razark

Well, if you're going to bring reality into it (), there actually was a proposed B-58 airliner version. It was based on a (again, only proposed) version of the B-58, using an enlarged version with SR-71 engines. This just amuses me.

The Convair B-58 carried its payload in an external pod, combined with a fuel tank. Passengers might be slightly opposed to the bumpy landing.

I have to admit my question is not answered, and I remain confused. Why play with other people if you don't want to play with other people?

Play a different game. Read a book. Take a walk in the park. Feed the ducks by the pond. Read a book while walking in the park and end up in the pond with the ducks.

But when they are not orbiting a planet or moon, they are still orbiting the central star of the system. Nothing says that two players can't rendezvous and build a station in stellar orbit. Why would you play with those people in the first place?

Land?!? I can't even remember how to get to orbit in 0.13!

Same as above. Just downloaded and am playing.

Angela Lansbury https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/11/entertainment/angela-lansbury-dead/index.html

It's the first thing that came to mind when I saw the news headline tonight. https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/28/entertainment/coolio-obit/index.html Aside from that, Weird Al parodies were the first version of many songs I heard. The man can perform so many different styles in impressive ways, and he's known for doing "funny songs".

Exactly. Everyone is doing activities that contribute to the same goal, the building of whatever is going to exist on that site. I'm questioning how Player A doing a Mun Colony supply run while five years later Player B is mining resources on Duna to build a station in the Jool system fits into "toward the same goal". How is that playing together, when both players could be playing their own games and sharing videos on Youtube while chatting on Discord, without changing the dynamic of their activities? Edit: Everyone is in the same environment, the house. They're using the same tools, cards and some method of tracking value (chips/cash). There's sharing of resources (beer/borrowed money). Everyone's goal is presumably the same (to have fun and hopefully come out ahead). But they're using those tools in very different environments, separate rooms. They're using the tools with different sets of rules. The gameplay and experience of each player is different, based on the rules they've chosen to follow. Further, there's the assumption that the multiplayer KSP is a coop. I have seen plenty of arguments about how KSP MP should work based on not forcing players into a coop mode.

I go to a friend's house. I'm at the kitchen table, playing poker. My other friend John is hanging out in the garage where someone's dealing blackjack. John wanders in, grabs a beer from my six pack, asks to borrow $5, and goes back to the garage. Are we playing cards together?

I still don't get why people are attracted to calling playing in widely separated time "bubbles" where they can't interact with each other or have any affect beyond showing up on the map1 is "multiplayer" rather than "multiple players with chat". 1Unless they synch to the same time and actually go into multiplayer, of course.

Probably something from Estes.

College would have been so much easier if all classes were like that.

Jeb, Bill, and Bob. Because there was no other choice. Sounds familiar:

How sad. May this Charles fare as well as previous ones!

No, WWI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewitt-Sperry_Automatic_Airplane https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettering_Bug

We can, but where's the fun in that?

My first Mun landing.

Pluto is not a planet. Pluto is not a star, whether or not it wanders. In fact, none of the so-called "planets" are wandering stars, or stars of any sort. Simply put, planets do not, in fact, actually exist, and any planets you may think of are merely the figment of a deranged mind.

My first reaction was "Oh, it's gotta be Gandalf!", but that's just too easy an answer. I'm expecting a twist to it.1 As I said before, I'm not familiar with the lore, but I've heard2 that it's too early for him to show up in the story3. Much like the movie, though, I don't really care if it exactly matches what existed before. The movie was a different interpretation of the story4, and the one and only movie of The Hobbit was a different interpretation, as well. Further, Tolkien himself wasn't exactly breaking new ground. Much of his stuff was taken from existing material, just rearranged. 1(Which probably means it is Gandalf, since they'll flip everybody's expectations by expecting that everyone will expect them to flip their expectations.) 2There is nothing of note here. 3Why do you keep reading these? 4The rotoscoping was kind of odd, though And they left out the third volume of the book, too.

I enjoyed it enough to keep watching. I don't really know much of the lore it's based on, so I can't complain about that at all.

Kind of makes me miss the days when information was posted across a dozen different unlinked sites, and people had to rely on threads that consolidated the updates if they wanted any sort of coherent idea of what was happening.

I get: Which, I will admit, is something I've never seen in KSP before.