Bej Kerman

I was saying it's not that hard if you know what you are doing It can take really only 10 minutes to make a flag and drop it into the game. I don't think an ingame software would be the right answer, that's because why spend your time making a vector software in the game when many companies already have done that for you for free? I don't think it's a good use of their time. Especially if you have software like Google Drawings or GIMP or Paint.net. Why do you need to make a painting software ingame when you already have three amazing free softwares. 10 minutes is a lot of time to spend on a flag.

May I ask, how does this slip past the playtesters?

I'd still (and also) like to know hiow. Orbital Construction is way too nerfed for my tastes. Bug in the game is preventing me from undocking my landers from a space station, unfortunately I can't break the connection manually because of 'part connections' or some silly arbitrary reason like that. Devs, why?

I agree, the devs told people about the game way too early and the best thing for them to do is to shut their mouths ...or maybe they could release the game and follow KSP 1's public development model? Rather than some corporate cinematics, spliced with a bit of gameplay and a few narrators telling us one paragraph of information in 6?

I don't really care, there isn't a worse way to retain the few drops of hype some of the people here still have.

Largely down to the developers of either version. Simple Rockets has proven that a mobile port would be possible if KSP wasn't built on jelly and gravel.

I find it not too hard to make flags. Just know where to drop them in. If you need a place where to make flags in an easy way I recommend Google Drawings I'm not sure who asked, but that's not what this thread is about. We know we can do it externally, but it'd be better to have ingame tools to help with the process.

1. Daedelus Daedalus 2. Why though?

For the hundredth time on this forum I shall say what I've been using this pod for years and I never noticed any RCS thruster effect, I was sure that these vents were purely for aesthetic purposes. In 1.4, the capsule was revamped as you probably know, and RCS thrusters were integrated. I've used the integrated thrusters a few times to help get my Kerbals back home after using up a tight fuel budget.

Why does it feel off? Not like we're working with spaceships several kilometres long and complicated orbital physics. I don't think complexity and difficulty are reasons to leave skyhooks out as the 1st game is already complex and difficult. I mean, why did Squad bother adding the Kerbol system beyond Kerbin and its moons all the way back in 0.17 if it's too difficult for even many of the players here?

A bit vague.

It's hard to be hyped towards a game behind locked doors. I'd be more hyped if its development was public like KSP 1 and I could actually have a reason to look forward to updates.

Don't remember what he said exactly, but wasn't it essentially that the force from acceleration would overcome the gravitational force keeping the planet bound? That, but also you'd use up all the fuel I.E. the entire planet after a few years.

https://youtu.be/Dgu1syQP124 TL;DW: Trying to use any planet as a rocket would destroy it.

Unless you do it Wandering Earth style. eg: hundreds of thousands of massive fusion engines that somehow run off of rocks. Fortunately, nothing we've observed has that many colossal volcanoes erupting 24/7.

And that's why no-one finds the idea appealing.

Why does this mod need to overwrite so many game files?

Yes, why not enable everything in the cheat menu by default as a 'joke'? "Make it unrealistic" won't make your ideas any less bad as the entire point of KSP is that even the most unrealistic parts of the game are semi-realistic. IRL you won't find 600km dwarf planets with a thick atmosphere and 1g of gravity, but the way the laws of physics are set up in KSP allows most physics to mirror the real world decently. But, in either universe, moving planets is an absurd and silly idea. Claiming it's a joke doesn't make it any less absurd or any more logical.

Is there any specific reason this isn't on CKAN?

DITTO! Same issue and the uncontrolled bouncing when stopped on the water! Most of my activity in KSP doesn't involve water. If I decide to use this mod in 1.11, is there anything else I should know before using it?

If we're going by Kerbal rules, the joints aren't strong enough to withstand a structure that's sufficiently tall, except on worlds where you can take off with a few puffs of RCS from, so why? But, I mean, if you want to get down to the point of doing it for the lulz, you can build a trebuchet on an asteroid in KSP already. I'm sure there will be more opportunities for shenanigans like that in KSP2. That's just not what I'd call a space elevator. Okay, space elevators are bonkers. Is there any other system that can get things to orbit with 0 fuel?

The cost of sending the rockets up on a magrail that is laying flat along the surface of the moon is orders of magnitude lower. Telling from VAB screenshots that show ore requirements for parts rather than money, the only thing stopping Kerbals from making a space elevator is the local amount of resources. With planetary infrastructure, there's nothing really stopping Kerbals from making one for the fun of it, as long as it's scientifically, rather than economically, viable. Besides, we're assuming that these would be built on Tylo or Duna. Space elevators would really shine on Gilly, Bop and Pol where maglevs (if any) would be used for operations beyond orbit instead.

What's Kerbium? A sugarcoated Unobtainium? The point is that the cost of sending said small rocks on space elevators is that it'll be cheaper than sending them on big oil barrels in the long run. If you could have a theoretical launcher that uses no fuel but takes in electricity only and has a large one-time cost for the construction, then it would get cheaper than even the most reusable oil barrels.

What happens if you use BG rotors and grip pads instead of Squad's horrid excuse for wheels?

Typical I'd say the only engine related things to be left out are warp drives. They go way beyond the tech capabilities shown in the trailers and they're also way beyond the game's technology, being set only a few centuries ahead of ours.