GoldForest

Speculations on what the new KSC will look like.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Yakuzi said:

Despite all my skepticism deep down I'm hoping that the devs know this, and have designed an alternative starting planet/system for players who wear their big boy space suit pants.

The problem with a bigger scale is that it is annoying for most new players. It takes an additional 3 to 5 minutes to get to orbit every time and for the most part you aren’t doing anything but watching the ship slowly get up to speed. When doing trial and error on a ship this is a very bad thing.

Its the exact same reason the majority of players just ignore the ION engines in KSP, they are boring.

I occasionally like a larger system too for the challenge, and actually needing to use cryogenic fuels, but you need to be an advanced player to understand the reasons why a bigger system is interesting. 

Edited by MechBFP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Yakuzi said:

Despite all my skepticism deep down I'm hoping that the devs know this, and have designed an alternative starting planet/system for players who wear their big boy space suit pants.

They (Star Theory) have so far stated that they kept the Kerbol system the same. Regarding KSC, I believe it is similar but with improvement to make it more to the likes of Kennedy Space Center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Eskandare said:

make it more to the likes of Kennedy Space Center.

See, I don't much like that. Why copy something from Earth? What's wrong with it being its own thing? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, this is what you can recover from the pre alpha footage, I hope it serves something ;)

0xXDg7Z.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tw1 said:

.... I headcannon this was caused by global warming.

It's nice to see the island chain there, but I hope we get the mountains too.


That said, I wonder what the buildings will look like. And if they're not similar, how long until mod makes add in classic look options. (TBH kerbal konstructs is one mod i hope gets remade for this),

This  new game sounds fantastic, but I'm quite attached to the original place, and it's background. I hope they add similar mountains before release. 

 

1 hour ago, Eskandare said:

Me too, as I rely on KK for Kerbin Side Remastered. And I would love to make more airfields in KSP2. I suspect I'll have to recreate all my models though.

When it's needed I would recreate KK. I really hope I can use a shiny new API that will result in less ugly code and less bugs. 

First step would be some editors for statics. the rest really depends on the implementation of KSP2.. its really to early know for sure
 

* Placing static Objects...  Its still Unity, so this will be not an issue. 
* Launching from multiple launchsites... this should be stock.
* Switching to other bases: might be stock
* editing Terrain: this might be done differently. 
 

The format of the statics and the shaders might change. We might need provide some community assets for the existing buildings --> Builtin textures are no longer existent. Shaders and stuff might be changed on the fly. The format for 3d models might change... 
But overall.... I'm hopefull that there will be many new Airbases on Kerbin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, the KSC in KSP2 is reminiscent of the space center in 0.7.3, with the forests, and swamps...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Ger_space said:

 

When it's needed I would recreate KK. I really hope I can use a shiny new API that will result in less ugly code and less bugs. 

First step would be some editors for statics. the rest really depends on the implementation of KSP2.. its really to early know for sure
 

* Placing static Objects...  Its still Unity, so this will be not an issue. 
* Launching from multiple launchsites... this should be stock.
* Switching to other bases: might be stock
* editing Terrain: this might be done differently. 
 

The format of the statics and the shaders might change. We might need provide some community assets for the existing buildings --> Builtin textures are no longer existent. Shaders and stuff might be changed on the fly. The format for 3d models might change... 
But overall.... I'm hopefull that there will be many new Airbases on Kerbin.

 

That would be great. Although we can't assume that builtin won't be a possibility, perhaps. 

 

But WOW! I see taxiways on the runway! 

 

Quote

Hi, this is what you can recover from the pre alpha footage, I hope it serves something ;)

Spoiler
21 minutes ago, cdpch2057 said:

 

0xXDg7Z.jpg

 

 

I'm not sure how I feel about the very bright pastel colors to the textures, but this footage is pre-alpha.

Edited by Eskandare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, GoldForest said:

-Eighth, launch pads have or can be outfitted with engine igniters. This might be a sign that engines are more realistic and have starter fuel. This also might be a sign that fuel tanks might need to be settled before engine ignition can begin. Watch out for your upper stages if this is the case.

Those are sparks to burn off Hydrogen. Nothing to do with engine start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MechBFP said:

The problem with a bigger scale is that it is annoying for most new players. It takes an additional 3 to 5 minutes to get to orbit every time and for the most part you aren’t doing anything but watching the ship slowly get up to speed.

 

1 hour ago, Eskandare said:

They (Star Theory) have so far stated that they kept the Kerbol system the same. Regarding KSC, I believe it is similar but with improvement to make it more to the likes of Kennedy Space Center.

 

Apologies, I didn't explain that very clearly. I meant that the classic Kerbol system will still be the default start. But hopefully Star Theory will give veteran players the option to start in a different solar system, on a larger home planet (3x-6.4x Kerbin).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Yakuzi said:

 

 

Apologies, I didn't explain that very clearly. I meant that the classic Kerbol system will still be the default start. But hopefully Star Theory will give veteran players the option to start in a different solar system, on a larger home planet (3x-6.4x Kerbin).

