Hopes and Wishes for KSP 2

[Dirkidirk]

1 hour ago, Brikoleur said:

 4. ?

1 hour ago, Brikoleur said:

YES! I would hate it if there's nothing to discover than more rocks with the occasional surface feature.

I will be genuinely surprised if they don't add some form of life to the game.

It would be as easy as putting some black, purple or green plant like organisms on the ground and/or some stationary animal like life scattered around the ground.

 

[retikulum]

 Delete all debris button :-)

Edited March 5, 2020 by retikulum

[Wjolcz]

I hope KSP2's multiplayer will be like The Expanse where everybody zooms around the system with super engines and can get anywhere in under 3 days (real time). That way all the problems with timewarp will be eliminated as there will be no timewarping at all.

[KerikBalm]

@Wjolcz because people will be online for 3 days at a time?

There will be no interstellar travel in MP?

My hope/wish is that they have advanced NTR designs as an alternate to metallic Hydrogen when progressing past metha-lox rockets

Edited March 8, 2020 by KerikBalm

[Wjolcz]

13 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

because people will be online for 3 days at a time?

Because you could have autopilots that would take care of brachistochrone trajectories on their own. In the meantime you could either do something else or simply come back after 2-3 days (worst case scenario as it takes a little less that 4 days to get from Eeloo's Pe to Ap if you go at 1G continuously) to see your ship at the destination.

Edit: nobody wants FTL and timewarp will be a nightmare to deal with in multiplayer (both for devs and players). Automated brachistochrones is the only way I can see exploration happen in MP. And who said you need to go interstellar? Interstellar brachistochrones would take way longer than flying from one end if the Kerbol to the other (~4 days). One star system per server would be big enough IMO.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Wjolcz

[bitflip]

31 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

Because you could have autopilots that would take care of brachistochrone trajectories.

I like this idea. Sounds reasonable to balance in a multiplayer environment.

[greenfox24]

all wish for is a great game (also mods for enhanced edition)

[Mikenike]

9 minutes ago, greenfox24 said:

all wish for is a great game (also mods for enhanced edition)

Would be awesome. KER, KAC, KM, BDA!

[Michel Bartolone]

How about a user selectable set up to optimize the folder layout to have the (basically) static files on one drive (ssd anyone?) and putting the dynamic things (persistent.sfs, logs, backups etc) on another drive (hdd), creating the proper symlinks (if that is the best way) or other support structures in place? (or a mod that will do it for us)?

[maddavo]

I wish that the QUICKSAVE naming would pad zeros to make the number after the # three digits.  Then the quicksaves would be sorted in numerical ascending order rather than #1 and #10-19 and #100-199 being all grouped before #2.

[infinite_monkey]

I hope they avoid stupid performance issues like 100% CPU and GPU load in Space Center view or R&D (what the heck?)

[Starseeker]

Something I'd absolutely love to see is a redone tech tree that does two things: puts remote probes before crewed flight, and follows a slightly more realistic & sensible (not that the two things are necessarily related :P) progression (e.g. small solid-fuel sounding rockets to start, first liquid-fuel stuff is .625m rather than 1.25m, every functional part has at least a window in which it's useful, etc)

[Catto]

Kraken bombs.

aka antimatter bombs AKA the ender of worlds

[Dirkidirk]

23 minutes ago, siklidkid said:

Kraken bombs.

aka antimatter bombs AKA the ender of worlds

AKA advanced orion fuel tank in a missile cone.

 

[LittleBitMore]

We don't need bombs. We really don't.

[Bej Kerman]

On 2/20/2020 at 8:45 AM, Ethanneri said:

Maybe a realistic simple universe model that allows players to explore other galaxies？

No

1 hour ago, LittleBitMore said:

We don't need bombs. We really don't.

How else do you clear debris without being boring?

[LittleBitMore]

5 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

How else do you clear debris without being boring?

