Flush Foot

Even with the 'expected' async style of warping many were proposing (I warp and you warp and eventually one of us chooses to 'catch up' to the other), I don't know how that would work in games where people had life-support mods (unless that warp was "resource-free") because if you plan your 'snack supply' for a 3-year round-trip to Duna and then warp-sync 5 years because the other person was doing a Jool mission, RIP to your Duna-crew? And that doesn't even 'consider' the eventualTM automatic delivery routes... Would they 'continue' through that same 5 year skip until all of your "warehouses/tanks" were completely full?

What was that? A parasitic social relationship?

Huh... I wonder if that is why I see "extra Orion cartridge" in my tech tree but not the actual engine(s) themselves... Do existing craft (in-flight) with repainted parts go berserk if I delete that mod? -- No, they do not

Yup! USI now being in my mod-list has given me back my sweet, sweet 'grippy' landing legs

Then I will hope I'll have it when I next launch the game (just thought to add in the 'Orion' drives and that had USI dependencies)

@Darmok do you know Jalad? I think he's over at Tanagra

Seems like Wednesdays are his "Studio-drama" upload schedule

Poll the buyers when "Dev declares current game to be complete" to see if that's justifiable? (Maybe not even needing to clear 50% + 1 vote, as if even 40% or so say 'yes, the devs have done enough already', that's giving them a slight advantage over "being held hostage" by a simple majority)

Kind of like Kickstarter then? Where backers only charged if the campaign hits 100%?

@PDCWolf I know there are no perfect solutions, but if the publishers had to 'pony up' a non-trivial amount of money upfront (or be locked out of EA-proceeds for a set amount of time), that could make them less likely to choose to use EA in the first place... I suppose another option might be 'well-backed EA-titles have an automatic 500-hr / 1 yr refund policy' or something similarly 'wild'.

Or alternatively, "if you are backed by a <major?> publisher/label, then you need to deposit 2-3 years worth of operating expenses in an escrow-account before we allow you to put the game in EA", or "if you are backed by a <major?> publisher/label, then you indicate to us how much 2-3 years worth of operating expenses comes to and we will hold EA-sales up to 110% of that amount in an escrow-account for 2-3 years of EA-dev-time [or 12 months past v1.0, whichever comes first] before releasing them to you"

“Most people agree”… by definition that does not mean “all people agree”, therefore “some people disagree”. I can grant Bej that ‘all flight-data in one place’ is nice, but Navball + speed being “in-line with” / closer to my craft is better in 99.7% of cases. Which dead game?

I am 95% certain that in a previous modded playthrough, I had the ability to toggle a 'ground-anchor' functionality on landing legs, helping to hold mining landers in place / stop sliding on minimally (or even moderately) inclined surfaces while also preventing them from leaping up when time-warp ends. I know 1.12 stock (or because I also have Breaking Ground) comes with a deployable ground-anchor, but I seem to remember having it on landing legs (such that I could action group: anchor, radiators out, drills extend in a single press)... Thanks!

Except for the fact that KSP 1 had (it sure felt like, anyways) 2x more biomes than in KSP 2 (and thus more chances at sweet, sweet science-points!)

FTFY As someone else pointed out, that might be hard (at least for me) when Civ VII comes out, but as I didn't seem to like VI as much as V (my introduction to the series, to be fair), maybe that's "a sign / for the best"?

Code compiles without error. Music plays when cues are hit. Colours are displayed as expected. Success! /s

No, but @PopinFRESH was answering someone else saying "all / a lot of these other things could be brought into KSP 1 with mods", so saying 'mods for procedural bits are available' is not "out of line"

See also: Satisfactory (headed for v1.0 / exit from EA 'soonTM' and (I would argue) Dyson Sphere Program (no idea when 1.0 is coming, nor what it might include, but their game is fairly fun, well-received/reviewed, and continues development with reasonable levels of communication, though it has been a while since I've heard anything...)

Also in "countries" jurisdictions within countries, à la Québec... <Looking into what our laws might provide for>

Or in other words, "Exhibit A" for some proposed legal-pursuits?

Pros Sound Design: I can agree that KSP 2's sounds + music are a good step forward Terrain Implementation: Not sure I agree here, especially with the Minmus "flats" not being totally flat (or at least, I seem to remember high-speed driving a rover around the 'flats' and finding deformations that did not play nice. User Interface / Feature: The UI in general is much better than the original; I have gotten used to the placement of the new UI (all flight-related displays in one place, exceptions being the staging and G-indicator) visual representation of a bodies sphere of influence: I do kind of like the representation of the other/embedded SOI, yes SOI entry - exit: here, no... I do not like this. Very large / "obnoxious" and I always have to spend a minute trying to determine if "expanding rings" is entering or exiting the SOI when I am focused on that next body to get an idea of my trajectory through its space. Part Manager is an improvement over the old system; it certainly has its place, but I'd go a step further than you and say 'Parts Manager should only be accessible via the app-bar, as with the Kerbal and Resource managers, leaving classic right-click menus as the default response to right-clicking a part' Load times [spaghetti code be gone?]: Not sure we can definitively say the code is free of long, soft pasta noodles, but yes, it does load fairly quickly (at least, now that the save files don't quickly bloat into the GB-range) Cons Colour / Shading: I agree that it's far more shiny / cartoony [not the biggest fan, but I could handle it] Manoeuvre Node Planner: I agree that it's less usable than in KSP 1... even if we ignored KSP 1 adding in the numerical/precise editor, KSP 1 at least had (1) the ability to push the maneuver to future orbits without first warping there and (2) could be 'intuitively and pre-emptively' placed in another SOI Performance: I will only agree that "between 0.1.0 and 0.2.1 so that's obviously some decent progress" Life Support: I know it makes sense to include some form of LS, but I still prefer to only include it via mods... I've only occasionally dabbled with the 'Snacks' mod where 'food' is important, but I haven't bothered with air/water/CO2/etc. because then I'd probably feel I was being 'overwhelmed' by dependencies and resource-flows while "Snacks" is simpler... X-meals per Y-crew per Z-days planned duration, provide enough snackage to complete the mission, with/without resupply or soil-recycling (though I do wish Snacks would somehow "automatically" add the Science Lab 'snack processor' to Greenhouse-type parts from other mods as that just seems logical... either to directly create snacks from onboard ore or as a 'more efficient' soil-recycler)

I kind of thought the 'biggest bonus' from Colonies, aside from yes, "easy mode", was being able to launch wildly oversized, un-aerodynamic craft from an atmosphere-less surface.

Isn't that better for the planet anyways? [Peacefully] Reduce the population a little to ease the strain on natural resources?