Big resources discussion:

[Vl3d]

I think I found something in an old interview that we might have missed.

We take for granted that we need science to unlock nodes / parts in the tech tree. There's a lot of evidence which indicates that we will also need the specific construction resources to unlock a part.

"As far as adding a new engine type to the game, adding the Orion drive style nuclear pulse propulsion...

As far as when it unlocks the progression, I wouldn't get too detailed about that right now, because we're playing a lot with the balance of the game. And if I tell you when it comes in the progression, it will actually give away a little bit about the resources that are needed to unlock that technology. So, I realize now I can tell you nothing on that count, and I apologize. I just don't want to give away anything. If I tell you where you're going to dig up uranium, then that's gonna ruin things entirely. (...)

So, there are many more resources in KSP 2 than there were in KSP 1, and some of them are very far flung or involve the conquering of a new physics challenge or a new kind of mission in order to access that resource. We think it really enriches the gameplay, and once you've achieved that mission, you're rewarded with a new capability. You're rewarded with a new kind of part that you can build or a new kind of vehicle architecture.

In my mind, it's a pretty compelling player goal. You get new capabilities when you find these things."

So it's logical to be able to build a party only after you research it and have the resources for it. Or maybe you don't even need the science points, you just have to explore and do the experiments to get "new capabilities". It is not clear.

But the more interesting thing is getting "rewarded with a new kind of vehicle architecture". Why would Nate use that term? What exactly is an unlockable vehicle architecture?

Will there be an actual template difference between vehicle types, alongside parts? Will we be able to select what kind of vehicle we want to build? Is this like the difference between the SPH and VAB?

It makes sense to not be able to build interstellar vehicles in the Kerbin VAB. Will having a OAB or a low gravity colony VAB unlock new vehicle architectures (like ones that allow using nuclear pulse engines)? But what if I want to make an Orion drive in the regular VAB?

Will we be able to unlock rover vehicle templates or have sea based vehicles?

Edited July 29, 2022 by Vl3d

[Pthigrivi]

Nice find! And this is super interesting. I guess we'll have to see what they have lined up and where they've landed. When it comes to fuel systems or possibly even raw materials for building vessels I could see having say nuclear tech unlock after you'd harvested or sampled uranium deposits, or fusion tech unlocking after you discovered He3. And when he says "vehicle architecture" that may be all he means--a fusion based vehicle vs a methalox vehicle, etc. Those technologies could even be tiered, so reaching various harvesting caps would unlock the next layer, but as he points out its a tricky balance thing because different playstyles might have greater or lesser demands for a specific fuel type and you don't want to be hoarding up great piles of a resource you don't really need just to unlock a niche engine you'd like to use. Then there's all those other types of parts like capsules and ladders and lights and structural parts and what does the structure to unlock those look like? 

... And Im also still kind of interested in special sites that carry specific scientific value, aside from resources. It seems like a nice dynamic because it builds in a reward for pure discovery, rather than just a search for raw materials to extract. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[Vl3d]

13 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

It seems like a nice dynamic because it builds in a reward for pure discovery, than just a search for raw materials to extract. 

You hit the nail on the head. Unlocking tech only after resource discovery is a very interesting way to do things and it overhauls the whole tech tree idea. No more science points.. just practical rewards for discovery and doing experiments to allow said discovery. It's a very organic way of doing things compared to having a boring tech tree and picking A or B to invest grinded points.

[shdwlrd]

41 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

Then there's all those other types of parts like capsules and ladders and lights and structural parts and what does the structure to unlock those look like?

I think a lot of the common low hanging fruit will either be unlocked from the beginning or after a few quick missions.

[Pthigrivi]

31 minutes ago, shdwlrd said:

I think a lot of the common low hanging fruit will either be unlocked from the beginning or after a few quick missions.

Yeah, for sure there's that tutorial-ish phase getting players to the Mun and maybe into their first starter colony, all before you've harvested any resources. And maybe those are all like adventure mode mini-boom events? I guess those could just be general science rewards that you could apply as you liked (my preference) or specific groups of things unlocked by specific triggers? I mean science is in its own way a resource, so Im definitely curious how a hybrid kind of progression system would work.

[t_v]

This is great! It virtually confirms that we won’t just have a single science point resource for getting tech, which I think is a good decision.

I think on the architecture front, it means that new kinds of ship designs will be practically unlocked. You can’t build your classic ISV with a radiation shield unless you have a radiation shield. You can’t build a sky crane unless you have large enough parts and good thrust vectoring or advanced control. Orion drives, for example, allow for a vehicle architecture where a large amount of cargo is hauled in a container section, to be added or removed without replacing the rest of the ship. 

[shdwlrd]

49 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah, for sure there's that tutorial-ish phase getting players to the Mun and maybe into their first starter colony, all before you've harvested any resources.

