Kaerbanogue

How are they clunky? I mean, how would they negatively affect gameplay for you? Robotics allow you to do anything you want in KSP, check Gordon Workshop's "Game in KSP 100% STOCK" if you want a proof of that, i'm sure if KSP were more popular we would already have stock computers... The integration of robotics was possible because KSP was already stable at the time (4 years after 1.0). But KSP 2 is in the state you know, and it takes already enough time to get patches on a game this barebones... Just don't use them if you don't like them, for everyone else they're incredibly useful I use robotics in KSP 1 because they are in the game and they are the only way to make propellers etc but it's my opinion that it would be better if we had stock parts in place of assembling robotics. I'd rather have a canadarm part than a wobbly pistons and rotors assembly, a stock propeller engine than a rotor with blades that move away from the rotor at high rpm because of joint flexibility... My point is that for a single problem there should be a single part because a part that has be designed to be used for something will perform better than robotic assemblies. real spacecraft rely a lot on robotics I thoughts spacecraft were made of bolts and wires I didn't know they had access to Breaking Ground parts too PS: i'm saying this for the forseeable future of KSP2. When the game will be stable and everything of course it'd be cool to have robotics ! And of course it's just my opinion.

SCANSAT IVA Comets & Asteroids Ascent, RDV & Landing autopilot Parachutes and headlights for Kerbals Kerbal customization (facial features, different spacesuits and maybe choosing between chutes and gliders) Propeller engines as parts Procedural tanks More command modules Things I think people want but would be detrimental for the game (at least for the forseeable future): Life support (it's just maluses on a timer, cool idea on paper but I'm sure most people would turn maluses off after a while) Malfunctions & wear (same idea than life support it's just maluses on a timer and doesnt need cool parts like life support would) Robotics (the game is already clunky enough and, imho, robotic parts were used as palliatives for parts like propeller engines, cranes, better landing gears etc... and i think i'd be better if they add those as proper parts)

This part is very interesting... the fact that the dots could symbolise a measure of distant seems plausible. Could represent the distance between in and out gates as the first dot point to the ship. The last two symbols are cryptic though... Is the right one (⚄) a planet with 4 moons as we see planets from kerbolian system represented as dots ? And what about the left one (the + with a black center)? The + sybol is used to represent a star (Kerbol) so could the same symbol with a black center represent a black hole or a black star ? Does it have something to do with the celestial body we see at the end of the Kerbal Space Program 2 Early Access Launch Cinematic ? Anyway thanks for the post it's really cool

@GargamelThe topic is not about mods but fixes in general that might help people have a better experience with the game. Could you maybe reexamine your decision?

Fixing wobbly rockets in KSP2: KSP 2: How to use Custom Flags: Fixing overheating GPU in KSP2: SpaceDock mods for KSP2: https://spacedock.info/kerbal-space-program-2 Recommended mods: Sticky Orbit Markers: "Makes your Ap/Pe markers stick when using the maneuver tool." https://spacedock.info/mod/3264/Sticky Orbit Markers. Topic on this mod: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/213117-sticky-orbit-markers-show-appe-during-maneuver-plotting/ Lazy Orbit: "Set a vessel's orbit, rendezvous and land using a simple menu opened with ALT+H." https://spacedock.info/mod/3264/Sticky Orbit Markers Disabling the Private Division launcher on Steam: Copy the KSP2_64x.exe install location on the game launch options in Properties/General between "" and add %command% after that. Exemple: "C:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program 2\KSP2_x64.exe" %command% If you have suggestions I will update the post.

