Search the Community

Many Worlds relies on superposition principle, making it impossible to travel between worlds. To put it simply, from perspective of any world, all physics is equivalent to that one and only one world existing. Of course, if the underlying field theory isn't actually linear, and superposition is just an approximation, things could be different, but then, strictly speaking Many Worlds doesn't hold either. We'd need a different many-histories theory to explain all of it. As for allowing for travel, you'd effectively be back to dealing with geometry of space-time, so you might as well cut out the middle man and talk about warp drives and wormholes to begin with.

Hi Guys. For starters, I have already overcome collision issues at high speeds. So I will be tuning the guns relatively close to the real world counterpart... even though it's KSP and there is no humanity for god's sake! Most guns fall between 750 - 900 m/s, I think the fastest firing gun I have right now would be the phalanx which fires somewhere around 1100 m/s - with nearly 100% of rounds colliding. I have a timer on all rounds, realistically I have to keep the overhead down with the rate of fire being high but not as high as in real life. I think the timer on the phalanx as well as all smaller rounds is about 4 seconds. Which after velocity falloff due to drag will give the round an outer range of 3 - 3.5 km. Penetration power is reduced as it slows down of course, so effective range (depending on the target) is likely under 2km. The larger rounds/shells have more duration on the timer. due to their extended range. As I mentioned in another post I was able to lay some smack-down on another battleship about 7.2km away. Really with those shells even when at reduced velocity they put down the hurt. I've added some fire/smoke fx to the ground where Incendiary shells land, and explosive force within a short radius of where HE shells hit the ground. This allows for some inaccurate splash type damage to be dealt. The final step to that will be spawning shrapnel at the explosion site, each particle then deal out damage as a low powered round would, this would be bad for weak targets like aircraft or other small parts that are not armour. Heat is one thing I've put some control on lately. When something burns it will heat to about 90% of that parts max temp... at that time it will randomly be determined if the part should outright explode or just burn-out and be fixable later. Parts containing fuel will check for an explosion around 60% of it's rated max heat. Engines that overheat will be treated the same way. Damage will take each part into consideration, wings lose lift, seize at a given position, or lose range of deflection. Engines shut down, turrets can't turn or fire... and so on. I haven't covered off everything but I'll try to cover the primary part types. Torpedoes are back in! I have them skimming just under the waterline at about 20 - 25 m/s, they have a base range of about 2km, though that can be changed. They don't seek or anything... they track the line you drop them at, they will have an fx trail so they are slightly easier to see from the air. Good discussion, there is a lot to cover in something as broad as this! On a side note: I'm picking some weapons/ordinance that I think would be neat to model and implement. I plan on adding an 88mm flak gun as I needed something in that range. My torpedo is modeled and set up to act like a ww2 Japanese type91, I just made a 30mm DEFA internal cannon. The tank turret has a 127mm smooth-bore gun and is loosely modeled after the turret off the Leopard 2 A6? MBT. The real tank has a 120mm... so this is slightly bigger... I was originally making a 5" naval gun, but decided a tank turret would be better.. so I kept the round parameters and made a tank turret model instead. Release 2 candidates so far are: 88mm Flak artillery, capable of use as regular artillery or AT. Small portable mortar (maybe). Acoustic homing torpedoes (slightly better than nothing!). I'm thinking of heat-seeking air-air missiles like a sidewinder... I'm only pondering it right now, and if so... there will be flares. I'd likely allow the flares to have an automatic discharge setting, or chime a note when the missile is 1 - 2 seconds from your plane to 'remind' you to deploy the flares. Anyhow... too much to talk about and too little time! Later guys

Better than me. I talk to computer generated graphics formed by lines of code and imagine they have personalities. I'm a bit weird.

Right. I will have to talk to MetalMouth and Defcon before saying anything on this, but no doubt they will want to see what you can produce. I will send them a message, and see what they think. Please do keep in mind though, that we are constantly working on this, and our texture artist (MetalMouth) will probably be working on everything a little as time goes on. I think he wouldnt mind the help though. 0.o What would give you the impression that we didnt care? We have even talked about scrapping hyperium at one poin, because of the amount of hate it got in another thread. Everyone only does mods because they feel like it (It's not like we get paid or anything.) but we do care about what people think. If we didn't what would be the point?

