klgraham1013

Well, I've already replied to this post. Here I am about to double post. My bad.

I try to rotate crew, just to make myself feel better about it. I have to much empathy for my Kerbals.

I typically have around 4 or 5 general lifter rockets I use for everything. When starting a new save, I always build these rockets first. I choose which rocket to use depending on the payload mass.

I like both the new MPR models. I also think giving the stack and radial versions a similar aesthetic is a good thing for players.

I forgot about the damaged flag. Another piece of legacy code they can remove with the upgrade to Unity 5.

Yes to all of this.

I'd like to see them take the lessons they've learned and start from scratch. I wonder how much of the legacy code/mechanics in KSP are holding back innovation. Maybe a clean slate is what they need.

Exactly. I don't use autopilot, but there's so much more to KSP than merely flying.

Some people think simulators are fun.

Better for everyone. Creating an artificial money hole is bad design, whether you have rescue missions or not. No Kerbal should ever cost as much as a rocket and I'd love for someone to explain to me why it makes sense. Again, "there's free Kerbal rescue missions" does not excuse this design choice. Seriously, there's a lot of people who are fine with the increasing hiring cost per Kerbal. I'd love a reasoned response besides, "that's just the way you play" or "you never need to use this mechanic Squad implemented if you use this other mechanic Squad implemented." - - - Updated - - - It's not about forcing a play style. I'm trying to understand why you all think this is good game design.

The point is that they are exorbitantly more expensive later in the game for no discernible reason. It has nothing to do with the challenge (or lack there of) of keeping your Kerbals alive.

Bob and Bill aren't pilots, silly. Patiently waiting for MechVal.

Why do you keep making mods that I must have? You're really cluttering my GameData folder!

I think to many people are giving silly hiring costs a pass because rescue missions exist.

These polls are always missing the third option.

Exactly. KSP asks us to do in simulation what hundreds are required to do in real life. I'm fine with some automation of the process. Example: building ships akin to Lego as apposed to real manufacturing.

...but, what about self-driving cars? I see no reason a person should need a driver's license to ride in a self-driving car. Ok...you've clarified through more posts, still disagree.

Well, it's a good thing they put in a mechanic to let us invalidate their other mechanic.

I take my game a bit more seriously. I hate it when I lose a Kerbal. I also have spreadsheet to keep track of my missions, though. I don't expect everyone to role-play as hard as me.

It's a problem with Squad's aversion to time-based mechanics. A yearly budget would be much better than artificially boosting the cost of each successive Kerbal. Yes, it's too expensive.

So. About the whole caring if people cheat during single player. I'm not going to discount that opinion entirely. I can certainly see how someone could respect you more for beating Bloodborne without the reproduction glitch that was eventually patched out. It's an understanding of the playing field we're all on. Knowing the difficulties we're all facing. That said, I still have no problem with MechJeb.

Simulations are cheating. Go work at NASA. edit I basically just said the same thing. I was tired. I have no excuse.

I actually still enjoy flying, even after so many hundreds of hours. Just felt like adding my two cents to that.

I use Kerbal Engineer. I do not think MechJeb is cheating.

It's not a bug, it's a feature.