What feature do you want for 1.8?

[Gargamel]

Overlapping threads have been merged and cleaned up. 

[Lisias]

I want some more new music!

 

[KingKerb]

[deleted]

Edited July 14, 2019 by KingKerb

[strider3]

LOL...some way to actually explore Eve biomes without having to strand a Kerbal scientist on each one! I've heard people have returned to orbit from Eve's surface...I just don't know how they do it, the DV is astronomical and landing is not a guaranteed success. Actually, I'm being facetious. What I would really like is a few more planets/moons, which was my vote. Oh...and biome maps with a legend on them...it's tricky using SCANsat and creating a BMP of the biome map with a legend. I have done it for Duna but, the "50 shades of brown" type color pallets are annoying?

Anywho, keep up the great work...I love KSP!

[Stone Blue]

1) Fixed support for Dx11 and 12... drop Dx9 support if necessary

2) Multi-monitor support... while it seems it may not work *well*, it was introduced in Unity 2017... hopefully it will perform better in Unity 2018 2019  vOv

So, if no one got the hint, I would like a Unity 2018 2019 update for 1.8

Edited April 30, 2019 by Stone Blue

[GeneCash]

Kerbal Alarm Clock stock.

Some way to build launch pads that you could select in the VAB like the current ones. Possibly you'd need to build a base with a certain (large) mass and population.

[DanGSun]

8 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

1) Fixed support for Dx11 and 12... drop Dx9 support if necessary

2) Multi-monitor support... while it seems it may not work *well*, it was introduced in Unity 2017... hopefully it will perform better in Unity 2018 vOv

So, if no one got the hint, I would like a Unity 2018 update for 1.8

 Yeah, multi-monitor would be great!

[Electrollama]

Small feature: In addition to the new "height from surface" feature in 1.7, maybe add "height from center of body".

Knowing the height from the center encourages players to use equations when appropriate,  and it make things easier for educators. It would have been useful for me when calculating orbital periods, before the new menu was introduced. While you're at it, the orbit info window could be updated when the "height from" option is changed. This might not be straight-forward for height above surface, but height of periapsis above surface would be useful for low orbits and landing.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Electrollama
removed bold

[ARS]

Internal heating module. We have radiators for shedding heat, especially when close to Kerbol, but I haven't see an idea for part that provides heat. It works like radiator, but instead of taking heat, it provides heat to surrounding parts, with small constant energy input. Basically, the farther your probe from kerbol, the cold of outer space starts taking effect on craft's performance where some or most of it's capabilities are impaired by cold temperature such as reaction wheel getting weaker, more electricity needed to transmit data, reduced engine performance, solar panels have delay in tracking the kerbol, etc. The cold effect greatly increased when landing on planet beyond Jool

[linuxgurugamer]

46 minutes ago, ARS said:

Internal heating module. We have radiators for shedding heat, especially when close to Kerbol, but I haven't see an idea for part that provides heat. It works like radiator, but instead of taking heat, it provides heat to surrounding parts, with small constant energy input. Basically, the farther your probe from kerbol, the cold of outer space starts taking effect on craft's performance where some or most of it's capabilities are impaired by cold temperature such as reaction wheel getting weaker, more electricity needed to transmit data, reduced engine performance, solar panels have delay in tracking the kerbol, etc. The cold effect greatly increased when landing on planet beyond Jool

I disagree.  This seems like it would be a relatively unused option.  It merely makes it harder to play rather than adding new and interesting gameplay.

I actually think this would be better done as a mod.  You are talking about touching almost everything in the game, and that is a nightmare.  A mod could be targeted at specific parts/modules, and then slowly have more features added without taking a chance on messing with the basic game engine

 

[ARS]

29 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

I disagree.  This seems like it would be a relatively unused option.  It merely makes it harder to play rather than adding new and interesting gameplay.

I actually think this would be better done as a mod.  You are talking about touching almost everything in the game, and that is a nightmare.  A mod could be targeted at specific parts/modules, and then slowly have more features added without taking a chance on messing with the basic game engine

 

Now you said about it, I think it does better if it's a mod, especially since this would make the post-Jool journey significantly harder and it's messing too much in game mechanic. Maybe it's because I'm just feeling that post-Jool mission seems relatively plain and same compared to other mission (flyby/ orbit/ land, click click science, plant flag and done), Nice job pointing that out BTW

[EchoLima]

Trajectories and Navball Docking Alignment Indicator made stock. 