Hi everyone: I'd like to announce the (pre-)release of KSPTOT v0.12. This is a pre-release edition. The application may be unstable, features will be missing, and no source code is included. The principle new feature in KSPTOT 0.12 is Mission Architect, which I've been showing off for a while now. The download link for this pre-release is here: KSPTOT v0.12 Pre-Release 1 I would encourage everyone interested in testing the new software to please go ahead and do so. All I ask is that if you find bugs or have feature requests, you please let me know in this thread so I can handle them. Mission Architect is accessible from the main KSPTOT GUI by going to Tools -> Mission Planning -> Mission Architect. Okay, enough of the serious talk: go at it, everyone, and let me know what you think! Also, to everyone who posted above, I will get to responding to you shortly.

Chapter 1: Milzer Kerman It was good to be back in the Astronaut Center. I turned up the speed on the treadmill for a brief sprint. These past six months have given me a renewed sense of purpose, but how much longer can I stay here? This past week of waiting for the decision had been stressful, not enough direction in my days and too much downtime. The physical and health tests were no problem, I'm sure I've passed those. Maths and science were never my strong subjects, but I still should be good enough for the corps. I'm fairly old to be re-accepted as a kerbonaut, yeah, but there are older kerbals in active service. The Psych test. That was it really. Bill's death had hit me harder than the others, I don't know why. The question was, had I convinced the agency doctors that I'd recovered from it? In the wall-length mirror in front of me I saw Bill enter the gym. Bob, not Bill. Of course it was Bob. I shuddered and shook it off. I guess Bill's spectre still haunts me occasionally. Bob spotted me running and began to walk over. Bob had been amazing after the accident, representing kerbonaut interests during the investigation. It was hardly a surprise he was appointed to the directorship to replace the ousted Gene Kerman. It had changed us all of course, the accident. I'd lost it, overwhelmed with anxiety I'd quit the corps. I wasn't the only one of course, but perhaps mine was the most dramatic exit. Bob instead had become more focussed, determined to see the culture which allowed the accident crushed. He had sullened too, no longer the jovial kerbal the corps had loved so much. His face now permanently wore the grief from the loss of his friend. Bob stopped beside me and smiled. He was looked pleased, sure, but it was a calculated happiness, no longer the spontaneous warmth of his younger self back when we were training together. "Congratulations Milzer, there's no point keeping you in suspense any longer. You've been cleared for active duty." A wave of relief washed over me. I guess I hadn't realized just how much weight I'd been carrying for that decision. It felt as if the last two years were being lifted off my shoulders. "Thanks Bob... I... it's an honour to be serving in the corps again." "That's not all, we want you to be commander of our next great project." Bob leaned forward. "We've finally restored funding to send a crewed mission to Duna." I slowed the treadmill to a walk. "Are you serious? That's... I don't know what to say..." "You've done excellently these past few months, Milzer. I know Bill's death shook you more than most, but you've shown us all how committed you are to the program. You've the experience we want, and the level-headedness needed in a commander. I don't believe there's a better choice for this mission." I tried to absorb what Bob was telling me. A command position? It was what I had always dreamed of before the accident, but afterwards I hadn't considered that it might be an option. "There's one more thing..." Bob fidgeted uncomfortably. "We've recommissioned the Aegean for this program." I stumbled and nearly fell over. Stopping the treadmill I stepped off and tried to compose myself next to Bob. I tried to slow my breathing. "The truth is the Aegean is still one of the most advanced craft we've ever built," he continued. "It's far cheaper and more versatile than a traditional stack; it built most of Magellan Station after all. And our engineers have gone over and refined the design countless times, we've learned from the mistakes of Project Ocean." Bob leaned forward, looked me in the eyes and intoned "I made sure of that." I sat down on a workout bench and rubbed my forehead. He was right of course, from an technically standpoint Project Ocean was brilliant. But we'd all been squeezed by the bureaucracy, the engineers especially. Mission turnarounds were too quick and kerbonaut feedback went unheeded as the engineers scrambled to refit the ships in time. All so the program would remain in the public limelight and funding would keep rolling in. All of us had at some level known that an accident was just around the corner, but with seeming success after success no one was brave enough to speak up. Still, if I were to trust anyone to make the right changes, it would be Bill's closest friend. Besides, it wasn't the Aegean which crashed. I stood up. "...I'm not sure if I could command another orbiter... I mean, I know it wasn't an Aegean model at fault, but..." "I understand," Bob replied. "After what happened I don't think I could face another trip to space either. That's why I accepted the directorship. But you were always more at home up there than me." He paused for a while. "If you turn down the command and the Aegean, you're still part of the corps. But the truth is I don't think we'll be sending up another stack for quite a while, certainly not manned. We'll respect your decision if you don't want to fly in an orbiter, but if that's the case I really don't think you'll get another flight. I mean this as a friend Milzer, I'm not trying to pressure you into anything, I just want you to know the facts." "No, I get that. Thanks Bob." "Think it over. Talk about it with Trudy over the weekend, I know how much she's encouraged you through the re-enlistment. I've arranged a meeting with you at 1000 on Monday, you can let me know your decision then." He smiled as he shook my hand, and I caught a glimpse of the old Bob. "Oh, and Milzer? It's great to have you back." As he turned and walked out of the gym I thought of how excited the kids would be to hear that their father was a kerbonaut again, and later how happy Trudy would be to share in my news. Even with my anxieties over the Aegean, I had already begun to realise that there was really only one decision I could make. I swallowed and began to collect my things as I headed back to the changing rooms. I guess I'm going to Duna.