You can blow up debris all you like with homemade missiles or something, but no parts specifically designed to be bombs. KSP isn't a game which I think would have bombs. Bomb parts are honestly a waste of time-- explosions are being re-engineered to accommodate for contents of tanks and such. Ergo, get a big barrel of boom (fuel tank) and hurl it at debris, and done.

Edited March 20, 2020 by LittleBitMore

[Bej Kerman]

1 minute ago, LittleBitMore said:

You can blow up debris all you like with homemade missiles or something, but no parts specifically designed to be bombs. KSP isn't a game which I think would have bombs. Bomb parts are honestly a waste of time-- explosions are being re-engineered to accommodate for contents of tanks and such. Ergo, get a big barrel of boom and hurl it at debris, and done.

Why?

[Dirkidirk]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Why?

I guess because you can just put an

2 hours ago, Dirkidirk said:

advanced orion fuel tank in a missile cone.

 

[Sepone]

If I had one wish, it would be...

MORE HAIRCUTS!

[HansonKerman]

moar Kerbal customization

moar details

same modability

editorLoop01

moar planerts

moar parts

chatter 

 

the same planerts but improved

rover optimization, it’s a hassle to make rovers on other planets

moar cheeeaaats

having all the traditional community quirks carry over, I.e. “moar”, the veteran Kerbals, the Kraken (dun dun dUuuuUuN) etc.

moar sizes (smaller srbs, PHAT tanks)

being good

On 3/15/2020 at 3:03 AM, Alex33212 said:

Something I'd absolutely love to see is a redone tech tree that does two things: puts remote probes before crewed flight, and follows a slightly more realistic & sensible (not that the two things are necessarily related :P) progression (e.g. small solid-fuel sounding rockets to start, first liquid-fuel stuff is .625m rather than 1.25m, every functional part has at least a window in which it's useful, etc)

Huh. Maybe two types of Career mode: realistic-ish, (as far as Kerbals can be realistic) and “Kerbal”, where they somehow though it was moar safe to send Jeb in a rocket and land in the sea than make robots to do it for them

Edited March 22, 2020 by HansonKerman

[Jim-Tanker]

I wold love to see most of the normal mods in the game, to include resource requirements for Kerbals (air, food, water, electricity, etc.) and just have buttons next to each mod to turn off/on.  

There has to be some way for each mod to be updated while part of the game.  

Maybe have a contest/poll to find out what mods the community wants.  

[CocoDaPuf]

On the topic of new parts, here are some of my hopes for KSP2:

* Retractable Grid fins

* Large aerodynamic landing legs (like SpaceX uses)

* Balutes (inflatable low drag parachutes)

* Inflatable balloon landing cushions (like the ones used on spirit, opportunity and now the starliner)

* Robotic parts at launch (even if it delays the launch)

I feel strongly about the robotic parts at launch. I think one of the reasons that the current robotic parts are a bit clunky to use is that they were a late addition, tacked onto the existing build interface. If robotic parts are part of the plan from the start, I suspect they'll be better integrated into the editor, making them easier to use and ultimately more fun.

I've been incredibly impressed by what I've seen so far. And I trust the team will make as many dreams come true as you can. I couldn't be looking forward to this more!

[baiselmareo6]

Yes, yes, it's yet another KSP 2 reaction.

Some things I'm definitely hoping for, performance is a big one. I'd hope for a complete rework of the game system, allowing for better performance in high part count situations especially.

Another big thing, I hope they don't lose focus of what KSP was supposed to be. KSP was always very open, free, you could do whatever you want, completely ignore missions, contracts and the such. Hopefully this sequel is equally unrestrictive.

 

[Whackjob]

I would like the parts tree to be completely redone.  In KSP 1, once you go past a certain level of complexity, serious errors seem to creep in.  That and torus style structures are impossible.  Every part is a child connected to one mother part.  You cannot, say, put in one part where it connects to two so they hold together.

I would also like to build craft outside of a VAB where I can zoom up and out as much as I wish, so that way I can build very tall or very wide.  Or both.