Kairos

For those who have the pass-throught-parts-and-ground bug: the experimental build of WaveFunctionP effectively fix it (there: https://github.com/WaveFunctionP/KSPInterstellar/releases). Didn't tried with my full bundle of mods, but clearing the GameData folder (leave Squad and NASAmission or verifify cache integrity after deleting everything) and installing this build fix it for 0.24.2. Thanks to WaveFunctionP!

Having exactly the same trouble with any reactors (each size and type). Guess it's the same with lab, but didn't tried it. Peculiarily, no power seems to be produced by the reactors, even when the three-parts drone I used for test doesn't collapse on itself, which is quite annoying to establish an microwaved energy network

Let's put aside the upgrade system for now. I'm not sure of what it should be. I'm really agree with you on theses points. For the record, I worked a while ago on a RPG system based on this concept - "You become what you do". But there's something frustrating in this if it doesn't keep a part of player-handed attribution, because if you just become what you do, you're equally no more than that. And the points system already exists - in terms feasability, it's more convenient to re-use it than to just forget about. All the goals your mention, seems to me like achievements: shouldn't we use it as conditions (solar flight under x altitude, moons rock from x biomes, and eventually moon bases or else if you like KAS for example, but we should already start a list ) to unlock the tech in which parts are unlockable? Then, using achievements again to unlock parts individually seems quite overlapping (don't know if I'm explaining rightly there). Instead, if the use of points is limited by the locked/unlocked nodes, and has for purpose to unlock parts individually, the "you-become-what-you-do" still safe, with the advantage to manage a re-use of the native science points system (without mentionning even that it enable soooo many research to do that you're pretty sure you can't just unlock everything by maxing output on minmus and mun). Affecting the points you earn still be quite fun if you can't go ubber on space planes without having ever use it Now, concerning the upgrades. I didn't really thought about that before reading your crash-test idea - that's more in this way I were conceiving it. Maybe, upgrade is not a good term - I guess we can see this levelling type as a malus remover more than bonus giver. That was what I meant by "unlocking prototypes" - some kind of downgraded parts that reach there full potential after some kind of uses (several launches, atmospheric entries, orbital flight, crashes, docking? ...). Exactly. That's why I might have seen it like that: the difference is that you can launch a prototype, and eventually fix it later with the knowledge acquired by experience in the interval. I mean, if KAS can add part to a ship while in orbit, it is necessarily possible to "update" a part on the same way. The point is that the crash test idea is really interesting, since it involve a wider range of evolution ingame. But there's two things embarrassing in the fact that "blank launches" should be required to make a real use of the parts: - redundant gamedesign - what about restart? I mean, I guess I would find it fun to crash some parts sometimes. But making a rocket only to crash it, to get a better one with which I'll must have to do the same before I can use it in a real ship seems to me a bit redundant. Instead, having it seperated from a multi stages launch, observing it's atmospheric entry and crash to up a little to a more stable state seems more interesting, because more collateral. And it preserve the fact you need several uses, in term of occurencies and times, to unlock a better part having this one as prerequisite. In other word, if we must do specific action to use a part after having unlocked it, I think it will become borring in the tenth first ones. And if you restart... So that's more in this last way I've think about that. Sure, we should have a list of what is required for a specific part to "stabilize" it; and in this vision, you can always make a specific prototypal test to rush on a upper tech level (for example with your excedent credits when it will be implemented). But as it is a passive system, even if you don't specifically make tests (you're no more forced to since you can use protypal parts in regular ships), you should eventually "stabilize" it without requiring a redundant gamedesign process. And you can always fix your prototypes parts later with EVAs It seems quite cool to me. I'll check this week end to see if the tech tree is modable in this way or not (I guess a looooot of ideas can add matter on this way ). Huh, if you want to start a list of potential achievements, I guess it can be usefull later anyway! Waiting for what you have in mind about that

I was thinking about something quite similar for a mod, but didn't checked so far if it were possible to edit the tech tree and the science points system without invasive code (hope not . Anyway, I think that's a very good idea in a challenging purpose. There's something sad about the actual tech tree (→ exhaustive unlockability with only a fine organised moons exploration), in the way you can unlock everything in less than a few hours, regardless to the things you currently do. I was thinking about an achievement system to unlock nodes (first extra atmospheric launch, first orbital flight...), which seems to me likely to be what you mean about research projects. As a result, I was wondering if science points shouldn't be used differently: to unlock prototypal parts in a unlocked node. There we're joining again I guessn since I was wondering if a complementary point system (developpement points) should be used to upgrade the protypal parts to stable mk-I, stable-mk-II, etc... Which can then be used as a condition to unlock some other prototypal parts (I guess the Mainsail require some use of the Skipper to be developped . This points could be aquired in a passive levelling system (the more you get data by usage, the more it level up to it's ubber-full-state), or in an active one, don't know yet. Anyway, always by usage, debris recovery or flight data saving system transmissions (which allows crash tests too XD ). I personnaly come out in favor of the passive system, but I wonder what you think about it. So far, I didn't checked what could be done with KSP current science system code in this way, but I guess it can give a way to make the research more involving in terms of tests and objectives than it currently do (I effectively reached the Skipper in 5 hours by focusing science points ditribution and maxing science output - just need mun and minmus orbital flight, with EVA's reports above the maximum of biomes of both... which is quite sad in fact). Does this concept join what you're thinking about the science system? Waiting for your opinions