Rover wheel sounds. 

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, ARS said:

Now you said about it, I think it does better if it's a mod, especially since this would make the post-Jool journey significantly harder and it's messing too much in game mechanic. Maybe it's because I'm just feeling that post-Jool mission seems relatively plain and same compared to other mission (flyby/ orbit/ land, click click science, plant flag and done), Nice job pointing that out BTW

You may be interested in DiminishingRTG.

[lajoswinkler]

3 hours ago, ARS said:

Internal heating module. We have radiators for shedding heat, especially when close to Kerbol, but I haven't see an idea for part that provides heat. It works like radiator, but instead of taking heat, it provides heat to surrounding parts, with small constant energy input. Basically, the farther your probe from kerbol, the cold of outer space starts taking effect on craft's performance where some or most of it's capabilities are impaired by cold temperature such as reaction wheel getting weaker, more electricity needed to transmit data, reduced engine performance, solar panels have delay in tracking the kerbol, etc. The cold effect greatly increased when landing on planet beyond Jool

It's a very interesting proposition but quite complicated when you think of it, knowing just how complicated and weird game's heat management is.

But, for the sake of an argument, let me just comment on the way it could work. It doesn't have to be an actual part you stick on the craft because those things are supposed to be inside electronic housing. It could be an option for each probe core, something one enables or disables in VAB. Sources of this additional heat could be either electrical heaters (which would cause a constant drain on the battery - a good thing player would have to manage) or a lump of blutonium-238 pellet. If we combine the latter with this idea, we get a spacecraft that, if shot into the abyss of space beyond Kerbol, will one day inevitably stop working, presenting a new challenge for the players.

I definitively like the idea, but it needs thorough and simplistic development with lots of automation because thermal management of electronics in space is extremely difficult to do passively.

[Lapis]

20 hours ago, Lisias said:

I want some more new music!

same here. I don't particularly dislike the current music, but it could be better. A couple forum members have written songs for this. I might not remember this correctly but i think @StrandedonEarth(sorry if I am wrong!)made some songs for this purpose .

Edited April 14, 2019 by lapis

[StrandedonEarth]

Just now, lapis said:

same here. I don't particularly dislike the current music, but it could be better. A couple forum members have written songs for this. I might not remember this correctly but i think @StrandedonEarth(sorry if I am wrong!)made some songs for this purpose .

Definitely not me. I'm so barely musical that it doesn't count

[Bej Kerman]

On 4/13/2019 at 2:48 PM, swjr-swis said:

An SAS that doesn't try to kill our kerbals would be nice. It went all HAL on us a couple of major versions ago and needs to become usable again.

SAS works perfectly fine for me. It's been working since some versions back when SAS used to punch the pitch and yaw in the direction of the selected marker then completely miss. I would like a more advanced SAS module that can hold a custom attitude though, for shuttle re-entries.

I would also like Persistent Thrust to be implemented into the stock game because using ion thrusters, despite benefitting my Delta-V, lead to terribly boring and long burns.

[linuxgurugamer]

23 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I would like a more advanced SAS module that can hold a custom attitude though, for shuttle re-entries.

No need.  You can use a probe core, set SAS to prograde, and then adjust the angle of control on the probe core.  I use it all the time with my shuttles

[JadeOfMaar]

15 hours ago, Electrollama said:

Small feature: In addition to the new "height from surface" feature in 1.7, maybe add "height from center of body".

Knowing the height from the center encourages players to use equations when appropriate,  and it make things easier for educators. It would have been useful for me when calculating orbital periods, before the new menu was introduced. While you're at it, the orbit info window could be updated when the "height from" option is changed. This might not be straight-forward for height above surface, but height of periapsis above surface would be useful for low orbits and landing.

Height from center of body is easy. Just add body radius to altitude from sea level.

On 4/12/2019 at 10:12 PM, razark said:

Something to do once you get somewhere, besides "Click click science done".

An overhaul of the science progression system would be very nice and should be very welcome. It would need a huge effort on Squad's part...but it won't be invasive and a burden on players' PCs like absorbing someone's giant parts mod...