Rubbish OIn this thread we are talking some simple gameplay enhancemnets that would be so simple to add that they where the first mods. Wouldnt be much of a development hassel in the case of entry reheat and a dv calc. The other things you talk of are a diffrent topic.

I extend my apologies to Sochin, he meant good, and as I told him in a PM, it's you guy's feedback that keeps me going (good or bad) and I appreciate it, in the end we'll all have a better toy to play with. The Gemini cockpit is not a good example in this discussion, because as you know, the panels are very different. Could I have designed an open cockpit with large window views like this? Certainly. But as you've seen from exterior views and in general that isn't the form factor of this vehicle. In that example, we could calibrate a HUD to a kerbal very simply. But the KSO's exterior doesn't have large bay windows to make that easy. Its control panel was already cut down further than originally designed as the measurements for a kerbal are very strange. In other words, a glass cockpit as seen in the KSO or an airliner is not as easy as doing something like the Gemini in terms of getting the views to be useful. The second problem when designing something like this is the angle or field of view. If the opening was large and directly in front of the Kerbal, that wouldn't be a problem. Otherwise if you have a panel in front of them, it would have to be incredibly short. Kerbals have a very short body compared to their large head. We've tested the actual Kerbal view lined up with the cockpit glass. His head would hit the top panel and his seat would have to be about where the top of the throttles are. So not only would the IVA had to have been redesigned but also the front fascia of the cockpit window arrangement. We'd end up with a helicopter cockpit pretty much, something closer to an Mi-8. Which is kind of funny because after I redesigned the panel the first thing I told Nazari was that it was now a Blackhawk control panel (which I worked on while in the military). So to wrap things up, moving forward: I appreciate everyone's feedback good or bad. However if it's an issue that has already been covered many times or is a design issue from the start in which I can't go back on at this point, I can't pay attention to that person's PM, or post, and they will feel they are getting ignored. It is impossible to answer everyone's concern, or account for everyone's suggestions when I'm swamped with pms, bug reports, plus spending more time working on more bits and pieces to this thing. And we do listen to folks feedback and I act on it right away. In fact, the KSO's art work got slightly modified today since Nazari worked out some of the RCS gyrating issues (although it may not be possible to fully zero out the roll without adjusting CoM for now). I'm redesigning the docking mounts as I personally find them useless (yes all the artwork you saw me post earlier I'm scrapping minus the lights). In the end, it wasn't my intention to come off hostile towards him. I really appreciate his and everyone's enthusiasm and maybe we can fit some of those features into the KSO Super 25 which I don't want to talk about right now...

