Snark

You nailed it! Thank you for taking the trouble to do it up "right". I'm sure your fellow KSPers will thank you.

What @Gargamel said. In short, do not attempt to be Little Bobby Tables.

"Everyone cheered!" "Awww, people are so mean." "No, I mean all the SpaceX people were cheering"

I'll admit, it does seem like an awfully gutsy place to park one's car. Did they... not anticipate the sort of blast you get from a 5000-ton rocket taking off? It seems like they didn't expect this much, or surely they would have done something to protect the tank farm, at least (either with distance or with barriers).

Some content has been redacted and/or removed. Folks, please confine your remarks to the topic at hand, which is about the mission and the ship. Commentary about posters themselves (such as their attitude, their way of expressing themselves, etc.) is both off-topic and inappropriate. Thank you for your understanding.

Various content has been removed, due to: personal remarks insulting language off-topic digressions Aside from the content that's actually rule-breaking, unfortunately we've had to remove other, perfectly reasonable content as well, simply because it was responding to the stuff that got removed. Thus making a tangled mess that was impossible to solve without just excising the whole thing, which is a pity, because it means that people won't see some of the actually useful feedback posted. We hate to remove actually useful content, so I'll summarize: A user raised a question as to why TweakScale has a pop-up with a CKAN message The author expressed the reason why The author helpfully provided a workaround that can suppress the message, if it's bothering people There was back-and-forth chatter about CKAN, which is off-topic here because this thread is about this mod Folks, please remember: A mod author owes you nothing. They're giving you shiny toys, for free, and nobody is forcing you to use them. It is inappropriate to use insulting language to anyone in the forum, but it's in especially poor taste when directed at the person who's giving you shiny toys for free, because you think it's not shiny enough. If you have feedback-- for example, "I was wondering about your reason for X" or "I would prefer it if you do Y"-- then that's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Mod authors tend to welcome feedback. However, please do so civilly, politely, and with a reasonable modicum of respect-- and leave the entitled rage at home. And a general note to everyone: if you see someone behaving in a way you believe to be unreasonable, please don't engage. It doesn't help, and it just tends to make a tangled snarl that increases the likelihood that whatever you write will end up needing to get snipped, if a moderator has to step in. Thank you for your understanding.

Thank you for the interest! We recruit, from time to time, when we need to expand the team or replace someone who's moved on. Typically what we do is look for members who have been around a good while, have an established track record of being often present in the forum, are consistently helpful to their fellow members, and with a clean record for their personal behavior and an unflappable, even temper. Then we approach them and see if they're interested. Some are, some aren't. (Moving thread to Kerbal Network, since it's about the forum.)

Some content has been removed due to: personal attacks off-topic content arguing about arguing Folks, the topic here is the KSP2 v0.1.2.0 patch. If you have something to say about that patch, then great! You're on topic. The following, however, are not on topic and are not allowed here: What you think about other posters' behavior or attitude What you think about the way other people choose to make their points Anything that's not directly related to this patch. #1 and #2 aren't allowed anywhere in the forum, because they're against the rules. If you've got something for #3 that's otherwise rule-abiding, feel free to spin up your own thread to discuss it, but this thread isn't the place. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content has been redacted and/or removed, due to: personal remarks trolling being off-topic (e.g. arguing about arguing) Folks, let's keep it civil and on-topic, please. We understand that this is an area that people (understandably) have strong feelings about, and there's nothing wrong with that. If you want to share your opinion about the game or its development, that's fine. Make your point. Expect other people to make their points. Folks can respond to each other's points, which after all is the (ahem) point of having, well, a forum. However, there are boundaries. The following things are not on-topic, do not belong in the forum, and are not okay to post here: What you think about the poster themselves. This includes your impressions of their attitude, motivations, or behavior-- anything other than what they've posted here in this thread. This also includes what you think about their posting history outside of this thread. Don't try to generalize what a person is like. Generalizing a person into a supposed group. e.g. "You're just like [group of people] who has [behavior I think is unreasonable]." Criticizing the mode in which a person expresses themselves, or the way they argue. If you do this, you're not debating the point of this thread; you're just arguing about arguing, which never goes anywhere productive. If you find yourself doing any of the above, you need to take a step back from your keyboard. If you're talking about a person rather than the thread topic, then you're doing it wrong. Either take some time to cool off until you can post something within the bounds of civil discussion, or else just walk away if you don't think you can manage that. And if you see someone else doing one of these things... please don't respond in kind. You're not in any position to address anyone else's behavior, and it only makes things worse. Please just file a report, and the moderators will have a look as soon as we're able; it's what we're for. Thank you for your understanding.

