Gaarst

I mean there will not be a way to view, download and install missions made by other players without exiting the game. I agree with what you said: the DLC is very much about sharing missions and crafts; but I don't think it will be integrated into the game, so we will still need the forums and whatnot to access the community missions. I should have specified that I meant an integrated UI or menu inside the game. It's what I mentioned earlier: a community-made analogue to CKAN or KerbalX. (As for the community mod repository, if we are thinking of the same thing, I can tell first-hand that it's probably never going to serve as a missions repository)

In the "Challenges & Missions ideas" section I suppose. Although I can imagine it being split when the DLC comes out. I don't expect the Mission Builder to handle importing missions from other people, but I'm sure someone will eventually come up with a mod to do it (cf CKAN and KerbalX mod).

For the parachutes press P, for the action groups thing no idea.

It's because Google's spreadsheet links are a bit weird. Instead of simply clicking or double-clicking on the link to access it, you have to click once and then click on the small window that pops up above. See the 1869SM link on the picture: I don't think there's much I can do about it.

The Wolfhound is a 400kN, 412s Isp, better looking Poodle... obscenely overpowered.

Tell me about it...

I'm done moving mods to the spreadsheet, so I've rewritten the main topic! The spreadsheet is now the main resource.

To add to what Harry said, the location given in the post he linked is that of the IVA asset itself, you want to modify the Mk1-3.cfg file located in GameData\Squad\Parts\Command\Mk1-3Pod. Edit: nevermind, looks like you got it.

For time degradation, I can think of DangIt which I'm pretty sure has RTG decay (but system failures), Real Battery which give batteries more realistic behaviour (but I'm not sure if they actually degrade over time and if it affects RTGs), Kerbalism being the beast it is probably has it somewhere in its million features but you will have to put up with the 999,999 other trying to kill your Kerbals. I don't know any mods that make science experiments cost EC though that shouldn't be too hard to implement with a cfg file.

Air molecules in space usually bounce off your spacecraft (they don't flow around it since you're in hypersonic flow) so I'm guessing as long as the intake is not larger than the spacecraft itself it shouldn't cause additional drag. I don't know how a regular air intake compares to a flat end but it should be similar. They have tested it in a lab with conditions reproducing that at 200 km altitude. They have succeeded in igniting the engine several times using only the atmospheric gasses you'd find up there, and they mentioned that they could measure thrust in their experimental setup though no numbers were given. You could compare to an electric scramjet since the airflow is not significantly slowed down but there is no compression of the air so it is not an actual jet engine.

I just found out about this (article is a couple days old) and it seems nobody made a thread about it here yet, so here we are: http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Engineering_Technology/World-first_firing_of_air-breathing_electric_thruster From what I understand, it is basically your average ion thruster except instead of a Xe tank as propellant, it has an intake that collects the few air molecules at 200 km altitude which are then ionised and accelerated like conventional ion thrusters do xenon. Applications are essentially for satellites orbiting in very low orbits (around 200km) for long periods, removing the need for internal fuel tanks and extending the lifetime: the article cites the GOCE satellite (Earth gravitational field mapper) which expanded 40 kg of xenon over its 4.5 years in a ~250 km circular orbit. I'm guessing most uses will be in various Earth observation/mapping missions where lower altitude means better resolution, but hopefully they will be able to improve on the concept to make it work at higher altitudes where drag becomes small enough that the thurster can be used to maneuver around (cheap LEO to GTO insertions in many passes comes to mind). No testing mission is mentioned in the article though, so this is probably still in very early stages of development and perhaps not usable at the moment.

o/ See ya. (I have no idea what you are talking about, but please don't leave)

Good news! The new textures are definitely better than the old ones and the French translation looks good (I spotted a typo during the initial loading screen: "Chargement des extensions terminée" should be "Chargement des extensions terminé", "chargement" is masculine so "terminé" doesn't take an additional "e") even though it is a bit strange to see every single engineering term translated to French (especially when excessive Francisation of new words is often made fun of). As for mods, reading the changelog, it looks like three things would affect mods: the change to a new particle engine, the texture switcher and the update to Unity 2017. I expect the first one to break mods that change particle effect (Real Plume for example) and the second one to break alternative texture switching solutions we already have in mods (Color Coded Canisters), but I'm not sure about the Unity update; will it break everything or will we be fine? (Pinging @RoverDude and @linuxgurugamer because they know their stuff)

