Xurkitree

Really? You're worried about this?

You forget that there will be all sorts of development tools and debuggers running in the background as well. They would also be testing certain prototype implentations of stuff. Honestly, the space stuff seems pretty okay, atmo is atmo.

This is very much a non issue and i wish i could hide the thread from me. Binaries are cool! What's your problem if they're almost right? As long as they don't break the game (which they dont), and can provide an proper challenge, they're great! I always wanted a lava world in KSP 1, even if that's because I had to struggle getting my lava right on my lava worlds, and now we're getting, not 1 but 2! real talk tho, where can i sue star theory for copying my idea of a lava binary smh

oh gods the furries have taken over in other news, why is this a thread dangit

Like I said, you can input a specific time frame for the transfer as well. It'll just give a initial burn vector and a final burn vector which one can execute. Yes, its made for Hohmann transfers, but it will do the trick.

The save files can be in the same format. It does its work. If you want something simpler to work with save file editing, try KML

Yes. Just input a travel time required, say like 4 days or 40 days or 400 days and it'll plot the lowest DV required for such a transfer. Another way is that you can have a specific date of arrival or departure, and it'll plot the lowest DV required for such a transfer.

@nubeeesThe mod you're looking for is Transfer Window Planner. Input destination and final orbits, and give a time range and it'll give a trajectory. Impulsive, but it should suit your needs.

Excuse me what the heck. i swear every place needs a thonk emoji/emote... AND YALL MISSING ONE THING in this entire video. Same-vessel interactions. The collision between the parts will help STOP massive wobbles since rather than phasing through unhindered and wobbling to dangerous levels, the reaction force will help stop and minimise wobbling.

reads OP THONK

I think there's an synchronous/semi-synchronous orbit around Dres that allows one to pass through the Dres Canyon at periapsis every time.

Yeah, you can't have rotational gee-forces. Needs to be added.

where's my option for the Calm Nebula Skybox? I WANT MY CALM NEBULA SKYBOX And the skybox is much better now, stop dissing on the milky way, you're one of the people who lives in it.

The system will work fine for what it is under patched conics. The issue is that there will be too many bodies handle. You're comparing KSP stock, a system with 17 bodies, to KSP 2, with atleast 30-40 bodies. Some of them are really far away. Another thing that comes with N-body is that Jool will have to be changed, with Retro-Bop and breaking the resonance, and I'm sure most of us agree that it isn't a very nice thing to do to our system. And then each system would have to be designed with stability, not gameplay in mind. We would all have to relearn how to maneuver when we start up KSP2 and that experience could be enough to turn many of us from the game. And then there's the issue of n-body trajectory paths over interstellar distances... Principia is best left as a mod. At the very least, the size of the KSP file will be smaller, boosting load times. As for magic tech, I wouldn't mind some time-save options at the end of the game to visit my colonies and stuff. I mean one of the first mods is going to be a warp drive after all...

I'm talking in game, not IRL - KSP's planets require an initial Orbit node, which contains all the orbital parameters at the epoch of the game. This also includes the reference body around which a body is orbiting. In the case of Rask and Rusk, which one orbits the other? In that case, with N-body mechanics, you'll have to wait a while before they stabilize into a binary pair, until then they'll continue to oscillate a bit. This means they aren't a binary at the epoch. Under patched conics, they wouldn't be a binary, just a moon with the same size as the parent. Unless KSP2 has a completely different approach to setting up the inital orbital parameters of the planets, or allows orbits to be centered around any point whatsoever, i'd expect a body substituting the barycentre. My question about Rald/Duna was about the inital setup of the system, and in hindsight it seems obvious - Duna just orbits Rald, and it'll just collapse into the stable arrangement principia provides. The non-principia option is how most KSP binaries in planet packs are made - a barycentre orbited by the bodies you wants (Beyond Gnome being a meme good example)

I'm intrigued.How did you set it up? That's my question. I know that binaries are stable and all that, but are they in orbit around a body being a barycentre or have they created a barycentre of their own principia?

Big Thonk

Wait, I made a pun? DAAAAMNN

Where's my Poll for capturing at Jool?

excuse me what lag i barely see any I would kill for this sort of performance.

damn, ya'll ready to play multiplayer meanwhile i'm going for single player lonely and alone

the issue of linking reproduction with time is due to the fact that we can just time warp and get infinite kerbals. I'm more happy about the fact that we're getting official kerbal r34 lmao

Yes. This is what we need. I can't wait for that old intro to come back again. We're seeing same-vessel interactions, so the reaction force from the the contact is already improving noodle rockets. In normal KSP, they would phase through each other, so you would get even wilder oscillations.

I'm sorry, but any person seeking to ruin the hype train shall be forcibly kicked out.