about the launchpads and runways...

[Not Sure]

Just now, sevenperforce said:

Low latitude is easier for players who are just starting out. You can do Mun missions without worrying about inclination, for example.

Yea, I agree, but I had not started playing career until I had 500 hours in sandbox, hopefully people take a similar route and know how to overcome the inclination, there are multiple ways to do it.

[ZooNamedGames]

4 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Low latitude is easier for players who are just starting out. You can do Mun missions without worrying about inclination, for example.

That's the point of the KSC.

On 4/15/2018 at 11:38 AM, [INDO]dimas_1502 said:

bumped

map of my suggestion about launchpad locations

not sure where should i put more runways...
 

Woomerang is a tad bit further to the northeast, just south of the mountain range's eastern side

On 4/16/2018 at 2:39 AM, razark said:

And a completely flat lakebed, in case you miss the runway.

We have two dry lake beds already though... specifically the poles.

Having visited the poles of other bodies in KSP, I can tell you without question that Kerbin's poles are unique. The Mun's is really spikey, and needless to point out the Mohole.

[DoToH]

Slightly off topic but.... does anyone know if the new launch sites also act as recovery sites? I mean...if I land my rocket at Woomerang or at the runway they are about to include with 1.4.3, will I recover full funds?

I forgot to check it myself when I tried 1.4.1 and now I'm back in 1.3.1 and don't want to update just for that test. 

[Nothalogh]

A runway twice as long, and twice as wide would make more sense if its intent is for spaceplanes.

A nice SpaceX style landing pad would be cool too.

The launch pad is mostly fine, but we definitely need some better launch clamp options.