Search the Community

Oh heavens to Betsy, we forgot all about the thread where they joked about putting imperial units in KSP. Quick everyone, we must finish that riveting debate! Seriously though, the thread isn't derailed so much as the topic is now something YOU do not wan't to talk about. No, they are telling you that you think something is fixed because you have not seen the cracks yet. They have been very patient trying to explain it to people in this thread. It is not a difficult concept to grasp. Why do people think the burden of proof is on the poster who went and did reserach on the topic, and not the poster who reads the post and goes "I don't believe you. I haven't looked, but you sound wrong." What about imperial tons? Back to topic and all that. (I know it wasn't you who mentioned getting back to topic, I'm just making a bad joke)

They've actively, literally, contradicted this by saying work was continued between the restructuring. Plus it's literally the same upper management minus Paul Furio who got fired early on, so it's either them practicing corporate diplomacy (with themselves?) or development really wasn't interrupted. Hope one day we get a proper post mortem and a case for devs and publishers to look at and learn from. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. They work super slowly > they can't show progress because there's none > there's nothing solid to talk about (and they don't want to talk about plans either because they know they'll be held up to their words, the horror). > they need to space posts more > those posts are still empty because (start cycle again here). Basic bug-reporting feedback right there that you should be telling the authors of reports. In github you get your issues properly tagged if they can't be reproduced, or are believed to be hardware related, or whatever. Reports being archived without saying a single word is a big no no, no matter what single excuse you could write for doing it. Even a "not important" provides at least some closure and safety that the thing was at least read. Not only is the faith in QA testing for this project under the ground, but the bug tracker that had to be fought for "happens" to be ignored and users are made to wait ~1 month to see if top voted issues are even being looked at. Because even those barely have developer interaction, only to be met with "can't reproduce lol". The whole bug reporting-to-feedback process (let alone a "hot" fix that's cold by 2 months at the minimum) is laughably bad and should be set as an example to every dev running a bug tracker on how exactly to not do things. Great way of putting it into words. We're 1+ years into the project and these very basic doubts still linger. Even if they work at the pace of a DMV, they should have a vision they want to pursue and a reason for wanting to repeat all the same mistakes KSP1 made. For all the hate KSP1 received in these forums once 2 dropped, from some people, they're really doing a very basic rerun with a fresh coat of paint and a bigger price tag. Doesn't matter, there's still a missing part to close the loop. It's the same issue the old "mail us the bug" reporting system had. You have no idea what they're doing, if they're doing anything at all, with your report. On which everybody complained about readability and what we got in return was "replace font 2 hard" and some color changes on the navball which is still a mess. Great feedback loop, at least that issue had some closure and we know we need mods to fix that. So you get another black hole place where you don't even know where your feedback goes. The K.E.R.B. is so vital and wanted because it's what's missing to close the loop: feedback on feedback. It's the only time we get to hear about what devs are actually working on, without marketeer language, without hypebeasting, and so on.

Exactly... currently. When you set out to do something more bigger and ambitious, than KSP 1 in this context, you have to plan ahead. I won't pretend that I know anything about that physics engine. But, I do have a little knowledge about programming, and as stated above, I'm very much curious how they plan to execute many things. Rocket wobble is just one of them. Continuous long burns, heat transfer, battery draining, etc... computations on all vessels during time warp... those are the meat mechanics of the (new) game. Thus far, as @PDCWolf pointed out, there was a talk about a short term and long term solution for rocket wobble. They went with middle term solution, involving autostruts. Why? I'm not dissing devs. If you asked me how to implement these things efficiently, I'd say wait for home quantum computers. The point I'm trying to make is that, we haven't got any indication on how these crucial things will be resolved. After so many years of development apparently,(judging by autostruts, they don't have any indication either. If they do, I'd be very curious to read an update on that. I don't care if I don't get any new parts, or parachute bug resolved within the next few months. I care whether the team is capable of developing the core mechanics needed for this game. Falling back to autostruts doesn't inspire much confidence, and I pray to be proven, oh so very wrong.

Since it was clogging up the spacex discussion, you can talk about starlink here!

That's a KAS problem, not Pathfinder. The following (old) post and the one after it talk about some work arounds for when this happens - to my knowledge no complete fix was ever made (at least there's nothing in the releases changelog that looks like it addresses this issue):

I wanted to put this out into the community about the next major roadmap updates to see if anyone agrees. Obviously the team has a plan for what features should come when but they have also said they will be flexible based on what the community wants. Perhaps this can be a thread to show what the community wants first. I am extremely excited for the colonies update and can't wait to see KSP2 finally achieve features that will separate itself from it's predecessor. It is my understanding from interviews and KSP2 development posts that the colonies update really only brings building colonies into the game. The only real purpose they will bring to the game is looking cool and launching vessels from whatever planet/moon you want in the Kerbolar system. That is all fun and good, honestly I would probably have hours of fun with that anyways if development stays on track with the current roadmap; However, this would also mean that the colonies wouldn't get any "True" functionality until after the interstellar update. Once the colonies update comes we will likely see a large gap between that and the interstellar update sense there is such a large amount of new mechanics and development that will need to go into new solar systems and how to get there. There was a 10 month wait for the first big update of KSP2 "For Science!", I understand that was to fix a lot of bugs on launch so I don't expect Colonies to take as long but I wouldn't expect it in the next 3-4 months. If we estimated an average of 6 months between each update that would mean we could get colonies around June or July, then interstellar around December or January of 2025, and then go back to resource gathering by Jun or July of 2025. Having a whole year between being able to build colonies and being able to utilize colonies in the way that I believe the devs want them to be used seems out of place to me. While I and many others are extremely excited for interstellar, I think we would also appreciate the colonies and their functionality being completely fledged out before going into the next "BIG NEW THING" for KSP2. To me it does not make sense to add construction of colonies, have a gap and add interstellar, then go back and add functionality to colonies. Another point to make, sadly, is bug fixes. The colonies update will likely have some things to it that the community will have notes on what could be done better, of course these things can be addressed in smaller updates in between colonies and interstellar, but I think it would also be good to have the next big roadmap goal also be connected to colonies, making the focus of the development team "locked in" on getting these parts of the game perfect before moving on. If resource gathering is next on the list from colonies it would also allow them to add big "second thought"/"lesser priority" things to colonies seamlessly in addition to the exploration roadmap goal (similar to how For Science! added reentry heating). Lastly I would like to talk about integration of the resource gathering and transportation system from interplanetary to interstellar. Resource distribution on this large of a scale seems to me like a hard case to crack, I think there will be some errors in the first version that the becomes publicly available. I would personally rather have those struggles on interplanetary missions rather than interstellar ones in the first implementation of resource gathering. If we switched interstellar and exploration on the roadmap hopefully it would mean that the resource distribution systems can be perfected and easily ported to interstellar. I would rather have headache and be able to look at it as just a problem with the one feature of resource distribution rather than feel like its frustration with interstellar and resource distribution. Overall I love that the development team has been more open with communication and taking advice from their audience (Thank you for fixing wobbly rockets ). I do wonder what the rest of the community thinks about this, and if the developers would consider changing such a big decision. Anyways much love to the devs and the community, I'm sure that we will be happy with whatever way development goes but I think it is something to consider. P.S. this could also mean that you could push the second new star system addition to come in the multiplayer update which could be fun to have the first looks of new territory to be with friends. Just a thought!

