Kerbart

A more specific question. “Which one is better in regards to (feature)?” “Knowing what you know now, would you buy your phone again.” “Why did you buy the phone that you bought?”

Comparing devices in a market where perception is based on brand loyalty and locking in customers is interesting. Especially since “better”is such a vague qualifier based on personal bias.

This was many years ago, but without exaggeration having Norton on my computer was worse than having a virus. Performance doubled and file operations got about 5 times as fast after I had removed it. They then contacted me if I wanted to fill out a survey why I removed Norton. Oh yes, I was more than happy to give them my opinion. I do believe in AV software but never again Norton. Have they sunken low from Norton Utilities and Norton Commander...

"a" chute? Did you bring the right parachute? The model matters. There's not a lot to go by here, so I'm going to guess that it's an unmanned craft. Initially you had radio contact so all would work fine, but now you're on the other side of the planet and without radio contact you cannot remotely operate your craft.

How many launches did SpaceX do with FH last year? How many will they do this year? How many launches have they done with the BFR? Answering those questions might hint at why there's a Falcon Heavy

This made me realize that there is a distinct difference between part mods and partless mods. For me, the latter provide services that I think the game should be providing. I certainly wouldn't be happy with DLC that would offer them as the main attraction. It should be truly stock! In my mind, there's two elements that make DLC parts more attractive than mod parts: Not having to worry that an upgrade breaks the mod and leaves me with disappearing vessels A visual style that matches stock The latter, I'm aware, is a contentious argument. Not everyone cares about it, and not everyone will agree on what the visual style of stock is (and might even applaud a deviation from it). I'm not saying that free mods cannot have a style that matches stock. There are some very good part mods out there, and a couple I even use! But there are also many that are a turn-off for me because the parts stand out so much from the rest of game that they don't seem to fit in. But not everyone looks at it that way. And I agree that it makes it a tricky proposition for Squad. Which is why DLC shouldn't be just parts. MH is an excellent implementation of that philosophy. I can see DLC that offers space station parts (rotating artificial gravity, huge nuclear propellant units, large solar arrays) in conjunction with a wormhole to visit other (procedural?) solar systems. Moving parts (robotics) in conjunction with a programming console, and so on.

I look at it the same way. But it's amazing how small the amount of people is who get this. For most of us, AVC will light up like fireworks on the 4th of July right now. And that's fully understandable; mods are made by volunteers who you cannot expect to jump up and recompile everything the moment a new patch comes out. But that's why I really like the MH parts. My suspicion is that parts will be a very, very large part of why DLC gets bought. But: "mods provide the same for free." So there always needs to be a part that is justification of why you buy the DLC, like the missions. Even when you never play them.

This is what engineering is all about. Designing is often balancing conflicting requirements — in this case burn time vs fuel needs.

Yes. What @5thHorseman said. I don’t run too many missions in parallel. Otherwise you (a) end up having upgraded the entire KSC and all science within a week (Earth days) or so and (b) interplanety never happens. Another risk of running too many things at once: inevitably, a re-entry will coincide with some absolute mission critical maneuver node. Still, you’ll have to pry KAC out of my cold, dead hands.

It's just you. I haven't seen a decline in the quality of the work that Squad delivers. That's not to say that this release is flawless, far from that. But neither is it a deviation from what was delivered in the past.

Thrust limit on the engine?

It would take them five years to come up with a concept for the design. Then another eight years to design their first car. The cockpit will be delivered three years after that, but it will fail testing and needs to be redesigned—another two years. It is at this point that they discover that the rest of the car was made to interface with the old design, so another six years will be added to the project. Finally, in 2042, they will unveil their 2018 F1 racing car. All joking aside, F1 design is exceptionally competitive and fast paced, and “innovate or die” (look at where Williams is right now, and they were once unbeatable). The business these aerospace companies are in is the exact opposite. No competition, and emphasis is on safety and getting things to work, not on gambling the future on design innovations. Just like an F1 team would be bad at designing rockets, a Boeing F1 team would do bad.

