Nuggzy

Having the name lock issue where creating one locks the name until you restart the game, even on deleted kerbals. Restarting the game lets you use the name again but weirdly it always uses the same model with that name. If you create random named kerbals looking for a kerbal you like after a few kerbals it will stop showing the image, it just shows the generic icon.

I added the system to 1.12.5 just fine though ckan. It looks nice in the tracking station. I am using USI's warp drive, it's going to take me 25 days of around the clock play to get there . Sure would like to see it up close, looks like I will have to cheat .

I just built a huge ship with 28 Near Future nukes for power. It maintains the energy just fine but the exotic matter conversion doesn't keep up so it will run for 54 minutes without stopping for charge. I am using the 3.75m Z-Model. The question I have is what is the top speed on it? I added the Strange New Worlds mod. At present calculations it's going to take me 25 days of around the clock play to get there. It's only supposed to be a little over 4 light years away. Something isn't adding up here . Is there any way to get this going any faster?

That's what they called the Edsel.

That's what I do, it's the only safe way to be sure you are saving it and not overwriting something else atm. Pretty much like the rest of the VAB, they took a working system and majorly overcomplicated it.

You aren't supposed to crash, but if there is going to flaming Kerbal meteors, we definitely want to see them! +1

I vote for KSP1 controls, this new VAB sucks imho. The movement tool is a disaster. You have to move you mouse to the right position to be able to somehow click the part of it you want only to have it click a part on the ship 100 yards behind the ship you are working on while trying to see that you are moving the part to the right spot because you are looking at it at some weird angle just to use the clusterF of a tool. It's ridiculously over complicated. The only part of the new VAB that is nice is the blueprint mode but that needs to drop the stupid camera glare and shadows. At first, I thought it was cool to be able to have multiple ships in there but then I tried to build something that would go interstellar and realized the clicking the next ship catastrophe of the part manipulator, which btw, needs absolute and local controls like KSP1.

I am on the forums and watch all of the interviews. I saved most of my vacation days 11 months waiting for this to launch. I wouldn't have bothered if I knew it was going to be an unplayable POS that was just going to frustrate me way too much to be enjoyable. I expected a normal AAA early release, the lack of content slighty buggy but playable base game to build on as usual. This game is not playable in any consistent way.

A couple sticks, a piece of cloth for a sail and a turd floating in the bathtub. You now have the makings for a sailboat on a high seas adventure, but who would want to jump in there and play with it. The term playable is a very broad definition wrapped in the normal CYA legal terms that is so easy to meet it's pointless for anything other then CYA legal BS.

Most games designed any engine require custom systems, unless it's the game the engine was designed around to start with.

I am pretty sure I am not. Being an Unreal developer I was curious myself so paid a lot of attention. When they first started this project, they were asked why they stuck with unity instead of switching to a much better engine. Their reply was because they had KSP 1 to build from instead of starting from complete scratch.

KSP 2 was not built from scratch. It was rewrote but not from scratch. One of the reasons they stuck with Unity was because they had KSP 1 to copy from. And they did a very poor job at that.

What you should be asking is why the version number starts with 0. We shouldn't have 0.1.x, it should be 2.1.x. That's the problem, this isn't even a quality remaster when it should be KSP1+.

So, tell me, in what game has it ever been ok to launch a version 2 that is just as bad(worse) then version 1??? Did they learn nothing from the years of bug fixes through community developed mods? And no, it wasn't this bad, at least you could get the noodle into space, here you are lucky to get it standing on the launchpad. This isn't even a quality remaster in an environment that is LOADS easier to program in than KSP 1 was developed. The tools we have today are much better. Not only that, but Indy vs AAA. What we paid 5 times the price for what isn't 1/5th the value in MHO, this should have been a limited time free access Alpha release.

KSP 2 is going interstellar. That means things will get a LOT bigger, not smaller, and will definitely get a lot more complicated. It's also going multiplayer, which means part count will be critical, so the current style of "MORE struts!!" is only going to cause tons of lag. The things they are doing are very counter-productive to the end goal. We need the minimalist designs for multiplayer but that means we have to break from reality a little. And after all, this is "Kerbal" Space Program, not "Human" Space Program, reality isn't real... unmodded KSP 1.0.5 ksp 2 - every joint is compromised, some of them severely. The uprights are compressed into each other.