B.Riches2500

I would like to see a star (or multiple) without planets. That way, we will have more of a reason to send a counting missions first to see if there is even any point going to that particular system with a full colony. Just an idea.

I like to think that it’s Dres that has been thrown out into a further orbit (perhaps right by the Suns SOI) by Jool.

This is fantastic!

RTG

Would give the devs new challenges for lighting, and us new challenges for seeing. Could perhaps be a reason to fly by instruments rather than by eye (for landing in particular), and would mean we would need more light sources for colonies. Oh and colonies (and ships) would have to use RTG's too.

I'm hoping (and expecting) at least 3 at launch, and as you said possibly some more in future updates.

Yep, 100% agree. Would also be an incentive to transport resources from one base to another (or perhaps even one planet/moon to another?).

Yeah, I would want a lot of it to be by choice of the player. Like you get given options when you start a new save and you can choose what things you do and don’t want as mechanics of the game. I really like this idea. With some adaptation from the devs (who will have more insight into how the progression will actually work), I think this could work really well and would be amazing to kick start progression.

In KSP, it feels strange having manned flights instantly and having probes come in later on. So do we think that KSP2 will have a more realistic progression where we start with probes and then work up to manned flights? I guess this could be implemented as an optional feature offered to you when you start a save? However, I do understand that things like spin stabilised stage and stuff like that would be insane for KSP, so I wouldn’t expect anything like we see in RSS/R0/RP-1. So the probes will still have to be enough so that it’s similar to having a level 0 pilot Kerbal (SAS can only hold position, and cannot point in certain directions automatically), but it could just mean that you get less science from vehicles being unmanned. Also, they could have it where you get a small reward for milestones (like passing the Karman line and reaching orbit etc) when it’s on a probe controlled vehicle, but when you re-complete that milestone with a Kerbal onboard you could get a larger reward. Just an idea, let me know your opinions and what you think the likely hood of this every happening is.

I would think they just work on particular areas to make them really good and perfect for showing to the public, while in reality there are many other aspects of the game that still need to be worked on extensively. Also, to go with what @K^2 said, we saw very early on in Dev diaries that the planets were already looking spectacular and really good, but they seemed to still be in fairly early stages of working on engine plumes and explosion effects. So yeah, some areas seem more polished than others and those are the ones we have been shown so far.

I just think that other than fairings, having procedural parts will make it too difficult for newer players to get involved. It would be easier to leave that to modders, give it a few months and there will probably be all the realism mods on KSP2 lol

I think it would be cool if you could do a Voyager type thing and fire something out of the system, but due to its speed and distance between systems, it probably wont go anywhere and will just be left drifting in space.

Extra: My brother added that if you did the science on ice then it could be a hockey puck and stick rather than a golf ball and club.

I’ve just had a thought, and I wondered if it would be possible and if anyone else liked it. (Possibly for KSP, but more likely KSP2) My idea is based on the fact that KSP and Kerbals in general are quite silly, fun and quirky, and this would add a bit more of that onto the current EVA science pack. As far as I have experienced, the only animation is a Kerbal hitting a golf ball. My idea however, is that the animation could vary depending on the location at which the EVA science is being conducted. For example, in the polar regions of a planet (if they are ice caps) a Kerbal could make a snow ball and throw it, rather than hitting a golf ball. Also, to add to this when a Kerbal plants a flag when in the polar ice caps of a planet, it could make a snow man (snow Kerbal) and have that as the marker. Again, this would all vary depending on the biome, type of planet, and possibly some other factors. Let me know what you all think

Getting into Duna or Eve orbit. It was amazing to finally see these two with my own eyes on my own game. While at all being legit too, in a science mode save. Hopefully soon I’ll be doing it all again in my career save (just need the next antenna).