1,402 m/s - MACH 4.134 - B9 and Procedural fairings with FAR Equivalent of 5,047 km/h or 3,136 mph Well... First the proof: Top speed @ 1:05 Landing @ 10:30 Now for some comments. Flying the craft You may find it odd that I chose to fly the aircraft from the angle shown in the video. This is however fully conscious as flying it from a chase perspective gave me very little visual input regarding the position of the plane - i.e. the direction of thrust - in relation to its prograde vector. This is crucial since deviating outside or even close to the edges of the prograde vector on the nav-ball at >mach 3 speeds, will end in catastrophic failure. Observing the plane from a backwards facing fisheye perspective allowed me to use the conic fairings as a very precise indicator of the planes positional direction in relation to the prograde vector in combination with the navball. Craft design Initial design credit goes to user Sevant. This craft design is very suited for fast flights. Engines More engines means more thrust. But it also requires more air. I tried several designs featuring 2 radial intakes on the sides of the craft, but they generated so much drag that achieving +1200 m/s was a challenge. The centered radial intake in the front took many tries to perfect. Just a few steps up or down in the SPH and the intake would generate drag either pulling the plane towards the ground or towards the sky, making it impossible to fly above 500 m/s. There has been talk about engines in this thread and the fact is that the stock TurboJet is the best for > 1000 m/s flight. The B9 engines all cut out between 1100 - 1430 m/s meaning at 1000 m/s they are at 1 thrust multiplier and at 1430 they are at 0. The stock Turbojets however 0 out at 2400 m/s and achieve multiplier 1 at 1000 m/s. This means that when the B9 engines cut out, the TurboJet still enjoys around 75% of its thrust capacity. If you wanna go fast you must use the stock TurboJet. Anyone who wants to know more should check out the followign imgur album by user Tarvert. http://imgur.com/a/hyuPE#0 Tarvert is a source of amazing information and if you like looking at graphs like the one for the atmospheric engines, you will enjoy some of his other work submitted to Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/search?q=tavert&restrict_sr=on Stability Stability is another issue. As explained in my flight note, simply deviating outside the green prograde vector on the navball at speed will end in complete disintegration due to drag forces applied to the craft parts. Some parts even explode due to the impact with the air. My design features control surfaces for the purpose of stabilizing the craft at speed. These also help move the center of lift back slightly which helps tremendously in landing the craft and flying it at slower speeds. Stability is even more of an issue on the return flight as this design is very rear heavy. This is also why I drop the engines - or at least tried to with the reduced weight, it is easier to fly and land. You may think putting rudder(s) on your craft will achieve stability and you'd be right, but it puts unnecessary drag on your craft and your top speed will likely be < 1300 m/s. Craft shape I have tried long thin and circular designs and none of them match up to the wide and flat design initially shown by Sevant. I have also experimented with different fairing shapes and while the length of the procedural fairings do not seem to matter for speed, the longer fairings can help move the center of mass forward. The conic fairings work best for visual clues about the direction angle of the plane when looking back on it during flight. Landing You want to switch off braking on your front landing gear. If you find yourself landing at 100 m/s, braking on the front wheel can - more like will - be catastrophic. Also make sure your rear landing gear is somewhat spread out. With a think shaped plane you'll want to place your landing gear farther out on the tip of the delta wings than I have. Due to the wide footprint of my craft I put them closer to the body of the craft to decrease drag in flight and decrease flex upon landing or the belly of the craft may have impacted the ground. Conclusion and suggestions for other competitors Use TurboJets. Consider fuel necessary. Make sure you have some control surfaces for stability at max speed. Use the COM and COL indicators in the SPH during construction. Be extra careful during slowdown or this happens Failure @ 1:10

Do you realize that you just got LUCKY? Now let's talk about all these other times when you get UNLUCKY and end up having to do everything again and again and again and again, or send a refueling mission again and again and again, if it's even possible. And all just because you were unable to plan your flight delta-v wise. That's gonna be frustrating for some players, me included. I don't like to fly blind. I like to plan. But why do I have to calculate such things by hand or use mods just because I like to plan my flights delta-v wise? Seriously, is there an answer for this issue? So much this ^! A very good statement. Can you tell us why do you think so? There are quite a few of developers out there that work on Early Access games and do this, and they're doing quite okay. TB's video discussion (in the OP) addressed this topic quite good. Yes, sure, I'm not against mods, I use them myself. But I'm just talking about attitude. Even in this thread I was told twice to use mods and stop ranting and even try to create my own game. That's what I'm talking about. It comes up every time when someone's upset with the stock game. Like there's nothing wrong with the stock game and dev's vision is 100% solid and should not be debated. Which isn't true. We can and should criticize the stock game.