I agree, that would be nice. Although I do think that rescaled solar systems should fall under the difficulty section with a clear warning as to the additional challenges the player will face as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cdpch2057 said:

Hi, this is what you can recover from the pre alpha footage, I hope it serves something ;)

Wow, nice work! How did you make it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, EchoLima said:

Wow, nice work! How did you make it? 

With a little bit of photoshop :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, tater said:

Honestly a reboot of KSP should have gone to a more realistic scale.

I don't think it should. A lot of players like the small size because you're not spending time and effort making huge rockets to get into space, then wasting more time and effort getting to the Mun or anywhere else.

6 hours ago, Tw1 said:

See, I don't much like that. Why copy something from Earth? What's wrong with it being its own thing? 

They're not copying Kennedy Space Center, just adopting the feel. IRL KSC has a lot of launch pads.

6 hours ago, Zacho said:

Those are sparks to burn off Hydrogen. Nothing to do with engine start.

Ah, right. Forgot about that, thanks.

4 hours ago, MechBFP said:

I agree, that would be nice. Although I do think that rescaled solar systems should fall under the difficulty section with a clear warning as to the additional challenges the player will face as a result.

Although I disagree with size changing, and think it should be left up to modders, I wouldn't mind the size change being in the options. Although, I dont think it should be tied to difficulty. What if I wanted to play stock size plant on hard? No, plant scale should not be tied to difficulty, rather it should have it's own dedicated slider under the advanced menu tab. 

 

But guys, this isnt to talk about what we want, it is to talk about what we can see in the trailer. Please keep it on topic.

Edited by GoldForest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, GoldForest said:

These are the things I noticed in the pre-alpha footage. If I missed anything, please do say so. 

You put an amazing amount of effort in that, with a very thorough list of observations. Well done!

The one thing you seem to have missed... it’s a pre-alpha release of a game that won’t hit the market in another year... pretty much anything is going to change!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

IRL KSC has a lot of launch pads.

Three is not "a lot".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

You put an amazing amount of effort in that, with a very thorough list of observations. Well done!

The one thing you seem to have missed... it’s a pre-alpha release of a game that won’t hit the market in another year... pretty much anything is going to change!

Thanks, and I do say that these and things in the pre-alpha I noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, am I alone in saying I want a version of kerbalx in ksp 2 and look forward to moar details. Also, Danny2462 should be bug tester/finder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, KerBlitz Kerman said:

Also, Danny2462 should be bug tester/finder

It will never go out of alpha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, razark said:

Three is not "a lot".

 

Well there are a bunch more next door...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, razark said:

Three is not "a lot".

 

Isn't it supposed to go up to 5? 
Because of SLS's new launch pad and Space X's new launch pad for BFR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GoldForest said:

supposed to

When government plans go as they're "supposed to", let me know. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nightside said:

Well there are a bunch more next door...

KSC constitutes Launch Complex 39. Every other Cape Canaveral pad *isn’t* a part of KSC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Kerbart said:

pretty much anything is going to change!

I hope it does get a fair amount of revision. KSC original was iconic, and an easy landmark to spot from orbit. It' was a great little campus, all those buildings were full of detail which you could explore with planes, boats, and rovers. I've no idea what the cumulative amount of time I've spend testing things on those buildings must be.

Basically, needs mountains, needs the landscape tidied up a bit, and needs more buildings. 

They must not forget KSC's dual role of being a testing ground. Plus,  I like it being a self contained HQ for the kerbals. TBH, a little science and admin campus, and a few VAB and I'd be me happy.
Like at kenady, they have the VAB and stuff a little bit away from the launch facilities. They could just remake the existing buildings at a distance to what we've seen. Whatever they do, just... keep it kerbal. Don't copy Earth. 

Edited by Tw1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Yakuzi said:

>> Honestly a reboot of KSP should have gone to a more realistic scale. [tater]

Despite all my skepticism deep down I'm hoping that the devs know this, and have designed an alternative starting planet/system for players who wear their big boy space suit pants.

Don't hold your breath. World size has ramifications all over, from how heavyweight the rocket parts need to be, to which airspeed is "reentry" and must be dangerous. You cannot move all of that to a bigger world and expect it to still work in the same way,or at all.

Just BTW, I'm not convinced that a bigger world as such makes the game more difficult or tedious to play. But be that as it may, this ship has sailed (again).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Laie said:

Don't hold your breath. World size has ramifications all over, from how heavyweight the rocket parts need to be, to which airspeed is "reentry" and must be dangerous. You cannot move all of that to a bigger world and expect it to still work in the same way,or at all.

Just BTW, I'm not convinced that a bigger world as such makes the game more difficult or tedious to play. But be that as it may, this ship has sailed (again).

Please take the topic of planet size to a different thread as it is off topic for this one. I have made another thread dedicated to talks about planet size. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.