Bej Kerman

It's a shame there hasn't been any good alternatives for a decade.

I know what you mean. Steam have some game promotions where a person can play a game for a limited time. In the case of Epic games they release free games on a regular basis which the player gets to keep forever. Get KSP1 via Epic between the 6th and 13th and you get it for free forever via the Epic App. Even if it was free, it's not worth downloading. Stock, it's a half-complete mess. Try to patch something playable together with mods, well, how do you think 70 mods written by loads of different novices will run? KSP has nearly bricked this thing twice now, and you know what, I'm not launching it again because this game always seems to bring pain whenever I try doing stuff with the elaborate missions I plan. I spent all of yesterday and today planning a large mothership, and now all it's good for is crashing the entire system thanks to KSP's terrible RAM management. It's good Squad is no longer updating it now; the threat of working on this monstrously pile of messy code and half-baked (sometimes outright missing) mechanics for another decade no longer looms over the staff. KSP won't even be good as a trial for KSP 2. Save yourself the pain of ever going near this game.

"Start tracking" button disappears when I set my orbit around Bop. Do I have to do a full mission if I just need to test this mod?

Fun, Fun, Fun In the Sun, Sun, Sun

And neither does the SI light year, it's only named a light year because of the Julian year, but it's based on a constant length! If Earth's orbital period was any different, it would have a direct impact on the length of a light year. Guess why

Kerbals don't use Julian years though. And as an additional point, we wouldn't measure light years based on how long it takes Proxima Centauri B to go around its star just because the species there prefer to use Proxima B years.

It's funny I never replied to this until nearly 2 months later because I was never quoted, but here I am Perceived problem: low TWR Actual problem: thrust not possible when doing on-rails warp, and just generally the idea of a high-TWR mothership using 60s tech The idea of a high-TWR mothership with its own compliment of landers and stuff is silly until you're looking at post-60s tech like Orion drives, so NERVAs having a very low TWR just simply is not a problem. This is exactly how KSP is meant to work - low TWR and high ISP or vice versa, no free lunch. The problem is that KSP doesn't provide adequate tools for dealing with long burns. It gives you a barely stable physics timewarp option, but it doesn't even go to 5x nor does it have an option to use lossless physics in cases where structural stability is a problem. If KSP had persistent thrust from the getgo, then we'd all agree that the NERVA is balanced as it is. So, to reiterate: today's technology is low TWR and high ISP or high TWR or low ISP. The very point of the low TWR of the Dawn and NERVA engines is that you're not getting free lunches. It's not imbalanced in any way, this is just the way modern rockets are and KSP is designed to reflect that.

The perceived problem: there's no war, no driving force for development The actual problem: humans are too obsessed with hate to focus on development without sinister motives. That's probably for the best. Wouldn't want Kerbals to be tarnished, to be seen as something like Humans, savages driven by brutalism, only developing tech for the sake of... well, we both history in school, didn't we? If there's one single thing that ever keeps me going, it's at least the idea that humans can imagine a species that doesn't suffer our horrid problems with violence, without people making the complaint that said fictional species being able to go on without violence as a means to an end is unrealistic. That's besides the underlying assumption that a species focused on spaceflight without doing it for the sake of death is unrealistic, which could be considered a very biased and silly assumption given that all we have to go off is one single species, one that has stagnated because its inhabitants can't seem to imagine technological development without some kind of greater "us vs them" threat. I'm not trying to attack anyone or start arguments, I'm just saying that short timelines aren't a problem, and that fanworks that don't place war on a pedestal shouldn't be discourged. I always like to see fanfics that do say, yeah, if we put the unproductive history of the human race aside for a sec and start blank and follow the misadventures of a few aliens from a race that doesn't have the same baggage as Humans do, then yeah, it's completely possible to go interplanetary this quickly without the looming threat of war. Ultimately, that should be a message everyone should be spreading because it is possible as long as we are at least trying to imagine a future of development and peace

It’s their story, so yes, if that is what they wrote, then it would. I'm not a big fan of the sentiment behind "war is necessary for quick development".

Would they?

All the other delays happened before a solid release date came. We've got a solid release date now, which we wouldn't have if the game wasn't in a good state. There's also no more lockdowns and the game's already went through its increase in scope. If you're going to be pessimistic, then it's probably best to have some actual evidence that supports your pessimistic outlook

No sci-fi tech will be in KSP 2 from what the devs have said. Er, your assumption of how it's going to work leaves a bit to be desired. We don't know how the devs have done it.

But a light year is defined by the time it takes for the planet (specifically the planet whose species is so concerned about the speed of light) to orbit the sun, and in the Kerbal universe a Kerbal's standard year, the length their calendar says a year is, isn't the same as an Earth year, and an Earth year isn't important to Kerbal physicists.