Ah yes, love the hyperbole. Also, you can clearly check that I'm a man of my word: i said that if FS! failed to deliver, I'd no longer have any hope or playtime for this game, and that's exactly what happened. I booted FS! a couple times to see what it was about, the game is still bad, and broken, science is a bad streamlined copy of KSP1 and now I post here with weeks or months inbetween right as I said I would. That you still have to strawman my posts as some sort of angry, rabid hater wanting change is funny, specially when I didn't ask for anything to change since before For Science! because that update showed me this project is hopeless. They're clearly not obvious for the devs, given how many remain unaddressed (can't address anything if you don't communicate), that's exactly why the community feels unheard. Very little people posts here anymore thinking the devs are gonna read their feedback unless it's a bug. That's as evident as checking the suggestions subforum and seeing the only people suggesting stuff is new users. Expectations remain unaddressed and unmanaged past the roadmap and some handwavy answers at the AMAs and will remain so until the devs decide to man up and come out with serious talk about the final shape of KSP2, so the people wanting something different can move on if they haven't yet.

Calling 911 to talk to King Richard.

agreed, I would appreciate more activity on the forums. Even if it was just a simple post saying "heard" on a popular thread that day. I would even settle for a cold "this is /is not part of the current plan" to at least get an idea of where we are going I also wanted to come back to this point I made a little bit ago. I think the best example of this would be this video from the KSP YouTube channel. It's a quick 5 min video talking about reentry heating which a lot of the community had questions about, even just the quick look at it and talk from an actual person working on it was great to see at the time. This in my opinion is the perfect amount of communication and is exactly what the community needs. Maybe once a month on a feature or a bug that there has been a lot of questions about.

I originally posted the following in the April Fool's Day thread about converting to imperial units. However, to avoid turning that thread into another one like this, I'm moving the post here so, in the event people want to discuss it, they can do so in this thread, where it belongs. A lot has been made of the development teams (coders, artists, etc.) not having anything to do with communicating with the community, and I'll say up front that I agree with that statement. No, I do not want the developers to sit around and talk on the forums or Discord all day long; they have a game to write, for pete's sake. I'd rather they spend their time on the clock coding, or drawing, or whatever it is they need to do to get the game done. Go. Please. With that said, it is the job of the Community Managers to interact and engage with the community. As far as EA goes, it should be their job to engage with us and let us know exactly what is happening with the development of the game. Yes, this involves interviewing the developers, and compiling lists of bugs, and all the other stuff that goes along with that. But it is their literal job to interact with the community, and the issue here is that instead of the CM's doing this, they are worrying about things that the community quite frankly as a whole doesn't care about. This leads me to believe that one of the following 2 situations is true: The CM's are understaffed and overworked to the point where they simply cannot interact in meaningful ways. Dakota is on his own right now as Mike is off on paternity leave (and coming back this month, I think?), and the organization either hired but has not trained the new person they posted for months ago OR they simply decided not to do it. And this is on top of all of the vacation and time off that was taken over the holidays. If this is the case, if it is a situation where Dakota simply does not have the time to effectively do his job and interact with the community in thoughtful and meaningful ways, then I have to ask why he has the time to come up with weekly challenges and joke threads. I get that those things may be part of his job, but we have begged for more meaningful communication and have not gotten it. Does he not have time to ask the developers where they are at? Do the CM's not have the ability or authority to ask the artists what they have drawn up lately? Has Nate decided that he doesn't need to give interviews to the CM's or host AMA's any longer? And if this is all the case, why hasn't the company hired more CM's to help alleviate the strain on Dakota? It's either this, or... The developers honestly have nothing to show or discuss at this point. And if this is the case, there's a whole box of Lego's that need to be unpacked with this. Because, quite frankly, how can you be 6 years into development, and 1 year+ into early access, and have nothing to discuss? We have bugs that have been persistent since launch, promises made both before and during launch that haven't been met, and yet they have nothing to divulge? Bug reports that aren't discussed but end up in the archive with no explanation, and no talking about them? The company hired 2 of the best and brightest minds from the KSP1 mod community to help write this game, and you've got nothing to show at this point? For Science! dropped almost 4 months ago, and since then we've seen like 1 or 2 images of what might be in colonies, but you have no words to go with that? Where are we at on the road map as far as colonies goes? I know you can't give any dates, but are we even close? And those images of gigantic parts in space - are they going to be in the game, and if so, how do we get them up into space? Where are we at with all those bugs for months you just keep saying "Researching"? On those bugs you are looking for additional feedback on - what do you need from us to help you? What information are you looking for that we haven't already provided? And what do you say to those people - like myself - who have mid-range equipment and are supposed to see performance increases but aren't? (Side note - anything greater than 200 parts on my rig drops my FPS to 10. In orbit. 32 GB RAM, 2060 Super, Ryzen 9 3900 12 core. Tell me again how performance has gotten better.) It's no secret that I have been very vocal about where I think the game is at, and where it is headed. I've complained enough, so I'm trying not to do more of the same here (even though I'm sure this will all still be seen as complaining). But I want this game to succeed. I want this game to outplay, outperform, and outlast the original. I do not want to have to see the community come together and have the modders create KSP3. Nobody wants that. We shouldn't even have to float that idea, to be honest. But enough. Enough of the joke threads. Enough of the weekly challenges. Enough of the silence. We have held up our end of the bargain here in EA by not only shelling out the cost of the full release game, but we've been up front and honest with you about bugs, feedback, and telling you what it is we want. We are simply asking for the company to hold up their end. Too much damage has been done over this, but we are still willing to overlook that and give you back our trust if you would simply communicate with us and let us know where this whole thing stands. No corp-speak, no double meanings, no half-truths. Just be honest. We will understand. Heck, we've been understanding for the better part of a decade now; honesty will only help to repair the relationship.