I hope that is the case. A few formality missions that a veteran player can knock out quickly to get on with things. But the same missions can be used to help new players get on boarded.

55 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

I guess those could just be general science rewards that you could apply as you liked (my preference) or specific groups of things unlocked by specific triggers? I mean science is in its own way a resource, so Im definitely curious how a hybrid kind of progression system would work.

I think science, in the beginning, will be more physically doing things before it you start having to rely on labs. You have to find the resources before you can start digging them up. You should map a planet before you land on it. You find a specific resource and then you need to find a use for it.

21 minutes ago, t_v said:

This is great! It virtually confirms that we won’t just have a single science point resource for getting tech, which I think is a good decision.

I completely agree with that approach. I hated the way KSP1 career and science modes worked.

[Ember12]

1 hour ago, t_v said:

I think on the architecture front, it means that new kinds of ship designs will be practically unlocked. You can’t build your classic ISV with a radiation shield unless you have a radiation shield. You can’t build a sky crane unless you have large enough parts and good thrust vectoring or advanced control. Orion drives, for example, allow for a vehicle architecture where a large amount of cargo is hauled in a container section, to be added or removed without replacing the rest of the ship. 

I think this idea has a wonderful amount of potential.   It could also facilitate different "styles" of ship construction.  You could run science missions that get you great big rocket parts for Saturn V and SLS type boosters, or research into sturdy side decouplers for Soyuz-like or asparagus rockets, or advanced control systems for SpaceX style reusability.

This, plus a mechanic making it more profitable to build on existing tech than to make new stuff,  would make each game different as you follow different courses of tech development in each one.

[Pthigrivi]

The other thing is being able to time-warp while burning is going to create more incentive for breaking up your supply chains into specialized vehicles because you'll be inclined to use much more efficient, low TWR drives between bodies and much higher TWR lifters moving things to and from orbit. In more involved, modded playthroughs I often have a few different tugs in different weight classes to efficiently haul fuel and move larger modules from orbital station to orbital station, and then tankers and sky-cranes that shuttle fuel and equipment up and down from the surface. There's also a big potential choice to be made between low dry-mass, purely vacuum rated vessels vs fuselages that can handle aerobraking. Its really nice to be able to deliver everything from Kerbin to orbit bone dry and supply all your local fuel by dropping down from Minmus and plowing a big tanker through the upper atmosphere a few times. You can do the same kind of thing from Gilly and Ike and from Vall to Laythe. Thats why I want them ballutes!!

Edited July 30, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[shdwlrd]

1 hour ago, Pthigrivi said:

The other thing is being able to time-warp while burning is going to create more incentive for breaking up your supply chains into specialized vehicles because you'll be inclined to use much more efficient, low TWR drives between bodies and much higher TWR lifters moving things to and from orbit. In more involved, modded playthroughs I often have a few different tugs in different weight classes to efficiently haul fuel and move larger modules from orbital station to orbital station, and then tankers and sky-cranes that shuttle fuel and equipment up and down from the surface. There's also a big potential choice to be made between low dry-mass, purely vacuum rated vessels vs fuselages that can handle aerobraking. Its really nice to be able to deliver everything from Kerbin to orbit bone dry and supply all your local fuel by dropping by plowing a big tanker through the upper atmosphere a few times. You can do the same kind of thing from Gilly and Ike and from Vall to Laythe. Thats why I want them ballutes!!

That is my hope for KSP2. Properly designed crafts for the their role. Actual incentives for using the correct type of crafts. I've designed ground to orbit shuttles for both low and high g worlds. I've designed small to huge freighters that are meant to never touch atmo. I would love to put these designs into use consistently instead of a one off use case. 

[Pthigrivi]

30 minutes ago, shdwlrd said:

That is my hope for KSP2. Properly designed crafts for the their role. Actual incentives for using the correct type of crafts. I've designed ground to orbit shuttles for both low and high g worlds. I've designed small to huge freighters that are meant to never touch atmo. I would love to put these designs into use consistently instead of a one off use case. 

Being big on design is why Im psyched for supply routes, because the pay-back from designing and executing a really good run could be huge. You can get a couple of orbital construction platforms going, a mining base or two, supply runs in between, and then move right on to colonizing the next planet. You'll be making decisions around freight optimization and flexibility and reusability rather than expediency. Lately I've found myself designing things that aren't optimal at all simply because they reduce the amount of time Im going to spend repetitively rendezvousing and babysitting. Having that out of the way opens up much more opportunity to focus on the next big step rather than getting bogged down in maintenance. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[Strawberry]

I wonder if rocket fuel will be rethemed as hydrogen instead of kerosene, considering that hydrogen is much easier to produce in isru and fossil fuels generally arent something you can just find. Its also possible youd be able to make biofuel using food instead of traditional isru which seems interesting gameplay wise, but seems tricky to justify mechanics wise considering the other fuels seem simpler to produce and are more late game.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Strawberry

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, Strawberry said:

I wonder if it will be rethemed as hydrogen instead of kerosene, considering that hydrogen is much easier to produce in isru and fossil fuels generally arent something you can just find. Its also possible youd be able to make biofuel using food instead of traditional isru which seems interesting gameplay wise, but seems tricky to justify mechanics wise considering the other fuels seem simpler to produce.

