Bej Kerman

It's impossible to draw the line perfectly, however in my opinion exploiting it is when your craft wouldn't work in real life. Blurry lines galore

ngl thats sorta rude The consequence of having a massive mod is that the one person developing it gives up on it because they have to update over 100 planets. Don't say the truth I've learnt from ages of browsing mods to find most of the larger planet packs have been stuck on one version for several months or years is "rude". Unfortunately having your dreams crushed is a part of life. They're dreams and you can't expect to maintain this mod and keep it on versions people still play on. Scale back your dreams and make them realistic and manageable because otherwise maintaining this mod is going to be an absolute chore.

There was a thread on that... No sense discussing that here. I already have, I am tired of just making the same arguments over and over. So do you have an explanation for how it works or no? Thank you for explaining your viewpoints.

Exactly, eternally working OP RTGs and reaction wheels are just as silly as working mmH engines. If RTGs can work forever, why not mmH? Please explain your viewpoints.

Exactly, it's like Kerbals found solid fuel instead of sticks and tools.

R&D: Probes before crew, smaller parts like thermometers and wheels before rockets and boosters. Why'd kerbals invent SRBs before liquid fuel, rockets before wheels and thermometers after all of that? Take inspiration from Human progression.

n = money_value fetch n if n = threshold< then(VAB>launch>boringmoneygatheringmission) if n = threshold> then(VAB>launch>funmission)

So "non-periodic" doesn't belong in the context of interstellar comets?

I'm going to sound silly here, but isn't the non-periodic here redundant?

It's over 6 years old now. RIP PlanetFactory CE

The entire point of the Alcubierre drive is that it moves space, not the vessel. Space can move as fast as it likes. Also don't forget that the Novikov self consistency principle can keep a timeline with backwards time travel "stable", whatever stable means.

It's probably named after the much more famous deep sea monster from mythology. Well, see, I've been around for awhile (since version 0.15 to be precise)... https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Deep_Space_Kraken And, you see, it doesn't take much to use Google to find out that the Kraken has been around for a lot longer than KSP.

Depends between installs of KSP.

1t+1t Right

Antimatter on its own interacts with itself like matter does, so is that mixing 500kg of antimatter and matter, or dropping one bit of matter into a mass of antimatter?

Yes, it's an orbital mechanic game with spectacle and they're even trying to make the game more appealing to a wider audience. I love trying to learn orbital mechanics to fly my ships but the prospect of adventuring and discovering the planets + career mode is what kept me going. The difference is that you can't use any of the celestial bodies in KSP 1 to instantly transport yourself to another location.

Any 3D modelling program.

I'd say the best implementation is through naturally occurring pre-set defined locations of where there would be wormhole entrances. After all, generating wormholes are extremely science fictional. The best implementation is none at all. The game is about exploiting orbital mechanics, not exploiting objects only predicted by relativity.

Yes it is a game. As to the levels of realism, that is subjective. The problem here is that wormholes would sidestep using the near future tech to do the whole interstellar travel thing the whole game is about. Squad didn't know what KSP 1 was going to be like when they were still considering a warp drive, but we sure know what KSP 2 will be like, and it won't have wormholes.

But this is a game about near future tech, not theoretical far future tech, even if you try to use "but aliens" to explain the problems away.

Hyperedit and Kerbal Galaxy do teleportation and wormholes, respectively, well enough. With a much updated and more flexible game, I bet modders could make wormholes completely seamless.

No.

As much as rockets fly, they also come crashing back into the ground. In a game where you can't avoid having at least half the things you make go hurtling into the ground, it's probably a good idea to emphasise the fact that things will blow up in your face often. It's not like "holding down" (spoiler alert: you can toggle it) SAS can avoid all catastrophes.

Let me rephrase myself, doesn't making metastable MH count as an engineering challenge? [snip] - something that doesn't exist as opposed to metastable MH, something that might exist.

Well, its a rocket using "a material with certain properties exists, which almost definitely does not exist ". The performance specs are intentionally vague. Sounds like something that'd go under engineering challenges.