Im aware there are issues preventing this, my whole point is that this thread, is to discuss wormholes and how they are used within KSP if they are ever implemented. If someday they are then we already have things worked out, if not, then mods might have the power to do it. Its about a possible solution, not how necessary it is. I dont understand why so many people are offended by this topic. If you think it will never be relevant then ignore it. Those of us who like the idea just want to talk about it.

The temperature's starting to get a little hot in here. While there's been a lot of constructive thoughts, let's calm down on some of the overt negativity. Thanks. Onto the subject at hand, it's up to the devs to determine what features make it into the game. While there may not be things that necessarily fit your vision, rest assured the devs are listening to the desires of the community. We support the modding community's freedom to give you the gameplay you desire as our development progresses. Please recognize it is not possible for us to implement every single thought and idea requested by the community. As for what will be implemented and when? That's subject to change, thus why it's necessary to talk about them with great forethought.

I wouldn't talk about water density here. I have no idea how part buoyancy is calculated but I strongly doubt any real notion of density has anything to do with it.

Actually, I like this one, maybe if people like KW better, they'd like having the KW Mainsail or the KW Poodle SPS or KW-T30 I think the nozzle gray area with those sharp contrasting shades of gray don't work, perhaps a light gray/white would be better. That green stripe on the pipe to the left of the engine looks too much like a Kethane part, I recommend changing it to yellow. Maybe you could talk to Kyle or Winston to see what they think about it, and how they can help.

I say again, I'm actually here to talk to other players about it, and _do_not_ ask devs to change anything. I just want opinions, that's it. Everything I'm talking about was suggested before. But there're forum rules that state "do not suggest this and that" and "do not necro old posts". You want to hear what Maxmaps told me when I asked him about delta-v and other info pages some months ago? Here you go: Answer #1 from Maxmaps from 08.08.2013: Answer #2 from Maxmaps from 14.08.2013: And then we all know what Harvester thinks of it now - we don't get no delta-v indicators. But that's what I do when I have anything to say to the devs - I go and send an e-mail. Now I want to hear your thoughts of such decisions such as this one, to cut another feature. I'm tired by now, will return to those posts I didn't answer yet next time.

New Update! I've got a hotfix for everyone, and a new interface skin! First off, the hotfix is sort of a rude one. You'll need to remove your old Hyomoto folder, even if you used 1.1c. All the Linux bugs should be gone, and there shouldn't be any more interface issues. This also opens it up for easier skinning support, which is my olive branch for being annoying and making stupid mistakes. Check out the black interface skin based on WaRi's work, KSI MFD 1_1d Black Interface Skin Now I should talk about KSO. I need to sit down and see exactly what it does and what it needs. Helldiver has my blessing for using my MFD so I'd like to make it as easy as possible to use a custom model, so for my next update I hope to work with him and other developers who want to do the same thing and see if we can't find an easy way to use a new model with the same files. This shouldn't just benefit me and those mod users, but anyone later on who creates a custom display for RPM. I'm trying to see about getting these types of features. I spoke briefly with ferram to see if we can't get a prop control for things like flaps or toggling his flight assists on and off. I'm also working on modeling a few components for this purpose as well, but as an amateur that is a ways off. I can only assure you I have the same dream.

Squad might be more receptive to a new solar system if we show them a viable manner of getting there. A bit like multiplayer, they didnt start working on it till someone showed them how it could work. Even if they never do anything we talk about, its still a possibility for mods so why not have it worked out in either case.

