Recommended Posts

I just don't understand why they don't have (or haven't shown) more advanced NTRs, which would have similar performance to mH. 

Also my problem with the mH rockets goes beyond the metastability issue, and extends to the non-sensical cesium doping somehow making un-ionized hydrogen able to be contained by magnetic fields.

In liquid core NTRs, they simply design the engine such that part of it is molten. Why can't they do that with mH. Youd basically take a liquid core NTR design, remove the U235(or U233) and change the molecular H2 for mH

Share this post


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

The horse has now been atomized. 

Eh, well, everybody needs a cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2020 at 9:56 PM, The Aziz said:

Popcorn or not popcorn, I think the point is, that some of the crucial elements are bent for gameplay. Two most common examples: Kerbol, aka the Sun, physically is too small to be a star. And planets have ridiculous density, Kerbin for example, over 58000kg/m3 (this is the density we would see in cores of some stars). I mean, Earthlike gravity on a planet 1/10 of its size? Yeah sure.

This is why some materials could exist in their universe, because they fit there.

Spoiler

Картинки по запросу "рука-лицо"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, OOM said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Картинки по запросу "рука-лицо"

 

Such insight and wisdom, where would our community be without such thought provoking and stimulating input?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the loudness all the time? Use something organic to power with instead ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh? I don't understand what you are saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coal is organic, for that matter.

Buuut I don't think it's gonna give enough oomph to even heat up the engine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/1/2020 at 11:55 PM, BlockGaming06 said:

They should add some sort of wormhole jump gate or a allcubire warp drive it would be very cool to go ftl.

They said that the technology in the game, is from near future and i think that a wormhole doesn’t fit in that category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/8/2020 at 4:58 PM, KerikBalm said:

Huh? I don't understand what you are saying

Animals are powered by water, food and more, what else can i say to make thou grasp the big concern about universe and such, that it is polluting to use petroleum.

On 3/8/2020 at 5:02 PM, The Aziz said:

Coal is organic, for that matter.

Buuut I don't think it's gonna give enough oomph to even heat up the engine

Organism has rocket boosters too you know, [snip] and such, pumps up the volume ..

Edited by James Kerman
redacted by a moderator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, kurt3 said:

Animals are powered by water, food and more, what else can i say to make thou grasp the big concern about universe and such, that it is polluting to use petroleum.

but... petroleum is organic. Define "organic" if you disagree. Organic, in scientific terms such as organic chemistry, refers to carbon containing compounds.

And a hydrolox rocket's exhaust is water, but is not organic? what is your concern? pollution of the home planet? All you said previously was "Why the loudness"

What else can you say to make one grasp a big concern? how about saying a coherent sentence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/13/2020 at 10:02 AM, KerikBalm said:

but... petroleum is organic. Define "organic" if you disagree. Organic, in scientific terms such as organic chemistry, refers to carbon containing compounds.

And a hydrolox rocket's exhaust is water, but is not organic? what is your concern? pollution of the home planet? All you said previously was "Why the loudness"

What else can you say to make one grasp a big concern? how about saying a coherent sentence?

Yeah man big problem, pollution i mean, cause caugh .. brain damage and such.

One simple question: It has relevance, so it's described in this footage put together like abstract painting to make a point <snip> and the question at 0:36 seconds "Is Earth's oil .." ..

Edited by Geonovast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys might be talking with a computer bot...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2020 at 7:22 AM, KSK said:

Well gosh. It's a good thing that KSP2 isn't going to include any propulsion systems that may not even be mathematically possible let alone practical. Or engines which work on paper but which come with a bucket of unsolved engineering problems.

I think that a non kerbal-made  jumpgate would be good idea actually. Have a single sci-fi plot device for enabling interstellar travel and dial back all the crazytech interstellar rocket engines that may as well be sci-fi anyway.

But it looks like that boat has sailed. Bring on the metallic hydrogen engines and torchships! :rolleyes:

 

KSP 2 seems to want there to be a journey in interstellar travel as opposed to wormholes that may not even exist. Jump drives are a bad idea, alien or not.

Share this post


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

KSP 2 seems to want there to be a journey in interstellar travel as opposed to wormholes that may not even exist. Jump drives are a bad idea, alien or not.

KSP interstellar travel is a bad idea in my opinion for reasons mentioned in another thread. 

Personally I’d prefer a larger Kerbol system - you only have to look our own Solar System to see that there’s plenty of scope for all sorts of bodies to visit around the outer gas giants, from frozen rocks, to ice worlds with huge geysers and possible life (Enceladus) to volcanic hellholes (Io) to almost binary planets (Pluto / Charon). No need to go to other stars to find plenty to explore but it seems the developers want to keep the same Kerbol system from KSP1.

Their choice. A strange one in my opinion - given the calls for extra gas giants and whatnot in KSP1, I wouldn’t have thought that current players would object too much to a bigger, better Kerbol system and new players wouldn’t have anything to compare it to anyway.

But this is pointless wishing on my part at this stage. Interstellar rockets look like a settled design decision.

Share this post


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

I think you guys might be talking with a computer bot...

its like colonel campbel joined the forums

Spoiler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KSK said:

Their choice. A strange one in my opinion - given the calls for extra gas giants and whatnot in KSP1, I wouldn’t have thought that current players would object too much to a bigger, better Kerbol system and new players wouldn’t have anything to compare it to anyway.

