Corona688

Well... Torchships aren't real.

Hydrogen is a pain in the ass and all but unstorable - it goes THROUGH solid metal like a colander! -- and because of that pretty dangerous ... It still gets used because its low atomic mass translates into high exhaust velocity. Hence its use in upper stages where efficiency is king but there's no need to store it for longer than a few hours.

Quite a few useful and specific definitions here: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/torchships.php But generally means output power in the gigawatts to terawatts range (space shuttle launch is double-digit gigawatts), 1+G acceleration sustained for days to weeks on end, and ISP in the high thousands.

Make a node, warp to node, problem solved

It's not a question of simple rocket mechanics because of drag. It wouldn't be one equation, it'd be an integration of calculations over time.

Pretty sure the VAB is sensitive to impact velocity. A pair of 20-ton solids hitting it on full thrust? Nothing. A high-velocity seprotron? Kaboom!

Caused the mother of all staging errors. The smoke finally parted after a sixteen-second slideshow of atomic flame, revealing the uppermost stage just ... hovering there on 1.0 TWR. Landed it. I did not revert that flight.

Hit my peak in 2013, all downhill from there. The mainsail was the biggest stock engine at the time. Crazy unbalanced part mods were all the rage - almost to the point ship-sharing became impossible. The stock parts were too small and too fragile to build anything, people said! Built the Jaekelopterous 3 to prove it was possible to build large *without* crazy unbalanced mods. I won that bet. Six FULL orange dranks to orbit in 2013 stock! (I later managed eight, but the feat wasn't reproducible...)

The only time I use the "jr" is a) I have nothing better unlocked yet, b) Tiny probes. The jumbo one is pointless. Leaving the standard size as the winner.

When the question is "more X", you can be pretty sure they're already thinking about it.

The most cursed screenshot ever, courtesy of

So... mission mode?

You don't "trip over" it -- the game literally tells you. The stupid place is where it is in the tech tree. You should already have something better after having gone to all that work.

I warned HarvestR about that back in the day, but it turned out to be a nonissue, because we can play whatever game mode we want. The only thing the tiers are about is the rough order the parts were added to the game. This entire forum: "I hate this game I have 10,000 hours in"

why do people use mechjeb again? things seem much simpler without it

I might be being just slightly pedantic but I don't think we've really seen that many asteroids. We've inferred more from their spectral properties and orbits than anything else

I almost question if you read your own topic. The answer to your original question remains an easy "no". The game as was, just wasn't sustainable; the writing was on the wall. The only question was whether they'd 2.0 it, or scrap it entirely. I think the "KSP feel" is as much it's users as the game itself. Think about it - how much of the game is stuff we don't use? The missions, the careers. So as long as we're around, we'll probably find a way to make KSP2 home.

If you're concerned Kerbal Space Program 1 will cease to exist, I note several things in your favour: It is widely crossplatform and lacks copyprotection. If you were actually hoping for ten more years of free updates, though, you are plumb out of luck.

Nope. KSP would have "died", all right -- there'd be no more KSP. This way, there's still KSP. All this kvetching and moaning, you'd think people hadn't gotten ten years of free updates.

Unless someone goes and deletes them all, what's the problem?

That's about the same stretch of logic. Barely related to the actual requirements of KSP.

KSP runs on Linux. Linux runs on wireless routers. Therefore, you can run KSP on wireless routers. Not really how it works. I used to run KSP on low-spec (and 32-bit!!) computers but it just plain outgrew them all. Mostly it's the CPU and memory requirements that did so, not the graphics.

I dunno what to tell you man, except read it, then read it again, until you understand it. If you read nothing else, read the extra big text that says "final update".

Called it! Of course this means that, in 10 years, only the Mac and Linux versions of KSP1 will still be playable.

In theory. Remember the console release? Yea... it's really not that easy. There's always corners and issues the computer can't fix for you. Porting to Linux is relatively easy, because (ironically) it's one of the least forgiving software environments - it will make a 30-page list of your programming flaws and staple it to your forehead. 30 years of being ported to every toaster gave Linux devs practice at porting. I was heavily involved back when home computers went 64-bit. That ripped the floor out from under a lot of old software, when lazy assumptions that worked for 30 years straight suddenly didn't.