Major bugs: -Flag names doesn't work properly. Can't write numbers nor special signs such a é è à etc. Capital "A" doesn't work either: Using Shift+"a" writes "aAaAaA". -Keybindings reset every time I launch the game. There is a keybinding for entering Map view, but not for exiting it. Keybindings are always in QWERTY: it prompts me to use W for pitch for example, but the key that's working is Z (which is at the same place as W for an AZERTY keyboard). -Ladders are not working near the 3 seats command pod (blocked) and the larger one disappears if close to a fuselage when the camera is zoomed. -When launching a rocket, it happened to me that the rocket launched inside the VAB. Doing anything when in its state just shows you the inside of the VAB, and it's not interactive. (Going into tutorials, KSC, tracktation etc is just VAB+ HUD of tutos, KSC or trackstation in top of it). Quitting the game doesn't fix it, I had to reload an older save file, make my craft file multiples subassemblies and reassemble them in a new craft file to be able to make the game work again. -Struts tubes fairings are not working. Attached to a decoupler, the tube sometimes jettisons it's fairings and sometimes not. I just launched the same rocket again and again, and the fairings jettisons ~10% of the time when activating the decoupler. Also, there is no staging to jettison the tube's fairing. -The LES icon is missing in staging. -Decouplers objects are not working. Sometimes they no clip through everything when activated, sometimes they get stuck inside the rocket which destroys it or give it unwanted speed and spin. Happens every time on some decouplers whereas other works ok every time, the only way to get around it is to delete the part and reconstruct the craft. Sometimes when activated the decoupler no clip through the craft and the two parts that were attached to it are now glued together. Happens very often. -Attached parts in the VAB sometimes are attached to another parts when the rocket is launched. When it happens, reloading does nothing, the only way to get around it is to delete the part and reconstruct the craft. -Fairings don't have any colliders and can't close into a part to hold it. -Offsetting objects make them act like a magnet with the part they're attached to. Offsetting up gives a part a force that pushes against the top of the craft, and offsetting them inside another parts sometimes make them want to shoot through, destroying parts and giving the craft unwanted speed and spin. -Wings or boosters (not sure which one) sometime make the craft explodes when launched, the only way to get around it is to delete the part and reconstruct the craft. -Maneuver nodes are not working. Creating a maneuver node, exiting and reentering map view change the maneuver. -Painting solid boosters looks bad. Its give the primary color to the engine nozzle, which looks very bad. -Clamps randomly flashing to the base of the rocket when asending. Happens ~5% of the time, and relaunching seems to fix it. Doesn't seem to collide with the craft. -In VAB when moving subassemblies that have symmetry modes attached parts, it sometimes changes the orientation of some of the symmetry attached parts. Moved my LEM from my bay and 2 of 4 parts were in the wrong direction whereas the other 2 were ok. -When lauching a vehicule, the pitch of the orientable light parts is reseted. -My craft was destroyed once for no reason while reentering Kerbin. I was time warping x4. -The 3 seats apollo pod is bugged I think. While trying my LES with the abort function (igniting LES+ decoupling under the heat sheild attached to the pod) sometimes it would behave strangely and my heatshield was missing, then when landing, parts of the pods were clipping though the ground as if the collision box of the command pod was a little sphere. EVA with a kerbal would make them clip though the ground too and land on the ground under the KSC. Not sure if it's a command pob problem or a problem with parts in gerenal, I noticed that when the craft is in any way bugged, some parts will behave like their collinsion box are a sphere. Easily noticeable when I try to make ground tests and I see detached parts rolling on the ground not matter the shape/ size/ material. -In graphics options, Windowed, Borderless and Fullscreen options are bugged. Visually, Fullscreen AND Windowed are both always selected. Minor missing features: -There is no way to lock a resource from being used. It's bad for example when I want to be sure my pod or CSM have full monoprop tanks when needed. -No way to know how much fuel I have left in individual tanks. -No Kerbnet. I'm sure the game is full of cool easter eggs and POIs, but how can I go see them without a way to point a location on a surface via satellite ? -No flashlights in kerbals EVA suits. -Using filters in the tracking stations doesn't hide icons in the map view. Could be really annoying with enough debris. -No "remove from symetry" option Something I think is bad: -The little attitude indicator which shows a little shuttle inside axes of motions symbols (Prograde etc) is bad when in atmosphere. When in atmosphere, before launch and when ascending the shuttle icon shows prograde but my prograde and the Up direction are the same... not mentioning launching a rocket from the north pole. I think this feature is useless since it doesn't give any information on my attitude and is even bad for people not familiar with planes/ rockets since in atmosphere this icon is useless but when in orbit it's working as intended and there is no way to not be confused if you're a newcomer i think. I also sent (some of [since it's edited]) the above with the feedback feature in the Private Division launcher. Closing thoughts: I have a 2060+ i5 12400f+ 16go DDR4 Ram and I'm using a SSD. I'm running the game is 1080p in High settings without Vsync and I have 40-20 fps with basic crafts and 1-5 fps with more complex crafts (an apollo style rocket, nothing super fancy) so performance and bugs wise, the game is currently unplayable for me. However the game is very promising and looks like excellent foundations for the future. Magnetic boots for EVA suits, Up/Down, North/South directions when in atmosphere, the new Navball and HUD are the kind of things that will make people not want to go back to the original imo. There is a lot of very good stuff in the game right now. Moreover almost everything thats bad in this day-one EA of KSP 2 is the fact that the game is not running. I'm personally very disappointed to not be able to play KSP 2, which I waited for all this time and bought day-one but when it's going to run properly it's going to be amazing ! And then thinking that at some point there is going to be colonies and interstellar blows my mind.

