ModZero

I really wish they just went with naming after function, it gives plenty of freedom in a setting where planets are made out of neutronium. So we'd have "liquid fuel," "cryo fuel," "oxidiser," "solid fuel," "monopropellant" and, last but not least, "fusion kibble." I mean, people would still split hair over "what fusion kibble actually is," but it sets expectations better.

They have been sprayed with seawater since 2097. It is imported and maintained at great expense specifically to spite the sailors.

Large Mass Assembler - Orbital. (I think dry dock is fine, but once you open the gates of creative naming you don't close them back)

I mean, while my preference is for rings to generally be "mist that hurts a lot if you enter it at wrong velocity" with relatively sparse larger objects, but with a bit of mathematical trickery you can ensure effectively infinite supply of objects, as long as you don't need to keep any data on them permanently. That's exactly what Elite does, and people actually map the rings. I'd actually love this for sparse-but-enormous asteroid belts, though I suspect the mix of "the asteroids don't exist until you start looking" and having a usable planning UI would be treacherous.

...as a person who used to help my grandfather with beekeeping, I am extremely angry about the way we're misusing the term "drone." I'm also pretty sure that, if we somehow survive into 2100s, there will still be sailors angry about the spacers using the term "dry dock" incorrectly .

Isn't Lua usually ran sandboxed? If so, then I don't really see much difference from any other complex file format.

will the planets be moddable with just config files or relatively simple scripts? Basically, will Kopernicus still be necessary? on the other hand, they've mentioned considering Lua, which is great, but will modders who want to still be able to use C#? thrust during time warp, it was implied but if possible I'd like to know for sure :-) will RTGs decay? Please make RTGs decay

Can be silly, that's why so many of us enjoy kids stuff. Problems start when we try to own it, like with the entire "She-Ra isn't sexy enough" debacle, or, well, this thread.

It's literally designed for kids, and maaaybe folks who enjoy kid stuff with a bit more "edge." It has little green men in it. The overly serious people spend their days complaining about the correct amount of resources in a life support mod instead of playing the game. And it has multiplayer now. In 2010s, a game without it would have very limited appeal to most kids. Most people even. But with co-op and base-building it has a really decent chance. And yes, it's challenging, but kids don't just play easy games. 9 year old is probably the lower boundary, but do expect plenty of early teens telling you to git gud on the forums.

In general, yes, but today might not be the best time for this claim

I doubt it will be an MMO. If your friends are griefers you probably have bigger problems.

Naw. The missing thing was multiplier first and foremost.

Rockets are noodly, though. Not super noodly, and KSPs joints are a poor approximation visually, but rigidity sets limits on rocket proportions. Most "real" giant spaceship designs go for pushing a spindly long ship because the forces involved are often comically low. And it's not just rockets that are noodly. Have this fun example. I also remember staying at a radar tower my father worked in, near the sea during a storm. That was concrete bending, thank $deity I don't have motion sickness.

...it's more of a game for 9 year olds than a game for adults complaining about 9 year olds, and if kids struggle too much then it means one of the main goals of the sequel — approachability — wasn't achieved. I mean, it's more for for like 14 year olds, but I suspect you were exaggerating anyway. And yeah, plenty of kids are into space stuff.

Is it adding <counts on fingers> 15 textures per part?

Low ambiguity, tooling, solid serializers and code generators available without it being a binary format. Established (if horrible) schema format and namespacing. It has plenty of bad properties, but general-purpose serialization formats are all horrible once you scratch the surface. JSON looks nice, but lacks comments, is in many places poorly defined, and it has number format inherited from JS, which can bite you hard if you handle large numbers - thankfully it's only really a problem if you handle really big number, but unless you're describing solar systems or something you're unlikely to hit it. YAML is an attempt to make JSON better, but between the references and the fact that it's actually a superset of JSON it's actually tricky to implement well, and enables horrifying structures (I'd know, I worked with Ansible, though that includes _templated_ YAML). I'm kind-of partial to HCL, but honestly, nowadays I've become one of those horrible people who think that you should just embed a Python or Ruby interpreter and expose a configuration interface in that language. Ruby has the benefit of enabling really nice DSLs, and if your users want to use JSON or whatever they can just use import the files themselves.

I'd say leave a lot of things to the mods. To me, KSP is a platform, so while certain things are unpractical to leave to mods (say, core flight physics), beyond that what I care about is "how well mods can do UI," "how much you can do with just the config files" (with all due respect to Kopernicus, Kopernicus shouldn't be necessary :D), maybe frameworks that establish conventions improving interoperability between mods.

Ugh, that feels like something that will just get in the way of what I'd prefer. And if other systems and/or mods use this, then the ability to turn it off might not really help all that much if I want life support, just different. But we'll see.

Huh? Where? I wouldn't be surprised, but haven't seen anything, and unlike the basic physical simulation it's something I prefer in a mod.

...every time I see a post like this I am amazed anyone bothers with ever showing a game to the public.

I "agree," I actually expect axial tilt to be either rare or quite limited in the "old" system, but also the new system to be way off the Kerbol's ecliptic.

> NIHIL INIQVIVS QVAM ÆQVITATEM NIMIS INTENDERE "Nothing is more unfair than to stretch equity too far." Well that explains a lot. Blocked

...irony is strong with that one. ...quite extremely strong. Godly, one would say. ...but why? And it escalates. Seriously, you're currently getting really upset that some people enjoy something, and a thing might not be for you. You know, I have a sandwich, and it's also not for you. That is... dismissive, patronising, and incredibly offensive. You seem to be trying to refer to accessibility features in games, which are good, but you don't actually care about what & why of such features, so you end up like so many people using social justice language without care for its actual content: saying things like "lack the intellectual capacity." Stay in your lane and don't pretend this isn't about you. Because you might just be talking over the people you just pretended to care about. ...also, pretending that you care about disability and then insulting other people's intellectual ability is really extremely ironic.

...many parts have more than one "module" in the current KSP, and heat shields have built-in decouplers, stock Soyuz tanks have built-in SRBs for separation. Parts-only mods (so no plugins) sometimes include combo fuel tank/decouplers (notably BDB for the early Titans).

When not looking at a planet or a sun or something, the stars are way brighter in space. And they don't blink. Figure's you'd be able to see the milky way better, I mean, you just need to get out of town once (I recommend it) to see it, and no, the atmosphere is not an amplifier. As a corollary, so many "experts" are here in this sub forum. Any moment now someone's going to demand a scientifically accurate flat Kerbin, hail Sobek.