Curveball Anders

There's a slight irony that TLA is a TLA for TLAs ...

For me the main reason to have a deep space station is to have a deep space station that I've designed, launched and made to work in it's intended to location

It doesn't have to be beautiful to work, but if it works it's beautiful

I might spend max 1% on the aesthetics and then only if it looks too weird. Otherwise it's all about function.

"Fly Safe" (or unsafe) has been a very common sign-off in EvE for 10+ years.

Nah, it's just another directory of < 5GB, but time might get a bit short of course.

Technically it could be just a craft file editor, with minimal graphics. But it's a serious bit of software and not a quick hack in any way.

Optimising the API, cleaning up old cruft and adding new better ways has been included in more or less ever devnote and every release. (Possibly because almost every dev at Squad also moonlights as modder ). Edit: But no matter what they do, the quality of each mod is up to the author and noone else.

Yey! Off towards the diner and cold pint. (In true KSP spirit I've bodged up me own access pass).

There is some small load that could be cut, but nothing major and not enough to create a stand alone VAB (aka EFT/Pyfa in EvE lingo) by just cutting stuff from KSP as it is. Creating a separate application limited to just building crafts and view calculated data could be done and would create result in a much 'lighter' application. But it's questionable if anyone would take on that job. Personally I use a copy of my main install on my travel laptop with all graphics and other fluff turned down to minimum (and all mods except MJ removed). Just so I can tinker in VAB/SPH when on the road. It works, as long as I don't try to launch anything

I roll the other way totally, not a single visual mod. I'm an engineer, I don't bother about looks, only about function (Well, Indicator Lights might count as a visual mod, but I use it only to see docking ports in the dark.)

15 currently. GameData at 395MB (including Squad at 377).

The difference between 'private agenda' and 'official plan' isn't very big in a small indie studio

EvE Online, Nethack, Civ 4 or SimCity 4. But most often I break from gaming by coding, so 'vim' might be the true answer.

I use the Kerbokatz FPS Limiter to keep my GPU from going nuts and running the fans to such a level that my computer dance across the floor ...

My post wasn't to state that it doesn't happen nor that it's due to other software. It's just that it's very hard to track down that kind of crashes (unless they are type 1). I don't know <explitive> about Squad's development process, I just know a bit about general software development. Regardless of how annoying the crashes are, upload the data to Squad, file a bug and fill out the forms. It's possible that the Squad Staff in leaning back, petting a white cat and giggling at us, but I don't think so. Provide them with data, and they'll track down the issue.

Congrats! It's a feeling that's hard to beat.

200 days to Duna. Mothership with 6000 dV in orbit around Kerbin, Duna and Ike landers designed and tested. Various rescue and gawker missions completed to make sure that my space program has ridiculous amounts of cash. Pondering retiring and bringing home my science stations/outposts since I've maxed out the level of science I bother about (I don't do aircraft in KSP, I prefer proper flightsims for that). (And a bit of coding and reading more source).

The problem is that too much limits blocks off people from even trying. And as I've stated earlier, too many options is a nightmare for developers. A fun challenge isn't very fun if all you do is fail, and your payback is dead Kerbals. Any game must therefore hover on the narrow line of 'challenging enough' but not cross into 'I can't do this'.

Spent last evening reading the source to @Mythos KML Reader so I don't have to write code that was already written. Trying to connect Kerbals to their contracts. So I actually didn't even start KSP last night, just reading code related to KSP

There are basicly two versions of "Access Violation" errors. One is simple to track down, normally an out of bounds index. The other one is a QA nightmare, it's random thread de-sync (stuff running in the background creating crashes regardless of what the user it doing). I haven't had many crashes, but since I'm a sysdev nerd I've tracked every single one trying to figure out why it happened. So far I've failed miserably. I've had crashes i VAB, in space, in the tracking view, even just having KSP in the background while using other software. My personal hunch is that it's the audio subsystem, but I don't have any data to back this up (yet). (A second option would be the asteroid detection sub system).

I'd like to answer "yes, if it was optional". The problem is that I know that every optional feature added to a game (or any software) adds complexity, makes QA harder and slows down development for all users, not just the ones who opts to enable the function. That's why mods is a better way to implement some things instead of adding them to stock (and I apologize to the console users).

I think it's: Building; 30% Failing: 50% Tinkering: 15% Flying (and most often reverting for more tinkering): 5%

So much this, and having fun failing

Bill is coolest, mainly due to Bill Anders ...