Jump to content

Pthigrivi

Members
  • Posts

    2,018
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2,274 Excellent

6 Followers

Profile Information

  • About me
    Space Cat

Recent Profile Visitors

5,183 profile views
  1. This is not so much a suggestion as a thought experiment exploring the ways a game like KSP2 could make some of the ideas from real-world ISRU into a fun, playable experience. There are a few essential principles in this, to my mind, in this order of priority: fun gameplay, efficient mechanics, and allusions to real life physics. Im going to focus on the 2nd, as I think it's the hardest part and mitigates the other two. Its important to realize in this that real-life will always be much, much too complicated to emulate exactly and be fun, and given how complex KSP1's basic framework is its critical that colonization not utterly dominate player time. So the question for me is how few resources and processing steps are necessary to convey the idea of ISRU? Fuels, Parts, and Life Support Starting with fuels we have some guesses: Methalox, Monoprop, Xenon, Uranium, He3, MH, And likely H2 and Antimatter. From a purely chemical standpoint the raw materials for these are relatively few: Hydrogen, Oxygen, Carbon, Xenon, Helium-3, and Uranium. But from a harvesting standpoint even these can be simplified. From my perspective H2O and CO2 could be gathered together from the surface as "Ices", Xenon and O2 could be extracted directly from some atmospheres, He3 from surface regolith, and Uranium from mining. Thats only 3 basic resources: Ore, Regolith, and Gasses, which could then be processed into CH4, O2, H2O2, Xe, U, He3, and H2 and further into MH and Antimatter with the appropriate processors. Each of the 3 basic resources could be scanned and understood with values from low to high, which would only effect the rate at which they could be harvested. Or it could be that concentrations for things like He3 and Ices are displayed independently in scans, but this might make it more complicated to harvest raw regolith and process it later and know what you're going to get. Next come Parts, and I'll include both rocket parts and colony modules in this. Again to me this about maximizing simplicity while creating good gameplay, and fortunately I think real life does us some favors here. Im going to simplify the raw materials for most parts as Metals, Uranium, and Plastics. I say this because I think both Metals and Uranium could be produced from Ore, and Plastics could be produced from Regolith as an analog to either ethylene or basalt fibre. The reason for the latter distinction is it would cause players to consider both high-quality Ore and Regolith concentrations when picking colony and mining sites, or come up with ways to transport and combine them. Again Ore could have a single concentration rating and be separated using different processors, or Metals and Uranium could have their own individual concentrations depending on the location. Last is LS. Now, I understand many players trepidation at this topic, but I think there are ways to make this both manageable and fun. Given understandable concerns about players time-warping and accidentally killing whole colonies I think there are 2 ways to approach LS as a resource. 1: LS would be an engrained requirement for increasing crews and populations. In order to add more crew to a large vessel or take advantage of population booms you would need to add Hab modules that increase max crew capacities. We could assume onboard systems are closed loop and that LS is a static resource necessary only for building new habitable modules. In that way it would be just like Metals or Plastics as a part cost, but would instead be produced with greenhouses or MELiSSA style regenerative LS modules fed with Ice rich regolith and nutrients from Ore. 2: LS would be a resource thats consumed over time, but the consequences for running out would be relatively minor. It could be created by greenhouses, extended by recyclers, and made indefinite with regenerators. You'd need to pump it around just like any fuel, and you'd be inclined to make sure you have enough on any vessel without a regenerator, but if you ran out it would only make Kerbals Grumpy and less productive, not dead. Using an overall vessel-wide Happiness rating could also encourage players to add other more luxurious habitation modules like centrifuges and recreation facilities and diversify the kinds of later-game modules you'd want to add to growing colonies. That would lead to a resource flow that looked roughly like this: Ore> Metals, Uranium Regolith> Plastics, Methalox, Monoprop, He3, H2, MH, Antimatter Gasses> Xenon, O2 Ore+Regolith> LS And the following processors: Refinery > Metals Enrichment Centrifuge > Uranium Polymator > Plastics Fuel Processor > Methane, Oxygen Monoprop Processor > Monoprop He3 Factory > He3 Electrolyzer > H2 Metalic Hydrogen Foundry > MH Antimatter Plant > Boomsauce Greenhouse > LS None of which sounds crazy overwhelming, but I think is just enough to get players thinking carefully about surface concentrations as they're developing and expanding their capabilities.
