What do YOU want to see in 0.24?

[Superfluous J]

Ability to transferr science between vessels to allow players doing apollo style missions.

Thats basic functionality, its strange that squad hasnt implemented it.

What's strange is that you don't know that they added it to 0.23 even though you want it so bad. You have to do everything in EVA, but a Kerbal can take any experiment from anything and store any experiment in any command pod.

[Themohawkninja]

What's strange is that you don't know that they added it to 0.23 even though you want it so bad. You have to do everything in EVA, but a Kerbal can take any experiment from anything and store any experiment in any command pod.

I think he means without needing to EVA, like how fuel can be transferred when you are docked.

[Themohawkninja]

Since Squad is working on contracts, I would love to see money actually get implemented so I can see just how cost efficient (or in efficient) my play style is.

[pizzaoverhead]

Since Squad is working on contracts, I would love to see money actually get implemented so I can see just how cost efficient (or in efficient) my play style is.

They're planning on having three currencies: The current science currency, money and reputation. They plan on allowing players to trade them in exchange for each other, so you could buy some PR to improve your reputation, sell some research for money, or lose reputation to get a bailout.

[iaminapeartree]

I would like to see reliability added. Maybe add a facility that you could test newly unlocked parts, so that you can increase the reliability on it. Of course this would have to be added in to the budget of your build whenever currency/contracts are added to the game. I just think it would add more realism.

[Justin Kerbice]

New ideas for next release:

1. allow to mix what we want to display in space center map (unless already done and I'm a fool ignoring it), it's not easy to show if debris or spaceships may have a "date" (a deadly one surely),

2. making kerbals easier to control, now it's looks like a crappy arcade plateform game when we get mad in 2 s trying to control a bad character.

("grab" command may appear 0.1s when a kerbal is jumping near a ladder)

3. with money there, making recovering of debris more or less valuable (at least make parts + 1 count in inventory but they have first to be checked for service, maybe)

4. why not include alongside the game a pack of the best mod (rated/used/anything) in form of a free "DLC" allowing people who buy the game with steam for example to notice there is a lot's of stuffes close to the game (I bet many people didn't notice the "space port" and community link just in front of their eyes on the game main menu)

5. allowing popup window on part to be moved like the one of toolbar plugin (most of the time, the navball hide some info on engine)

6. finally: change the spirit of vehicule builder, it's a pain to just align two parts most of the time when not attached with the nodes

Edited February 4, 2014 by vexx32

[tetryds]

@JK:

1- Pass the mouse on the top of the map view or tracking station

2- Change mode on the settings menu. Kerbals are actually very easy to control, the rcs backpack mode is meant for EVA in orbit.

4- I belive that it will never happen, mods aren't DLCs, they are made by community and should never be used for advertising. Some modders are hired by Squad, and often add some parts of their mods which fit very well in the game.

5- Click with middle mouse button to pan the camera arround so you acn see the engine.

6- Build the rover on the SPH then save it as attachment to import to VAB.

And i belive that using so many *s does not highlight your point of view about something

[spinomonkey]

Had this idea about biome's and re-playability. I realize I've read on here a few times about dev's not being big on random events, though I think this would be kinda different. Would be kind of cool if aside from collecting surface samples there were randomly generated (and perhaps very few) "superior samples". Something that could only be discovered by coming within range of this rare thing (like a rock). This way, it would encourage exploration on a planet or moon. I figure a superior samples could offer some kind of science reward too, depending on how rare it is could increase the science %.

I'm a big fan of exploring, and I'd hate to see the game turned into a quest to reach all the planets as quickly as possible just to gain science, when a player could also be rewarded for taking their time and exploring a single location. I like to think of it in the same way Assassins Creed offers you chests of gold. It might just be a small reward, but if you put forward the time and effort it can turn into a real reward in the long run.