Moving to Mod Discussion. If you have a question about a particular mod, the best place to ask is in that mod's thread. (It also helps if you mention what mod you're talking about...)

We've merged your post into the thread for your mod. If you have anything to discuss about your mod, please use the mod's thread for that-- we try to avoid having multiple threads for one mod.

A large amount of content has been removed, due to being off-topic. Folks, yet another reminder: The topic of this thread is limited to the downloads available in this thread. If you don't see a link to it in the OP, it's not on-topic here, please don't ask about it. Volumetric clouds are not publicly released and are off topic for this thread. That's why they're not mentioned in the OP. Please do not post or ask about them here. Yes, we understand you're excited, and understandably so. blackrack makes amazing stuff. But you'll have to find somewhere outside the KSP forum to discuss matters that are outside the KSP forum. Please respect the forum rules, and also @blackrack's stated wishes: Thank you for your understanding.

It's not just a question of abuse, it's a question of you can't magically invent value. "Likes" are, in effect, a form of currency. There are a certain number of them going 'round, and people attach value to them only because they're finite. Imagine that we installed a forum update so that every post that everyone makes automatically and instantly gets 1 million likes. That's amazing, right? Everybody would be overjoyed because everyone would have tons of affirmation, right? Well, no. All that would do would be to completely devalue likes and make them meaningless. That little rush you get when a post of yours gets a lot of likes? You only get that because not everything gets likes. Since they're in finite supply, that's what gives value to a thing. It's an unavoidable rule of economics. Increasing the "likes supply" is only going to result in "likes inflation" and nothing more. So, although we understand people's desire to give likes to things and feeling like they "want more"... raising the limits wouldn't improve folks' feelings of kudos, any more than printing a bunch of money will make everyone richer. There's another issue at play, as well: Raising the "likes" limit would disproportionately give influence to the loudest voices. Suppose we allowed 1000 likes per day per person. The vast majority of members aren't going to use anywhere near their quota (heck, they're not even using their current 25), because they simply don't have time to read 1000 things in a day... but folks who are especially determined and want to make their voices heard above everyone else would have a very disproportionate influence. The net effect would be that the large majority of likes in the forum would come from a tiny minority of very "loud", determined people, and would become less representative of the forum population as a whole. And that right there is, to me, perhaps the strongest argument not to raise the cap. Our observation has been that the very large majority of users-- we're talking over 95%-- don't come even close to hitting their 25-likes-in-a-day cap. That doesn't mean they're apathetic, that doesn't mean they're not reading stuff in the forums, and they do issue likes; it's just not dozens a day. If the overwhelming majority of users don't hit the cap, then that means that the cap is essentially irrelevant to them. If you're one of the few people who is hitting that cap and feeling constrained by it... well, that means you're especially passionate and/or happen to have a lot of time to devote to the forums, and that's great. But the fact that you're hitting the limit means that your "voice of approval" is already considerably "louder" than everyone else's, and isn't a persuasive argument to make it even more so. Let other people have their voices, too.

Some content has been redacted and/or removed. Folks, we understand that folks are passionate about space travel and also passionate about the game, and it's fine to argue passionately... but let's keep things civil, please.

