KSP2 EA: Road map explained by Nate!

[Vl3d]

This article is very important - it contains a lot of cool information about the early access road map and how each feature stacks up on the previous one.

https://www.pcgamer.com/kerbal-space-program-director-explains-why-colonies-are-going-to-change-everything-lays-out-early-access-plans/

Spoiler

In our interview, Simpson said that after the early access launch, new features will be added to KSP2 in "staged rollouts." First up will be science mode, a progression mode that "rewards exploration with increasing technology levels and new kinds of parts." That'll add some optional structure to the launch sandbox mode, which lets you build willy-nilly without having to unlock parts.

The next staged rollout will add colonies to KSP2, which Simpson says "are going to change everything."

"Colony gameplay is about facilitating the collection of resources," he says. "There's a system that works hand-in-hand with colonies called the delivery route system. The way that system will work, when colonies are in place, is I can set up a colony using prefabricated parts I've brought to a site on a vehicle, and then the colony can bootstrap itself by constructing its own vehicles, including resource-extraction rovers. I can automate those missions: I can drive a resource extractor out to a resource deposit, drill for it, extract it, drive it back, and then turn that into a repeating delivery so that I'd continue to receive that resource over time. The colony gets the ability to utilize those resources to expand itself. Then the delivery route system does something even cooler: you can automate the transportation of resources from one colony to another colony. Once you have that capability you can set up orbital colonies that are functionally hubs, to which you're ferrying resources from multiple star systems, even. It almost becomes like you're building a trade network. That's pretty exciting for me. Maybe most importantly, colonies are pretty fun to build. It's still Kerbal, right? If you build a tower too tall, it's still physical—it'll fall over."

The stage after colonies is interstellar travel. That order makes sense, because you'll essentially have to have colonies to construct the massive vehicles needed to go interstellar. You'll need to build interstellar ships in orbit, and they'll be much more complicated than the ships needed to reach the Mun or another planet in the Kerbol system. Simpson mentioned the "mothership concept" as an example: building multiple landers and attaching them to a larger vessel, which has to travel vast distances over a period of years and years. This will require a new scale of parts not available at the start.

The Debdeb system is the first (and so far only named) star system that'll be added to KSP2 as interstellar travel enters the game. And then, finally, we'll get multiplayer.

Once interstellar travel is in place, KSP2 will have the "fundamental underpinnings for our complete career-equivalent mode," Simpson says, which is now called exploration mode. Currency is out, and resources are in—the key driving force for exploration campaigns will be the resources you collect and transport between colonies and use to build new vessels.

"The mature game involves a lot of locating, extracting, processing resources at colonies, which then unlocks new capabilities," Simpson says. "New resources can be used to develop new kinds of technology. Then there will be a delivery route system. Once we have all those things together we're going to wrap it up with a nice big bow and deliver multiplayer, which I think a lot of us are very eager to experience."

 

Edited November 17, 2022 by Vl3d

[mcwaffles2003]

Proof of function delivery system was confirmed. Now wondering how it will work with the concept of time tables and dV windows

[stephensmat]

Gotta be honest, after playing KSP1, every step up to 'Colonies' would be enough for me. Interstellar would be interesting, but I'm not sure I'm that good a player. 

[jastrone]

"Once interstellar travel is in place, KSP2 will have the "fundamental underpinnings for our complete career-equivalent mode," Simpson says, which is now called exploration mode. Currency is out, and resources are in—the key driving force for exploration campaigns will be the resources you collect and transport between colonies and use to build new vessels. " ok i think this answers a lot of speculations of the exploration mode. there is no money.  its not just science mode. but now i have the question: what limits me from making a big ship the first thing i do? will i have to get resources on kerbin? basically the only limit to how much you can build is time.

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, jastrone said:

"Once interstellar travel is in place, KSP2 will have the "fundamental underpinnings for our complete career-equivalent mode," Simpson says, which is now called exploration mode. Currency is out, and resources are in—the key driving force for exploration campaigns will be the resources you collect and transport between colonies and use to build new vessels. " ok i think this answers a lot of speculations of the exploration mode. there is no money.  its not just science mode. but now i have the question: what limits me from making a big ship the first thing i do? will i have to get resources on kerbin? basically the only limit to how much you can build is time.