A lot has been made of the development teams (coders, artists, etc.) not having anything to do with communicating with the community, and I'll say up front that I agree with that statement. No, I do not want the developers to sit around and talk on the forums or Discord all day long; they have a game to write, for pete's sake. I'd rather they spend their time on the clock coding, or drawing, or whatever it is they need to do to get the game done. Go. Please. With that said, it is the job of the Community Managers to interact and engage with the community. As far as EA goes, it should be their job to engage with us and let us know exactly what is happening with the development of the game. Yes, this involves interviewing the developers, and compiling lists of bugs, and all the other stuff that goes along with that. But it is their literal job to interact with the community, and the issue here is that instead of the CM's doing this, they are worrying about things that the community quite frankly as a whole doesn't care about. This leads me to believe that one of the following 2 situations is true: The CM's are understaffed and overworked to the point where they simply cannot interact in meaningful ways. Dakota is on his own right now as Mike is off on paternity leave (and coming back this month, I think?), and the organization either hired but has not trained the new person they posted for months ago OR they simply decided not to do it. And this is on top of all of the vacation and time off that was taken over the holidays. If this is the case, if it is a situation where Dakota simply does not have the time to effectively do his job and interact with the community in thoughtful and meaningful ways, then I have to ask why he has the time to come up with weekly challenges and joke threads. I get that those things may be part of his job, but we have begged for more meaningful communication and have not gotten it. Does he not have time to ask the developers where they are at? Do the CM's not have the ability or authority to ask the artists what they have drawn up lately? Has Nate decided that he doesn't need to give interviews to the CM's or host AMA's any longer? And if this is all the case, why hasn't the company hired more CM's to help alleviate the strain on Dakota? It's either this, or... The developers honestly have nothing to show or discuss at this point. And if this is the case, there's a whole box of Lego's that need to be unpacked with this. Because, quite frankly, how can you be 6 years into development, and 1 year+ into early access, and have nothing to discuss? We have bugs that have been persistent since launch, promises made both before and during launch that haven't been met, and yet they have nothing to divulge? Bug reports that aren't discussed but end up in the archive with no explanation, and no talking about them? The company hired 2 of the best and brightest minds from the KSP1 mod community to help write this game, and you've got nothing to show at this point? For Science! dropped almost 4 months ago, and since then we've seen like 1 or 2 images of what might be in colonies, but you have no words to go with that? Where are we at on the road map as far as colonies goes? I know you can't give any dates, but are we even close? And those images of gigantic parts in space - are they going to be in the game, and if so, how do we get them up into space? Where are we at with all those bugs for months you just keep saying "Researching"? On those bugs you are looking for additional feedback on - what do you need from us to help you? What information are you looking for that we haven't already provided? And what do you say to those people - like myself - who have mid-range equipment and are supposed to see performance increases but aren't? (Side note - anything greater than 200 parts on my rig drops my FPS to 10. In orbit. 32 GB RAM, 2060 Super, Ryzen 9 3900 12 core. Tell me again how performance has gotten better.) It's no secret that I have been very vocal about where I think the game is at, and where it is headed. I've complained enough, so I'm trying not to do more of the same here (even though I'm sure this will all still be seen as complaining). But I want this game to succeed. I want this game to outplay, outperform, and outlast the original. I do not want to have to see the community come together and have the modders create KSP3. Nobody wants that. We shouldn't even have to float that idea, to be honest. But enough. Enough of the joke threads. Enough of the weekly challenges. Enough of the silence. We have held up our end of the bargain here in EA by not only shelling out the cost of the full release game, but we've been up front and honest with you about bugs, feedback, and telling you what it is we want. We are simply asking for the company to hold up their end. Too much damage has been done over this, but we are still willing to overlook that and give you back our trust if you would simply communicate with us and let us know where this whole thing stands. No corp-speak, no double meanings, no half-truths. Just be honest. We will understand. Heck, we've been understanding for the better part of a decade now; honesty will only help to repair the relationship.

Just to be clear: I'm not defending anything. I'm stating facts. That those facts are contrary to what people want is not really my problem. To also be clear: Of course I want a perfect game delivered 12 months ago with no bugs and a $10 price tag. However I live in the real world and understand that in the vast majority of cases I will never ever get what I want. So, I determine if what is offered is worth what I'm willing to pay and if it is, great. If not, oh well maybe I'll leave a bad review and then I'll move on. Complaining about obvious things over and over is such a useless exercise it frustrates me that so many enjoy it. Talk about twisting your brain into a torus, that's the idea that after the first 300 times, the 301st complaint will make some sort of difference.