  2. I could potentially see fewer experiments honestly, or at least making collection automatic or completely rethought to avoid tedious right-click menus.
  3. Goootcha. That makes sense. Id been thinking about whether non-nbody lagrange simulation/ approximations were possible for other things like satellites.
  4. Interesting. Cant you just put it on rails to follow the L2 point?
  5. So rad to see the process on this. And congrats Nertea that's fantastic news.
  6. I cant remember exactly but I feel like in my reading about real-physics interstellar travel they were only accelerating to .15-.2c. I guess you're suggesting they might also want to buff that to get in-game time-warps down? One thing to consider in all this is that by the time you're sending interstellar vessels you've probably got an entire economy of other vessels tooling around the Kerbol system, and because all of these vessels require attention from time to time--launch windows, circularizations, dockings, minor course corrections, etc, max-warping all the way to another star uninterrupted might not really be something that's likely to happen anyway.
  7. Probably not in-scope at launch but I would love to see this and airships as an expansion or something.
  8. I would say launching and positioning space based telescopes in specific orbits sounds fun (this is why I was asking about simulated lagrange points) but I dont think I need a minigame where I need to look through it. It might be okay to set it to lock on to a star I was interested in and unlock associated planets over time. Even this information should be very sparse—mass, orbit, maybe scant information on whether it had an atmosphere or not. As far as spoilers and wikis go I think the truly new stuff is only going to be an experience at launch. Once people have have discovered these places and documented them the information is going to be out there. If you want to have that spoiler-free experience a year later you’re just going to have to be disciplined enough not to look it up. Id rather see the extrasolar systems curated for composition and orbits and relative position to kerbol than randomized. But making it so you can only see the star and know its main sequence or a red dwarf and no planets right away sounds good great. Works too for first sending fly-by probes that could tell you a lot more about surface compositions and geography before you sent a whole colony ship if you wanted. Gaining tighter knowledge might help players bring more tailored landing an prospecting equipment.
  9. Im not a programmer but could there be a stripped-down physics warp that only accounts for mass, acceleration, and trajectory but treats the vessel as rigid?
  10. Question about this: I know n-nody is ruled out but could lagrange points be simulated with small, orbitable, blank soi’s?
  11. Yeah Im pretty hopeful that the folks at Intercept have been thinking a lot about ksp1’s strengths and shortcomings and adventure mode is gonna be great. I like to experience games the way developers intend first so I’ll be diving right in. I think the core system of build/fly rockets is there. My biggest hope is that the core development and colony building mechanics are solid, even if the balance isn’t perfect. I think within the first six months or so with feedback and care and attention and updates that can be tweaked up.
  12. This reminds me though what I'd really like to see is the target and projected landing point painted both in map mode and in flight mode. I find its much easier to control my vessel when I'm looking over its shoulder at the target and can see which way Im tilting to make corrections as I burn. Its still a funky thing because the landing site moves opposite to the way you tilt and only moves while you're burning, but I think seeing all that on the screen at once would make the experience much more intuitive.
  13. We don’t know for sure, but if its anything like real life its a LONG way. Jupiter is 5.2 au from the sun, five times farther than the earth. The nearest star, Proxima Centauri is 272,000 au away, over 5,000 times Jupiter’s orbit. The Kerbol system is scaled down by a factor of 10, so its possible the distance to stars will be 1/10 as well, but even at that distance you’ll be a long way out even from Jool. Numbers like this tend to be unintuitive so I like using analogies. The difference between the earth and Jupiter is like the difference between 1 and 5 minutes. The difference between Jupiter and Proxima Centauri is like the difference between 5 minutes and 6 months.
×
×
  • Create New...