J.Random

Go ride an elevator.

Already happened, didn't it?

Yeah, no. Considering what modders were able to do to original KSP, considering budgets and the team size and experience of the original KSP, the arguments of "you don't understand game development", "they had to build a studio", "never been done before" and so on just won't fly in this community. Or at least I hope that the community preserved enough collective critical thinking to destine these arguments for RUD.

Working on an update, hopefully. Definitely not swimming in a Scrooge-McDuckian money vault. I think.

Forums need a !remindme bot.

Which one? Because PD is purely virtual, nothing but a label, T2 I don't think would be affected, and why would T2 care about Intercept's reputation?

Have any wheeled rovers inside the fairings? There seem to be some weirdness there, with random "bumps" just throwing SAS off course.

Buying decals is too easy. Buying lootboxes with "collectable" decals (one use only, btw) would be perfect.

Short answer: yes. Long answer: if you call yourself a fan, and behave as a fan, you deserve whatever whoever you're fan of does to you. Being a paying customer is one thing, but any emotional attachment exists only in your head and is definitely misplaced. A company cannot be your friend. Any illusion that it can leads to Scam Citizen-like cults and should be avoided.

Ditto MMB, so what? Edit: also, how do these people which don't have mouse wheel zoom in and out? Same keys, with the same modifier keys, could work for camera movement.

This is not necessarily stupid, but why couldn't you just allow players to use scroll wheel? There is enough modifier keys on a keyboard for all three axis.

I'm not talking about computing. It's doable, the awesome Principia mod is the proof of that. But, AFAIK (I'm not going to pretend I know all or even a lot, so I may be wrong too), you can't really use these two systems together. N-body can probably take over from conic patches ("here's the position and current velocity vector, here are the bodies applying force to the craft, go on, integrate") but I can't imagine the reverse, because this extra m/s accumulated from pull by 3rd body may lead to weirdness when you try to describe it as a single SoI orbit. Like, imagine you're in a halo orbit around L1 and switch from N-body to conics. Suddenly, you have radial velocity of the Mun at what, 3/4 or 4/5th of a distance from Kerbin, so suddenly you're on a hyperbolic trajectory (didn't calculate, but seems like it). They may have made the barycenter's SoI large enough so that there's negligible difference between calculation results, but high warp may still lead to glitches. We'll wait and see, of course, but I have my doubts.

Nope. Extreme example but proves that the flex is there anyway.

Sidenote: do devs measure time in m/s? No wonder fizzicks is so weird.

I don't mean "all the time" as "infinitely into the future", I'm saying that you can't have both and switch between them arbitrarily.

That roadmap is anything but specific. Or a promise.

Judging by the videos, wheels slide too much. Probably traction/friction parameters need some tuning. Did devs expose them, or is it all predefined/automatic?

Catch-22: if people don't buy it, it may never mature into a finished product; if people do buy it and criticize its state, negative reviews and refunds may lead to the same result; if people buy it and refuse to criticize it, it will work as an excuse for bad business practices and lead to more of the same result again. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. One thing that should be pointed out is that negativity and even anger is way better than indifference.

Thanks, censorbot, I laughed.

You don't seem to understand how Unity fizzicks works. Stack of lightweight parts connecting heavy structures (like interstellar ships from promotional materials, with engine/fuel tank block connected to long truss stack connected to hab/command assembly) will flex and wobble like there's no tomorrow, and SAS will help it to flex and wobble even more.

My understanding is that it's impossible to have both in a consistent, reliable way. They don't transform into one another, so you either integrate all the time, or you have patched conics. Which is why I'm very suspicious of devs' claims that the 3-body will be implemented for the binary (and only there and nowhere else), and that it won't be done through barycenter hack.

I hope they understand that .Net assemblies are wide open and if the code is the same (or worse, is "borrowed" from mods), it will become known pretty much immediately.

Well known issue with Squad's rover wheels is that on a downslope, as soon as rover reaches the max-rated speed for the wheels, you're no longer able to stop using motor, you have to resort to brake (with pretty obvious results, especially obvious for any signal delay mod users). Do not repeat the same mistake Squad has made in KSP1. Instead of motor torque curve zeroing out at max speed, use constant motor torque and a resistance torque curve, maxing out at max speed to value equal to motor torque.

Kerbals are devolving. Autostruts and KJR are long-lost relics of the ancient, more technologically advanced civilization.