The EULAs you accepted are the EULAs that apply to KSP. It doesn't matter who wrote them, as long as DEPORTED recognises them (which they did by saying they will apply to KSP) they are the EULA that apply to KSP and that you have to accept not only to play future versions of KSP (for which the new EULA will be the only applicable) but also older versions previously covered by the old EULA (as my earlier quote specified). They give you the right to disagree with the new EULA but that means stopping using any version of KSP (at least that's how I understand it). Make no mistake these EULA are extremely restrictive, but so were the old ones and so are those of any other game: they exist to make sure that the publisher/developer cannot lose a case (because of a legitimate problem, ie: hacking, copyright theft... not because people make mods) because of a grey spot, hence why they are so explicit. In practice, they are rarely enforced clause by clause and just there as a safeguard. To my knowledge GTAV was the only case where modders were sent a C&D by the publisher, but the case is very different to that of KSP. To prevent mods from interfering with microtransactions, developers implement DRM or straight up forbid modding before the game is released; developers of KSP have ensured that the game is as open to modding as possible and implemented several features specifically designed to make modders' lives easier. Backing down on that would be impossible without major rewrites of the code (you might as well make a whole new game intended to restrict modding from the start, but that's another story). As for stealing content, it's already seen as a terrible practice pretty much anywhere you look, from academic publishing to art, programming included. By stealing a mod or an original story T2 might save a couple tens of thousands on artists/programmers but they will be losing many times more on PR. And that is without going into the legal nightmare that would be justifying that simply linking a mod hosted on a third-party website would give T2 exclusive rights on it. Same as forbidding mods, they can do it and it would be very evil to do it but there's little if any profit to it (not even EA which is Satan™ Corp. according to Reddit does this). I like mods (if I wasn't I wouldn't be maintaining a list of >1000 of them) and seeing some modders willing to abandon theirs because they happen to have read T&Cs for the first time is saddening.

That is not how it works; per the old EULA that you accepted:

I'm an old KSP player so I'll get it for free. I don't know if I would have bought it if I had to: I'm not that interested in the Mission Builder thing and I've seen the historical parts done better (IMO) elsewhere. I'd probably have bought it if it had become a requirement for other mods; either way I paid a grand total of $15 for KSP so it probably wouldn't have hurt me too much to pay 10 more.

And? If I'm not mistaken this is from T2's EULA, meaning it applies to all games they publish but simply says they can put microtransactions in one of their games if they want to. Microtransactions are impossible to enforce in KSP without a major rewrite of the code, the end. There will be MTs in KSP when there will be MTs in KSP, not when the publisher says it has the right to introduce them in it games.

Then please read the following thread and post the relevant information.

I've added it to the spreadsheet, thank you.

@Gargamel @stibbons Oh right, I forgot it was to come with the DLC.

1.4 is coming shortly? I must have missed the announcement.

That was intended. All legalese sounds scary, and every EULAs are written to allow the game developers/owners to ruin your day. Even if you include the parts that I snipped, it still is very intimidating. My point is that even though Squad or Take-Two has all the rights on their product, it doesn't mean that they will enforce every single clause of their T&Cs as strictly as possible (as you said, they have altered the EULA several times). They can, but I don't think they will. Modding is a good part of what makes KSP alive, KSP has zero DRM, KSP's code has been written to be as open to modding as possible since the beginning, KSP developers have supported modding since Alpha, KSP is strictly single-player... Buying a licence and banning modding to force people to buy DLC (alienating a good part of the game audience) is a terrible decision from a business perspective, even more so for KSP specifically. The case of GTA V is completely different (a mod that allegedly reverse-engineered the game code and that interfered with existent online microtransactions), and everything that may have justified T2's decision to send a C&D back then is absent in KSP. Also remember that this new EULA is T2's EULA, it was not written specifically for KSP and neither Squad nor T2 have ever expressed any intent to ban modding from KSP (if anything, all statements regarding this issue seem to indicate the devs wish to keep modding as free as possible).

RSS is not updated for 1.3.1 yet. From there you have 3 possibilities: 1. Play KSP 1.3.1 without RSS; or 2. Revert back to KSP 1.2.2 and enjoy RSS; or 3. Use the 1.3.1 RSS patch by ZAJC3W, here's how: If you are using a clean install, run the game once to let it generate settings files. Download and install the 1.3.1 patched RSS here. Download and install one texture file for RSS, these don't need to be updated so just get the regular ones from the RSS release thread. Download and install the RSS dependencies that are normally packed with RSS manually. That is: Module Manager v3.0+ for KSP 1.3.1 and Kopernicus 1.3.1-x (ModularFlightIntegrator is another requirement but it is packed with Kopernicus). Enjoy your big planets!

When you are out of timewarp and controlling the ship, you can set SAS to radial-in which will keep it pointed towards the planet. However, remember that keeping your ship pointed towards the planet means making it rotate as the same rate it is orbiting the planet (like the Moon does), as timewarp and switching to another craft stop all rotations to make calculations less intensive, your ship will keep pointed towards the same spot on the celestial sphere and it will change its orientation relative to the planet when you timewarp or switch vessels. If you are willing to use mods, MandatoryRCS will keep your ship's orientation relative to the planet even in timewarp.

Please read the above. Scary isn't it? This EULA explicitly prohibits you from: claiming ownership of your KSP copy (2), having multiple installs of KSP (2 and 7.3), having KSP on a hard drive (7.4), using KSP on more than one device (7.2), claiming any rights on any derivative work based on the KSP IP (3), playing KSP in any form of multiplayer whatsoever (7.5 and 7.9), writing any kind of mods (7.7), complaining if Squad voids your ownership of the game whenever they feel like it (11). Think about how awful KSP would be if you had to follow this EULA to be able to play the game. Now think about how awful KSP was these last 7 years when this very EULA was that of KSP.