All I wish for in version 1.1 is a Giant Habitation Ring

[Just Jim]

OK, I haven't seen this mentioned or suggested.... if it was in another thread I apologize. But there is one thing I would absolutely give anything to see in 1.1, or some future upgrade, and this is the only way I can think of to get anyone's attention...

There is one part drastically missing for all of us Space Station fans... a big habitation ring of some sort. Something to house a decient number of Kerbals. Whether as a whole unit, or maybe broken into quarters or something... something to make a space station LOOK like a real 2001 style space station! Y'all are making giant new engines... why not a giant space station part??? Please???

I'm hoping I'm not the only one in on this... anyone else agree we could really use a big ol' space station ring of some sort???

[Bloody_looser]

I'm not a fan of habitation rings, but we have like five more or less dedicated station/base parts. It's the most lacking part of the game. Any parts for that purpose would be welcome.

[problemecium]

I wouldn't hold my breath over this, for a few reasons:

- creative individuals have been cobbling together decent-looking rings from stock parts such as crew cabins for some time now

- launching a monolithic giant station ring is downright silly. SQUAD is trying to make a game about launching practical rockets and managing a space program in a rational manner, even if many people say KSP is just about boosters and explosions.

- not launching a monolithic giant station ring, but rather building a monolithic ring in orbit, means implementing orbital construction. Again, KSP is about launching rockets and exploring, not going all sci-fi and inventing nonexistent space colonies and warp drives. As a rule of thumb, only existing or very near-future stuff should be expected to show up in KSP.

- Mods did it already. Several mods exist that provide nice big station rings, so if SQUAD tried it then A: it would outmode those mods and leave those poor modders up the creek, B: it would be redundant, and C: people would complain (as they've done with fairings and ISRU) that the new stock version is inferior to the mod version.

[Kerbart]

Mods did it already. Several mods exist that provide nice big station rings, so if SQUAD tried it then A: it would outmode those mods and leave those poor modders up the creek, B: it would be redundant, and C: people would complain (as they've done with fairings and ISRU) that the new stock version is inferior to the mod version.

Using that logic there would be no reason to release a million additional spaceplane parts with each release.

[Bloody_looser]

Using that logic there would be no reason to release a million additional spaceplane parts with each release.

Pretty much this. Though 1.1 will bring mostly fancy airliner parts, big turbofan or small jet do not even belong into space.

I wouldn't hold my breath over this, for a few reasons:

- creative individuals have been cobbling together decent-looking rings from stock parts such as crew cabins for some time now

- launching a monolithic giant station ring is downright silly. SQUAD is trying to make a game about launching practical rockets and managing a space program in a rational manner, even if many people say KSP is just about boosters and explosions.

- not launching a monolithic giant station ring, but rather building a monolithic ring in orbit, means implementing orbital construction. Again, KSP is about launching rockets and exploring, not going all sci-fi and inventing nonexistent space colonies and warp drives. As a rule of thumb, only existing or very near-future stuff should be expected to show up in KSP.

- Mods did it already. Several mods exist that provide nice big station rings, so if SQUAD tried it then A: it would outmode those mods and leave those poor modders up the creek, B: it would be redundant, and C: people would complain (as they've done with fairings and ISRU) that the new stock version is inferior to the mod version.

When the question is 'Where's my habitation ring?' or 'Where's Alcubierre drive?' - 'Mod it!' is the answer.

When the question is 'Why existing stock mechanic/feature X (like craft readouts, base parts, building tiers, command modules, etc.) has gaping Moholes in it?' - well 'Mod it!' is a part of the question.

[Motokid600]

Only if it comes with proper life support.

[Curveball Anders]

implementing orbital construction.

I'd very much like to see that before any large pre-made constructions.

[severedsolo]

Space stations in general are very under appreciated in ksp.

The game basically goes:

"launch a space station that can support 5 kerbals"

ok then what?

"uh... Leave it there and build another one that supports 7 kerbals"

I know they have mentioned that 1.1 will have extra contacts to add labs to stations, but it doesn't address the underlying problem! What do you do with them? We need crew rotation missions as a minimum IMO.

Yes I know, the answer is mod it (and I did) - but it would be nice if I didn't have to.

[DocMoriarty]

A station ring makes not much sense, since all stations would look the same and not kerbalish anymore. The creativity in using stock parts to create a ring is much more kerbalish. But it would make sense, especially with the new concept of context missions, when there would be more station / base related parts such as bio domes, science related stuff, a kerbalable telescope module to discover asteroids, ...

[Torquemadus]

KSP currently lacks habitat modules for stations, bases and interplanetary missions. Present day or near future examples would include Bigalow inflatables for stations, NASA's proposed Transhab for interplanetary missions, and the Mars Direct "tuna can" design for ground bases.

[KerikBalm]

I prefer to just make things that look like centrifuges, and that I can spin manually to achieve that effect:

Its not a station though... its what I send my kerbals on interplanetary missions in... they travel in relative comfort (also crews of 3 males and 3 females, each specialty has a colleague of the opposite gender to work with... who knows what goes on in the command pod, or the science lab, or the crew modules because the engineer doesn't have much to do during the IP journey)

[eddiew]

Did Porkjet not already answer your prayers with his Habitat Pack mod?

[Kerbart]

Did Porkjet not already answer your prayers with his Habitat Pack mod?

Wait... that mod is stock now? AWESOME!!

[eddiew]

Wait... that mod is stock now? AWESOME!!

Not that I know of... but I don't see any reason that's a problem?

[Frozen_Heart]

Using that logic there would be no reason to release a million additional spaceplane parts with each release.

Using tat logic we'd still be back at 0.17 or so. Pretty much everything has been done by mods by now.

[cantab]

All I wish for in version 1.1 is bugfixes and performance improvements.

[Warzouz]

Well, I don't like too much "big parts". I prefer "small parts you can create big parts from".

The only drawback is part count. Maybe KSP should integrate some way of reducing part count after design by welding some of them.

[jackboy900]

I'd Like to see a MKS lite set of parts in stock. Inflatable bases and orbital habitation. Maybe also porkjet's habitation pack. And very maybe a lS system similar to USILS.