John FX

Watching mechjeb can teach you a lot. Try using the `rendezvous autopilot` followed by the `docking autopilot` (make sure your crafts have RCS) next time you want an intercept. It is not the most efficient way or the quickest way but it works pretty much all the time. When you decide it is time to go further, like Duna or Eve, mechjeb can help you to find the best time to go as well. Once you are in orbit, you are half way to everywhere.

This is a much nicer place than a lot of the internet. Glad you are finding the game more fun. I had to laugh out loud when I read the `I quit this game is impossible` post, which an hour later was followed by `I DID IT! I GOT THE SCIENCE!` That is one of the great joys with this game, you want to do something, you reckon it can be done, then there are a few times of failing then great joy when you finally do it. Then you want to do it better, with less fuel. Eventually you make a craft that can refuel itself and go anywhere, or space stations, or mining bases, or recreate NASA missions. Then, when that gets boring because you find it easy now, there are many many mods which will give you all those feelings again fresh. Remember, F5 (quicksave) and F9 (quickload) are your friends. They will help you more than a lot of other things. `Ooh, looks dodgy, I'll try this`(F5) `Oh yes, that was very dodgy` (F9) `Ooh, looks dodgy, I'll try this instead` `Hmmm...` (F9) `Ooh, looks dodgy, let's see if this works <evil scientist laugh>` `That was cool, it worked!` (F5)

Sad or not, it is true.

Mod, mods mod mod. Very nice to see this paragraph. Extended life for KSP is in mods. They will be the thing that keeps interest going long enough, when development and DLC run dry, to make KSP 2...

Sorry but this gave me a chuckle. I have no doubt that a graphical update (which has been called for for years with no result) is very far back in the list of priorities. I was more replying to the effect that it is possible that the core code would not need to change (although likely it would), and funding would not need to be found from main game sales, which seem to be declining. The actual validity financially of doing so and likelihood of it being done is something nobody here can comment on, either through lack of information or an NDA. My suspicion is that the validity of being able to do so is very low. I am fully aware that nothing will happen unless it is the most profit making thing. As a business it would be daft to do otherwise and I have no delusions about this. I have previously said on the forum that I apply a little test to features or suggestions to see if they are likely to appear in this version of KSP. Will doing something else bring more profit for the amount of effort than X, if so X will not be done. If doing X is worth the expenditure in time etc, will waiting to release X until KSP 2 bring more profit than if released for KSP 1? If so, X will not be done for KSP 1. Obviously these are dynamic and change with new information. As such I do not think we will see a graphical update for KSP 1 because I think a graphical update would bring in far more sales for KSP 2. We can however have clouds, eclipses and the rest now by leveraging the very open code via mods, however unlikely it is for that to happen in stock. Eclipses for KSP 1 is something I would say to download a mod for, IMHO it is wasted energy calling for it to be included in the stock KSP 1.

And yet we have them without a change to the game's code, just a mod. The current code does not, but it can be made to with a mod. This suggests an `eclipse module` could be made which is extra to the code, like the asteroid mod which added features and parts but was optional. Then those with better hardware could have a better experience, and those with a potato can play a lower quality game. I agree that nothing is for free so the addon could be for a price. I would pay for clouds, eclipses, HD textures, more complex particle effects, better flame exhausts. All these are possible with not a byte of change to the main game's code. We know this because it has been done. No doors closed, no need to change the base code, coding paid for. All optional. win-win. EDIT : Also, If you feel the need to say more than once in a post <not criticizing> then you might just be being over critical. Especially if you are a mod...

I was just correcting you when you made incorrect or not relevant statements in your attempt to prove my statements wrong. I do not have any desire to be right and I will not defend an incorrect position but I will defend my statements when someone erroneously says they are wrong. There is a very important difference. Now you have stopped we can stop this back and forth.

Then either it is a non commercial user made mod or it is a commercial exploitation and therefore not covered under fair use. The non commercial `fanfic` TARDIS is covered under fair use and would be legal. But then it is not an easter egg, it's a mod. EDIT : Also, a TARDIS easter egg would not be `caricature, parody or pastiche.` nor would it be `for the purposes of non-commercial research or study, criticism or review, or for the reporting of current events.` are you even reading what you are posting? We are still talking about it because you keep posting incorrect information and I correct you. We have done that for a while now. If you do not post more incorrect information we can stop.

It is completely possible to raise the maximum specs without raising the minimum specs. I support any graphical improvements. if you use Principia, you get authentic eclipses, at the correct date as well.

