BowlerHatGuy3

It’d probably be best as a graphics setting, where you could adjust the brightness of the backround. Even if it is realistic to have the stars I don’t really like the look of it. Like, you can even see them when looking directly at kerbol.

You’re assuming there is no sun. Unless the sun is being blocked by something (like a planet), you’re eyes or camera would adjust to where you wouldn’t be able to see the stars. They’re too dim. You may go to the article that @JoeSchmuckatelli provided, but it states that Al Worden saw the stars on the dark side of the moon, not the bright, which makes sense since the sun wouldn’t force his eyes to adjust. Also, @whatsEJstandfor I noticed that after I posted. After writing nothing but emails for weeks you kinda forget how easy it is to sound like a buzzkill. Thanks for letting me know .

@Nate SimpsonThis looks really cool of course, but I don’t really like the amount of stars. We all already know that space is pitch black most of the time, but the lack of stars also looks better in my opinion. It makes a nice contrast and also serves as a reminder that space is extremely hostile. BTW the frame rate on the launchpad is a little concerning. You guys working on that?

Peak humor

Yeah. I don’t see any reason for something like this. Seems more like a gimmick than an actual feature.

I mean, it wouldn’t be too hard. It’s standard practice in modeling.

I don’t know man. Cool for a mod but would make kerbals obsolete.

I’d say all of the above. It’s called sandbox for a reason. If I wanted to have actual progression I’d play adventure mode.

While I do agree that sports turned into video games is kind of silly, I’ll make an exception for mountain climbing. While football is objectively dangerous, the worst you’ll get is a couple of broken bones and concussions. Meanwhile, climbing will have you be freezed to death, or impaled on a tree, or falling on a sharp rock and being ripped in two. My point is that I’m not willing to chance me dying a horrible death just for some adrenaline rush. Plus, very few games are on a scale like Kerbal (or Kerbal 2 for that matter), and I feel that many of these great environments would go to waste if they didn’t add some way to traverse them without a vehicle.

Exactly. It could also open up a lot of new exploration challenges. I for one would love to scale the tallest mountain on Kerbin with a friend on multiplayer.

I think due to the size of some of these mountains, a stamina system would only make things more tedious.

Seeing all of the new terrain on the new planets in Kerbal 2 has got me thinking. As an avid hiker and professional masochist, I would love to climb/hike up them. Not only are they big but they also seem to be extremely detailed, down to every individual rock. It would be a shame if the devs didn’t add an intuitive way for a kerbal to climb up them in the future. So here’s my idea. Gear Assuming that there’s an inventory system like Kerbal 1 or various mods, you would be able to equip a pack that has all the necessary gear you would need to climb any mountain in the kerbal universe. This would include: Rope 2 ice axes Crampons Tent/Temporary shelter Gameplay The ice axes and crampons are self explanatory. Ropes main use would be to secure your kerbal to said mountain, just in case you slip or accidentally press space. Every 10 meters or so you would place a hook to attach a rope to (this would also delete you previous hook just to make things less complicated). You would also be able to attach a rope to another kerbal for rescue missions & multiplayer. If kerbal 1 falls and kerbal 2 isn’t secured, this would cause kerbal 1 to pull kerbal 2 off the mountain and both of them would perish. As a bonus, it would be cool if there was a winch part for rovers. A kerbal would pull the hook attached to the winch and place it on anything they desire. This would be good for pulling rovers up steep slopes and pulling broken vehicles to a different location. The tent would be used for if you wanted to do something else or to resupply a Kerbal’s oxygen (if thats a thing). Conclusion Not only would a feature like this aid in exploration, but it would also open up new possibilities in science. Imagine if there was some special rock or land feature on a planet, but it’s on a mountain at a 70 degree slope. You could climb up there using a kerbal/rover.

Musics fire. Kinda wish we saw the engine running tho

I don’t know about the mechs, but solar sails would be awesome.

L Just making the connection that many realistic games rely on extreme repetition.

Playing a lot of semi-realistic games recently, and I’ve been reminded of something. The Grind for a lot of realistic games (progression wise) is absolutely atrocious. There have been games that have such a bad grind that I just got bored and stopped playing. There are also other games that are not frustrating because of the grind, but they lack basic quality of life features that make the most simple of things take much longer than they should (looking at you Space Engineers). I really hope Kerbal 2 doesn’t fall into this trap. The game should be painful to a degree, but the devs need to make sure that theres a light at the end of tunnel. There should be a moment after all of your hard work where you can see your colony up and running, look over other planets and admire an alien star. If there’re any devs reading this, please take this into account.

Oh sry I thought you said that everything flying should be limited to mach 3.

I don’t think they should be THAT slow. Theres something special about seeing your plane glow up from the speed it’s at. IMO Mach 4 should be the breaking point where going any faster is a death wish.

Yes I know, but then there would be no point for a scramjet. Many of Kerbal’s engines are less powerful & less efficient than their irl counterparts for gameplay reasons. This should be no different for aircraft.

I don’t know if that would work. If they have a good science system you’re already going to be exploring planets anyways. Also, if your rover falls down a hill or does some tight turns (which is inevitable) the track is going to be all sorts of screwed up.

I think nerfing the whiplash to make room for a ramjet would be the best option. The Whiplash would have a top speed of mach 3 and the scramjet would have a top speed of mach 4-5. The Whiplash is already op as it is. Revamping the way that you turn on the ramjets/scramjets would be nice as well.

The trains would probably be much farther in the tech tree, as making a train network on another planet would be a tremendous task. I guess it would be in the area of when your about to start interstellar. You wouldn’t want to have to monitor your rovers and planes while your making your interstellar vessels. So it’s a way of guaranteeing that you’re getting a constant flow of resources much quicker and more efficiently than other transports without having to make sure its working correctly (you also wouldn’t have to design unique transports for every planet anymore).

This is the way. Building a train network across a Kerbal sized planet using individual pieces would be an indescribable kind of torture. There would be no point in using the trains.

There are already ramjets in the game; that’s why I’m looking forward for scramjets. Ramjets could be reduced to mach 3 and scramjets would keep your plane going until in disintegrates.

One of the science report near the launchpad says that there is green goop everywhere.