Thank you for being helpful to the community! Unfortunately, for various reasons including legal ones, anyone providing executable content (whether it's an in-game mod, or an out-of-game tool/utility) needs to follow the add-on posting rules, which involves giving it its own thread under (in this case) KSP2 Mod Releases, with information about license, link to source code, and so forth. (yes, we know it's a standalone utility and not an actual "mod" per se, since it doesn't run in-game, but there's no separate forum for utilities, and the same rules apply as with mods) In short, it's not allowed to just post a link to a thing, like in this post. Yes, we know it's a hassle, and we're really sorry about that, especially since you didn't do anything wrong and are just trying to be helpful to the community. Unfortunately, it's one of those areas where the rules are hard and we don't really have any wiggle room, because of issues around licensing and permissions and stuff. You're welcome to post your link in the forum, but if you do, you need (alas) to jump through the necessary hoops to create a thread for it under Add-on Releases, and then you could link to your thread from here if you like. Again, we're sorry for the inconvenience.

Hello, and welcome to the forums! Moving your question to Gameplay Questions.

Some content has been removed. Please stay on topic and don't make things personal, folks. The topic here is the game itself, not how you feel about other people's posting habits.

Some content has been removed and/or redacted. Please don't make things personal, and try to stay on topic. The topic of this thread is about Take Two and Private Division. The topic is not how you feel about other people posting in the thread. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content has been redacted and/or removed. Folks, please try to stick to the discussion at hand. Don't make personal remarks, don't comment on other users' behavior, and don't get into arguments about arguing. Also, please bear in mind that everyone has their own opinion, which they are entitled to just as much as you are entitled to yours. You can address substantive points or provide your own opinion, but other people's opinions are not yours to judge. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content has been removed, due to interpersonal bickering that contributes nothing constructive and does not actually help answer the OP's question. Folks, please don't make things personal. It's not appropriate to lob public accusations and recriminations at each other. Also, please try to stay on-topic, which means addressing the poster's concerns. In this case, the OP appears to be a player, not a modder, who is asking what tool they can use for organizing the mods that they use. Therefore, if you have advice as a player as to what tools may (or may not) be useful, then that is appropriate to post, here. Bear in mind that a modder's experience of working with a tool bears little relationship to the user's experience. The bickering we've removed, here, was a bunch of modders sniping each other about their experiences, which has absolutely zero bearing on a player's experience of using the tool and therefore is completely unhelpful here, even if it were civil and otherwise appropriate (which it wasn't). Please don't try to make this about you. So, with that in mind, can we please try to focus on welcoming the poster to the forum and helping them with their question, rather than airing your own grievances? Hello @TateSV, and welcome to the forum! By far the most common tool that folks have used over the years for organizing their KSP mods is called CKAN. There exist others, but that's overwhelmingly the most common. (I'm not endorsing it as "best" or otherwise, merely observing that it's in very common use.) Many people like to use it. Some people prefer other tools, and some (like myself) just organize their stuff manually without any tool. If you're interested, you can give it a try and see whether it meets your needs or not. Since I haven't used it myself, I'm not in a position to give advice on what it's like to use. People who have used tools here can give feedback on what their experience has been, and what they do or don't care for about the tools they use.

Some content has been redacted and/or removed. Folks, please don't make things personal. This means it's not appropriate to criticize a person's attitude or behavior (no matter how unreasonable you think they are), and it's not appropriate to use demeaning or insulting language about people just because they happen not to agree with you. Ideally, every argument could be settled in amicable fashion by people having civil discussion, with appropriate citations as needed (evidence, relevant expertise, etc.) In the ideal case, if someone has a wrong idea, then presenting reasonable evidence that they're wrong would change their mind. They'd be happy to get a better understanding of how things work, and everyone wins. Alas (surprise surprise) we do not live in an ideal world, and it rarely works out that way. Sometimes a person just won't budge from their position. Yes, even if they don't actually have any evidence or relevant experience. Yes, even when presented with evidence or relevant expertise to the contrary. You could say "that's unreasonable," and you wouldn't necessarily be wrong... but people have opinions and sometimes you can't budge them. It is not helpful to get angry or dismissive when you can't persuade someone to change their opinion. That won't persuade them, and it will likely just make them more stubborn. Accordingly, please take it down a notch, folks. Some people are going to have ideas that you're convinced are very wrong, and are going to be stubborn about it. You can counter-argue, if you feel like it, but you can't force them to change their mind. But making it irate and personal solves nothing, and personal remarks are not allowed. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content has been removed due to people making personal remarks. Folks, please don't make things personal. Address the post, not the poster. It is not your place to comment on other people's attitude or behavior. If they say something you disagree with, you can respond to what they said-- but it's not okay to go after the person themselves, regardless of how much you may dislike their behavior. If you think someone is behaving so egregiously that they're violating forum rules, then by all means file a report and the moderator team will have a look. Beyond that, though, please keep the personal remarks to yourself. Thank you for your understanding.

