[Title will now include the {MonthDAY} of when this post was last updated with new content.]

I've only had 15 minutes of playtime since updating and I've already run smack into a few things that have left me sighing and grumbling. I partially blame myself, though, because I figured this update was going to be a few hundred MB, and I am limited per-month which would've prevented me from being able to properly beta test. (During most Betas, there's a quite a few updates to iron out bugs people find, and ensure no further ones crop up due to said fix.)
So color me surprised it was only 100MB, which I could've handled :\

---

SUGGESTIONS

1) Why did we get Hollow Glass but STILL don't have Glass Cone? When WNP had mentioned more Glass fuselage parts, I honestly was expecting to finally get the Glass Cone I've needed/wanted. :( Having to use 8 to 10 thin pieces of Fuselage to try and make a similarly curved glass surface, only to have it terminate in a hard point on one end, is such a bummer!

Really, the thing to do is not piecemeal Glass parts, but flat out make Glass versions of all the Structural parts. It was nice being able to make see-through Glass Cockpit canopies, and Glass overall is such a great addition! But without the Glass Hemisphere and Glass Cone, making certain replica planes (see: WWII Bombers) is not as 'simple' as it could/should be. A "Hollow" Cone and Hemisphere, in Glass and Normal Fuselage, would be quite a treat.. but honestly just a solid Glass of both would make me content! ^_^

2) To have the Fine Tuner, Attachment Editor, and Variables Editor buttons moved OUT of Rotate menu, and append them to the main menu below Part Settings. Variables can still be persistent (static) in the same way that some of the other buttons are (Colors, View, etc)

Or if they're nested that way to accommodate Mobile screens (which is OK by me), an option to allow us to have them moved, or even a config file-only setting (to skip needing to make new item(s) in the Settings Menu).
That way the SECOND Variables button -- which I'm not sure why it's in two places -- can be removed entirely. (I keep clicking on that, instead of Overdrive, *and then* end up clicking on the ( i ) thinking it's an [ x ], which... well you know what it does heh Then to compound matters, I'm clicking Fine Tuner when I want Overdrive... Having it be the furthest-left button, after any other ones added by mods, would at least spare us from that.)

3) A third Seat that is a hybrid between Basic and Modern, and is simply the Modern seat w/o that big whatever-it-is at the top. (Not sure how that's supposed to even fit under a Canopy, since half of it clips outside the two we were provided... lol)
This gives us a realistic seat for fighters, with better lateral support and Ejection handles, which can easily fit inside a Cockpit

4) 2 things for Wright Runway please... Though I LOVE the new runway!
- [MODERATE] Not sure if this part had been tweaked as well, but the Runway Edge needs to be nerfed big time (toned down). I became literally stuck on it multiple times trying to turn my plane around, taking over 80% throttle to budge me (twin, contra-rotating 400HP 150in 2.4x cord propellers [twin 800HP basically]). Then after falling off again and hitting it at ~25MPH, it stopped me dead, causing the back of my plane to jump up.
- [MINOR] The Taxiways, I can't say for certain, but I feel like they're narrower? The runway can support a bomber or airliner easily, but the Taxiway (especially with that lip) wouldn't be possible to navigate.

5a) Give the Gauges a Transparency setting, to allow us to use them like a HUD.
UPDATED 5b) Since I see that a Camera --specifically Camera-1-- has a lower (base?) Attachment Point, and a slightly-higher (actual view-point?), it seems only fitting to allow that "higher" attachment point to rotate WITH the camera's view; up, down, left, right. That'd let us attach parts to the Camera's View/"Lens", therefore whatever is attached will also rotate when we move the camera. (unless that higher attachment point serves some other purpose...)

Things we could do with that?
Immersive "Helmets" where we can see part of it at the extreme edges of our view when that camera is selected. The ability to then mount Gauges, or Digital Readout Text like in the new Jundroo "Harrier" cockpit (forgot its actual name), to said helmet's visor (hence the need for a Transparency setting), which would obviously also be locked to our view regardless of where we look. Or, just so a pair of Aviator Sunglasses stays locked to our ""face"" while piloting... like I'm trying to do right now... lol
[NOTE: Admittedly, this might be doable with Variables and the new Joystick part, as in Nutz/One2's Tutorial (see: issue #11 in "Closed Tickets" section for link) mentioned we can bind stuff to random system-level inputs like a keyboard keypress. So I'm hoping Mouse Movement is also bindable.]

