Waterlimon

MM free gamies gib for me yes... Excited for explosions.

How does the full network look thru tracking station? Maybe they have some hacky SOI hierarchy based approximation for general connectivity in case someone feels the need to sprinkle 10,000 relays across the system (they need the full network viewable in tracking station with no lag?). So if they go moon->planet->sun->other planet as an approximation, it would give the path you get. Would expect them to override with precise calculations for transmission tho. I wouldnt be surprised if the path depends on active vessel from simple numerical errors, because of the distances involved.

You can still add KSP to your steam library, so you can run it through steam (google how if you cant figure it out), but it wont be an actual steam game. People online said it would get steam overlay this way, but that didnt work for me (I wanted the steam FPS counter... squad plz implement natively)

Procedural generation would not work because: Its easier to create content by hand when its getting as slowly as it is in KSP, especially since players sharing the same environment is nothing but good. The actual problem is that youre stuck at KSC. That is what makes the game repetitive. This wont change no matter how much you mess with the outer planets (which the average player will never fully explore anyways, I assume) The best way to add content is to: Add detail through procedural generation (not scale, not new planets) Manually add a few hundred additional planets and moons. Theres room. At most requires some minor UI improvements. And then fix the real problem and give the player 10 unique space centers spread across the system in completely different conditions/environments, that players get access to when they 'conquer' that celestial body in some way (commnet access, having station there, managing to land there, maybe buying it, whatever). Maybe throw a space center in space for end-game. Thats how you fix the repetitiveness. Promising content in the form of a whole new randomly generated system doesnt help much if half the players get bored while exploring the first one for a few hundred hours.

Map of every relevant situation where kerbals can be permanently stationed. Shows number of kerbals there. Include goals. Station N kerbals in X situation => Get reward. Could be contracts, but I feel its better to let the player decide what order to do things (stationbuilding contracts already exist anyways). Award reputation for stationed kerbals (could be a bonus based on amount of currently stationed kerbals, so it goes away when the kerbals do). For harder difficulties, if a stationed kerbal doesnt have commnet access, incur high temporary reputation penalty (goes away when access to internets fixed for the poor kerbals). High because its a rare circumstance and guaranteed to go away when you deal with the issue, which shouldnt be too difficult. Could be hundreds of rep. Add new tourist+ / citizen type kerbal, fixed cost or free (or even give you funds), who you can fill your stations (and the system) with. Unlike the current ones which just get more expensive. Limited EVA would be nice (maybe no jetpack, or less fuel). Update stationbuilding contracts to require them be actually filled with these kerbals. Add larger, more specific, systemfilling goals as contracts, such as "have this many kerbals living on every moon of that planet". Basically contracts that dictate the order in which you should fill the system, maybe with deadline, instead of you doing it in whatever order/timeline you feel like. Add contracts to move the kerbal citizens from one station to another, since now you are guaranteed that kerbals will actually be present on stations instead of them all being empty. Now, this would make stations feel less 'forced'. I feel like something like this (just tracking kerbals across the system and tying that to some rewards), is the minimal solution, and kind of necessary (unless a more complicated solution is preferred). Later on, it would be nice if reaching a certain kerbal population somewhere would let you do something like set up a small space center there (like a fixed location per planet, where you can build a mini-KSC if you have enough kerbals, fuel, electricity on that planet) Contracts could prefer bodies where you already have many kerbals, to a certain point, so every playthrough naturally gets a different set of focus points. Assuming the player plays along (people can always go against the flow, send kerbals elsewhere, and force the contract systems biases to shift)

They just dig a hole and dump the craft in there. Why bother bringing vessels back to KSC, when they can find new parts so easily all over the place with nothing but a metal detector and a shovel?

The only remaining option is to use kerbin to alter your trajectory (without landing), bounce around the system a little more, and hope the second intercept is both possible and slow enough.

In KSP saves folder, theres 5 (by default) autosave backups. That might be far enough to take you back to an earlier point. I dont know how to actually access them since theres no ingame way to load autosave backups (I assume you just replace some main save file or move the backup to the regular saves folder - but dont do anything without looking up exactly how, and even then backup the folder before trying anything)

Can you do some aerobreaking passes to form a less energetic orbit around kerbin before finally landing? If even that is too fast (ie cant slow down enough to actually stay in kerbin system after first pass thru atmo), then idk. Maybe pull some crazy maneuvres using the moons?

A giant balloon/airship-based launch / drop test facility. There should be multiple such facilities. They would either just drop things from launch clamps (like an inverted launchpad). Or they would have a runway. Or both. Uses: Test parachutes and other parts of landers by dropping them from high. Get to places with gliders, not requiring any fuel at all. You cant glide if you start at sea level. Make kerbin-based contracts actually fun, when you dont have to fly 10 hours to get to the other side of the planet. You can just drop a glider or a lander with a rover from a nearby airship (not TOO near, has to be balanced). You can still use planes or rockets, but more options seems fun here to keep things nonrepetitive Launch spaceplanes and specialized rockets above dense atmosphere (with drawbacks, ofc) Allow more interesting contracts for planes (transport things to/from airships) Allow challenging attempts to land on one from orbit (destructible like the buildings on land). Act as relay or point of reference for ground based things Ideally balloons and such would be added as player-usable parts at the same time. The facilities could be built using those, if some mobile launch pad stuff is added as well. The facility does not generate fuels. It has finite storage for that stuff. Refill must be done by player. Refill contracts are possible. Refill is not necessary for drop tests or gliders, since those do not need fuel. Perhaps monopropellant could be generated by the facility on its own (assuming its just nitrogen from the air or smth). Lack of fuel generation would be the main drawback. For practical reasons, mass/size limits might exist as well, but I feel like those just make things less fun. There COULD be some mass based launch cost (presumably the parts have to be shipped up there somehow), to balance things against ground facilities.

Could you keep ksp pre-loading these terrain chunks by switching through an array of pre-positioned ground stations parallel to the race track, ahead of the speeder?

My theory is that once upon a time there was everything and there is still everything because time is a human construct, and one of the things is the universe, and we are in the universe instead of some insanely complicated thing BECAUSE the universe is one of the most efficient structures that can give rise to life COMPARED to its complexity (sure complexity EMERGES from the universe, but the fundamental rules that it follows are much simpler), so there are more of "universe" contained in "everything" than there are "overcomplicated thing where potatoes spontaneously spawn everywhere".

Ah yes, your quadtree coding idea is easy to do (at a high level, dont know about implementation): 1. Take picture 2. Interpret as bits 3. Split in half in some way (so theres two sets of bits) 4. Interpret the halves as big integer x,y coordinates. 5. This is unique location of image in that rectangle of yours. The sequence of choices to find the image is trivially computable from the integer x,y coordinates. (first step is given by first bit of x and y coords, second step given by second bit, and so on) I assume you want the images to get "closer and closer" as you go deeper. Not sure how to do this, but I would begin by optimally choosing how to order the bits of the image when interpreting it as x,y integer coords. (you want the most significant bits to have most effect on the image - perhaps the image should be encoded as fourier transform, or maybe something like gray code where one bit at a time it goes toward the target, idk)

Lua was written with the goal of maximal simplicity and being easy to embed as scripting language IIRC If you use LuaJIT its very fast too. Though its mainly a scripting language, not used as often for standalone executables. And I would say a more strict language with strict typing leads to better code and more things learned.

Just make it a QR code that links to the wikipedia page on humankind