Superfluous J

I have never heard of the Twitch app. I thought you were talking about the streaming service when I saw the title. Never liked CKAN. No reason, it just doesn't work for me. I have a bookmark folder of links to all the mods I use, and occasionally visit all of them to see if there are new versions. It's the first place I go whenever I start a new career, and the first place I go when I think I've found a bug.

Nope. The only time I've ever used the LES was to play with it when it first came out.

It could be called Sun. Or Sün. Or Suhn. Or Johnny. My problem isn't that it has a name. My problem is that the name is Kerbol. It's like fingernails on a chalkboard to my brain.

Well my tongue is planted quite firmly in my cheek there. It won't actually keep me from buying the game. Also, it's a fact I garnered from several sources of official information about the game, as opposed to random speculation.

Nope. Your first stage should get you up into the higher atmosphere and moving maybe 1000m/s. Then you used those massive inefficient but powerful engines and should toss them. Your 2nd stage should get you into orbit.

Nobody's talking about the really big story, here. In KSP2 the sun will officially be named Kerbol. That's enough for me to want to not buy it right there.

And I can point to dozens of games that have multiplayer which never need to be online. No opinion here. I have nothing against non-intrusive DRM and don't care if KSP2 has it. So the past result of KSP1 being on Steam, plus being told multiple times by a source that is both reliable and knowledgeable, should lead you to trust that KSP2 will be on Steam. So they put time and effort into making a planetary system and want to sell it for $5. Sounds fair. As to the 11th revert... that's ridiculous. If you actually fear them doing that for real we can't have a rational conversation. You may as well fear they'll charge per pixel lighting up on your monitor. Okay then. I guess we can't have a rational conversation about it. As much as you don't believe the information you've been given, I also don't believe you'd accept that information from anyone. I'd actually not be surprised that when it comes out on Steam you're still skeptical that it's really there. What situation are we in? Our favorite game getting a sequel? What aren't they showing us? Are we supposed to be skeptical that they're not showing the CEO of Take Two kicking puppies because that must mean he's doing it? Healthy skepticism is fine. I'm skeptical about the sequel even being necessary, and am willing to just up and not buy it in many cases. I think a lot of others are as well. But assuming not just the worst, but worse than the worst ever has been, isn't healthy and it's not skepticism. It's tinfoil-hat country.

I hope they're working on a new game. You can barely keep a company afloat working on a single game when it DOESN'T have a sequel looming.

Good! A good cheap reliable lifter will have good atmosphere engines (with an atmo isp that's close to their vacuum isp) on the bottom stage with a TWR of around 1.3-1.6 and a total dV of somewhere around 2000 vacuum (even though you're in atmosphere, use the vacuum numbers, it's how we all do it and it lets us all talk about the same thing. And the numbers aren't that different if you're using the right engines). Then for your second stage have good vacuum engines with 1500+ m/s of dV and a middlingly good TWR. Doesn't need to be 1.0 even but that's a good number to start with. Feel free to use solid boosters to help that first stage, but count their dV added to the total dV of the first stage, don't consider them the first stage themselves. And of course drop them as soon as they run out of fuel. If you do your gravity turn correctly, you'll still be in the atmosphere when you drop that first stage but you'll be high enough that vacuum engines will work at almost maximum efficiency (anything over 10km is basically space) and you'll be burning almost sideways, pushing your Ap ahead of you and slightly raising it until you get it to 80-100km. Then cut the engines, coast, and give it the last 50-500m/s you need to actually reach orbit. Expect yourself to take multiple tries to get this right, and then multiple months of flying as you tweak your gravity turn with experience. It's not something you get right the first time. You're not ticking off an achievement from a list, you're learning a skill that you'll use on almost every single mission from here on out.

Considering KSP2 will have multiple star systems, it would be very odd for none of them to have gas giants. Also in the (non-gameplay but it'd be tantamount to a lie to stray THAT far from actual gameplay) trailer there are several gas giants shown, some even with rings.

Note that SAS isn't magic. It can't hold your ship still if your ship is incapable of holding still. It's like steering a car that's skidding across a sheet of ice. It's not the car's fault that the steering isn't doing what you expect.

I have preferred each new version over the previous one, without fail, since 0.22 became 0.23 I'd add "after bug fixes" but I can't think of any that caused that to not be true.

Would someone who wouldn't normally click like on this post, please click like on it for me? I want to give it 2 thumbs up and the forum won't let me. Around 2020. 2020.

Ignoring that ice caps don't work like that...

I have yet to see any official word that does not include Steam.

Actually relieving them of the responsibility may in fact be the most prudent option available. I assume you were the first post on the original thread, so your post is actually older than the "first" post of this thread. I also assume they could change the time stamps so the thread was more logically ordered, but I don't know this forum software very well.

That's fair. I disagree with you but if a new KSP version is not worth that to you then it seems the correct course of action for you to not buy it.

That's the best part! I wouldn't play KSP anymore if it didn't involve building and rebuilding craft essentially forever.

I guess I just forget that's not something everybody just does by default. I mean, I've still not bought Mass Effect Andromeda because it's only on Origin, and Just Cause 4 because the reviews are so bad I don't want to even spend the $20 it was on sale for during the Steam Summer Sale. But then there's people who shoveled cash at Microsoft and Squad to get KSP on consoles when it was painfully obvious to me that any port would at best be a shadow of what we play on PC, and at worst... well it'd be what was actually released.

So there is literally nothing anybody can say. You will therefore need to wait until the game is released to know.

Okay some replies to random posts from the past 17 pages. First, regarding Steam (or presumably any) achievements: I don't understand these statements. If you don't like achievements I can see that, but if you hate them that much you presumably already disabled being notified about them so why would that matter? Do you dislike others getting them as well? How so? I imagine that it'd be easier to add a star system (or many star systems) to a framework that already has star systems. ...so you're saying you had to sign NDAs? I'm curious then if there's anything someone could say that would assuage you or @kithylin ? It seems that there isn't, which makes me wonder the use of asking.

I have so many mixed feelings about this I can't even begin to express them. So instead - and for now before I read the past 16 pages - let me list the things I'm concerned and/or excited about without saying what I actually think about them. Because I don't know. Clouds. Colonies. "Not actual gameplay" Not actually Squad. Unity Coming out next year. FTL/Interstellar travel.

I don't know about should or all, but it does show up on some. I could see not adding it to plane cockpits or docking ports. UI clutter is bad enough that you really need to think about how often a button is going to be used. Wanting to control a cockpit from the front because when landed it's a rover is one thing, wanting to control a docking port or airplane backwards is another... with a lot fewer use cases. I believe we have no bug here, but instead a misunderstanding of the feature.

Very likely it's got thousands if not hundreds of thousands of lines with an error in it. Exit and reload KSP, play for about a minute and then exit out, that will hopefully generate a smaller log that contains the errors.

I believe it's mass, speed of impact, and closeness to the device. I also think it's capped.