I believe it was confirmed current LFO engines will be methalox with LH2 being s separate fuel. I dont know if airbreathing plane engines will use a separate fuel based on kerosene. Definitely agree on the potential synergy between fuel and life support chemistries. The Martian is a great primer on how fun the chemistry of living off the land could be. 

Edited July 30, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[JadeOfMaar]

On 7/29/2022 at 9:43 PM, Strawberry said:

I wonder if rocket fuel will be rethemed as hydrogen instead of kerosene, considering that hydrogen is much easier to produce in isru and fossil fuels generally arent something you can just find. Its also possible youd be able to make biofuel using food instead of traditional isru which seems interesting gameplay wise, but seems tricky to justify mechanics wise considering the other fuels seem simpler to produce and are more late game.

We're not necessarily locked into using [simulating] fossil fuels in-game. Everyone knows about the Mars refuel plan where we send Hydrogen, react it with Mars' CO2 and easily produce Methane. That's all the hydrocarbon we need where gameplay and propulsion overall are concerned. Kerosene is not terribly important on the whole and can be left to be modded in by the RF/RO communities.

I've looked into aviation propulsion and I've seen places where it matters that a jet engine is burning Hydrogen or Hydrocarbons so I'm curious to whether this differentiation occurs in KSP2, and if the engine's operating speed ranges and other specs are affected by the propellant choice. If they're not then that can be modded in. KSP2 is being made to be modded.

[Meme Kerman]

I think antimatter can be used for engines and power sources .  Since it's so powerful you can contain it in a special Antimatter container, you can use the antimatter container and use it as fuel to power a antimatter engine. Since it is so powerful you use it to build the bigger engines for bigger spacecrafts.  You can find antimatter in h2 which you can find in a gas giant such as Jool.  Antimatter can be collected by a harvester that you can build and place it in a gas giant orbit. You can also sell it for lots of money since it is a harder and more powerful resource, if misused you can blow up your ship and any other surrounding ones. You can also maybe turn it into bombs to destroy your friends ships if you are fighting or doing a war RP. Just think theses are some of the possibility's you can use with just one resource and they might add hundreds more.

Edited September 2, 2022 by BobKerman

[mcwaffles2003]

I think we will se a lot of different resources and I'm hoping they're strategically placed for gameplays sake. I imagine we will start with kerosene and move on to hydrogen and methane, touching in a bit on uranium and Xenon. I think it would make sense to have players build their first mining colony on Kerbin as to make it simpler to teach the mechanic so maybe Uranium, Xenon, and possibly Argon or Krypton (depending on dev interests in ion thrusters) will be walled off from the KSC but still on Kerbin in rare amounts comparatively to some of the rest of the games worlds. I think the Mun will be the first place we find usable quantities of H² and H³. Enough to start a fusion ship program but not enough to fully develop it. I think in general heavier elements should be found in higher concentrations on both planets nearest their star and asteroids while lighter elements will be found in higher concentrations among further celestial bodies. I'm guessing metallic hydrogen, if it is able to be harvested, will be found among gas giants and we will need ways of pulling it out of their cores from orbit. 

I get the feeling the devs haven't told us of every technology we will find yet and have suspicions that antimatter will make an appearance and perhaps we will either need to build a tech to  create it or hopefully it can be harvested around exotic bodies with a bit of skirting reality for gameplays sake.

Speaking on resources other than fuels I think some planets may be fuel barren but rich in metals required to build engines giving players the puzzle of creating a space logistics network capable of providing fuel to necessary metal harvesting colonies that can not harvest their own fuel to ship those precious metals.

Overall I think the resource system will be deep enough to drive players to seek new worlds and harvest their resources while also streamlining the system so it doesn't take TOO much from the core gameplay. I like Factorio and wouldn't mind seeing some of its elements in KSP 2, but I don't want space Factorio. This kind of system can help prevent players from never leaving Kerbin's SOI by leaving carrots for players to chase after while also making the whole space program feel more rooted in reality helping people understand why humans may one day benefit from expanding into space.

[Strawberry]

Honestly kind of wish that there wont be antimatter and instead its some other apex resource for your fuel needs, antimatter would strip a lot of the logistics away by only needing energy as an input and also is one of those things thats cool but honestly kind of overrepresented in sci fi.