[frisch]

Re-entry heat damage and heat shields (make aerobreaking vs retro-rockets an interesting technology choice)

balloons, nuclear jet engines, etc for exploring planets with atmospheres (eg Eve). I want eve to be a technical challenge, not just drudgery waiting for a computer to very slowly run a very large staged rocket and hope that nothing breaks this time

Fixed aerodynamics / drag / lift. I want rockets that look like rockets, not pancakes .

The current game is great, but you reach the point where you know how to build a rocket that will go anywhere, but it takes a unreasonably large one to do eve.

[Dunbaratu]

What's strange is that you don't know that they added it to 0.23 even though you want it so bad. You have to do everything in EVA, but a Kerbal can take any experiment from anything and store any experiment in any command pod.

A computer should be able to copy data from a thermometer or gravioli detector easier than a Kerbal can. Currently it can't. Copying data from the instrument to a computer core shouldn't require a manned mission.

[Dunbaratu]

A new type of science data that consists of point-source things in the midst of biomes rather than just wide-area biomes, and a new part to help detect them. For example, detecting specific locations where geothermal activity is under the surface, or detecting specific locations where a rare mineral is there. The idea is that this gives a reason to bother roving and exploring.

[somnambulist]

A computer should be able to copy data from a thermometer or gravioli detector easier than a Kerbal can. Currently it can't. Copying data from the instrument to a computer core shouldn't require a manned mission.

I haven't tried this in game, but it looks like it's already possible with ModuleScienceContainer

MODULE
{
	name = ModuleScienceContainer
	reviewActionName = Review Stored Data
	storeActionName = Store Experiments
	evaOnlyStorage = True
	storageRange = 1.3
}

Try setting evaOnlyStorage to False and increasing the storage range.

[spinomonkey]

How about a rocket preview when you click on the launch pad to launch a prebuilt rocket. Tired of clicking on the rocket name and it gives me a description but no photo. A spinning 3D preview of what I built might be nice.

[meteorgazer]

I'm really excited about career mode and it's prospects, so everything I have is centered around that:

While I see contracts making a big difference in career mode, I would like to see science play a role in more than just the parts tree. For example, the ability to invest science to create more efficient propulsion and/or power generation/storage. I understand the initial jump in science leading to different parts/modules/instruments/thrusters etc., but eventually we should be at a point where the technology leaps are slowed to a crawl, but we are fine-tuning what we have developed (increasing fuel efficiency by 1%, or SAS responsiveness by 5%).

Engineering points could be introduced as well. Each vessel built would earn points based on how many times a part was used, and a modifier based on travel. The point system would work much like science but used to develop lighter heat shields, reduce drag on parts, stronger parts, lighter parts, cheaper parts.

I'd like the science gain to be bit more involved as well. Currently, if I send a lander to Mun, for example, I design a lander, load it with scientific instruments, slap a lift vehicle to it, and send to Mun. Jeb touches down, spends about 30 sec maximizing all the science gain he can for the mission, and heads home in his KRV. I'm not saying "give me more science!" in fact, it being career mode I would like to spend more time on these EVA's conducting the experiments and gathering samples (for the same science gain). As it is, it seems a bit OP. Having the excuse to spend more time on the surface would make it seem more like a space program rather than just a "Jebediah was here" game.

Implement a damage system. Already we can repair damaged struts and wheels, and there are plans to toss in telescopes (trickling science, maybe?). Having your Jool destined probe sustain random damage to the solar panel requiring a rendezvous and repair mission to save your expensive probe and get the contract completed without losing reputation would be just one idea, or a heat shield that gets damaged on launch (now the reason the shuttle does a 180 to get inspected by the ISS) that needs emergency repair or rescue to save the crew. Obviously we don't want this to happen on a regular basis, but the chances that it might happen would be a great reason for a ready-launch-shuttle docked at the now useful Kerbin orbit space station. Damage on launch is a common effect, but most often its due to mistakes on the ground. This could be a reason for the engineering point system, starting with a hidden penalty that increases the chance a science instrument or engine will become damaged and either fail or be less efficient, and reducing that penalty with engineering point investment.

