Bej Kerman

No they're all just people. And people can love up. And when they love up repeatedly, believing they will stop loveing up in the future is a nice thought but not the most likely outcome. For what KSP 2 is after only ~3 years, and given all the background content being worked on at the same time, I wouldn't consider it much of a love-up

It's a better alternative to fixed limitations that have no reason or rhyme behind them.

<s> No, because everyone is a devil apparently </s>

Such as making x number go down until it's below y? Believe me, a game about engineering of all things shouldn't resort to fixed values. If you are brute forcing stuff, that's on you and isn't an indication of how others might choose to make a rocket that stays together.

And this is what I've been trying to tell @Alexoff et al. KSP 2 is already big for how young it is, that's not even considering the roadmap features that the devs have been working on over the same three years as the core experience. Glad to hear it from professionals

The dynamic limit is mess around and find out until you find something that works. I would hate to be fighting arbitrary limits that have nothing to do with the rocket itself. Noodles aren't pretty but joint stress can at least be worked into something more realistic, and either way it gives you an engineering problem rather than a "make sure this number doesn't get bigger than x" problem.

Honestly, dynamic limitations introduced by your designs and their physics sounds a million times better than arbitrary limitations imposed by fixed values that have no reason to exist besides Da Balance

What?

There's nothing specific I need to say about my attempts to go between two stars using Blueshift crashing if I dare timewarp too quickly.

I run on similar enough hardware and get quite a bit more frames than this sheet would indicate.

Those are all problems that will either be eliminated or eased by how KSP 2 has been built

At that point you'd have to intentionally be ignoring them.

If you can seriously believe interstellar in KSP 1 worked well... Such as the fact multiplayer is in a working state and that many roadmap features were found by dataminers to be in KSP 2? Enjoy the high road while it lasts.

I like the retro look.

What about those of us that like it?

So it helps the game has been designed from the ground up to support it

The devs are playing multiplayer behind closed doors and dataminers have found roadmap features in good state.

The organic way KSP has evolved led to this. There are a lot of elements in the game that never came out of an overarching vision, but just grew that way. I don't see how an organic development would inhibit Squad from making decisions so basic like "should we aim the game at newbies or make players handcalculate things?"

Just because the devs thought it'd be appropriate to carry over flying by the seat of your pants, probably.

I have a hard time believing Harvester seriously didn't see the problem with telling newbies "here's a game that'll teach you space travel in a really simple way, now do the calculations yourself!". Did he not have a clue who he wanted to aim KSP 1 at? Is the first thing they teach in GCSE Media not to try split yourself between two audiences unless you have a really, really good reason to? Again, before that defense pops up again, just because Squad is a small indie group , doesn't mean each developer there should have been completely devoid of the ability to make decisions that make sense. Scattering important readouts to different parts of the screen to make quicktime flying difficult, hiding the alt-F5 and alt-F9 functions until they tweaked the UI flow for 0.21, etc. For such a fan-central product where mods and Scott Manley are the things that kept it afloat for long enough to become significant, Squad really didn't want to take their hands off their ears in regards to this 'decision'

How would the coloring not be possible?

What's the problem?

Like the fact the devs are juggling the core game you and many others are whining about and all the background features that are not yet ready for release? Or the fact they're dealing with technical challenges Squad didn't even bother with? Maybe even the fact much of the game they were working on probably went out the window with Star Theory? Don't forget that they are also trying to support interstellar travel using techniques that are being pioneered right now, you can't complain about them taking their time to implement object position tracking in a way that they can't just take off a stack exchange, when literally nobody has done anything of the sort before.

You didn't get anything in the first place. If you were waiting for a proper release that's aimed at a wider audience which isn't interested in filing bug reports, then EA was not intended for you. You made the mistake of waiting for the 24th like you'd wait for the 1.0 release with interstellar and all that.

I think the mistake in being heartbroken here is that EA is not a proper release and that the purpose of it is to gain feedback on this and other core aspects of the game. Else you'd have probably waited another 1-3 years to say you're heartbroken, and you'd be trying to play a full game with some of these mishaps.