This is a serious topic, and unfortunately, KSP2 fails on all fronts here. And I can only talk about problems with interface, but I'm sure there's plenty more things that can be improved. Plus, if anything, the 0.1.4 made it worse. Look at this Let's start from the top left. The "hamburger menu". Known to exist in most mobile apps, but absent from most desktop applications, except some browsers. Alright, it's a good idea to have a button AND a hotkey (Esc), just like staging does, but does it have to be an actual icon of a hamburger? Probably a snacks joke, haha. Okay, it's there but... it only works one way. There's no button to go back from the menu. Not very intuitive, is it? Meanwhile, a button with similar function (opening a menu of options) in App bar looks entirely different. Next stop is on the right, the GFORCE window. Or is it a Gforce window? Maybe it's crew portait window? And if it is, why does it show empty seats? Where's that cyber Kerbal dummy that devs have shown us ages ago? Anyway, what matters is that the name has a hard time explaining what it is, because the GFORCE only applies to that thin strip on the left. And I think another issue are the window names. Not only they're 8 pixels tall (at 1080p screen), very inconsistent in letter shape - look at any two same letters close to each other, they are not identical because the whole thing is badly compressed, but also inconsistent in letter size and style - for example, the resources window has the title made of 7 pixels, but also the separator isn't a dot, but a hyphen. And the whole theme makes it look like it's some placeholder codename, not an actual thing. Why is it ORBITAL.INFO, and not Orbital Info? Why is it TIME.WARP and not Time Warp? There's no reason to have it like that in a product that's not a prototype available only for the dev team. Font choices. On that one screenshot I counted 12 (Twelve) different styles, including changes in font size. That is the opposite of unified interface, feels more like a bunch of different bits made by 5 different people, glued together to make a UI. We've got window names in two (at least) sizes, orbital parameters (also at least two sized AND styles), the navball there you can find another 3, timewarp window with 2 more, the resource window with another new size, and staging with at least two more. Iconography. There isn't much here but there are two identical radiotelescope icons that do different things. One shows radio connection, the other is Tracking Station. That can be confusing. Also, all planets in the top left list have the same icon of Kerbin. I know it's an icon for "planet" but it's the same for moons. The Navball. Oh the navball. I should explain that I am slightly visually impaired. Wearing glasses, short sighted, astigmatism, recently fighting (without effects) focus/contrast issues in my right eye. And there's no other way of saying this, the new dark mode of the navball looks like crap and is unreadable for me without leaning in and squinting. The tiny, very densely packed numbers blend with the background, the center bird blends with the background lines, the SAS icons can be barely seen against what's behind them. You could say to increase the size of the UI - but I don't think I should. I'm not that blind because, in KSP1, with roughly the same size of the ball, I had no problems reading the numbers. Here though, it's a complete blur. Honestly, the most readable thing in this whole screenshot, is the FPS readout.

Talk about beating a dead horse - at this point y'all are knocking on a skeleton Last I checked, SpaceX was doing perfectly fine without needing to check arbitrary boxes set by not-SpaceX on SpaceX's own missions.