6) [General Suggestion (unrelated to v1.11)] Nose Cone needs to end at a steeper angle, not as flat as it current does. So many builds I've made where that leading part from the back with the "straight" section ends up ruining the lines, and I then fight to try and hide that inside the fuselage, so that I'm left with the proper taper. But since there is a slight angle to that back portion, it means I have to play the game of "Move it... Resize it. Move it more. Resize some more..."
[Solution?] Adding a Back Fill % which when adjusted, also moves the model to prevent there being a gap between what it's connected to (similar to how adjusting Length moves it). This would allow for the removal of that problem area and convert it form the Funnel shape it is now, to a customizable Cone shape.

7) [General Suggestion] Hell! For that matter, add a Tapered Fuselage part, that is basically the Nose Cone, but with 1/4 of the front cut off, and given all the Fuselage connection points. We can use it to make smoothly tapered fuselages with like 1/8th as many parts!

8) [General Suggestion] Symmetrical Parts, please for the love of god lol I don't even have OCD, but the fact that the Circular shape is NOT circular, bugs me to no end! T_T
Seriously though, the Circular corners result in a half-assed circle that has this weird joint where the ends meet. This is most evident on the Cone part, where the bottom has this odd triangle shape in the model. (I can't imagine this is a Unity error, but I wouldn't put it passed them.)
It's also present on the Hemisphere (and I imagine Sphere, too), but in a different way, as flat end of the curved side isn't parallel with the flat mating side. (I noticed this while making the shoulders on "Derponaut Betty", having to impart some rotation to get them to look good.

9a) [General Suggestion] This sort of fits to 1.11 but still labeling it General... It'd be great if the Wing Landing Gear (Wheel-4 and the new Wheel-6) could have a setting in the Menu to set the Retracted angle, effectively like a Rotator. That way if a wing has any dihedral applied to it, we can adjust the landing gear to still close flush (case example: the new Twin Prop) and have it still open at 90deg to the ground.
That'll allow suspension to work optimally, traction to behave properly, while allowing everything to look less-derpy :)
9b) [General Suggestion] And can we please get the Brake Torque added to ALL the Landing Gear parts, so that we can dial up their stopping power so they can be more capable on bigger builds? A single "Resizable Wheel" (default) seems to have far more stopping power than even the Twin-Wheel gear.

10) [General Suggestion] The new Wing Landing Gear Bare info text had me a bit confused with what was intended for this part, which is to be used on a wing we've skinned with a fuselage, thus explaining the issue I was having by being completely unable to get it to snap to a Wing-#.
ANYWHO the suggestion: Allow for us to override those whitelists, to snap parts anywhere. On PC (and Linux) it would seem to be well suited for this to be tackled with holding down CTRL while moving a part around (post-Click+Dragging of whatever part). Currently when doing this, pressing CTRL causes us to let go of the part we're moving (not sure why). I would figure for MacOS this would happen when pressing either CMD or OpenApple key.

It's Mobile that I don't know how to really incorporate it, but maybe that is a "caveat of using mobile SP", where certain things aren't possible? (Not sure how they handle the CTRL+SHIFT to move the camera super-slow in designer... Via multi-touch by Three-Finger-Drag? If so, maybe having it where when they're dragging a part around, a second Touch will trigger this? That way anyone could even use their other hand to initiate it.

ISSUES

Again, I don't think these are technically "Bugs", and I don't want to say "Oversights" either because that sounds really douchey/patronizing... Nevertheless, they're "Issues" in a Quality Assurance way, so in no particular order, here's what I've come across (so far):

Cockpit Canopy

(Specifically, this is based on Cockpit-Canopy-2 aka Block Canopy)
1) The part's Y-Axis coordinate is oddly based on its Hinge location, not the middle of the model, or the bottom edge (like one or two rare parts).
This makes aligning it with other stuff through Fine Tuner an incredible pain in the ass...
Why am I moving it via coordinates? Well...
2) The Connection Snap-Point is also in an unintuitive spot, located at the bottom of the back edge, instead of the middle-bottom and middle-back like all the original Cockpits.
Not only does this make connecting something to the back-center of it impossible, it also doesn't seem to even work with the Cockpit Base
3) The shape of the Canopy's back is... something that's going to require the new Slicing tool, in order to get that same curvature -- or I need to re-think my approach entirely... But that's not even the whole issue, either. It's the new 'scale' and that the Canopy part itself can't be size shifted through its Settings.
What I mean by that is, traditionally we've dealt with 'simple' numbers. Sizes of 1, 2, 1.5, 1.25 etc etc. I'm not even sure that the 1.6625 is even spot on, but it's visually as close as I could get. I think 1.1 is correct, but I can't say with any conviction that it is right on the money.