On 4/13/2019 at 1:19 PM, Barzon Kerman said:

I would like, ummm, more solar panels, and all of Nertea's mods to be made stock.

I would like KSP to not absorb any large part mod or mod suite, thanks. This kind of thing happening will lead to chaos. There will be confusion and mass groanings over KSP taking that much longer to load, people who will want to use these parts for stock challenges, and people who don't want their KSP to take that much longer to load, and people who believe that huge part packs should remain as mods-- entirely free for the user to control whether it's in their install or not.

Now...

I would like 1.8 to have...

1. Fixed SAS (it became magically actually great in 1.2 but it quickly became crap again).
2. More options for modding engine plumes and a fix to plume scaling.
3. An overhaul for the drag cube system and the elimination of the following known traits/effects of it:
   1. Stack nodes add to drag.
   2. The first or second fuselage part after the airplane/spaceplane cockpit always produces huge drag.
   3. Some parts from mods drag even harder, like wide body spaceplane engine mounts or the occasional other part that may have been scaled weird in Unity. Their effect is akin to spamming open airbrakes. The red drag effect line reaches back to the KSC.
   4. Hollow parts by nature produce immense drag because of the non-hollow part attached at either end of them.
   5. In a sequential array of hollow parts (extra long cargo bay) a random number of the member parts will produce a lot of drag-- or no drag at all, which makes zero sense.
   6. If you chain adapters in a stack and observe and understand the aero data, you will often find that drag area is not always totally reduced, like KSP sees a different shape for that part than you see.

The drag overhaul would be a huge effort by itself due to its depth as part of KSP's mechanics and is integral to everyone's game, but it would be much more worth it in the end than any part pack project.

I'm not a big fan of Squad's part revamp effort (I appreciate it but I'm not hyped for it) and am of the opinion that the revamp itself should have secretly been done all at once (or fewer, larger chunks released at a time), or all that part making effort should be used on an all new part-pack DLC like base and station parts and colonization. We have Restock, so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited April 15, 2019 by JadeOfMaar

[Xurkitree]

We need new parts. Period.

I really, really want to see stock get some new toys to play with. Yeah yeah mods exist but have you looked at my loading times? I can't play that stuff all the time!

also we need a lava planet so that we can figure out how to make more lava planets 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Xurkitree

[Lisias]

1 hour ago, Xurkitree said:

We need new parts. Period.

I really, really want to see stock get some new toys to play with. Yeah yeah mods exist but have you looked at my loading times? I can't play that stuff all the time!

Had you considered why the loading times are huge?

Well, it's because they are loading things. So by expanding the stock's parts database, you will also expand the loading time for stock game.

Of course, you can argue that by using Add'Ons you are loading a lot of stuff you don't wanna. But you can delete anything you don't want it you choose to do so.

It's a catch-22 situation. More parts, more loading time. By adding new parts to the stock game, you are rising the stock loading time - what is exactly why you are complaining about the Add'Ons.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Lisias
yeah. I'm picky. :)

[Xurkitree]

4 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Had you considered why the loading times are huge?

Well, it's because they are loading things. So by expanding the stock's parts database, you will also expand the loading time for stock game.

Of course, you can argue that by using Add'Ons you are loading a lot of stuff you don't wanna. But you can delete anything you don't want it you choose to do so.

It's a catch-22 situation. More parts, more loading time. By adding new parts to the stock game, you are rising the stock loading time - what is exactly why you are complaining about the Add'Ons.

Yeah, its impossible to construct a good argument for new parts without addressing the mods issue, but if you try to address the mods issue, you realise the same problem lies with stock.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Now what can I do? KSP really could use new parts for everybody.

[Lisias]

26 minutes ago, Xurkitree said:

Now what can I do? KSP really could use new parts for everybody.

You manage to cook a good idea, you call me. I'm on the same boat!  [and I'm out of ideas!]

Edited April 15, 2019 by Lisias
addendum

[traisjames]

I would like be able to toggle SAS using action groups.

[JadeOfMaar]

1 minute ago, traisjames said:

I would like be able to toggle SAS using action groups.

Press T to toggle SAS... If you mean to disable individual reaction wheels, you can already action group their Toggle Torque button.