MISSION_UPDATE - Tour de Minmus - Johndin and Podcal looking on the ancient relic found in the mysterious crater on Minmus. While Poduki relays their findings to KSC FOREWORD: Before we start - I would like to say that this post became a lot longer than I anticipated. I would very much like some honest feedback on weather I should dial it down a notch and be less detailed. Or cut it into more edible pieces. or if its just all good and fun. Before we start - I would like to thank all who indulge in my increasingly longer forum posts. Any way.. Funny story! A mistake was made by my internet provider and I was without internet this weekend! It was an odd experience.. I mean I grew up without internet.. but I realized how much of my home is setup to use internet.. I hear my radio through my Sonos and see TV through my Chromecast. At least when I was a child we had antenna tv and FM radio. It actually made my wife and I talk about getting a low tech FM radio - Just incase the political climate deteriorate even further in Europe.. and we need to be able to get news from the government. But before we go all doom and gloom... let's keep on topic... Without internet, the only game I could play was KSP - the others required internet in varying degree. So I managed to get the rover the last stretch to the mysterious crater in record time. Before being offgrid for an weekend, I was only driving the rover, half attentive, while listening to Audio Books or Podcasts with my wife. This weekend, the journey was done with plenty of whiskey in the glass and vinyls on the record player. You may be thinking, why plenty of whiskey? is Rovers that bad? well no... whiskey is a nice drink of course.. but also yes.. let's talk about Rovers.. and how much I dislike the Rover Game Mechanics. MISSION TASKS: A. Test the Rovers functionality and maneuverability - Success B. Drive an expedition to explore the North of Minmus - Success C. Drive the Rover back to Base Camp One C. Recover Rover via Dropship and return it to base- Success D. Return Dropship to ICV Explorer - Success LESSONS LEARNED; LESSONS IDENTIFIED: Section A: The Rover has left the Sheet Ice of the frozen lake and drive in the Snowdrifts that cover most of the little moon. Let's talk about rovers: I... HATE the way rovers drive in this game. It is not that I expected it to be Snow Runners, with the game simulating every minute physics detail of sand, snow and mud.. But man It would be nice if rovers at least drove like a car... and not a shopping trolley... It would be so nice if the wheels had just an inch of traction.. Speaking of traction.. What does the traction slider even do? It seems very backwards. If I turn traction up, the engines cannot turn the wheels, it feels like the engines are terrible underpowered (are they that weak?). But if you keep the tracktion down, you'll be wheel spinning like mad.. but unlike in our world, were the vehicle would dig it self down.. In the solar system of Kerbol the vehicle will gain momentum... a lot of momentum. I found I could get my rover to ~10 m/s on rough terrain (the only limiting factor being that it's hard to gain speed when the wheels dont have a lot of contact with the ground from all the jumps) and I never reached the limit on the flats of the Sheet Ice lakes.. the rover hit a small bump and tumbled. The science junior on the front broke off. - It was a bloody miracle the antenna didn't break off or the vehicle exploded.. So Johndin had to pick up sample and take readings by hand after that. The rest of the journey was done with the antenna folded down... and then only folded up to send situation reports to Kerbin, or the ICV when it passed by. After realizing this was how it was going to be - the only thing left to do was to strap in hit the speeder and tune the radio in on: And Start drift.. I mean driving. I found that the only reliable way to turn was to create a custom made Action Group for turning the Reaction Wheels ON - do the course correction and then press another custom made Action Group turning OFF all reaction wheels (to avoid the rover doing flips from the torque power when pressing forward). Because of course the "Only online when SAS is on" is bugged. The rest of the lessons learned Lessons identified I've put in spoiler sections for those interested to keep a bloated post more streamlined: 1. Axle configuration and angle of climb: 3. Thrusters: 4. Lights: 5. Power and Recharging: Section B: The rover - stopped in the snowdrifts - to enable Johndin to take samples and readings - While a cresended Kerbin is setting in the horizon. The Expedition to the Northern parts of Minmus was divided into 5 legs: Leg 1: Contained the initial testing of the Rover on the Sheet Ice Flats of (what I have Identified to be?) The Greater Flats that Base Camp One was established on. After that it took a sharp turn North East to get to new terrain that was found to be snowdrifts. This was done in the hopes that the reason the rover drove like a elephant on ice skates was because of the sheet ice - and not game mechanics.. Unfortunately I was to be disappointed. The rest of the leg consisted of the traversal of the Sheet Ice by night - Heading North West. Leg 2 + 3: Would be traversal of the hardest terrain the Rover forced. It was the heavy cratered mountains North of The Greater Flats. Leg 4: Would be the traversal of the less demanding rolling hils on the path North West - Dont let the map fool you - it looks way more smooth than it is. I thought it would be quickly traversed at high speeds. But the low gravity and rolling hills meant that as soon as the rover exceeded 10 m/s - it would spend the same time in the air (between jumps) as it did on ground. Making it impossible to really pick up more momentum. Leg 4 ended shortly before the destination. (My kids wanted to see what was in the crater, and were sleeping at the time) Leg 5: would be the last short stretch to the edge of the crater with the mysterious lightsource. (My daughter was so impressed by the monument that she had to call my wife so she could see it) Bellow a Map showing the approximated route with legs marked: From Right to Left: Leg 1, Leg 2, Leg 3, Leg 4 and Leg 5 Bellow in the spoiler section you can see a detailed walkthrough of the Journey: The Minmus Monument: Here, at the end of the journey I was presented with a choice - Call the mission done and drive home. Or, in the true spirit of the great kerbalnaut Jebidiah, drive down the cliff side and study the monument up close - though with the chance of not being able to get up again... or worse.. crash and burn The Rover had shown itself to be quite tough - It had survived landings with up to 20m/s - And no way in hell I was going to drive the rover all the way back again. No... going down would be a great excuse for a pick up via Dropshop and be flown back to Base Camp One, Johndin argued. So down the slope it was. Geronimo! - the rover going down the slope. While it is true the rover had survived traversing a chasm with the thrusters - and subsequently bounced in the rolling hills for several km going 20 m/s (it's hard to break when your wheels hardly touch the ground). Going down the cliff side quickly accelerated the rover to 40-50 m/s. and worse still, it was aiming directly for the statue. While I was positive that I could survive these speeds on uneven terrain as long as I kept the wheels leveled with the ground.. I was sure the suspension would not "tank" slamming into the statue at the center of the monument. In a last ditch maneuver Johndin, (who had pitched the idea of going down), managed to pull hard on the controls, pitch the rover up and break the rover with the thrusters. - a daring move! Having redeemed himself, he was given the honour of planting the flag.. and take another sample. KSC was still just visible over the ridge.. and the call for a taxi was relayed to ICV Explorer. While waiting for the dropship to arrive. Johndin, Podcal and Poduki had ample time to study the ancient ruin. Who was it depicting? How was it build? By Whom was it build.. answers I will likely only get once I've exhausted the sandbox experience - and try the campaign. Section C: Dropship arriving at The Minmus Monument - ready to pick up the Rover Crew. I had a feeling that by diverting the remaining fuel from the 3 Dropship to 1 - I would be able to complete the taxi mission. I was correct. It was strange to zoom past the terrain I had just spend the better of 4 evening to cross in meer minutes. Playing with audio on for once, I found that the Minmus Orbit Theme is really awesome - it made the tour back to Base Camp One felt like a final victory lap. I was to make one important Lesson Identified though: When correcting inclination - eyeball it - maneuver nodes are unreliable, as seen from the example bellow: The maneuver nodes are weird around extreme inclination burns - If I told the node just to burn Normal it would say that my craft would leave Minmus SOI before reaching the northern hemisphere. I had to adjust by also pulling on the retrograde node for the maneuver to stay in orbit. In the end the maneuver node did not work - and I ended up just burning Normal and eyeballing it. (without leaving the Minmus SOI) The result was this: Notice how much much further apart the two vehicles would be before the burn was complete. As well as the wrong fuel bars from image 1 to 2 (which had a quick load between them) For detailed walkthrough of the pick up - see spoiler section bellow: Plotting the course to Base Camp One: the next leg - getting the rover back to Base Camp One was a simple maneuver that did not require a lot of Δv - since there was no need for a expensive correction inclination burn. And the correct direction could be picked from the start, The maneuver wasn't even required to be orbital and a sub-orbital path was charted: The rest was just a final victory lap, were the achievement could be marveled at. - a few course correction had to be done as I forgot to take the rotation of Minmus into account. The last thing to do was to pluck the rover back into base for a refuel - I was a bit nervous about this since the rover tilted the base when I tested this feature on the runway of KSC - the alignment was slightly off. My fix to this was to give all the base elements landing legs - not only because I anticipated it would be nice on uneven terrain, but also because I thought it would fix the tipping issue spoiler alert - it did: As you can see it worked fine - but for a moment I had real fears that docking the rover to the base would cause it all to do flips in the low gravity. My fears were unjustified - The rover was refueled. Although not to full, as I didn't want to empty the G.P.U - the G.P.U was dropped only half full because of weight synergy between the base modules and the dropships performance window (around ~10t cargo each) - but I expect that I need to either downgrade the rover fuel levels (which is fine) or upgrade the fuel amount for the generator (which is harder to pull off). there are many things to consider for future base missions. In the spoiler section below you will find a detailed walkthrough of the tour. Section D: The dropship tacking off after waiting for ICV - Explorer to get into an optimal position for rendezvous. I thought i was smart and waited for the ICV - Explorer to get around Minmus, so I didn't have to play catch up - I did not wait enough though. After doing the initial sub orbital burn to get the right AP for a intercept orbit set, I realized that I was going to get ahead of the target... New plan had to be made. I had 2 options: A. Make a inclination correction burn and set an orbit 10km higher than target - wait for it to catch up and perform rendezvous maneuver. B. extend the AP and to meet target on the other side of the planet - making use of the approx 30° difference in path and correct inclination and make the path orbital at target. Option A. was the safest - but would use more Δv - something that was a bit on the low side (in hindsight it would not have been an issue) - option B used less fuel - but would need to perform both circulisation and inclination correction at the same time (this would also not be an issue due to the low orbit speeds around Minmus) I decided upon B and in the end the relatively speed to target was only 50 m/s opun arrival- an easy correction. the dropship safely docked back at ICV - Explorer. The Δv between the dropships are all but spend now - which means It will be hard to perform another pick up of the rover in the future. Although that being said - the Crew Shuttles have enough Δv to land and take off on the Mun from a 10km orbit. and the two that landed the crew at Base Camp One only spend 1/3 of their Δv - having 921 left - so Δv could be taken from the Crew Shuttle still docked to the ICV - as it only need enough to perform an emergency landing in case of catastrophic event. Now the only thing left - was to dock the dropship back at the mothership and call it the day.For detailed walkthrough see spoiler section bellow: Moving Forward: Where as I have done the long stretch from a bit south of the Minmus Equator - to the northern hemisphere. I only came across 2 different biomes. And can I truly call the expedition a success when so many more biomes are left to be explored? So much Science can be done? The Δv of the Dropships may be spend - I may have done enough Rover Driving on Minmus for 1 life - But.. there are two perfectly well functioning Crew Shuttles at Base Camp One - with ~920 Δv on them each. Maybe a few further excursions to the other flats - the south pole etc. can be done to gather more science with them? Am I done with Minmus, or should I explore further before closing down the Minmus Base for now and fly the Kerbals home. I need to ponder on this. Stay Tuned for More!