of course it is a matter of opinion. Im just trying to keep things as a constructive discussion rather than argue without substance. sure it might not work at all and we could all just be spinning our wheels if we cant figure anything the devs would accept. but there is a chance that there might be some kind of solution if we put all the ideas on the table and talk about them constructively. the what not to suggest list is there to stop "givz us warp drivez now!" posts. not to stop actual discussion. of course its sci-fi, but its also a game and we need to figure out the least sci-fi method possible that might work. wormholes dont require any tech part to achieve and i like that, but the super heavy/expensive FTL drive you need to use in deep space might also work, these are the ideas we are trying to go for. since neither actually exist beyond theory we need to accept a bit of sci-fi with them. but the devs have stated that they dont want warp drives, so we need a natural phenomena instead. not saying they wont change their minds if we figure something workable, but this thread was made to discuss the use of wormholes if they were ever implemented in the game. so lets stop attacking each other for our ideas and focus on that. if you dont agree thats fine

Wormholes, or more specifically being able to navigate through wormholes in a useful way, being "just believable enough" is a matter of opinion. So it's cool to talk about wormholes, vs FTL, vs transwarp conduits, vs lightspeed, vs befriending Q. But it's all in the realm of science fiction and I think it's disingenuous and unhelpful to pretend otherwise. It's a valid conversation to have, we just have to be clear on its nature.

Chapter 4: A New Addition to the Crew ICE: Jeb. Jeb. Jeb. Jeb: *Groans and wakes up* When I said I needed an alarm clock, I expected a ring or something. ICE: RRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Jeb: Ah! Okay, okay. ICE: Good morning captain. Jeb: Good morning, ICE. ICE: We have a transmission from High Command. There is a change of plans. Jeb: We aren't going to Jool? ICE: We are going to Jool, captain, but first we have to return to Low Kerbin Orbit to retrieve another crew member. Jeb: Who? ICE: They did not say, only that you would know him and he would be arriving via the shuttle "Resolute". Jeb: Wonder who it could be. Anyway, wake up Bill and plot maneuvers to put us into a 100 kilometer circular orbit around Kerbin. ICE: Yes captain. Bill: FRAK THAT WAS LOUD! Jeb: ICE, be a little louder, would you? ICE: RRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Jeb: I was being sarcastic! ICE: I don't understand, sarcasm, captain. Jeb: Well, before you become a crew member, you need to learn sarcasm and joking. Or else you're just a robot. ICE: I am a robot, Jeb. Jeb: Yeah, yeah. Now get those maneuvers started. ICE: Yes captain. Meanwhile, down on Kerbin... Charlie: Alright control, all systems go. Are we good for launch? Mission Control Commander: Roger that, Resolute. You are good for the quick rendezvous with the Charon. Ribbles: I still think it's ridiculous we're launching an entire shuttle for 1 guy. Why not some small pod? Control: He's a valuable asset, Ribbles. Now lets launch the shuttle. Ribbles: Oh, all right... Charlie: Yes sir. We're launching now. Charlie: Waugh! Ribbles: Oof! Charlie: Damn these things are rough! Ribbles: You've never flown one before? I thought you said you had! Charlie: I said I had flown for the corporation that sold these shuttles to the Coalition! Ribbles: That makes me feel a lot less comfortable! Charlie: At least the guy in the back doesn't know! *The shuttle continues upward, and begins it's gravity turn.* Charlie: Detaching SRB's in 30 seconds. Ribbles: Uh! How are you so calm with this? Charlie: Experience. Ribbles: You said you'd never flown one of these before! Charlie: That doesn't mean I don't have launch experience. *The SRB's detach, and the Resolute continues her path upward.* Ribbles: We... made it? Charlie: Not in hell yet, Ribbles. *The engines ignite to circularize.* *The Charon pulls into view, and a kerbonaut goes on EVA over to it.* Ribbles: That's a nice lookin' ship. Charlie: Ever seen a destroyer before? Even nicer looking. Ribbles: Say, how big do warships get these days. Charlie: There is a single battlecruiser in commision over Duna, there is a few slightly smaller cruisers and then there is destroyers and corvettes. Ribbles: I'd like to serve on a warship one day. Charlie: Well, you're stuck doing errands with me for now. Ribbles: Speaking of which, can we finally talk to the guy on EVA? Charlie: Yep. *He turns on comms with the kerbonaut nearby.* Bob, do you read me? Bob: I read you loud and clear. Heading over to the Charon now.

Is anyone in contact with the creator? Looks like he was banned from the forum, and I kind of need to talk to him about the booster.