This is what I reckon as well. As an aside, I misremembered Russell's teapot as Maxwell's. That would be a far more interesting teapot. So? That is true for many other things, for which you could get sued. That does not make them legal, or make them things where you are not in a position to be sued. I Imagine Squad are not wanting to break any laws though. Everyone knows things happen, prudent companies err on the side of caution and do not even allow the possibility of getting sued. From your link "It's unclear how Warner Bros. would have been able to use the police box design legally. The appearance was not clearly parodic nor was it even historically accurate. The scene was set in America and the DC universe had never previously established the existence of British police boxes in the United States." Your link confirms that to legally use the TARDIS commercially in the UK, you would need an arrangement with the BBC. The BBC being lax enforcing their trademark does not change the fact that you are liable to be sued if you use it in the UK.

To those who would say that the lack of any proof is proof of anything at all other than there is no proof, I remind you of Russell's teapot. Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others. Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion.[1] He wrote that if he were to assert, without offering proof, that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, he could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong. This means that if you assert there is a TARDIS at KSC the burden is on you to provide proof, and naysayers can just naysay until you do and that is the correct position. The burden of proof lies upon you to prove there is a TARDIS, not me to disprove it. Until there is proof, the assumption must be that there is no TARDIS. Really, the TARDIS is a registered trademark of the BBC and if you, as a company, use it in your commercial product in the UK, you are breaking the law and can be sued. Even the monolith from 2001 must be licensed to use commercially, MGM IIRC licensed a company to produce 2ft tall monoliths to sell to collectors in 2016. In the USA, you can even use an image of the TARDIS, and call it such if you are exercising your right to free speech, for example as parody, but only within the confines of the USA. If you try to do that in the UK you will be sued. The laws of the USA do not override laws of other countries inside those other countries... There is no right to free speech in the UK. We have laws that restrict your actions but no rights. As such there is no protected usage of other peoples trademarks without a licensing agreement. Any company wanting to use a registered trademark in their product, be it the TARDIS in KSP or Marmite in a sandwich, has to negotiate a license from the holder of the trademark or be liable to be sued. This is really getting tiresome. Please post links to back up your assertions, for example, here is one that says how owners of a trademark can defend in in court. There should be no doubt that the TARDIS is a registered trademark of the BBC. The owners of a trade mark can legally defend their mark against infringements. To do so, the trade mark must either be registered, or have been used for a period of time so that it has acquired local distinctiveness (Prior Rights).The extent to which a trade mark is defendable depends upon the similarity of the trade marks involved, the similarity of the products or services involved and whether the trademark has acquired distinctiveness.A registered trade mark is relatively simple to defend in a court of law. The Trade Marks Act 1994 states that "a person infringes a registered trade mark if he uses in the course of trade a sign which is identical with the trade mark in relation to goods or services which are identical with those for which it is registered" (section 10(1) of the Act). A person may also infringe a registered trade mark where the sign is similar and the goods or services are similar to those for which the mark is registered and there is a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public as a result (section 10(2)). A person also infringes a registered trade mark where a sign is identical but the goods are dissimilar if the trade mark has a reputation in the UK and its use takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the mark's distinctive character or reputation (section 10(3)). As such KSP, being an entertainment product, would infringe on the registered trademark of the BBC, being a TARDIS, because IMO the goods (entertainment product) are identical to DR Who. Even if regarded as not identical, KSP would still be taking unfair advantage (legally, unfair would be if they used it with no prior arrangement) of the distinctive character of the TARDIS and the reputation it has gained from the Dr Who show. Remember, something only needs to be illegal in one place to stop Squad putting it into the game everywhere, for example an obscure law in China, France, or Italy. Just because you can do something in the USA does not mean you would not get sued if you tried to do it in the UK. EDIT : It seems in May 2017 the BBC brought out a video game featuring the TARDIS as a main character. Yet another reason that a video game containing the TARDIS would infringe on their registered trademark as the products (video games) are identical.

You have to remember that KSP is a game sold internationally, as such they are subject to the laws in the USA, and also all the other countries they sell in. What is legal in the USA may well not be in other countries. You may not be able to sue in the USA but you can in the UK, maybe other countries. As such Squad still get sued if they use another companies registered trademark commercially. This means they have to be more careful than if they only sold in one country. There is no TARDIS easter egg.

Not yet, there is DLC to monetize first.