Scenario: We just developed immortality and can choose who gets it and who does not. Like all technology, no one holds a monopoly on developing it, and it is only a matter of time before the have-nots either purchase or develop it themselves. Nevermind the black market too. How it works: The first were designer babies that were biologically immortal. The male babies carry the immortality DNA, so they won't age past 40. They can pass on their immortality to their offspring, even if the woman mated with is not immortal. Female immortal babies cannot pass on the immortal trait to their offspring as adults unless the father is also immortal. Why I even started this thread: No healthy person wants to die, but I could not help but wonder about the alternative, and I considered perhaps it is for the best that we are not immortal. Since it is reasonable to conclude that both the best, the worst, and the pragmatic side of humanity would decide not only our fate, but the worlds'. And on a faster time scale. Think civilization evolution... on steroids. The most obvious problem is overpopulation. Child bearing age for women is ideal in the 20's, less so in the 30's, and definitely not at 40. Initially space colonization won't be available, so I suppose the humane way to prevent overpopulation would be to government regulate reproduction and only allow the act in goverment hotels after you have cleared all paperwork giving you the OK and what you need or won't. Birth control would be the rule and not the exception, and goverment hotel staff would make sure of this before any reproductive acts take place. Having a child illegally would be punishable by jail time and the baby would be taken from you to be a ward of the state. My conclusions: I don't like to admit it, but the death of humans seems to be part of a fine tuned system, which would quickly malfunction if every one of us became immortal. Some religions teach humanity will live forever on Earth, but barring anything beyond divine intervention, as long as we are running this planet, I am not sure giving us immortality is healthy in the long run. Why? Consider how capitalism works I dare say immortality and capitalism don't get along, since overpopulation creates scarcity of resources and the number of jobs to fill in any society is limited. Which at some point unless the majority were allowed to die like we already do, capitalism as we know it would break down. Entire economies would be forced to adjust for a population that is not going to pass away. What are your tboughts? Please try to not get the thread locked. Avoid politics and talk of.... eradication of undesirables Thank you.