You are not the only one. That's for sure. Now sit back and enjoy being called a troll. So here’s the list of things that I find highly questionable and, actually, wrong: "Solves part of the puzzle" said harvester, while telling everybody that he wanted something for people to get into orbiter knowing something when he started this project. Now he wants some kind of trial and error simulator it seems. Don't worry, fecal matter will probably hit the fan as soon as kEdu comes out and it has this kind of stuff. Not really, the ones that don't care are mostly the people doing SOKERBAL XD jokes. Even a dev said they hurt the game, but yeah, money first I guess. Reentry heat was mentioned multiple times, There's no reason for it not to be implemented until now except for the constant focus changes. I began to believe it will never come because "it won't be fun", resources reference totally intended. Also, reentry heat makes returning stuff back to Kerbal even more rewarding. And risks of losing Kerbals vs probe gives you even more choice here. But I’ll talk about probes a bit later. The tech tree deserves a book for itself to voice all the stuff wrong with it, a long one at that. Back-ass-ward logic, meant to be a tutorial but it teaches nothing, it just limits the parts. Manned flight first ("HEY, LET'S PRESENT THE TRIO TO THE NEW PLAYERS FIRST SO THAT THEY CAN KILL THEM FASTER"). "career is in development" is the common excuse for all this, but yeah, no solution or even a "yes, we know" has been given from the dev side. They can't give a road map if they are changing it as soon as a new money grabber comes at hand (Multiplayer, EDU, "Scope complete", whatever comes next). This is a problem with the community, and it happens on every moddable game. It's pretty much like saying "Yeah, we know the game is cr*p, here's a mod, play with it or shut up". Shows the conformism from the community, which also happens on every indie game for some reason. Me? I agree with this, even if your reasons differ from mine. The rest of the forums probably think you are a troll.

I started writing this before there were any reply's so I apologize if I reiterate something someone else said. I took so long because I had to go and watch the video to know what kind of argument was being made. Also this is not intended as a personal attack but I'm sure by the end it may seem like one. 1. I like the fact I have no delta-V indicator. I know what it means, I knew what it meant after about a week playing (steam says I'm at 695 hours now). I like that fact that it is not indicated otherwise I'm not sure why I would need to redesign a ship (apart from structural failure on liftoff). I like the skill of having to judge by eye my delta-v and Thrust to weight ratio of each stage. I makes getting terminal velocity right harder. I would like a total mass readout though. If it is available in map view why not in build view? 2. Yea might be nice. 3. I think the first few stages of the tech tree can be used in this way without impacting the difficulty of the carrier mode. 4. Manned flight is heaver than unmanned and this is without life support. There has to be a reason to take Kerbals out there. Until the carrier mode I had no reason to send a Kerbal to any of the planets, so I didn't. The manned only science gave me a reason to make more variety of crafts and types of mission. 5. Game development never happens the way people think it does, the best games in the world are not how they were planned to be. You start with a good plan and then change it to be more fun as things go on and you see how things pan out. If they gave you a road map then the game would either be exactly like it and not so fun as it could be or fun but different from the given road map. I personally have supported a lot of early access games from early minecarft (indev that was before infdev that was before alpha that was before beta that was before the release) to Starbound to Minerwars to the dead linger. Some off these games KSP especially are very good games. Some like the dead linger are unplayablely bad. The differences between good and bad early access games basically boil down to three things. A: Bugs. Crashes every twenty minutes, items disappearing, invisible monsters (that are meant to be visible) you get the idea (by the way all these and MORE can be found in "the dead linger" lets just call it TDL from now on). B: Not enough content. This is when a game just hasn't had enough ideas or items added to it to make game-play fun after an hour or two. This also counts when a game has many items that are basically just the same and so add nothing to game-play (TDL has 30 types of melee weapons but there is no game-play difference between them so they don't matter). C: Just not being fun: TDL does exactly the type of game-play they say they will. It is a zombie survival shooter. They say what will be added and do it. It is not fun. after playing it I can tell them what they NEED to do to make it more fun but they are sticking to their road plan. Yes I have watched the TotalBiscuit video and I agree with some of the things he said. He doesn't like playing early access games so that is a difference to begin with. He also was talking about quality control when it comes to steam this was linked in his talk to road maps but actually I do not agree that they are the best way to know if a game will be good because I do not think there is a way to know the future. I have played enough early access game to know a road map is not what I want. I want a fun game. These are not the same things. 6. I'm not sure where I stand on this. On one hand I would like to see features from some mods in the vanilla game (some reentry heat, some life support, some more parts) but on the other I don't want all the mods implemented into the game-play. I do not use mechjeb and I would get board if I didn't even have to fly my own flights. I understand kethane but I personally don't want it. FAR is good sometimes but it slows down computers and although I can run it some peoples computers right now struggle with 100 parts in a non modded game. Which mods do you add and which not? Second do I want the developers spending their time replicating someone else's work? do I want a three month update to be mostly spent on adding something already available in a mod? yes it might run better, not crash and be forward compatible but while there are people making mods this isn't want I want the Devs to work on. Also how could the Devs create a road-map AND add mods to the gameplay? Every new mod taken up by enough people would have to be added to the road-map making it pointless. I think this is the biggest problem with early access, not that the DEV's have done anything wrong but that, because it is not a finished project people get the idea that they have somehow diverged from some perfect game. There is no such thing as a perfect game. At no point have I expected the Dev's to follow my ideas of how the game should be developed, at no point have I expected the game to be 100% want I want. All I expect is for the game to be fun and updated, the updates are up to them. I'm sure you are not the only person thinking this and I'm also sure this will start a new flame war. I'm just not sure why you are trying to control a successful game. If you want to change something then make a mod. You are welcome to but don't try and change my game without asking me and all the other people who play it (including NASA apparently). I have given my money to the Dev and this is what gives them the right to choose its path for right or wrong.