I am doing a start-up at the moment and these two items are the only things that really matter. Item zero though is finding the smart people in the first place... When I bought the game in 2013 I bought it to take advantage of the cut-off point for permanent free DLC etc. I had not played the game but people were exited about it, it seemed like something I would like. This means paid DLC has publicly been a thing that would happen from at least early 2013. It's no surprise by now or shouldn't be, and from sales figures it seems needed. The new content seems appropriate for a paid DLC. It has a theme (historical flights), it introduces new features(mission planner), and expands on what is possible in the game. I had initial doubts but as news has unfolded it seems like a nice add-on to the game and I am looking forward to it. As a bonus it seems stock is getting some love too. We may even see mods with new features as a result. EDIT : Series. It is the singular and the plural. The two series converged, for example. The series started with a 1, for another.

This is very good news.

I also see all of that argument as moot because your main point for dismissing my comment, being " the original design came from here in the US." is very wrong. The original design from the USA for a police call box was literally a box bolted to a post with a phone in it, not a box you could walk into. Those were started in Glasgow although they were hexagonal and cast iron. The blue iconic police box we are talking about was designed in 1929 by the Met's own surveyor and architect, Gilbert MacKenzie Trench. It is very much English. The argument that it is another active companies intellectual property still stands be it trademark or copyright. They are still allowed to sue for unauthorised usage, which is the point. I have already addressed that Dr Who have registered the original police box as their trademark. Here is a website that describes the LMPD's attempt to claim the trademark and why it was given to the show. I am quite interested in whichever company uses a toilet like the one from the destructed KSC as their trademark, like Dr Who uses the tardis as theirs. Which show does this unbranded image come from? The fact you know proves my point. Now name the company with a toilet as a trademark. Let me know if you want me to completely disprove all your points in further posts although I am finding this conversation tiresome. I can't be bothered but please imagine I made a dismissive comment about nationality as well, maybe something something colonies something.

The police call box is not a TARDIS. They look different. OP stated there was a TARDIS, which would have copyright issues. If it was just a call box there would not be. I imagine the TARDIS looks different precisely so it can be copyrighted. EDIT : Also from your link "The name TARDIS is a registered trademark of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The police box design has also been registered as a trademark by the BBC, despite the design having been created by the Metropolitan Police.[6] " EDIT 2 : also from your links "Although the dimensions and colour of the TARDIS used in the series have changed many times, none of the BBC props has been a faithful replica of the original MacKenzie Trench model." All this confirms that even a police box would need licensing if used in a commercial product.

I also agree, both with you and Rocketeer. One of the only actually interesting places to go is the very first one you try to go to. The game peaks too early as far as quality of destination goes. The most interesting places should be on the surface of Moho, Tylo, Laythe, Eeloo with places `a bit more interesting than Mun but not as interesting as Moho, Tylo, Laythe, Eeloo` being the rest although Dres should be made the most interesting planet it is easy to land on. Just because it needs it. In the real world, Squad will not be revisiting the planets. My more realistic hope is that Making History will add enough features so modders can make `interesting` things about, on, and around planets to make the destination worthy of the journey. Hopefully outside of a career or mission environment. Things that react to a craft or kerbal would be very nice.

They would not include copyrighted items from a show in current release without a proper contract, and much publicity from both sides. Aside from a licensing nightmare, there is no way a KSP/WHO partnership would happen without many bells, whistles and a huge fanfare. This has not happened so...

Interesting it is a new game, not an update. I'm sure there are reasons.

For me, as with all things in KSP I find are not to my taste, I will be using mods to swap any parts that are not up to scratch with ones that are, I will be playing a game which has it's own balancing done to be very realistic. The textures will be revamped, the atmosphere will be different, there will be clouds, the scale will be right, better orbital physics and so on. These days I change so much of the game to suit my tastes that not much remains from stock. As such, updates are only interesting to me if they expand the possible range of mods, or make current mods easier to use, more functional, or easier to program (which means faster reaction to updates of KSP). This makes me far less bothered by anything introduced, or taken away, or changed, by an update. It is very liberating. I will be very interested to see how Making History is used in the modding world. All the rest, not so much. The main thing I am looking forward to at the moment (if it has not already happened) is RSS/RO/RP-0 moving to 1.3.1, and further down the line 1.4/Making History.

I clicked when I saw `interesting locations` in the title because IMHO currently KSP has close to none and I wanted to see these `interesting locations`. I support this idea to make landing on a body more interesting than land, EVA, flag, science, leave.

Trust me, bombs are a lot faster than rockets. Rockets explode very slowly. Except for when they turn into actual bombs and explode very quickly. Even then, they are a lot slower than most bombs.

A slow bomb.

Is there not a mod about that can already do this?