I think a good way to implement this would be that you start with the round chutes, then a little way down the tech tree you then get to the steerable chutes. And it could be that the steerable one weigh more and take up more space, so if you are tight on cargo capacity or weight, then you gotta make your decision on whether you want basic chutes to save on weight and space or advanced ones for more safety but take up more space and weigh the craft down more. (that may be jumbled, I’m tired lol)

I’d have to disagree with you. The focus of the game is around the Kerbals, and their technological advancements and that. If the devs were then making differently scaled modes of the game, then it takes focus away from the base game and we would not have as good of a game and would not get as frequent updates. However, I wouldn’t worry as the modding system should be much more advanced and mods that do alter the scale of the game should be easier and safer to install, and should be better too.

Yeah, I'm worried that it wont feel like KSP anymore, and will instead seem more like simple rockets in a way. I too fear that the entire game will be over simplified (or at least the standard progression from say LKO missions to Duna and Eve mission). I just hope that it will still have the feel of KSP and will still be very challenging. Something else I love about KSP is that its realistic and in my opinion only slightly whacky, and I think that KSP2 will make kerbals too childish and clumsy to be cartoonish. I do have faith in the Dev team and I love everyone's work, but I am worried that my favourite part of the game will be the graphics of the planets and moons lol.

1) more incentive to have early game/LKO space stations (so, other than science labs, fuelling, and space docks...) 2) slower progression. I don’t want to be interstellar within a month of getting the game lol, I feel that’s just too fast and that we should have to really earn that with lots of time and effort. 3) more reason to have rovers. Perhaps there could be more things to use scanning arms on and there is more reason to use them. 4) scout out an area before you begin building a base there. So probes to scan the surface, look at elevation and ores and biome and stuff like that, as well as rovers that actually explore the area to get an up close view to see if it’s suitable. Then small manned missions to get a legit Kerbal view of everything and see if it’s suitable for a habitat. (Very tedious, but perhaps it could work as a career+ game mode) 5) I hope that the game is still played like “rocket science Lego” where the parts have predetermined measurements and you have to work with what you’ve got (and if you want particular things that aren’t base game, then you’ll just have to clip things and drain tanks etc). I just don’t like the idea of parts where you place it and then you get to device for instance how tall a 2.5m fuel tank is. I like the current system where there are like 10 tanks and you just have to mess around and find out a look and system that suits you. and finally, I just hope the graphics live up to my expectations after all the footage we’ve seen lol, it looks beautiful so far!!

I think the crazy explosions are just what makes KSP different (as well as many other things). Because you can make a game ultra realistic and have dented or cracked tanks, but KSP is wacky and fun and although it isn’t entirely realistic we still get a kick out of it and really enjoy the fact that it’s I guess kinda cartoonish.

Yep, Mun will be my first destination too lol. I’ll be doing that within a couple hours of getting the game.

Perhaps this could be an enhanced version of career mode, where there is some incentive to do this (perhaps each time you design a brand new rocket, it uses a lot of funds. Like engineer wages and materials cost for example). That way there is a reason for you to have a standard rocket and design your payload around the rocket instead of designing your rocket around the payload. (This would also stop people cramming EVERY science piece onto a simple LKO orbiter, and would give you more of a reason to have multiple launches and satellites).

No mammoth engine?! Like, ever? But the mammoth engine is beard off of the SLS, so surely it’s got to be a standard/base game thing that you’d expect to see as soon as you load the game?

I would love this, but just as like a side mission type thing. So you don’t have to do it to progress, but if you do then you get additional funds and reputation. I just wouldn’t want to get a lot of funds or rep from it, as like I said it should only really be a thing on the side and mainly for fun but you do get a little something for your effort.

100% agree. If the developers had this to work on too, then it would take focus away from the whole point of the game being the Kerbals and the different area in space, and we would get a lower quality Kerbal game and fewer updates to it. The devs kept saying that the game is going to be highly moddable and friendly to mod makers, especially as there are things that player may want but they don’t want to add in (Eg realism overhaul and weapons). So yeah it makes total sense for the modders to add in these different features for those who want it, as it would result in the devs creating a better base game overall.