Contracts could issue entire campaigns. For example, the Titan program: the Kerbal government issues a challenge to send a series of explorative missions to Jool, and (most notably) Laythe (as it would look so enticing from a telescope). Back at KSC you have a tab that allows the management of these programs. A flashcard-type system that allows you to designate missions in progress as protagonists for the campaign goal (IE, select a craft bound for Jool and drag it to a campaign goal, and title that mission Titan I, allowing it to complete the goal, and for you to easily manage multiple contracts at once). While we're at it, the Astronaut complex can have the added feature of being able to commit some of these program missions to a museum, complete with a customizable description, snapshot of the craft (or a stage that you designate) or even an in-game 'model', the participants (if manned), and the dates of the program, and the name of the mission designator and program (mini campaign) it was in.

Reputation modifiers based on the kerbonaut (which changes depending on his success rate)

Flight simulator mode allowing you to test your craft in simulated conditions at a fraction of the cost of the vessel and no reputation (or kerbonaut) loss

Depth to the Kerbals! Divide the kerbs into pilots and mission specialists. Allow the specialist to gain boosts in science gains, and the ability to begin a timed (over say, a month) experiment in the laboratory or station. These guys would be more efficient when it came to data analysis and surface sampling as well. Pilots should be the only ones that can fly, or just make the nav-ball indicators and course trajectories disappear for non pilots. An engineer class (or just a different mission specialist stat) would be more efficient at repair work, or would be the only one able to conduct repairs. This actually gives you a reason to take more than one kerbal to space (sorry, Jeb).

VIP contracts: take x-scientist to do y-study at z-planet; take rich dude to planet-x

Sustainment modules. Kerbals need water and food. I think I'm probably the 1 millionth person to say, but introducing a food and water resource stat(s) to the equation would go

a long way in immersion and realism factor - no more going interplanetary the second you get staging. Small flights (in system) should be sustainable with the resources in a command pod (measured in consumption per 24 hours), but longer flights would need more resources per kerbal. And since you now need a pilot, a scientist, and an engineer, you would need exponentially more resources, and therefore more planning, and therefore more immersion. Right now we get great rewards for going interplanetary, we should get increased risks with that as well. This would also make space stations and bases require logistical support.

While we're at it, an insanity stat! Not sure what courage and stupidity stats do for us, but sanity would be a new ball game. Short flights would be no big deal, but leaving Bob working long months orbiting Minmus with nothing to do might make things... break more often... or suddenly find the station hurdling towards the surface... hehehe. But seriously, there is no downside to not rotating kerbals out of a far away posting. We can make them permanently happy by giving them social (other kerbals around) and entertainment (attachable module = big boost, ship part = small boost).

Competition mode, inserting another agency in the mix competing for money, contracts, reputation. Occasional this (or these) agency (-ies) might become a sort of ally as you work together in a scripted scenario, campaign or event where you each contribute pieces to a project such as a station or interplanetary vessel, or they have an accident and need rescuing.

A 'pledge' system where there are hundreds of developer issued challenges (read: achievements) in-game (send a probe to orbit Eeloo for 2 years, send a manned mission on a 'grand tour' of the Jool system, land on Moho's shadow ridges (or other biome that actually exists). This system would allow you to operate separate from contracts, on your 'spare' budget for a boost to the reputation, science, funding, and engineering gain, but at the risk of a huge loss in one or all three.

More science experiments: magnometers, spectrometers, plasma analyser, charged particle instruments, meteoroid detectors, photopolarimeter, radiometer.