The state of the EA is indeed concerning. As you said, the absence of reentry heating and thermal systems at launch gives away the fact that the game isn't ready for public release yet from a quality standpoint. Even if it's for "a brief window at the beginning of Early Access", I doubt that Nate Simpson, who sounds legitimately passionate about the project, would qualify this situation as satisfying in regard to both quality standards and customers appreciation. It seems quite rational to assume that T2 gave KSP2 a definitive release window and that Intercept Games had to release a product for us to buy during that time period. Now if I'd have to summarize your concerns about this whole situation, and correct me if I'm wrong, I'd say that you're worried about the eventuality of T2 stopping financing KSP 2 if the game sales are insufficient. Obviously T2 wants returns for their investments and judging by the long development, the expansion of the game's scope and the priority put on accessibility to get new people aboard, they seem to aim for a lot of sales. It's reasonable to think that as KSP 2 is bigger in every way possible than KSP 1, the budget of the game should be greater too and therefore so are the targeted sales numbers. Moreover, it's alarming to think that the "novice" audience is going to be introduced to KSP with this EA, missing core features of KSP 1 and requiring a high-end config to run decently. Although KSP 1 fans are going to buy KSP2, make a good review and support the project no matter what (because we know the potential of the game, and we know that Nate Simpson is going to make everything he can in order to make KSP 2 the best game he could), the new audience in the other hand is likely to discover KSP via this EA and is likely to not want to buy the game or refund it and making a bad review for the game. That is, I think, indeed very worrying about the potential success of KSP 2... that's the way it is, the game is going to release in 62h from the time i'm writing this and is going to be in the state we know. However, it could not be as bad as it sounds, I was watching all the previews from the ESA event and I found interesting that the PC Gamer and IGN reviews, which both journalists were exactly this "novice" target audience, (having zero knowledge in KSP, orbital mechanics or space rocketry) sounded like they had a ton of fun with the game. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I look back at the time I started playing KSP and how the game could have no planetary bodies except Kerbin and I wouldn't have noticed. I remember having to watch Scott Manley videos to understand how to play and not understanding a single sentence he was making, since I'm not a native English speaker and space rocketry use a very technical language. With the lack of tutorials and personal knowledge, it took me weeks to consistently reach orbit and months to reach Duna and dock for the first time. Anyway what I want to point out is that, us, KSP 1 fans, set up our expectations very high, rightfully so because since 2019 we were told the game was going to be this ambitious sequel to our beloved KSP 1 adding a ton of features and challenges; but a novice player that is going to try KSP for the first time with KSP 2 EA may very well enjoy the game for the process of learning orbitals and rocketry by trials and errors as much as we did when we started KSP. In fact, features such as interstellar, colonies and resource gathering are targeted for already experienced players and their absence in the 0.1 EA could not impact the experience of a novice player in any way. But on the matter of KSP 1 fans getting KSP 2 EA Day-one, the game is going to be as unfinished as it seems, but again, Nate Simpson. I think I can speak in the name of all the KSP community by saying that the man really earned our trust and no one here have any doubt that he's going to do anything he can to deliver the game he promised us back in 2019 and that he will try to push the game as far as possible no doubt. In conclusion, I would say that on one hand this version 0.1 of the EA is indeed under delivering in many ways for a KSP 1 fan but on the other hand newcomers could very well enjoy this game as it is. As long as the time between the release and the first roadmap updates doesn't exceed the time that new players would take to start mastering this version of the game, it would keep them engaged. I think if this reasoning is correct, the same could be said about the absence of reentry heating and thermal systems, yes it's bad not having it Day-one, but I think the success of the game is going to rely on the speed of the game's updates more than the actual state of the game at launch. KSP is such a complex game after all... if heating is implemented quick enough, new players could not even realize a core mechanic is missing. KSP 1 fans are likely to buy the game in early access and are going to support the game no matter what, and the percentage of new players that will buy the game in EA are, in my opinion, going to enjoy the KSP 1 experience in KSP 2 not even aware of what's missing in the game; and the percentage that will buy it later will have a more fleshed out experience. So let's hope heating is implemented quickly enough and that the next roadmap milestone (science) is around the corner. Tldr: EA state is really bad, but it could not impact sales and reviews this much. Vets know the game is in good hands and how the game is going to be great once it will start to take off and new players will need some time to start mastering the game, at which point the game is going to be in a much more complete state, hopefully. And in the meantime they're going to have fun with learning the basics of the game.

Does anyone know if we will be able to preorder the game or pre download it to start playing when it realases ? Or is the release time the moment when we can buy it and start downloading it ? And does anyone know the size of the game ?

