Bej Kerman

So their decision making is worse than I suspected... In what universe would having to do hand calculations benefit the gameplay?

No No That'd just be childish Because fixing the game takes priority over wasting time entering slap fights with unruly forum users. People have given extremely detailed answers about why all of this would be utterly pointless. All I'll say is that I don't see what any of this would solve.

And they are - either way, you gotta concede they are doing a million times better than Squad who didn't understand the important of dV until more than half a decade into the development of their rocket science game.

I find that the procedural wings have made doing things in regards to aircraft much more fun than before

I didn't see anyone complaining too much about the fact Squad relied on 3rd parties for things as basic as dV readouts, so surely something like this is a relatively forgivable sin?

We are

I uh, really? Well, I don't often find people who don't concede that the game in its unmodded state is not a very good way to play it. For a good portion of KSP 1's history, you needed mods to get dV readouts, which is absolutely required for spaceflight. So yeah, completely agree. KSP 2 has dV right out the box and that, to me, makes it more promising than KSP was.

I like the idea that the Kerbals, by their alien nature, are genderless, and we can't make any assumptions. But come on; they are obviously human proxies and clearly present as male or, less often, female. Hardly. A man can wear a skirt if they so wish. Culture be damned. All that means is that she didn't find a Kerbal that fit her fashion preferences. If you say the game is presenting men as the astronauts and engineers, when half the Kerbals dress androgynous and there's no labels for gender at all, all that means is that you imposed your image or idea of a default gender onto them. It's reasonable to assume KSP 2 will get a character customiser sometime before or during the release of multiplayer. That'll be the fix you are looking for, but it is a ways off. The game just came out and multiplayer is at the end of the public roadmap.

You make flaps by adding wings near the CoL that deploy when you use an action group. Basically, KSP 2 already has them.

There is no gender. It's a good time to explain to her that the masculine, feminine and androgynous fashion choices picked by the Kerbals she sees can exist detached from gender. Frankly, I find the idea of male being a default gender for someone you don't know the gender of to be just as regressive as what you accuse KSP 2 of. [snip]

Perhaps simply announce that it's common courtesy to explicitly state whether downloads are included or not in the title, without any extensive moderation. The term exchange is used here as in a telephone exchange. People weren’t physically trading telephones, it was just a central location used for the routing of calls. In this case, it’s a central location where people can post both craft images and files. Since a gallery would imply images only, exchange is more fitting term. You are technically correct, although this is a very unintuitive use of the term. The logic here may be flipped to demonstrate that while a gallery is where art can be viewed and sometimes collected, exchange implies to a great extent the circulation of useful assets e.g. craft and workspace files. Seeing as this subforum is brand new and separate from the KSP 1 ship gallery, perhaps it can be renamed. With the prevalence of aircrafts in here, and the previous points, maybe something like "Ship Gallery". It's also a bit of a play on words, as in the quarter gallery of a ship

That's just what modders came up with. Intercept's official solution to modding when that comes about will probably be less debatable.

It lets you find other parts even if they are in inaccessible locations. That being said, a search function would be nice, and as a whole it really needs optimising. If you have it open in the VAB, the game lags when dropping parts. Presumably it's regenerating the entire menu when anything changes? This is actually in the game. Click the arrow next to the GO button and it'll extend the stage display to show dV. Though, while it does show dV for each stage, you only get to know the TWR of the first stage under Kerbin's gravity. There's no individual stage display for TWR and the engineer's report doesn't let you set gravity and atmospheric pressure. That's all valid, but do give it credit. Calculating how the trajectory warps under acceleration has been a long time coming.

I know people are saying the devs claimed to have defeated the Kraken when they were clearly just issuing themselves the challenge, in a very tongue-in-cheek way as well I might add.

It's not just a remake, it's a completely different take. I don't expect it'll ever reach parity, given the flexibility of both the workspaces and the non-impulsive maneuver planner.

With KSP1 maneuvers, I can start a maneuver at half the predicted burn time to get a perfect orbit starting from the precise point I want (e.g., from Ap/Pe). With KSP2 maneuvers, I can't precisely time them around Ap/Pe because the maneuver nodes represent the start of a burn rather than the center of one. Not really. As I said, they predicted orbits and did not at all take into account acceleration. If you have a low thrust craft and you want to achieve 0 inclination, you have to start your maneuvers well ahead of the 50% rule else you cut your engines at a much higher/lower latitude than the maneuver would anticipate. Only in KSP 2 can you properly do a low thrust inclination change using maneuver nodes (image credit: @Draradech) The 50% rule was just a workaround for KSP 1's extremely flawed system that didn't always result in "perfect" orbits. It only correctly approximates no-gravity-whatsoever environments where the maneuvering object does not change in mass. I'm struggling to find the right phrasing, but I think @Immabed worded it perfectly: It didn't really deliver perfect orbits. Just an extremely vague approximation you can only approach with extremely high accelerations, unless you are dealing with extremely minor changes, like fine tuning intercepts. Again, KSP 2's system blows this issue out of the water. By starting the burn at the node, you can extend the burn without the start time creeping backwards, and the node remains anchored where your old orbit ends so it isn't part of the constantly changing mid-acceleration section of the orbit, which would complicate interacting with the node, especially when you make use of ion engines, and eventually, torch drives and interstellar engines, where the "middle of the burn" would creep outwards into interstellar space as you pull the prograde handle. As demonstrated in Immabed's image, you can properly account for burn times when engineering orbits. The new maneuver system does exactly what you say the old one does, it puts you in the orbit you asked for, properly accounting for your acceleration (and probably change in acceleration, but I haven't tested that yet). You're allowed to complain that the maneuver isn't in the middle like you're used to it being, but in KSP 1 you couldn't do what's shown in the image and time the burn of a low-acceleration craft to land you precisely in a low-inclination orbit. This is just one of those changes you might need to get accustomed to when KSP 2 eventually (and hopefully) takes off, like procedural wings and workspaces. It's different but that doesn't make it bad.

Which is why I suggest a subforum in which no downloads are required

That's flat out wrong and also implies that mouse sensitivity somehow has no use outside FPS

KSP 1 maneuver nodes are broken on a fundamental level, considering your maneuver as only an impulse. For burns longer than a few seconds, and especially for capture burns, the predicted orbit will be completely wrong. KSP 2 does it right and properly accounts for acceleration over the course of the burn. May I ask what kind of engine you're using to attempt this.... interstellar mission?

Pings an account that has done literally nothing for its entire existence KSP 1 development is basically wrapped up. You could probably fiddle around with suspension for a while until you find something that doesn't wobble to bits, but it'd probably be easier to put most of your gear on the fuselage like a real airliner

Perhaps image-only posts could be directed to a subforum to ensure that the spacecraft exchange remains a spacecraft exchange?

Forum user attempts to apply statistics, broad general things, to a very specific situation

Saves and ships are stored in C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\LocalLow\Intercept Games\Kerbal Space Program 2 now. As for extracting things like the tutorial mp4s, you can use unity asset extractors like Asset Studio. I still haven't figured out where the music and rocket sounds are kept - I really want to listen to these sfx and the files in SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program 2\KSP2_x64_Data\StreamingAssets\aa\StandaloneWindows64 (where th tutorials are kept) don't contain them

I've played the old versions a fair bit myself. I can say with reasonable confidence that there are rose tinted glasses involved here.