Again, not talking about "magic me to orbit" - but I am choosing to be a little evocative in the hopes some will think about their own carte-blanche aversion to any kind of orbit assist. I used to work for an MMO called WWII Online, half-scale map of Europe with realistic guns/tanks/planes/yadda. When it launched, you could spawn at any friendly forward base alone the front line, and drive, ride, or walk, towards the nearest "enemy" town. The dream come true. Do you know how fun it is to talk 15km in a video game with birds tweeting in the distance, only to find an empty, poorly modelled village? Or to crawl thru ditches towards one for 2 hours only to have your screen go black inexplicably, because the bullet reaches you before the sound of the shot. Well, that's one of the reasons not many people have heard of the game (even tho it is *still* running, lol). One of the biggest cluster-fs in the game was finally realizing the melding of the naval aspect of the game and the land aspect: cargo ships. But, not wanting to break the spirit of the simulation, every troop and vehicle that the ship was going to carry had to be loaded onto the ship. That is: 1. Spawn the ship, 2. Convince people they want to ride a freighter to the battle happening _right now_ in Kaalmthout or Antwerp or somewhere, 3. Sail the ship into harbor and line it up against the dock, 4. Raise the crane and turn it out over the side of the ship, 5. Get a tank/atg/truck to drive in under the crane, 6. Lower the crane, find the hitching point, get the vehicle hitched, 7. Raise the crane, carefully, swing it over the hatch, 8. Gently lower the vehicle without damaging it and place it onto the cargo bay, 9. Unhitch the vehicle without dropping it, 10. Have the vehicle find the parking spot and "mount" the ship, 11. Repeat, 12. Sail a WWII freighter vessel across a half-scale English channel, while the players stay connected to their in-game troopers/vehicles, 13. Hope the fight remains at a coastal town you can reach during the *2 hours sailing time*, 14. Try not to get bombed/strafed/sunk by enemy air patrols who have a reasonably good sense of where freighters would be launching from, 15. Try to reach a piece of coastline sufficiently far away from the fight that you won't get shelled/bombed before you can unload, 16. The freighter didn't have a cargo ramp, so ... find a spot where you can use the crane to unload vehicles without dropping them into the water. Use the life boats to lower troopers down and hope you're not too far out... 17. Despawn, because f**k sailing back. 18. Never do this again after all the complaints you get from people who disco'd, sank, drowned, or who didn't get to the target until after it had been captured and the frontline moved away. It absolutely made sense that there be a player-investment in the loading of the vehicle, so that it wasn't just a magic firehose-for-one whereby if one player can get a boat into position X they could spawn an entire army on the enemy; but the vice-like grip of the auto-fear meant that there was no willingness by certain team members to even consider ideas where any part of that process wasn't entirely manual/humanized. My concept was for to add supply trucks/engineers who could execute sorties to the docked ship, the ship would operate its crane to take loads onboard, and then when it reached the opposite end it would be able to provide/deploy an amount of resources corresponding to the amount of effort that went into loading. Because on the rare occasion when people were insane enough to mount actual coastal assaults, almost invariably the outcome was that the reduction in number of combatants *at* the fight ended up killing the fight. You might be willing to spend 2.5 hours boarding a ship and sailing to 50km away from your planned destination, but will the enemy wait there or despawn and go someplace else? What I'm aspiring to here for KSP2 is that it be possible in some game modes to earn additional launch assistance so that you can *feel* you are moving your focus onto the next stage of gameplay. And yes, some people will hit launch and then timewarp. But what of it? How does that affect you? I dunno about you but when I watch Matt Lowne videos I'm always glad he doesn't show the whole thing in real time? I mean: tell me how much of *this* video you actually watch, and how much you think anyone else would watch?

I've been working on this mission for over a month: a couple of weeks of design and build, 1 day to launch and get to Duna, another couple of weeks doing the Duna Elcano, and 1 more day to do Ike and Kerbin return. Plus another day to put all the screenshots in order. This was my third launch that involved landing kerbals. These are my "Giant Hop" missions. On this mission I obtained over 8000 science points, plus another 3035 points for the following 3 missions: Are There Fuel Stations In Space (35): Orbit Kerbin with a X200-64 methalox fuel tank and a docking port Duna Monument (2000): Visit the Duna monument Three Is Company (1000): Land 3 kerbals on Ike Here's the mission report. Enjoy! A full set of screenshots here: https://imgur.com/a/Wn2FzAj A subset of those screenshots are used in the highlights below. Launch, Transit to Duna, and Duna Landing More: Duna Elcano Circumnavigation Some of my favorite screenshots along the way: Documentation of the Elcano: I couldn't figure out a method to mark the Map View to show where I've been. Flags do not show up on Map View. So what I have for documentation is a set of 37 screenshots, 1 taken every 10 degrees of Latitude (with the landing location represented twice): https://imgur.com/a/PTpaWhz I noticed that items dropped from my lander, such as parachutes, did show up on the Map View. They also provide a waypoint marker in flight view when they are 50km away or less. I used my dropped parachutes to show my landing location every time I went to Map View, and to guide me home as I finished up the Elcano. Anyone have any ideas on how to bring 18 to 36 items to drop during the course of an Elcano? Let's just have flags show up, please. Overall, the scenery was great, but the Elcano just took too long and required too much personal attention while running it. If I start to talk about another Elcano any time soon, talk me out of it. And, yes, I experienced what I call the "finger flick" bug consistently and repeatedly throughout the whole journey. This is the bug where, with no input on my part, the kraken flicks a giant tentacle and knocks my rover to the right or left, sometimes spinning it out of control, sometimes messing up a tricky ascent or descent. This bug has already been reported by others through the bug reporting process. What a pain! Duna to Ike, and back to Duna More: Return to Kerbin More: Mission Complete!