Generalized illustrated summary of these three issues; The chunk of "blue" where the red arrows point is where I colored it to offer better contrast to show that even with almost perfect L x W values, even Circular isn't round enough. Click images for full size

This one shows my second attempt to get things to mate up, and how everything just kinda... acted like the other part didn't exist... lol

"Can you please tell Canopy that I am not speaking to them, and that I was here first... Thank you."

4) Cockpit Frame (either of them) lacks the option to "Set as Primary". Or, if that wasn't the intention, neither do either of the Seats, or Canopy parts, but the Frame seems the best suited for that. Seems silly that we can build a literal cockpit, but it... can't function as the cockpit. That instead, we have to add another part (the Flight Computer) to accomplish that. Which by that point we, might as well leave the original Cockpit and XML it's mass to 0, since it'd be just as much work either way! heh

5a) Grip-Joystick-1 has 5 modeled inputs, but only 3 bindings can be assigned.
5b) Grip-Joystick-2 has 2 modeled inputs, but 3 can actually can be assigned.
Solution? 5a: Remove a button and the lower (smaller) thumb-stick, or add 2 more ControlBinding entries. 5b: Remove a ControlBinding, or add a second button; perhaps a split-thumb button that are placed to the left and right, such as <|> which could handily be used for weapon cycling or swapping between Air or Ground weapons.
(Note: This would be fine, generally, except with the plans to go ahead with a VR version, this will pose issues for intuitive interfacing. People will see 2 and therefore assume 2 functions only, or 5 and capable of 5. Perhaps the ideal solution might be for them to have a top-surface Attachment Point, for players to physically attach buttons to, allowing the joysticks to act similar to a hinge rotator whereby all the buttons follow the joystick's moments.)

6) ALL the Cockpit Control Parts need to have the "Tooltip" capability. If we're allowed to configure (customize) controls, like the Joysticks and Lever, to do various secondary tasks, then it only seems fair there be tooltips that can be applied as well.
The Button and Switch have it, even though they're small enough to easily have a Text part applied to label them. Yet, large controls which have multiple functions and such a labeling would make cumbersome (nevermind unsightly), lack such an ability. Just feels odd to me.

7) The Parts Setting menu for Button, the "Input" option lacks the ability to open the "Funky Trees" menu.
Update: The "Funky Tree" option is also not available for Wing Control Surfaces, either. I'm now thinking that this was not the "far-reaching" functionality that I thought it was, and it's limited to only a few parts for some reason...

8) Seems it'd be more user-friendly if the Text part's Selection Box (hitbox?) was opposite of how it currently is. Right now, the text has to hover significantly above the surface in order to have it actually be able to be selected again, which if you look at it from the side you can see that the text itself even floats well above the selection box. As such, moving the text down to the needed height, buries its selection box.
Thankfully... I've basically confirmed that just now, by inverting the part's scale value to -1 (which thanks to text being 2D, just mirrors it), pushing the text below the selection box and allowing you to move the Text Part down next to the surface all whilst still having it be selectable! :) {codeblock since we no haz Strikethrough)
----{NEW} UPDATE:
OK! So I noticed the offset entry that can be tweaked via XML inside the Text part's Label sub-category. as well as figured out how fine-grained the values for it at. As such, the above suggested scale fix is no longer ideal and I've nailed down better values for offset. Since the default is 0,0.006,0, changing it to be 0,0.0005,0 (or 0.001) seems to give it a nice enough buffer against a flat surface. (If this default offset value of 0.006 was done to allow text to display above gauge faces, then unfortunately that's still not enough and would require the user to Nudge it. So changing its default to the suggested, would at least make for less work when using it in general, as it can be placed and no additional futzing needed.)

9) The Attitude Indicator is missing the static "Reference Point" infront of the bubble. The same thing that's present on the HUD UI's Attitude bubble, that looks similar to: ¯¯¯¯¯V¯¯¯¯¯
Without it, it's hard to know what your attitude actually is. I recreated one though a Text part, but it's super crude and isn't entirely accurate. (Also the font's don't support Unicode, making it even harder to make it look right)

UPDATED 10a) This one is more of a Bug than an 'Issue', but on the Text part, there are a lot of characters that are supported BUT their usage breaks the Curvature function on EVERY Font except for Default. (Pretty much anything outside of the basic Latin character set it seems, although I didn't do much testing, but a couple extended Latin chars I tried did work [as well as that Attitude upper-line]; I'd paste a known example which does not work, but lord knows these forum's own limitations would consume them heh.)
UPDATE: This also happens while using <u></u>. The actual Underline fails to Curve, even though all the text does. Technically it *tries* to curve, as the first and last character that are Underlined, have it curved properly. But the underline for everything else is just a straight line across the diameter of the curve..
10b) Similarly... some of these otherwise-functional extended-set characters when pasted into the Text input box do not show up at all (not even as the 'unsupported character' square), but do display in the Funky Trees Editor. Just to be clear, the characters do visually work on the actual part, it's just in that sole Input box where they don't show up.
10c) Also, it might be beneficial for the Curvature menu option to have a max of 360 instead of only 180.