The detail in some of these IVAs is something to be reckoned with, and before this I had 0 time in IVA. The stock IVA models are just so bland and underutilized, and now I'm hoping desperately that KSP 2 is this detailed with its IVAs. My only complaint with this pack is with the GPWS... "Fifteen hundred One thousand five hundred" ... "Twenty-five hundred"

Why? You already have gained enjoyment from the game for more than 250 hours. If it was recent, that would be one thing. When you buy something in a store, and a month later see it on sale, do you ask for a refund there? Next day, perhaps, but a month? 250 hours, at 40 hours per week, would be more than 5 weeks. Yeah. I bought it about a year ago. But I still think that I got backstabbed. Yes, Abel. You got "背刺" because the two pennies you pay for KSP 1 on its bi-daily sale paid for one game but not another completely different game made by a completely different set of developers. Harvester didn't even know about KSP 2 for a while, so it's safe to say that KSP 2 has about as much to do with KSP 1 as FNAF: Security Breach does with the FNAF games made by Scott.

A bit dismissive to the lack of variety, no? One hotstage decoupler, singular, is just absurd for a paid DLC. For a paid DLC that comes with parts that should just be part of the America-centric stock game anyway, surely doing a worse job of fixing the stock parts selection than Restock+ shouldn't be expected. Yeah, you can make ugly Frankendecouplers and N1 tanks using struts and fairings and various hacky workarounds, but it isn't particularly pleasing to the eye. Hopefully KSP 2 has some procedural conic tanks to do N1 with, some NOT America parts for once, and lets you pick hotstage decouplers as a variant... for every decoupler. Why is the only hotstaging decoupler in KSP 1 part of the horrid 1.9m parts selection, again...?

I think that's overblowing my expertise a bit. Quicksave files are extremely simple to understand in KSP 1 (the settings are written in plain English and the file itself isn't buried deep), and I suspect that in the pursuit of efficiency KSP 2 may not go with such a format. KSP 1 saves just describe your rocket in almost plain English as a list of parts which the game parses, and I guess there are ways to format saves that wouldn't take so long to read.

If you disabled revert flight and are now circumventing the fact it's disabled, just turn revert flight on instead of running through hoops to avoid a challenge you set yourself. If KSP 2 saves are formatted anything like KSP 1 saves, you should just need to copy the entire thing and change the mode in the persistent.sfs header.

Just ask a sandbox player. Or anyone who doesn't need artificially imposed barriers to have fun

If you don't know their pronouns, they is fine. If nobody relevant to the grid of gender-ambiguous Kerbals complains about it and nobody was correcting pronouns and everyone behind the scenes was fine with they, then it was used correctly! Please stop complaining about how people (or fictional characters e.g. those Kerbals) like to refer to themselves, because that's exactly what you don't want to do. Don't object to how people refer to themselves if they are fine with their pronouns. Don't call certain pronouns "annoying and overused" because, well, I really don't have to explain to someone in 2022 why it's bad to target certain pronouns and, by extension, people's identities. It's possible to say that freedom of pronouns is good and make it clear that companies shouldn't be in it only for the money, but this isn't how. You only had to say "I'm on board as long the intern behind the monitor here is doing this for the community and not for the profit margin". If Intercept decides to go in the direction of Outer Wilds and remove gender from Kerbals entirely and this is just a breadcrumb hinting at that kind of decision, then I'm entirely fine with that anyway, and before anyone brings up boom events, there's no reason boom event reproduction has to be gendered ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ This had not come through yet when I was still writing this. Apologies.

You paid for KSP 1 and got a decade of updates. Now you have to pay in order to play an entirely different game that isn't built on spaghetti code, with many times more content, new gameplay loops, and polish?? Buying KSP 1 wasn't a free pass to get everything else on Steam.

What reason does this have to exist? KSP 2 is not built on spaghetti code. "60fps" and moderately sized rockets aren't mutually exclusive. Orbital mechanics doesn't even have a notable impact on framerate. So, difficulty

I doubt the KSC is a colony or is made up of colony parts. Why would it be? It's on the Kerbin home world. And? It's a space center that you will be upgrading. There are different ways to handle that from perspective of both the game code and design. While it seems reasonable at first to just make it a colony to conserve the effort of re-implementing the build system for KSC expansion/upgrades, the fact that KSC has a lot of custom structures might make it too complex. E.g., I'm pretty sure runways at KSC aren't going to be built out of colony tiles, in which case, you wouldn't be able to expand these trivially. So the KSC might not be a colony for the purposes of how things will be built. Though, I'm sure a lot of the code and assets will be shared, so I have no idea how much of a distinction there would really be. Fair enough. But it will be weird if all the other colonies upgrade and expand in a dynamic-ish way while the KSC just sits there somewhat static with predetermined upgrade levels and runways that can't be expanded or cut down.

Since there's no reason you'd need to store an interstellar vehicle in its entirety, I just figured nobody was talking about storing interstellar vehicles, rather just talking about storing smaller things Assuming we can put a colony right in the center of the KSC. Implying the KSC isn't a colony? It only makes sense that in KSP 2 the KSC will be a colony made from parts available to other colonies,

This is the KSP 2 subforum