The whimsy of the game is a part of it's charm, but gleaning more information from the planets and their satellites and being able to view that through some sort of tiered unlockable wiki

[Deathsoul097]

I'm really excited about career mode and it's prospects, so everything I have is centered around that:

While I see contracts making a big difference in career mode, I would like to see science play a role in more than just the parts tree. For example, the ability to invest science to create more efficient propulsion and/or power generation/storage. I understand the initial jump in science leading to different parts/modules/instruments/thrusters etc., but eventually we should be at a point where the technology leaps are slowed to a crawl, but we are fine-tuning what we have developed (increasing fuel efficiency by 1%, or SAS responsiveness by 5%).

Mentioned a few times, but I don't think this kind of thing should be implemented until you are at, or very near, the end of the tree.

Engineering points could be introduced as well. Each vessel built would earn points based on how many times a part was used, and a modifier based on travel. The point system would work much like science but used to develop lighter heat shields, reduce drag on parts, stronger parts, lighter parts, cheaper parts.

Hmm. Sounds good in theory, but it may be a bad thing as well. I like it, but I don't know how the typical player would respond.

I'd like the science gain to be bit more involved as well. Currently, if I send a lander to Mun, for example, I design a lander, load it with scientific instruments, slap a lift vehicle to it, and send to Mun. Jeb touches down, spends about 30 sec maximizing all the science gain he can for the mission, and heads home in his KRV. I'm not saying "give me more science!" in fact, it being career mode I would like to spend more time on these EVA's conducting the experiments and gathering samples (for the same science gain). As it is, it seems a bit OP. Having the excuse to spend more time on the surface would make it seem more like a space program rather than just a "Jebediah was here" game.

100% agreed.

Implement a damage system. Already we can repair damaged struts and wheels, and there are plans to toss in telescopes (trickling science, maybe?). -Citation needed?- Having your Jool destined probe sustain random damage to the solar panel requiring a rendezvous and repair mission to save your expensive probe and get the contract completed without losing reputation would be just one idea, or a heat shield that gets damaged on launch (now the reason the shuttle does a 180 to get inspected by the ISS) that needs emergency repair or rescue to save the crew. Obviously we don't want this to happen on a regular basis, but the chances that it might happen would be a great reason for a ready-launch-shuttle docked at the now useful Kerbin orbit space station. Damage on launch is a common effect, but most often its due to mistakes on the ground. This could be a reason for the engineering point system, starting with a hidden penalty that increases the chance a science instrument or engine will become damaged and either fail or be less efficient, and reducing that penalty with engineering point investment.

SQUAD have said they don't want random damage, or random damaging events, so this is probably a no go. Imagine, you had a rocket, which functioned perfectly the first 10 times you launched it, but on the 11th launch an engine fails to ignite, or you reach orbit and a little pop up says something along the lines of: "Part-X has been damaged to Y extent, New part-Z needed or On site orbital repairs." How annoyed might you feel at that?

Contracts could issue entire campaigns. For example, the Titan program: the Kerbal government issues a challenge to send a series of explorative missions to Jool, and (most notably) Laythe (as it would look so enticing from a telescope). Back at KSC you have a tab that allows the management of these programs. A flashcard-type system that allows you to designate missions in progress as protagonists for the campaign goal (IE, select a craft bound for Jool and drag it to a campaign goal, and title that mission Titan I, allowing it to complete the goal, and for you to easily manage multiple contracts at once). While we're at it, the Astronaut complex can have the added feature of being able to commit some of these program missions to a museum, complete with a customizable description, snapshot of the craft (or a stage that you designate) or even an in-game 'model', the participants (if manned), and the dates of the program, and the name of the mission designator and program (mini campaign) it was in.

Interesting. I like this idea, and I hope that the contract system eventually evolves into something along those lines. It sounds like the NASA mission pack will do pretty much what you are describing.

Reputation modifiers based on the kerbonaut (which changes depending on his success rate)

Yes, I like this too, but his (Or her's. You never know if female kerbals will be implemented.) reputation should influence the rep of the program. Say Jeb is the first kerb on the mun. He is already famous, but this act would bring a lot of publicity and funding to you program, along with attracting new test pilots to join up.

Flight simulator mode allowing you to test your craft in simulated conditions at a fraction of the cost of the vessel and no reputation (or kerbonaut) loss.

With the current revert function I feel this is unnecessary. Nuff said.

Depth to the Kerbals! Divide the kerbs into pilots and mission specialists. Allow the specialist to gain boosts in science gains, and the ability to begin a timed (over say, a month) experiment in the laboratory or station. These guys would be more efficient when it came to data analysis and surface sampling as well. Pilots should be the only ones that can fly, or just make the nav-ball indicators and course trajectories disappear for non pilots. An engineer class (or just a different mission specialist stat) would be more efficient at repair work, or would be the only one able to conduct repairs. This actually gives you a reason to take more than one kerbal to space (sorry, Jeb).

Agreed, but I feel a few kerbals, such as jeb, should stand out from the rest, and provide a moderate boost and higher than usual ability in all areas. You would still want a specialist over him, as the specialist would be better at increasing science gain, but Jeb would be better than other pilots and such in the science field.

VIP contracts: take x-scientist to do y-study at z-planet; take rich dude to planet-x

I can see similar things being implemented to a minimal extent, but unless the VIP is a scientist who will possibly double science output at a base or station, I think that this kind of thing shouldn't take anyone any further than mun or minmus.

Sustainment modules. Kerbals need water and food. I think I'm probably the 1 millionth person to say, but introducing a food and water resource stat(s) to the equation would go a long way in immersion and realism factor - no more going interplanetary the second you get staging. Small flights (in system) should be sustainable with the resources in a command pod (measured in consumption per 24 hours), but longer flights would need more resources per kerbal. And since you now need a pilot, a scientist, and an engineer, you would need exponentially more resources, and therefore more planning, and therefore more immersion. Right now we get great rewards for going interplanetary, we should get increased risks with that as well. This would also make space stations and bases require logistical support.

I am a bit on the edge on this one. I like realism, but I feel that Life support and deadly re-entry could well ruin the game, as most people probably wouldn't find it fun to micromanage all of these kind of things. In my game, I assume that any ships or stations that are permanently in orbit are constantly re-supplied by ATVs, and I am there to run the big stuff, like the mun missions and missions to other worlds and moons. I feel that the player would feel more of a detriment to the gameplay if Life support systems were introduced to stock. I for one, would create a mod to remove LS (Unless it is done in a good way, but for the way I like the game, I don't think that would work.) if that happens.

While we're at it, an insanity stat! Not sure what courage and stupidity stats do for us, but sanity would be a new ball game. Short flights would be no big deal, but leaving Bob working long months orbiting Minmus with nothing to do might make things... break more often... or suddenly find the station hurdling towards the surface... hehehe. But seriously, there is no downside to not rotating kerbals out of a far away posting. We can make them permanently happy by giving them social (other kerbals around) and entertainment (attachable module = big boost, ship part = small boost).

AFAIK, someone is actually working on this in the mods. IIRC though, SQUAD have also said a BIG no to this one.

Competition mode, inserting another agency in the mix competing for money, contracts, reputation. Occasional this (or these) agency (-ies) might become a sort of ally as you work together in a scripted scenario, campaign or event where you each contribute pieces to a project such as a station or interplanetary vessel, or they have an accident and need rescuing.

This has been discussed to death. I think that only the space race style missions would be good for an opposing AI. Collaborative projects require too much communication to work without other players.

A 'pledge' system where there are hundreds of developer issued challenges (read: achievements) in-game (send a probe to orbit Eeloo for 2 years, send a manned mission on a 'grand tour' of the Jool system, land on Moho's shadow ridges (or other biome that actually exists). This system would allow you to operate separate from contracts, on your 'spare' budget for a boost to the reputation, science, funding, and engineering gain, but at the risk of a huge loss in one or all three.

This actually is already in the game, to a degree. The game has achievements listed in your persistence file, but they don't actually show or affect anything in game. It is pretty much a base for what you have described, but nothing has been done with it yet. (It was implemented in 0.21, IIRC.)