12) Regarding the UI's ""Camera"" in Designer: Now, more than ever, with the fact while in the Designer we're going to be PHYSICALLY "inside" our builds a lot more, thanks to the Cockpit parts... I definitely have to call out this long-standing annoyance/frustration: using CTRL+Click to move the camera view and not worry about selecting a part, is awesome; however, the fact that this capability is NOT also present while Painting and Editing Fuselage parts, is just... ugh.
PAINTING: If we're inside a cockpit with zero view of the Designer Background, and zoned in on your build, forgetting that you can't use CTRL+Click to rotate the camera while painting... Well, then you end up mass-painting whatever the heck the mouse happened to pass over top of as you click-and-drag trying to move your viewpoint! It happens to me often enough that I've at least gotten into the habit of making sure I'm not set to All on the paint brush!
FUSELAGE EDITING: While inside your build, trying to place and modify a piece of Fuselage, but need to Rotate your view to another side to know whether a change is going to work... CTRL+Click would come in handy so that you don't switch to another fuselage piece when trying to move the camera, just because you haven't exited out of the Parts Setting menu.

In both cases, there's two options: Either zoom out so you can see the Designer Background to click, and zoom back in while holding the click, so you can see where you are. OR, exit out of [Paint Mode | Part Settings] so that you can CTRL+Click to rotate the camera, then: if painting go back into Paint Mode, select the swatch, and get back to it; if modifying a fuselage, select said piece, click the Parts Setting icon, click Edit, click "Backward" or "Forward", and get back to it. (No, "Double Clicking" the part isn't a solution since that changes your viewpoint, negating the entire reason you went through that whole routine! lol) [/frustrated rant]

CLOSED TICKETS:

(Yay!)

!! SOLVED THROUGH VARIABLES !! 11) (pretty sure this is not a bug, as it probably wasn't ever considered) Trying to use Buttons set to an Action Group outside the range of the 8, fails to allow us to Toggle that AG ON/OFF.
It does trigger the AG and anything associated with it, but only if they were Activate#=0 beforehand. Anything that was already activated is unable to be turned off.
Similarly, the Button will not "Latch", either. It only acts as a "momentary" switch -- though I imagine it's the same reason behind this, as what's behind the inability to turn stuff off.
REPRO STEPS:
1) Place a Beacon
2) Edit Beacon's Input to Activate10 = 1 ? 1 : 0
3) Place a Button
4) Edit Button's inputId to Activate10 (via XML)
5) Spawn build
6) Press button; Beacon turns on, Button does not stay depressed (latched)
7) Press button again; Beacon does not turn off
[Huge thanks to Nutz (aka One2) for their Intro to Variables guide; text above = the link to their post.]

---

T.B.C.

Granted, some of these 'issues' are a somewhat moot point given the "Hide Part" feature in the designer, but this entire list is primarily QA/QoL stuff anyways. The easier things are for users to do, the more enjoyable it will be to build stuff, leading to a persistent userbase/community, which in turn means incentive for future purchases.
Also a company's willingness to address that stuff can also have a knock-on impact by making "fans" out of players, who will then be interested in purchasing other games they offer. In this context, "Time is Money" has dual meaning, as it indeed takes time to implement this stuff, which costs money; however, putting in that time can drive sales, which means money made! :D (And if you need a QA Tester with an eye for this stuff, I'm your man! There's plenty of stuff I find but don't mention, figuring it's known about and if it hasn't been addressed yet, it probably won't be... Or my assumption is wrong and the stuff isn't known! heh)

[Full disclosure: Just to be clear in case anything I say above or in a comment comes across defensive or demeaning sounding... I'm not trying to be argumentative or insulting in nature, only civilly debating by offering my opinion, point-of-view, or advice! I cherish all replies and views in order to further my own knowledge and understanding here, so I appreciate the responses! I'm definitely not hard-set in my view/opinion on any of this, so my mind can indeed be changed.]