I don’t think a stock OPM – however well executed – would have been enough to differentiate KSP2 in the market, especially given the huge variety of mods. It needs a sufficiently spectacular hook. If not interstellar then what?

Share this post


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

KSP interstellar travel is a bad idea in my opinion for reasons mentioned in another thread. 

Personally I’d prefer a larger Kerbol system - you only have to look our own Solar System to see that there’s plenty of scope for all sorts of bodies to visit around the outer gas giants, from frozen rocks, to ice worlds with huge geysers and possible life (Enceladus) to volcanic hellholes (Io) to almost binary planets (Pluto / Charon). No need to go to other stars to find plenty to explore but it seems the developers want to keep the same Kerbol system from KSP1.

Their choice. A strange one in my opinion - given the calls for extra gas giants and whatnot in KSP1, I wouldn’t have thought that current players would object too much to a bigger, better Kerbol system and new players wouldn’t have anything to compare it to anyway.

But this is pointless wishing on my part at this stage. Interstellar rockets look like a settled design decision.

The entire purpose of KSP 2 is that it's going to be KSP 1 with near future technology. What's the point of KSP 2 if it's just going to be a KSP 1 planet pack? The devs might as well have settled as KSP 1 modders if that was the plan.

Share this post


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

KSP interstellar travel is a bad idea in my opinion for reasons mentioned in another thread. 

Personally I’d prefer a larger Kerbol system - you only have to look our own Solar System to see that there’s plenty of scope for all sorts of bodies to visit around the outer gas giants, from frozen rocks, to ice worlds with huge geysers and possible life (Enceladus) to volcanic hellholes (Io) to almost binary planets (Pluto / Charon). No need to go to other stars to find plenty to explore but it seems the developers want to keep the same Kerbol system from KSP1.

Their choice. A strange one in my opinion - given the calls for extra gas giants and whatnot in KSP1, I wouldn’t have thought that current players would object too much to a bigger, better Kerbol system and new players wouldn’t have anything to compare it to anyway.

I can see your reasoning - it would be nice to have a better Kerbol system whether they added other systems or not, in my opinion.  I like the idea of new systems, but I wonder if its worth the effort.  Everything I've seen about the KSP1 player base indicates only a small percentage (<10%) make it past the Mun.  Unless substantially improved navigation & planning tools are available, I wonder what percentage of KSP2 players will ever see another star system?  1%? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Personally I think ‘near future’ is lowballing KSP2’s technology level. Leaving aside the Fuel that Shall Not Be Named, inertial confinement fusion drives, torchship drives and whatever else they’re planning to include for interstellar flight, aren’t really ‘near’ future to my mind. 

As for other ideas apart from interstellar flight to make KSP2 stand out - multiplayer and off-Kerbin colonies would be two, not to mention setting up orbital infrastructure to build increasingly large ships. All of which is in there already.

And - without wishing to recap the many, many threads and opinions on the subject, a more fully fleshed out Career mode (or equivalent) would work as well.

Even a Kerbal sized version of the Solar System is a big place, especially if you include trans-Neptunian bodies. Dial back the tech level a bit, or move away from the ‘moar rokkit powaaahhh’ theme to include stuff like solar sails and VASIMR engines and there’s plenty of scope for exploration and for challenging gameplay using all of the off-world construction goodies that we’ve been shown, without needing to resort to immersion breaking interstellar rocketry.

But, as I said, this is all kind of moot at this  point.

Edited by KSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cavscout74 said:

I can see your reasoning - it would be nice to have a better Kerbol system whether they added other systems or not, in my opinion.  I like the idea of new systems, but I wonder if its worth the effort.  Everything I've seen about the KSP1 player base indicates only a small percentage (<10%) make it past the Mun.  Unless substantially improved navigation & planning tools are available, I wonder what percentage of KSP2 players will ever see another star system?  1%? 

How about we just remove the Mun if it's so not worth it? Extrasolar travel will be worth it, why else would we get KSP 2? A simple rework of KSP 1 wouldn't be worth anything. The purpose of KSP 2 is to introduce new and veterans to future technology, not expand on the current technology that, I'm going to be honest, I'm tired of seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, KSK said:

Personally I think ‘near future’ is lowballing KSP2’s technology level. Leaving aside the Fuel that Shall Not Be Named, inertial confinement fusion drives, torchship drives and whatever else they’re planning to include for interstellar flight, aren’t really ‘near’ future to my mind. 

What's your opinion of near future? 5yrs? 25yrs? 50yrs? 

And for the rest of your statement, I feel the same as Bej Kerman.

24 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

How about we just remove the Mun if it's so not worth it? Extrasolar travel will be worth it, why else would we get KSP 2? A simple rework of KSP 1 wouldn't be worth anything. The purpose of KSP 2 is to introduce new and veterans to future technology, not expand on the current technology that, I'm going to be honest, I'm tired of seeing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expandability.

That's why they are going with interstellar travel.

There's a limit on how much you can extend the Kerbolar System and probably the few planets and moon we've seen in the footage are already reaching that limit alone, also if they continue to add and change things in the starting system they give the impression of an unfinished game and can mess up with people saves.

Adding new systems just avoids all of that.

 

Send a colonization megaship to a new system and you can basically start a new game without loosing your old things.

Share this post


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

immersion breaking interstellar rocketry

Not a fan of sci-fi, I take it?

Share this post


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

Not a fan of sci-fi, I take it?

On the contrary, I’m a big sci-fi fan. Just not that particular expression of it in the context of KSP.

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.