust when in motion then stationary and that they also loose thrust as you increase the altitude because you the mass flow rate drops due to a thinner atmospheric density. While it probably doesnt match real world numbers, the performance of stock jet engines isnt what id call absolute bull, since they do kinda act as a real jet would (and given how the stock KSP universe is scaled and such, it makes more sense to use different values for thrust/ect to make it balanced gameplay wise).

Im literally trying to compile the exact same code found on github (the latest version). Im getting stuck on the line i mentioned above in the DEGaplessParticleEmitter.cs file. i can upload my entire code folder if this will be of help, but sofar i just dont get why you are able to compile it and im not even if its the exact same code? Something has to be wrong with my compiler setup as i cant think of any other possible reason why it wont compile...

Id absolutely love to have this in game. Considering that none of the stock icons make much sense for me (KSP is a game about capital ships, starfighters, armored vehicles, ect), i want my icons for tanks of different classes (heavy, light, apc, ect), capital ship classes (corvettes, frigates, carriers, ect), icons for smaller ships (starfighter, heavy fighter, bomber, dropship, ground attack ship, ect). That and id love the ability to define when i make a ship what icon it spawns with. Right now its extremely annoying that anything with a airplane cockpit is automatically assumed to be a airplane, especially land vehicles that happen to have a aircraft cockpit as command module because i just like the way it looks. Same thing with the rovers, anything that has external command seats on it is automatically made into a rover, and not that many rovers even use those things (im much more likely to have ext seats on dropships and escape pods then actual land vehicles that are going to be shot at and thus its not exactly safe to have exposed kerbals on em). If we cant get custom icons/ship categories, at the least allow us to define what sort of icon we want per command module (right click context menu) when we build a vessel! Also, unrelated to that, i think it would be very nice to bring all of the game textures out of the assets files and into folders that allow people to edit them. Yes im aware we have texture replacer, but it only works right with a few textures, not all of em. Allowing people to alter the textures as desired will open the door to things like UI skins (not that i have anything against the stock UI, but id much prefer something sci-fiy and less stockish), easier universe texture replacement (yeah there is a mod for that but its laggy and this would be much better done by just editing textures you want the same way we can do so with parts which have their respective .dds files sitting in folders where we can edit em), ect. Right now the textures are all locked behind sharedassets.assets files (cant exactly alter those), and itd just be so much better for everyone with every single (or at least the non-critical ones) texture put in a folder where it can be accessed by us without any issues.