Reading all the chemistry talk and minering, it really push me to install the full IQ package. But I still need to solve some bugs. The only that I need like guide to start, if you people help me to indentify some mods conflict that I may have. I dont wanna make spend time to anybody making analisys, I just was hoping a quick read to see if someone of you had problems with mods of this list before. Thanks. This is my mod list: Squad (all tanks, adapters, chutes, aerodinamycs parts, cones and others parts remove) Real Fuels 4.3 (with chestbuster config engines) StretchySRB_v8_1 ProceduralDynamics0.7 ProcFairings_2.4.3 (I remove half of the parts) B9_Aerospace_Pack_R4.0c (all aerodinamycs parts and extra tank fuel type remove, etc) NovaPunch2_03a (all tanks, adapters, or similar parts remove) RealChute-v0.3.3.2 (some parts remove) ALCOR Capsule-v0.7 KAS_v0.4.5 (5 parts remove) InfernalRobotics0.12 (like 15 parts remove) Smart-parts-v0.4 (3 parts remove) Habitat Pack TarsierSpaceTech_2.4-VE SCANsat_b5 Toolbar 5.0 RemoteTech2_Release_1.3.3 FerramAerospaceResearch_v0.12.5.2 DeadlyReentryCont_v4.3 LifeSupportMode ECLSS 1.0.15 Action Group Manager 1.3.2.0 Raster Prop Monitor 0.14 KSI MFD1_1a targetron 1.3.4 editor extensions 0.6 KerbalAlarmClock_2.7.0.0 EnhancedNavBall_1_2 DockingPortAlignment_3.01 MechJeb2-2.1.1.01 Kos 10 MultipleSavesDA016 Kalculator-0.1 RCSBuildAid_v0.4.4 TacFuelBalancer_2.3.0.2 ThrottleControlledAvionics1.11 VertVel131 TweakableEverything-0-6-2 KerbalJointReinforcement_v2.0 VisualEnhancments-6-7 (pimp my clouds) Texture Remplacer (edraxial planets and moons, pimp my kerbals, skybox) TextureCompressor-2-15-aggressive Last ExsurgentEngineering.dll and Firespitter.dll Works fine until I add Interstellar quest, then I have some graphics bugs if I go and back 2 or 3 times from launch to the VAH (maybe due to memory), or I can not end or delete vessels from Tracking Station, some other problems with part activations, etc.) I understand, you are right, There are different approach.

Welcome : ) In the name of all KSP addicts here, I salute you! Now go build some rockets. Talk to us when you have reached the Mun.