I don't know if it had already been said but if they want to match the arecibos message aspect ratio, they will need at least 2 more feature videos meaning that if they stick to their schedule (5/6 months between videos) the game won't be released before the very end of 2022. And as the arecibo is 73x22 and they have released two 16x22 messages we can expect the complete message to be 64x22 or they will have to change the messages length at some point.

Imho the best "Show and Tell" iterations were "Clouds" and "New engine exhaust effects". They showed that KSP2 will be a real step-up compared to the original without spoiling anything about gameplay or exploration. So personally I'd like to see Jool's new cloud system or reentry VFXs but it's more likely they'll show us some parts modelling like solar panels or whatnot...

See you space cowboy ...

This

Some "minor" things I think KSP needs: A 0.625 m LES Symmetric radial-mount chutes White variant for the MK2 command pod New texture for the Nerv, Rhino, Reliant and Swivel engines and for reaction wheels and batteries A way to hide kerbals parachute backpacks

Whoaooa so much to see in this video ! 1:57 of pure awesomeness. Can't wait for Scott, Matt and Shadowzone analysis

See yonder, lo, the Galaxyë Which men clepeth the Milky Wey, For hit is whyt. — Geoffrey Chaucer The House of Fame, c. 1380.

I think he confused the prefixes intra and inter which both share the same etymology apparently. And most people don't even know how many planets there are in the SS nor their names. Most of people just don't care about astronomy. See how NASA desperately tries to appeal to new audiences by promoting movies like the martian for exemple or how Nasa news are becoming sciencepost level of clickbait... We know astronomy stuff because we like it but maybe the guy who wrote the article is fan of cooking and would think you're a retard if you can't make an omelet !

Rings are cool... I hope we will get accretion disks as well but that's unlikely

oh yes indeed, but the page I linked is as recently updated as individual pages so there is a mystery here. maybe just debug your plane close to sun, engines off, and see how the heat is handled

as mentionned you fly too fast too low, but the FAT-455 and the BIG S-delta wing (which I think iis attached to) have the same Max. Temperature according to ksp wiki. So having one burning up and not the other is quite strange. Are you sure your engine exhaust doesn't heat the wing ?

We don't have much footage of those planets yet so it's to early to tell... btw Ovin is a Super-kerbin not a gas giant and Eeloo is already a Pluto analogue

Well if cockpit interiors are as detailled as they're used to in KSP I will definitly miss DE_IVAs... But I hope I won't have to

The problem with the Enhanced Edition (note the irony of that name) is that it's a port of the PC version by a third party editor. It seems KSP 2 is being developped for PC PS4 and XONE from the startup so I think it's safe to expect an enhancement of the console version of KSP 2 over KSP Enhanced Edition

The guy who wrote the PC gamer article is just a video game journalist, he doesn't have to know about astronomy. We love space but some people don't care. People have different fields of expertise, they are not "ignorant" because they don't know what you concider the basises. The article covers the features in good details and the guy seems to have tried to understand the game mechanics as well as he could... Peace

I was not into LS until I read this post. What OP says is very important, in fact I don't see KSP 2 not having such features right now. And I want to point that what he's talking about should belong to the Aventure mode and should be togettable difficulty options in Sandbox mode. First it's clear that Nate loves mods and some of the mods we know in KSP will be stock in KSP 2 (PlanetShine or Transfer Window Planner for exemple). We can expect Nate to know about Zee's "Probes Before Crew" mod or at least be aware that manned missions being easier than probes missions is an issue for a lot of players (for science and career modes). So it's not too crazy to think that probes vs manned missions difficulty could be rebalanced in KSP2. Having LS in spacecraft is a good way to balance interstellar trips because if I don't need to worry about communication, electricity management, life support and if I can do EVAs and plant flags, why should I even think about sending a probe mission instead? It wouldn't be realistic and not appealing in terms of gameplay. Lastly, sending science missions to know about planets and to update the Tracking station would give a real purpose to the science parts, that we already know are featured in KSP2. And for (I can't stress that enough) the Aventure mode, it would be stange to able to see and check all the informations for every planets from the startup. That's why I think what OP says make sense.

I know that but I won't say IVAs are fonctionnal in KSP... Try flying on instruments and you will know your pain ! Personnaly I love aircrafts and clickable cockpits are my thing. Knowing speed, altitude and attitude precisely is necessary to fly properly an aircraft. Moreover with the current status of IVAs, trying to launch and land on the mun, for exemple, only in first person, without mods nor watching the map is harder in ksp than IRL ! (If you know how to use real-life spacecraft instruments) But maybe someone whose gameplay is more focused on building than flying won't be bothered at all by the lack of instrumentations inside KSP pods. So I think that depends on your gameplay style... Wow I didn't see that ! We need caves, hope that's indeed a hint, not a typo !