Some jokes and trolling in incredibly poor taste have been removed, along with the responses of various (no doubt well-meaning) people who would have done better to simply report the matter and let the moderators handle things. The topic of this thread is about the layoffs at T2 and PD. It's a legitimate topic of interest to forum members here, because of our concerns about ongoing KSP2 development. That's why the thread is okay to be here, and is left open for discussion. It's not a vehicle for making mean-spirited jokes about real people's livelihoods. Furthermore, trolling is against the forum rules (specifically 2.2.n), as is spreading disinformation (2.2.h). Thank you for your understanding.

I would disagree with this, fairly strongly. I think that KSP is a game about thinking things through and planning them out. And the maneuver tool is a planning tool. Pausing the game allows for more planning. There's no reason to penalize the player. Other UI works just fine when paused. You can switch back and forth between map and camera. You can choose a target. You can toggle various controls on the ship, such as whether reaction wheels are enabled. So why single that one thing out and make it not work? It makes no sense. The game is not about "doing things really fast and if you're not fast enough, you get a penalty." This is not a twitch-reflexes game. Forcing the clock to run while you're figuring out your maneuver nodes is making it into a hurry-up game. For a game that's about thinking things through, how does taking away time to think help the player or make it more fun to play? Doing so would just make the game more of an ordeal without actually adding to the challenge. "Challenge" in KSP is generally about thinking through more difficult problems (of orbital mechanics, engineering, aerodynamics, mechanical design, etc.) It's not about rushing the player. I also think it would lead to a poor initial user experience. If a user is new to the game, it's going to take them some time to figure out how to even work that UI. Giving them an experience where "you'll die if you don't figure this out this complicated UI in the next 45 seconds" doesn't seem like it would make them want to come back to the game. Personally, I'm against it as a game option, even if the default is "can use when paused". Rationale: Features are not free. UI complexity is not free. Any feature added is additional time that some dev is going to have to spend implementing, instead of implementing something else. Every extra bit of complexity added to to the UI is a learning-curve tax that introduces clutter and makes everything else incrementally harder to find. I'm in favor of having options that are important and meaningful and really need to be there, but this doesn't feel to me like it meets that bar. I don't think it's worth the complexity that it would add to the UI, and I'd rather the devs be working on something else. In short: I think they should just make it work the way the rest of the UI works, and therefore the way the player will expect it to work. Allowing interaction while paused is a useful quality-of-life feature for users, improves consistency, and in no way diminishes the real challenges that are at the heart of KSP. That would make sense to me. The current behavior feels kinda like a bug to me, honestly. Not only is it inconsistent with everything else, but when it locks up during pause, there's no visual indication that it's dead (that's one of the problems, actually-- the user clicks on a thing, nothing happens, user thinks it's just not a clickable thing and can't figure out how to work the UI). If the devs actually meant it to be disabled, you'd think there would be some sort of visible "this is disabled" effect.

Oh, I agree that you shouldn't be able to pause the universe while in multiplayer-- that would affect other players and would not be okay. This is the same as with other multiplayer games. However, I'm talking about the single-player experience, for which I contend that it is unambiguously the correct thing to do to pause the game clock when it's up. Pretty much every single-player game I know, does this: pause the game when the menu is up. The only one I've encountered that doesn't (Satisfactory) drives me actively nuts because of this. We don't have multiplayer now. We're not going to have it for a long time yet. And even after it arrives, players will still be spending plenty of time (perhaps the majority of time?) in single-player mode. (I personally will have no use for multi-player mode, because that's not my personal cup of tea, for example.) So: I agree that multi-player would work differently. But I don't think we should let the existence (future or otherwise) of multiplayer mode be a reason to have a suboptimal experience in single-player.