mcwaffles2003

A bit, but there are no thermal nozzles in FFT like in IE where you can just feed a propellant through a reactor and expel it to create thrust.

Not to mention how would playing and racing against an AI even work? The concept seems very messy.

As a player who's been wanting multiplayer and has been teased by talks of including it in KSP 1 with updates, I would simply find this an admission that multiplayer will not be included ever and that would genuinely affect my rationale to buying the game when KSP 1 does me fine as is

o·ver·re·act /ˌōvə(r)rēˈakt/ Learn to pronounce verb gerund or present participle: overreacting respond more emotionally or forcibly than is justified.

I don't think we have any reason to think a mechanic like that would exist in this game.

Yes please.

if there's multiple trains on a schedule, individual trip times will be meaningless and it will all come down to an economy of energy That's a pretty unique rickroll and i love it... BTW... the game

That's been that standard cost for a non-indie game since like the year 2000. I'm honestly shocked that AAA games today aren't $150 seeing as how much larger dev studios have gotten and the amount of work that goes into them now compared to then.

Based on this graph shouldn't it have released back in like 2018 then?

Just as KSP showcased a variety of planet types in the kerbal system, I'm assuming, along with the increased scope of KSP 2, that we will similarly now see a variety of star system types. Some of what I'm expecting or hoping to see would be: The Kerbal system A young system where many of the planets have rings since we heard Nate talking about that in one of the first dev diary episodes (I expect here is where we will find rask and rusk) A system with a red giant star A system with a red dwarf star An all Jovian system A binary star system Possibly

The devs deserve the to get paid for making a good game. $60 isn't that bad for what anyone can get out of it... That's like 1/3 the cost of a couple of nice beers and a burger at a bar

@K^2 Is the point of preserving lamda to still allow sheering events to still occur where the two parts of the welded pair join? I would just figure not allowing fractures at all at any of these points to keep it simple and reduce the total calculations.

Isn't that the point of making them non joints? I don't think it would be kerbal without bendy rockets. Without it aerodynamic stresses wouldn't behave correctly at all, though less bending would be nice as the extents of bending we see in game can get extreme. It's already confirmed colonies will not be single rigid bodies though, so there can be failures to stop people from making completely crazy builds like a long plank base over a pit and it hopefully can add fun to the process. I'd wager a lot of the stress and unevenness will be solved with the posts that join the

Why is it that percentages in forum polls are based on (votes for option/total votes) instead of (votes for option/total voters)? As is now if a multiple choice poll has 4 options and everyone voting chooses all the choices then all 4 choices will show 25% despite 100% approval. All this does is effectively shrink a graph and hide the minute differences in polls with lots of options and a poll with 20 options barely sees an option go above 5% despite taking on a large majority of the votes. If the latter were implemented it would make reading poll results more easy and intuitive to

past few days...