ArtemisAZ Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 (edited) As a lover of Chemical Warfare chemistry I was pondering up in my noggin that it would be mighty neato burrito if KSP2 will have or will at the very least consider adding the option to let players make their own fuel mixes to use in spacecraft. There's been mods in the past that simulated this by adding various types of fuel that you can stick into your rocket and watch it go. While this is all fine, dandy and all that what I want to see is something a little more complex then that and giving players more control of the Boom-Juice and what types and ratios of fuel they can add each with unique effects that correspond to real life chemistry (provided in a Kerbalized fashion so more fictional parody chemicals then actual ones). For example let's say you accidentally swapped out the tank of Kerbalox for a tank of unstable Keranium and added it into the fuel mixture that would be on your rocket, instead of causing the rocket to blast off high into the heavens it instead does the same thing only in very small pieces. Having the ability to experiment with this sort of stuff would be great fun and could probably get the kiddos that will eventually play KSP2 through High School chemistry. cause trust me that Chemistry was hell beyond compare and I will never forgive Ms.Johnson for taking away my gameboy >:( Edited October 13, 2019 by Krulliam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 Mmm, I say no. Leave part failure or field failure to the mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtemisAZ Posted October 13, 2019 Author Share Posted October 13, 2019 1 hour ago, GoldForest said: Mmm, I say no. Leave part failure or field failure to the mods. Any specific reason why not? I'm saying having this available as an option for players if they so choose as it creates a unique challenge that runs parallel to to the overall design aspect and making stuff that's viable at doing a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 13 minutes ago, Krulliam said: Any specific reason why not? I'm saying having this available as an option for players if they so choose as it creates a unique challenge that runs parallel to to the overall design aspect and making stuff that's viable at doing a job. It doesn't feel ksp to me. Yes, ksp is about failure, but adding fuel failure seems a little too much. And I get that it would be an option, but fuel failure in stock ksp? Just doesn't feel right to me. I feel that part failures should stay in the modding community. There's 2 or 3 part failure mods already for KSP 1 and I feel thanks to KSP 2's increased moddability, we'll see more than that in KSP 2. Besides, if it stays in the modding realm, people will have more options to choose how or what fails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtemisAZ Posted October 13, 2019 Author Share Posted October 13, 2019 20 minutes ago, GoldForest said: It doesn't feel ksp to me. Yes, ksp is about failure, but adding fuel failure seems a little too much. And I get that it would be an option, but fuel failure in stock ksp? Just doesn't feel right to me. I feel that part failures should stay in the modding community. There's 2 or 3 part failure mods already for KSP 1 and I feel thanks to KSP 2's increased moddability, we'll see more than that in KSP 2. Besides, if it stays in the modding realm, people will have more options to choose how or what fails. Ay now I see what you mean. I really can't wait to see what systems some people are going to integrate in KSP2. To be honest I just want to create real powerful chemical explosives and see what happens if I put Kerbals in close proximity to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 31 minutes ago, Krulliam said: Ay now I see what you mean. I really can't wait to see what systems some people are going to integrate in KSP2. To be honest I just want to create real powerful chemical explosives and see what happens if I put Kerbals in close proximity to it. Star Theory agreed to give exploding fuel tank shockwaves. Someone's about to blast some kerbals to space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtemisAZ Posted October 13, 2019 Author Share Posted October 13, 2019 21 minutes ago, Xd the great said: Star Theory agreed to give exploding fuel tank shockwaves. Someone's about to blast some kerbals to space. oh if you only knew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xd the great Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 1 hour ago, Krulliam said: oh if you only knew Time to open a server dedicated to blowing up kerbals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2019 Share Posted October 13, 2019 A new gameplay system needs to add meaningful and interesting gameplay for a manageable amount of work. I don’t think a fuel chemistry simulation would qualify. I was originally very negative about having more fuel types explicitly defined in the game (methalox, kerolox, hydrolox, hypergolics etc) but am now less so, @Dragon01 pointed out some interesting ways it could tie into a resource management system involving ISRU and a few types of raw materials you could find on planets. IMO CommNet is a good benchmark. Any new system shouldn’t be much harder to implement, and it should open up similarly interesting gameplay scenarios. Incompatible or poorly optimised fuel mixes resulting in explosions or bad rockets isn’t enough. It’d just be busywork and remembering to look up and apply the correct chemistry in the VAB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gydra54 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 (edited) On 10/13/2019 at 2:52 AM, GoldForest said: Mmm, I say no. Leave part failure or field failure to the mods. I don't get this. If I'm reading it right, OP is suggesting player-caused failure, not random part failure, which is what most "part failure" mods do (and that should absolutely stay in the modding community, random failure outside the player's control is terrible game design (EDIT: well not for some people I guess, otherwise there wouldn't be mods for it :P) and is not realistic as it is often claimed). I see no issue with part failure induced by player error. How is it any different from, say, failing to add struts and watching your rocket consequently wobble itself to its doom? Edited October 14, 2019 by Gydra54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 48 minutes ago, Gydra54 said: I don't get this. If I'm reading it right, OP is suggesting player-caused failure, not random part failure, which is what most "part failure" mods do (and that should absolutely stay in the modding community, random failure outside the player's control is terrible game design (EDIT: well not for some people I guess, otherwise there wouldn't be mods for it :P) and is not realistic as it is often claimed). I see no issue with part failure induced by player error. How is it any different from, say, failing to add struts and watching your rocket consequently wobble itself to its doom? Mmm, I guess in that case it would be okay. You revert back to the vab/sph upon wrong fuel anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtemisAZ Posted October 14, 2019 Author Share Posted October 14, 2019 9 hours ago, GoldForest said: Mmm, I guess in that case it would be okay. You revert back to the vab/sph upon wrong fuel anyway. Yeah but it still be funny to know you just poisoned the KSC for about a month because some absolute putz of an "engineer" decided to pour liquid Kermonium into the tank full of Kitrogen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 On 10/13/2019 at 12:00 AM, Krulliam said: Any specific reason why not? Cost/benefits relationship. I enjoyed the idea, and loved how you sell it. But I'm the kind of masochistic that learnt how airships are engineered to try to do the same on KSP. Definitively, I'm a point out of the curve on the profits equation! Both of us will enjoy it, but how many more would? The money spent on something else would be probably more profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incarnation of Chaos Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 I wouldn't mind a more in depth system for fuel, we know IRL how "Lean" or "Rich" rockets runs affects ISP and the condition of the turbopumps, engine bell etc. It would add a whole new dimension to building rockets; allowing finer balancing of engines. Perhaps even making some engines "OP" but forcing you to run them on non-optimized mixtures until materials could handle the ideal configuration. But at this point i would start asking why we're not just desigining the engines themselves; something like this feels like it would be part of a procedural engine system and not just standalone. It's ideas like this that actually get me pretty excited; i know KSP1 wouldn't handle procedural engines well......but who knows how KSP2 will. Iv'e been bitten by the modding bug before; i'll be watching closely at what KSP2's tools shape up to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts