Minor adjustments for the 0.25

[Ykrus]

explosions system: empty fuel tanks should not explode when crash, maybe bend or something. After a ship with fuel explodes should have more persistent smoke, like in arma 3, smoke lasts more and go sky high, just like in the art of anoucement of economic boom, there a very big smoke of explosion going up behind kerbals. Maybe have two diferent explosions, like solid fuel explosion and liquid, having different behaviors with some aplied fisics.

smoke you have done a great smoke on the falling buidings, i just think it vanish too quick and dont go up too much.

building destruction: is it possible to do a building damage like in red faction? like you could go through a building with the rocket, and only if it suffers too much damage it would fall.

building upgrades: just like in the own history of development of kerbal space program, in the begining of the game the player should have only a few buildings ,and you would have to upgrade and build the others to have some tech tree enabled or missions.

[Murph]

explosions system: empty fuel tanks should not explode when crash, maybe bend or something. After a ship with fuel explodes should have more persistent smoke, like in arma 3, smoke lasts more and go sky high, just like in the art of anoucement of economic boom, there a very big smoke of explosion going up behind kerbals. Maybe have two diferent explosions, like solid fuel explosion and liquid, having different behaviors with some applied fisics.

Actually, there's a very real reason why an empty fuel tank can explode. The remaining fuel vapour in a fully drained tank can end up at the perfect fuel:air ratio for detonation from the slightest spark. It's something that's a well known risk in the aerospace industry, and bulk fuel handling industries. The risk can be negated by an inerting system, filling the empty tank space with nitrogen.

[Ykrus]

so, with this inerting system, is there a chance of explosion? because, in the game world we should presuppose that's built in the fuel tank by standard.

[Javster]

I agree with OP, most people might find that Murph's explanation is confusing although (I assume) correct

[JakeRocket]

They should make more symmetries for spaceplanes (x4)

[Murph]

so, with this inerting system, is there a chance of explosion? because, in the game world we should presuppose that's built in the fuel tank by standard.

With a properly designed and functioning inerting system, the tank is protected from vapour explosion, although any liquid fuel remaining could still explode if vaporised in a crash.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inerting_system

Nearly 20 years after TWA800, most non-combat aircraft still do not have an inerting system, and the FAA and industry are still debating the finer points of such systems. So, in the real world, it's more unusual to have an inerting system, than to have one, at least on planes. I'm uncertain if they are commonly used on today's real space missions  the weight and complexity penalties may be enough to discourage their use other than in cases where tank structural integrity requires pressurisation, or some other factor raises the risk above normal levels.

I'm uncertain of the current status of retrofitting A320s and 747s with such a system (they were the major cases flagged as having a higher risk factor).

[Ykrus]

ok, you make clear the point of having explosions with the empty fuel tanks. thankyou!

[MKI]

Wow some people went into heavy detail on why fuel tanks should explode. I just say they explode because this is KSP and everything explode, even the people LOL.

Otherwise everything else suggested isn't very minor at all. New destruction system to the buildings ala red faction would never come. Upgradable buildings may come in the future. And longer smoke durations may or may not ever come. This is a visual problem and I don't know if the Devs would consider their current model in need of a change.

[Javster]

I would love to see fuel tanks being damaged and leaking varying amounts of fuel:

velocity*mass of impact * gravity of body +0.01 should equal fuel lost. +0.01 for orbit