More science experiments: magnometers, spectrometers, plasma analyser, charged particle instruments, meteoroid detectors, photopolarimeter, radiometer.

The whimsy of the game is a part of it's charm, but gleaning more information from the planets and their satellites and being able to view that through some sort of tiered unlockable wiki.

I agree, MOAR SCIENCE!, is pretty much what I want as a major feature in the next few versions, even if it just comes down to biome maps for all bodies. It is annoying that we know everything about everywhere straight away, and I feel science should be a large part of that. However, I feel that we should at least know where everything is, whether or not it has an atmo, and roughly what the land looks like at the start. I don't want to start blind.

[NQMT]

With the current revert function I feel this is unnecessary. Nuff said.

Testing a Gilly rover on Kerbin is rather pointless, you don't get anything near the lack of gravity without using the debug menu. I think meteorgazer means "simulation" as in testing in different environments without having to send a huge 'practice mission' to see if something doesn't come up.

Also, it's happened to me before that I've forgotten very important parts, and once you're there, you can't do much about it.

- Kyrian

[Rdivine]

improvements to the ocean of kerbin so it doesn't go UNDER the mountains and terrain, and a setting to disable ocean animation.

[Deathsoul097]

Testing a Gilly rover on Kerbin is rather pointless, you don't get anything near the lack of gravity without using the debug menu. I think meteorgazer means "simulation" as in testing in different environments without having to send a huge 'practice mission' to see if something doesn't come up.

Also, it's happened to me before that I've forgotten very important parts, and once you're there, you can't do much about it.

- Kyrian

True. Though that didn't occur to me at the time. I agree that this kind of thing could be useful, but only really for testing stuff that is destined for another world, no so much LKO, or mun/minmus.

(Also, why, of all places, would you try to send a rover to Gilly? You have to thrust to keep yourelf on the ground when you land FGS. Heck, even IONs have a decent TWR there.)

[meteorgazer]

This has been discussed to death. I think that only the space race style missions would be good for an opposing AI. Collaborative projects require too much communication to work without other players.

Thats what I mean, but thanks for clarifying. I don't see how MP in KSP would ever be possible. Lack of timewarp would make the game unplayable, other players timewarping when I'm not ready or doing a maneuver would break the game, timewarping not affecting both players at same time would make the game ridiculous.

I agree, MOAR SCIENCE!, is pretty much what I want as a major feature in the next few versions, even if it just comes down to biome maps for all bodies. It is annoying that we know everything about everywhere straight away, and I feel science should be a large part of that. However, I feel that we should at least know where everything is, whether or not it has an atmo, and roughly what the land looks like at the start. I don't want to start blind.

This is probably the most important thing to me. As it stands the game is too short! I have confidence that squad is improving the system though, just wanted to mention how many different experiments can be accomplished.

[meteorgazer]

Also, it's happened to me before that I've forgotten very important parts, and once you're there, you can't do much about it.

- Kyrian

Thats a big pain, too. I am looking to test all aspects. For instance, yesterday I designed a re-usable lander to land on Laythe (and subsequently, other moons of Jool), then rendezvous with the Jool station for processing and cleaning of the data/instruments and refueling to continue the exploration. Naturally it was going well until I tried to dock, and found that the RCS was poorly placed, not allowing for translational thrust, making docking take an incredibly long time, and now my calculations for the amount of mono I needed for the project will require two fueling runs all the way to Jool.

The idea is to reward preparation, rather than the frustrating trial and error mode we have now. I understand that the launch vehicles are easy to test, but by the time you go to a new world you should have several tried and true LV's in the subassembly tab. I mean the ability to test things in a simulated operational environment, much the way NASA does in the pool, flight simulator, and computer models.

[Serratus]

Dear Harvester.

