Jump to content

Lord Aurelius

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

484 Excellent

About Lord Aurelius

  • Rank
    Supreme Commander

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The tech tree in KSP1 definitely has some major problems that should be fixed in KSP2, but the bigger issue I want to see addressed is making the game progression about something more than just filling out the tech tree. The tech tree should enable game progression, not be the vast majority of it. Sandbox has its place, but I would like to see career expanded to provide more goals along the lines of what the anomaly explorer contract pack does, giving the player a concrete long term objective (get to a specific location on a planet and return data from the site, to unlock a logical next contra
  2. From reading the posts in here, I seem to be in the minority hoping that KSP2 does have a more story driven game mode. In KSP1, some of the early devs stated they intended to do something like that with the anomalies, and I've really enjoyed the anomaly explorer contract packs. I don't see a story driven mode as a replacement for the current sandbox/science modes, but rather as a complement for players who enjoy a more story driven challenge, and as a stepping stone for players just coming off the tutorial to apply their skills and get mission ideas with entertaining cutscenes between cha
  3. If I'm wanting a really unusual planetary system, maybe have one full of alien constructs like Halo style ring worlds, hollow spherical planets that are giant metal lattices with deep shafts going down to the core and huge void spaces, rotating O'Neill cylinders scattered throughout the system, and a Dyson swarm of dead satellites around the star.
  4. I totally agree, it would be awesome for each planet to have its own theme music. There's a mod for KSP1 that allows for this, and it really improves the feel of the game.
  5. I wonder if an Orion style antimatter engine would be more feasible, using antimatter bombs instead of nuclear explosives. Nuclear bombs are technically just super inefficient antimatter bombs since the energy comes from e=mc^2 matter to energy conversion, same as antimatter, with only a tiny % of the bomb's mass undergoing conversion. An antimatter explosive would greatly reduce the mass of the fuel, and the same shielding techniques proposed for Orion would likely address the heat and radiation concerns.
  6. Agreed. Also consider that when Take 2 originally made its statement regarding console support KSP2 was still scheduled to launch in early 2020, prior to the current console generation. At that point it would have been a no-brainer to attempt to support that console generation, but with all the delays it makes less and less sense IMHO, especially given how slow the CPUs in those systems are. I really don't want to see KSP2 gameplay limited to what the CPU in an OG Xbox One/PS4 can handle.
  7. Now I'm tempted to repurpose my old gaming laptop as a dedicated Linux machine just to show support for games on Linux, its more or less the same Clevo model that System76 used for one of their machines so all the hardware should be supported.
  8. For KSP2, I want to see both easter eggs (random funnies like the toilet in a destroyed astronaut complex, crashed UFOs and other amusing hidden things that have zero effect on gameplay) and also hidden anomalies that tie into the exploration gameplay like the newish green monoliths. Basically something like the anomaly explorer contract pack that functions as the lightweight story mode for career KSP1 never officially got with some reward for finding each anomaly, unlocking the ability to find more anomalies.
  9. I play a lot of games and have a Windows gaming PC so that Linux availability doesn't affect me personally, but given the demographics of the KSP playerbase I'm saddened that KSP2 doesn't look like it will have Linux support at launch. It probably comes down to finances unfortunately, they have telemetry from the game that tells among other things which platform the game is being played on, and its very possible that the number of Linux users (who are probably also adept at disabling telemetry further reducing the number) is small enough that they came to the logical conclusion that there
  10. Totally agree with the OP, and I also want to add that seeing the KSP1 launch made me feel the same way. Really hope the management above the KSP2 devs doesn't push them to release a broken KSP2 by a specific date, although given how KSP1 and The Witcher 3 survived their initial launch states I can't say there's really strong incentive to get it right at launch provided they're willing to continue to support the game and eventually make it better since that usually makes gamers more willing to accept a rocky launch.
  11. Given how well KSP1 currently "works" on last gen consoles AFTER all the bugfixes and how the release of KSP1 and CP2077 on last gen consoles went, I hope the devs quietly scrub mention of PS4 and Xbox One from the page and don't waste any time trying to get it working on those systems. KSP 1 is CPU bound more than anything else and I don't want to see KSP2 hobbled by a misguided notion that they need to somehow make it work on such underpowered hardware (see https://www.anandtech.com/show/16336/installing-windows-on-an-xbox-one-s-apu-the-chuwi-aerobox-review). In all honesty, I hope
  12. Totally agree with the OP, the part prices make zero sense for the most part (along with a lot of other part values like mass, storage capacity, thrust, etc and the tech tree in general). There's been a few halfhearted attempts by the devs to balance the parts, but given their reluctance to break people's craft files (even prior to 1.0) the game never got the deep balance pass it needed and we're probably forever stuck with these bad placeholder values. At least the values are easy to change using modulemanager.
  13. The collision physics are pretty impressive for a voxel builder with block damage and destruction and terrain deformation, but the actual simulation isn't great. Things like tensile strength aren't simulated at all so its entirely possible to build enormous constructs supported by tiny beams. Orbital mechanics aren't simulated at all either. Planets have gravity wells that will gently pull you in towards them in a straight line, but there's no circular orbits at all. As soon as you cross the magic threshold to get out of a gravity well, you can completely shut off your engines and your sh
  14. Kerbals are great comic relief and definitely add to the overall appeal of the game for me, but they're still ultimately just a nice side touch and should not distract from the core game mechanics of building rockets and flying missions. I've spent far more time in KSP building and flying rockets/aircraft that were either unmanned or had the kerbals permanently in their capsules such that it wouldn't matter if they're kerbals or not than actually using them directly. That said, I would like to see them integrated a bit better into the core game mechanics with a better implementation of ke
  15. One feature I've wanted for a long time in KSP is the ability to add action-group style actions to staging in the VAB/SPH. The primary use case for this is to automatically enable/disable specific RCS thrusters so that I can use Vernier thrusters on my lower stages without burning up RCS monoprop, and switch to RCS on my upper stage more easily without needing to take up an action group slot for a one time action. This could also be used to do things like automatically deploying solar panels and antennas once fairings have been jettisoned, and a million other creative things I haven't even tho
  • Create New...