Where were you 3 years ago? Squad seems to completely ignore most of us here in the community, but given the way you state that you demand bugfixes, and that you single-handedly paid for its development, Squad will jump up, get its act together and fix everything before the week is over, schedules and reality be damned! Had you issued this scalding critique three years ago, Squad would by now have rewritten the entire game from scratch in Assembler, bug free and with multiplayer to boot. Aargh! The suffering all those years! The agony! for nothing! On a more serious note, yes the bugs are unfortunate. It's easy to think that Squad does this on purpose. Or that there is some kind of ulterior motive. Or at least nefarious shenanigans! But keep in mind: The game originated as a 2-D-ish "launch a rocket" game By someone who was far from a professional developer, let alone of video games There was no vision for any long-term development, let alone the need (or expertise) to build a flexible framework to support that During it's lifetime the Unity engine went through various upgrades, forcing the game to upgrade with it Version numbering is a joke, but it's safe to say that there have been at least 3 major versions – 0.2x, 0.9x and 1.x – and where for practically all software you get charged for a major upgrade, Squad didn't I mentioned many years ago that I thought the "pay once, never pay for upgrades, ever" model was shortsighted and that somewhere down the line things would fall apart. Ongoing development requires ongoing funding. Conversely, paying $20 for a game many years ago, and after all that time still playing it... that's a good deal. To then state that I paid for this game and by god I feel ripped off by Squad not giving up on fixing bugs after one patch, well, in my book, "that's rich." Chill. They're not happy with it either. They're working hard to fix it. And yes, scale does matter. This is not Adobe charging $1200 for an initial release and $300 for every upgrade (been there, done that). In return, be a bit more relaxed towards the state of the product.

Have you taken a look at how you build a rocket in the VAB? From the top down. INSANE! That's not how it works in reality! ...but we all agree that it works better in the game that way. The tech tree is not there to mirror reality (as far as reality is relevant when dealing with little green men from space). It's there to provide a challenge, yes even guidance for new players, and give a need to progress. Make the tech tree too "realistic" and half the technology would never get unlocked because all the stuff you really need is already available in the first three tiers. Is it perfect? No. Can it be improved? Yes. Will that happen? Probably not. But whatever the improvements are, they will be based on the gameplay experience, not on "how reality really is"

The health and safety board tells you to wash it by hand. Your boss tells you to wash it by hand. Really, wash it by hand.

What an adorable analogy. So cute. A windwshield is a pretty essential part when you drive a car though. It's like maneuver nodes not working. Sure you can play the came but it's very, very unpractical. What you're attempting to describe though, is something like a recall. Dear Kerbart, we'd like to notify you that under certain conditions the seatbelts in your Rockomax Thunderbird might fail. Please call your dealer to make an appointment to have them replaced. Dealer: Yes, visit us 3 weeks from now. We'll need your vehicle for one afternoon. Three weeks later, dropped off the car, taking a taxi to work. At 3PM: Mr Kerbart? We discovered we need some extra parts for the replacement, and we don't have them in stock. You can pick up your vehicle this afternoon but you will have to bring it back two weeks from now... Well imagine that would happen with cars. Impossible! They'd never treat you like that! Well... been there, done that. Half of Detroit apparently thinks this is the normal way to do things. So yeah, this kind of behavior isn't really that special. Don't be a whiner.

Compared to more pressing issues like exploding landing legs also one of the least urgent ones.

Aside from the usefulness with ion drives available for unmanned probes, the challenge is sending what is effectively a nuclear reactor into orbit. It’s of course perfectly safe but a nuclear industry screwing things up every decade or so doesn’t help. Fukushima was perfectly save, and we were told that there was a 0% chance of a meltdown when, we learned later, the meltdown had already happened. Good luck in an environment like that to sell it to the public that this will be different, and safe. Why would they believe that this time it really is safe? The problem is not with the technology but with the inaptitude of those involved in self-regulating themselves and marketing it properly. You can’t fix that.

When all else fails you can always try [path where python is]\python.exe -m pip install krpc

I seem to have that reputation somehow. Not sure why!

But it already is partially free! See, the DLC consists of two parts. There's the one part, that is free. Then there's the other part, that costs $15 They're sold together though, so it's not like you can get only the free part. You have to buy the entire set, which is partially free. Seriously, what are we talking about. As @Just Jim pointed out. I had lunch with an ex-coworker today. We split the bill in half, and I paid, including tip, $19. I paid less for the DLC.

Option (c): you don’t notice but all goes well anyway, because you have adapted the sane habit of deleting the old mod folder before replacing it with the new one. Blindly dumping new content into a mod folder (or even worse, gamedata) is not the most careful approach to start with. I would always visually inspect what you are replacing with what.

It’ll be ready when it’s ready, asking for it won’t speed it up. The biggest issue seems that it doesn’t recognize the multi engine plates, that’s just something to keep an eye on when designing. Aside from that all else works fine for me.

For me every day is autism awareness day.

Hahaha. Good one. Kinda.