ExtremeSquared

One issue with your plan. In 1.0, the thermometer would explode from core / conductive / radiative overheating before most other parts would. I like to think this was on purpose, to be funny.

It may have been fixed by now, but a couple versions ago, the core game couldn't handle a TWR below a certain level, most likely due to FP inaccuracies. Acceleration would round to 0 when pushing asteroids with a single ion, and the xenon would drain away for 0 delta V.

The idea that a motivated KSP player couldn't bring any CPU to its knees is absurd. Any CPU within the next 5 years even. I use KJR and SpaceY. It's not because I need to cheat. I've built web-of-struts 2.5m monsters that would go to eeloo and moho in 0.22. I've proven I can. I've done my time. Now I can build 7.5m launchers with one fifth of the part count, a few struts, and triple the frame rate for the same deltaV.

Bugs with time warp cause havok with conducted heat even in stock. It wouldn't surprise me if it's due to craft heat.

In theory, a low cost / (payload*deltaV) could make SSTOS and Space Shuttles attractive. This is a video game though. More and more I am considering (cost * part count) / (payload * deltaV). Even in career mode, I just have more fun flying a slightly more expensive 20 frames per second rocket than a frugal 5 frames per second spaceplane.

That's a nonsensical time in the screenshot. I don't think NASA has ever used the scrambled US civilian date format.

Rendering artifact. Thought it could be a Dark Side of the Moon reference but the angles are wrong for both the album cover and optical physics. Landed where the right "ray" meets the right side of the triangle. Location 9deg23m15N, 60deg32m28E

I'd love to be able to downgrade to the lowest tier runway at some point. Later on in career the technology required to build bushplanes has been unlocked.

They aren't 100% thrust in reverse. Almost as strong. Probably 80-90%

A C17 will drop like a rock on final approach.

This seems questionable.

The ridiculous thing is when the thermometer overheats and explodes from radiative heat. I'm glad that wasn't a manned mission.

I briefly had an isru mining operation where I had to land a fuel shuttle directly on top of a docking port sr from orbit. I trashed the whole system about 3 successful landings in. Wasn't good for my sanity.

7.5m landers are a bit ridiculous. Never landed on a lander before.

Yes. It's well below average in polish and stability. It's so above average in fun and innovation that it's easy to lose sight of this fact. Edit: Then again, I don't play that many video games any more, so it's possible that stability standards have gone downhill over the past few years.

We should be honest with ourselves here. The beta testing nature of this game is something that should be better advertised to new buyers. We were ready to deal with it. Not everyone is.

The price per hour played is pretty low for most of us. This isn't a 10-hour shoot em up. If I were a new purchaser, I'd hold off for a month or two anyway, though, because a recent platform change has riddled the game with bugs. This is not a good version to start on. It will probably be more stable by the steam summer sale. Waiting is a win-win.

Kerbal Alarm Clock. Because this is how NASA spends 6 years going to Moho: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MESSENGER#/media/File:MESSENGER_trajectory.svg

What we need is competition. EA Games... EA Sports... EA Space?

Of course. Polls were taken on here during the 1.0 release. The vast majority of this forum agreed the 1.0 release was a very silly thing. I don't think this is very controversial.

The pendulum fallacy applies to rigid rockets though. The rubbery rockets of KSP end up bending out of alignment in compression, but tension acts to straighten them out. Using KJR mod makes the whole thing less of an issue.

New people are the only ones that have a right to complain. The rest of us signed up as beta testers by buying the game in beta.

It was a mistake to release 1.0. Most of us on here at the time predicted that, but we were already on board with dealing with a messy alpha product until completion. This leaves the post-1.0-release buyers though. An informed post-1.0 buyer should hopefully be able to see reviews, and this forum, and realize that this game is not finished.

It was a "release" in name only. I feel bad for people who didn't realize that, but the timing of the "release" was regarded as sort of a joke in the community, and a little bit of searching would have revealed this to new potential purchasers. It's still a de facto Early access, and I trust them not to abandon it.

People don't realize this is still a de facto Early Access game. There will be bugs and they will be fixed. It's being run just fine for an Early Access project.