Bej Kerman

Would you like to go into the reasons anyways?

Sounds like you don't know what you're talking about. You can't say it'll be easy or hard to implement, because you appear to be suggesting you aren't a programmer.

Thank you! Btw, if you plan on making tutorials, I'd highly advise you choreograph these so you're not spending viewer's time on messing with the UI and correcting mistakes.

What?

You never explain any of your standpoints, and YOUR preferences are NOT an excuse to hinder creativity. Again, explain. And prove that not all players want to be able to reduce lag by using one proc part instead of stacking multiple lego-parts to get the right length. Prove it. Given the sheer scale of the rockets in KSP 2, why would they not want to use proc parts? And why would you not want proc parts in KSP 1?

It's becoming increasingly difficult to make my rocket designs come true when my parts list is cluttered with 50 different sizes of parts, and when there's 3 SAS module sizes but 8 part size/cross sections. There's only 2 flat adapters, 1 N1 decoupler in the 1.5m scale, 4 sizes of inline RCS tank that are each too thick to fit on anything that's not unreasonably large for, say, a trip to the Mun, only 3 inline battery sizes, there's only cargo bays for the Mk3 parts, only 2 engines for the 1.8m series, etc. Part variants are also lacking. The wings don't have a soviet style, the S4 series doesn't have any variants beyond the boring NASA-style colours, etc. Did I mention that there's no soviet style parts except for, maybe, 5 I found laying around? Can't we get Procedural parts for every type of part - rockets, boosters, wings, hitchhiker containment modules, etc. implemented for us who can't run mods very well? Like the mod, this would also allow us to make rockets with unified colours, and the parts list wouldn't feel like an explosion at the VAB. Will this happen or will SQUAD just keep doing LEGO-style parts until the list is too long for Unity to handle?

Looks out of proportion like the old sonic design from the Sonic Movie. If they tried to do a stunt with a rocket, they probably wouldn't be able to see beyond their neck piece on their space suit.

Is it not possible to add pictures so that this alphabetti spaghetti makes sense? Exactly how I feel.

Elaborate, please.

What do you mean 'special code'? I'm pretty sure KSP 2 wants to handle time warp, physics and physics ranges much differently than KSP's alphabetti spaghetti code.

This is about KSP 2.

In what way would it be hard? Thank you.

Still eye candy, like SpaceEngine has proven. Black holes could be used to do course corrections thanks to their strong gravity. Normal stars would do kraken all at 10% of c. All jovian would be BORING. Idk why people seem to like this idea, but no variation of planets isn't something I want to see in KSP 2. KSP 1 already has an asteroid belt. There's no dense clusters of 'em like in Star Wars, but that's the harsh truth of reality. They could pose challenges to crew safety and temperature management. There's already the Hourglass Twins Rask and Rusk, and ST has stated that they are making a custom solution for this binary planet. A protoplanetary disk could be a problem with avoiding debris. You're thinking a solar system sized field of tiny particles of dust rushing at you at km/s. I agree, but as a difficulty option (and as someone who wants to kamikaze their house at .1c) this would be acceptable.

There's no variation in that idea, it would be quite bad to make every exoplanet a gas giant. How about replace that option with 'Life-bearing' or something.

What I think will happen is that you manually build colonies until they reach a certain size oir point in the tech tree. At that size/techlvl, you can attach a part processing unit and begin building the colony like you would a vehicle in the VAB, albeit you might need drills and rovers that can scavenge for more ore. Same for ships, you might put a launch pad on a colony or clamps on a space station and build from there.

I think it has more to do with NPCs just being, how could I put this, foreign to KSP. Like how KSP science (or any sort of science) is foreign to Mario. KSP 2 should add the forgotten planet, but frozen over with ruins and monoliths all over, as and analogue to our theoretical Planet 9. Fun > Realism, so even if P9 turns out to exist, it would be fun to have a 9th planet or a rogue planet to aim at when practicing interstellar travel. While talking about this stuff, we should also get an oort cloud with asteroids that could be settled on, allowing colonies in interstellar space.

All they have to do is make the rocks blend in more, and you've got something 1000x better than KSP 1.

You mean as a graphics option? I don't see how letting you push buttons but closer to the crew would impact ordinary gameplay, and it makes no sense for this to be a difficulty option.

KSP 2 is getting decals you can place onto the hull, so why not the ability to coat parts with ablator, or liquid explosive for extra boom?

They should preserve all the parts internally or in their own category, and have more categories for KSP 2 parts and other mods. They should also allow you to convert KSP 1 saves and ships, so low performance ships can be run in KSP 2 for proper testing.

They meant as a toggle. You can't just say 'no' and give no reason to say 'no'.

Well that doesn't look like a real space shuttle. In fact, it's the most Kerbal looking one I've seen so far.

I'll go with 1.8. Boosters! If you were to count pre-1.0 versions though, I do miss 0.18 and 0.19. 0.18.2 was when I started and 0.19 brought a lot.

Can you repeat this in different words, specifically KSP terminology? For example, administration building, contract, etc.