Talk like Up-Goer Five: Express complex ideas using only very simple, common words. For anyone who has somehow managed to miss it, a while back xkcd had an absolutely brilliant strip: a schematic of the Saturn V, carefully labeled.... but with all terms restricted to only the thousand most common English words. This is where the KSP community gets the term "you will not go to space today." https://xkcd.com/1133/ This game is to talk like Up-Goer Five. That is, you have to express complex ideas using only the most common English words. Here are the rules: The person before you ends their post with a brief paragraph of something reasonably complex to explain. You need to take their post and re-word it using this tool (it lets you type what you want, and draws a red line under any "forbidden" words): http://splasho.com/upgoer5/ You can paraphrase if need be (you'll probably need to). The one really hard rule is, your "translation" has to fit in that tool's edit box with no red "forbidden words" underlines at all. Post your translation inside a spoiler box, so that people reading your post have a chance to guess an answer first, if they want to. Then provide a technical paragraph of your own for the next person to take a shot at. You're not allowed to answer your own post; someone else has to. But you're welcome to come back again after some other folks have had their turns. Guidelines for the "technical paragraph": Don't make it too long, please. Just a sentence or two is plenty. (Otherwise nobody will want to take the burden of "translating" it.) Don't make it so hard that nobody understands it. It should be something that a typical KSP forum user can understand without having to go look stuff up. Ideally the post should be about KSP-relevant topics, e.g. spaceflight, astronomy, engineering, KSP game advice, etc., but that's not a strict requirement, just a suggested guideline. (Props to @Deddly for pointing out the upgoer5 tool to me, which is what gave me the idea for this game.) Just as an example, here's a sample technical paragraph: SRBs are useful as boosters on the launchpad, because they're inexpensive and provide a lot of thrust. However, they're less efficient as upper stages, due to having a low Isp. Here's my stab at translation, using the above-linked tool to validate it: Fair 'nuff? Okay, to get the ball rolling, here's a technical paragraph for someone to start with: Building a SSTO spaceplane is challenging, because not only do you need to balance air-breathing engines with those that work in a vacuum, but also the ship needs to be aerodynamically stable at high velocity.

Launch them attached to a manned vessel. Release the first one above KSC so it has connection. The rest can talk through it.

just a small thing dakota has done this week alone, communication requires more people a decent talk today with them on discord (dakota and darrin) they wish to have more CM's to help workload but he would rather have the resources spent elsewhere. and finally, dakota somewhat ratio of workload he has to do until April 1st (then it MIGHT change) hopefully there will be less stuff on dakotas plate when mike is back.. also Just because dakota said he is working on it doesn't mean its coming soon just shows what is needed for a single person in a week, and there is more that is missing from that list. why none of this was in dev tracker... and finally dakota said he will do this once in a while telling what he did that week increased communication

Expansions add to what is already there. Without being argumentative, please reconsider your choice of vocabulary. There is no complete gameplay loop to KSP2, not for those of use that play career mode. I feel when it is done, it still will not be an expansion.. but something else entirely. As far as the simplifications: They have said that omitting occlusion from the game was a choice. They may revisit that at a later time, but [it was not implemented from the very beginning because they wanted it to be easier to have communication with far out craft]. One per system is all you should really need to talk to all the cosmos, right? The entire idea of Commnet was abandoned as an unnecessary complication. Perhaps exitc alloys will be relegated to nice shiny scatters [nodes] with collision mechanics. Im sure the pretty visuals will go over well with the kids. You can mine it like all the other survival crafters. Not being able to create maneuver nodes in another SOI is definitely a simplification over a feature already implemented and well established in KSP1 (Whether the wish to change that later due to feedback remains to be seen) The maneuver node itself used to split the burn time in a manner that felt more intuitive. I do not know advance math related to this, but all the math i do daily with circles involves ratios related to the arc. It feels simpler. There is no longer fuel priority assignment No longer mission specialists No longer experiments that require physical interaction during EVA The proposed colony design will be like craftin in Planet Crafter or Subnautica instead of the way people have spent up to 15 years building colonies? [Instead of having to Scan for ores with polar arrays, build complex SSRUs, develop solid engineering designs to connect orbital structures]... Granted some of this was mod function. But it was built around the core mechanics of the base game in such away to enhance. I really want to say something to all the people that keep saying .. "KSP1 didn't have that, that was a mod" The developers may not consider mods when evaluating what they want to replicate from the first. Considering Adderly's history that is asanine. Perhaps he only considers the mods he wrote to have enough significant meritory value to include into KSP2 From a community stance. The mods HAVE to be considered by the developement team... They have kept this game alive long after release. I want to figure out a series of polls to determine the length of time people have played the game, and if they use mods. The question becomes which mod features from KSP1 should be included in the BASE game. This is before the massive roadmap that included features we could only dream of without modded support. [My own deductions lens through perspective]

But Starship isn’t exactly reliable. It fails almost every flight, and frankly I don’t even know why they’re shooting for orbit, considering it could barely go to sub orbit. And Starship is taking so long to fix, yet it’s advertised as the future of space travel. Also, let’s talk about Elon himself. You really want our future to belong to a Reddit bro? He’s openly anti-Semitic, has 10 children among three women, half of whom won’t speak to him. But no, he can run a colony. He can’t even keep his own family together, and somehow you expect to run a city on another planet. People just listen to anyone with money.

This is the only project I've heard of that people feel needs more CMs. They don't even engage in moderation duty nor are they too public other than random tidbits on the Discord. This is just work not being done, not short-handedness. Sadly it seems to be the case for the game too: Bi-weekly KERB failed multiple times. They stopped giving certain dates because they failed multiple times. They stopped upnates because they failed to understand basic interaction rules and what the community wants to hear from them. They announced their new devblog system with videos and what not and we got... 1 deep dive, 2 interviews... and that was it, months ago. We as a community wanting to engage with an EA need to see plans, specs, designs, ideas, a smidge of compromise (as in being invested in the realization of your promises, not as in tradeoff) both with a vision and the steps required for its execution. Instead what we get is the inability to even make a list of 20 bugs every 2 weeks, let alone knowing anything else about the plans for the game. That's not even going, as other users have, into how feedback that's not bugs just goes into a dark hole, if it goes anywhere. Aaaaaand that's not even going into actual stuff relating to the development of the game. It's incredible to me people are still here. Remember when they laid off the whole community team after the paul furio fiasco? oh wait, the community team wasn't affected at all. Plus, it's not really the place to talk about the huge work of the community team when they're just announcing they can't do a single post every two weeks.

To help us understand better. Simply due to the shift heavily going to colonies work instead of smaller bugs (cause large bugs take forever) with NDA's, and just information you cannot talk to the public, it will be shifted to monthly due to "there ain't nothing new in this front" due to the priority shift to colonies. for a TLDR?