What are the chances of being able to choose Scale or Radius?
Radius is uniform, a single float value, scale being vector can be XYZ, at least for geometry this would be super useful, since tp and pf both can generate a native scale value.
Without orientation, how would you define how the XYZ of the particle scale matches up to the XYZ of the sampling array?
Not sure about TP but orientation is free with pflow, and you do get the orientation channel in KCM now, so it is possible to get/set is it not? I am pretty sure pflow is defined in local space, as local being per particle.
Just saying that you need to replace radius with scale AND orientation. Scale by itself wouldn’t be useful.
This seems to be a popular request, and it’s on our wishlist. We don’t have a timeline for when it will be done, but anisotropic meshing laid a lot of the groundwork for it.
Thanks for the info Paul 
ah i see 
Always on the defensive with you and Bobo, seems I have a tendency to forget something obvious!
It’s been a popular request, especially if you ignore how I’ve been stuffing the ballot box. We have a particle workflow that allows us to do particle orientations pretty trivially, so this would go a long way to making nice space filling but surface fitting meshes. I just wanted to clarify with you so that we could make sure that all our requests got tallied up together.