I was a very good boy and I want:

1. Optimization.

2. Payload Construction Building (as mentioned by the Devs some time ago).

3. Kerbonauts equipment (EVA pack, backpacks, boxes, ect. Basically what KAS does but better and stock).

4. All stock capsules with cockpits.

5. Real, free-movement in IVA.

6. Whether

7. More stable joint connections (I'm tiered of tall rockets breaking in half when IRL they would be fine).

8. Fix the Jumbo tank pleas! (overheats, ridiculously susceptible to destruction by compression).

9. Life support systems.

10. Re-balancing of power systems (solar panels are giving so much power, if we had them IRL, 1000 of them would be enough to power Earth...).

11. Add communications systems (like in that one mod, but make it better).

12. Add 15 more unique planets with moons.

13. Add tycoon mechanic to building up my KSC in career mode.

14. Plane parts should be more accessible early on. Force players in career to explore kerbin BEFORE leaving for the stars.

15. Make EVERYTHING MUCH BETTER.

16. Do it fast.

Thank You in advance

Ps. 17. Also add more parts of all kinds. Especially the kind I want.

[Dunbaratu]

I'd like to see a hardcore/with-simulator mode. It would work like this:

1 - You decide before launching the flight whether this will be a "real" or a "simulation" launch.

2 - If it is "simulation" then it works as normal but with this exception - a copy of your persistence file is made, and the entire mission takes place inside this copy rather than in the real mission file. This copy is thrown away when you quit the game and cannot be saved permanently.

3 - If it is "real" mode then it works as normal but with this exception: The "revert flight" feature is disabled.

So it basically does the same thing as "revert flight" except it puts WHEN to make that decision that "this flight doesn't count" earlier in time. You have to decide "this doesn't count" BEFORE you launch the flight. This represents the idea that you're practicing the mission, simulating bits of it ahead of time, and detecting mistakes prior to the real thing, but once you launch for real you can't undo.

That would make things like escape tower mechanisms more necessary.

[SkyHook]

I really want kerbals to take the lead in the next update. Obviously the next update is already decided so this will have to be 0.25. I think that the following things would add greatly to kerbals and their utility.

- Enhanced IVA. I think kerbals should be able to move around in IVA, and conduct experiments, etc. from inside.

- Construction. Kerbals should have abilities a la KAS, and they should be able to add/remove small parts and construct/repair things using tools, etc.

- I think there should be SOME penalty for their death. If not a penalty, I think that several advantages should be lost. Kerbals should matter.

That's all I can think of right now, but I am sure that I will think of more.

[Pockrtplanesairways]

Dear Harvester.

I was a very good boy and I want:

1. Optimization.

2. Payload Construction Building (as mentioned by the Devs some time ago).

3. Kerbonauts equipment (EVA pack, backpacks, boxes, ect. Basically what KAS does but better and stock).

4. All stock capsules with cockpits.

5. Real, free-movement in IVA.

6. Whether

7. More stable joint connections (I'm tiered of tall rockets breaking in half when IRL they would be fine).

8. Fix the Jumbo tank pleas! (overheats, ridiculously susceptible to destruction by compression).

9. Life support systems.

10. Re-balancing of power systems (solar panels are giving so much power, if we had them IRL, 1000 of them would be enough to power Earth...).

11. Add communications systems (like in that one mod, but make it better).

12. Add 15 more unique planets with moons.

13. Add tycoon mechanic to building up my KSC in career mode.

14. Plane parts should be more accessible early on. Force players in career to explore kerbin BEFORE leaving for the stars.

15. Make EVERYTHING MUCH BETTER.

16. Do it fast.

Thank You in advance

Ps. 17. Also add more parts of all kinds. Especially the kind I want.

Buddy, most of that is under this page here ----->http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/36863-What-not-to-suggest

P.S. I wish some of that was in the game too.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Pockrtplanesairways

[MartGonzo]

Please Squad for the love of God fix the maneuver node placement after changing SOI, I'm sick of playing hunt the pixel