As I said when we were speculating on this months ago it does make sense.

Money (as implemented in KSP1) is a constraint applied only on the early game, when the new player is already struggling to learn orbital mechanics to play the game and the veteran just want to skip their nth career begin and sub-orbital flights to go straight to the shiny new things.

Unless you start implementing deeper colonial mechanics the economy is going to be about resources anyway past a certain point (the point in which launching from Kerbin to get the free stuff start getting more bothersome than its worth), so skipping money makes sense.

 

As for contracts they made more sense in KSP1, a game in which all orbital construction and bases were cosmetic and head-canon only. With KSP2 setting up infrastructure is going to be the main way of progressing in the game, you already have goals other than pure exploration to chase, having the game economy rely on a "random goal generator" such as the contract system is not strictly needed anymore. Even then they could possibly implement something similar for the late game with the "boom events" they talked about, once you have your colony and infrastructure into place the population is going to give you challenges and achievements for new exploration goals. 

[Pthigrivi]

Any chance we can consolidate these threads a bit? We've now got 3 simultaneous career threads. (Nothing against Vl3d, I always appreciate your enthusiasm )

 

Edited November 18, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[darthgently]

I would still like the random rescue, repair, investigate request/opportunity pop up now and then similar to the contract system. 

Perhaps even NPC activity like non-player launches etc that then logically lead to rescue and repair assist requests later in game.  Maybe an extra pad down the shore where you may occasionally see a rocket launch from that isn't yours and seeing the occasional sat in orbit that you didn't put there.  I'm imagining this for single  player play only; MP wouldn't need it

Probably more something a mod should do leveraging MP functionality to run a NPC launch provider alongside the player

Hmmm.  Now I'm thinking single player space race gameplay against a bot

Edited November 18, 2022 by darthgently

[magnemoe]

18 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Proof of function delivery system was confirmed. Now wondering how it will work with the concept of time tables and dV windows

My guess its will be based on the performance of the craft you do this on and how you do it, the fuel might be the payload after all. If higher than minimum transfer dV it might select faster / earlier trips. Don't think this work with multistage and I assume you need to return to base, and that both sides has to have the fuel you need if you refuel at target before return, or its an flat requirement. 

My milk run has been tankers from Minmus to LKO to refuel crafts going to Minmus or the Mun.

[Alexoff]

It's hard to understand exactly what it all means. What resources will be mined? Where will we spend them? How will the colonies function in general? It’s a pity they don’t show us anything, they only say meaningful phrases

[Vl3d]

3 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

We've now got 3 simultaneous career threads. (Nothing against Vl3d, I always appreciate your enthusiasm )

This one should stay separate as it is informational about the Road Map.

[regex]

11 hours ago, jastrone said:

what limits me from making a big ship the first thing i do?

They can tie in building upgrades and ship limits to the tech tree. Gather science/resources or do research projects over time or something else to advance the tech tree, things more in-line with an actual "space program" than the current (entirely un-fun and unimaginative) concept of contracts. The lack of money in no way prevents construction limits and other methods of unlock.

[Pthigrivi]

8 hours ago, Vl3d said:

This one should stay separate as it is informational about the Road Map.

I don't think it's your fault, but the article is specifically about colonies and resources and how they affect career and so now we're trying to have a thoughtful conversation on the same subject in 3 places. I'm not picking on you, your thread just happened to be the most recently started out of the 3 redundant threads. The same thing happened with the Tech tree/ Kerbnet/science progress threads where three treads on the same subject were started within a few days and it made meaningful conversation impossible. 

Edited November 19, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

This is just another reprint by PCG of the 'interview' from the video

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, Laikanaut said:

There is additional material in the article that was cut from the video.

Not really.  

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Laikanaut said:

Money in KSP was unrealistic in many ways, and if you claim to know how every veteran player approaches the game, you will always be wrong.

I'm not getting into another argument with people who want money removed, they already won that argument because the devs have decided it.

Not arguing for the removal of either money nor career mode. I don't care what kind of progression system they implement, I just want something that's fun to play, regardless of how things worked in KSP1.

Call it money, resource, science, potatoes. It doesn't matter. What matters to me is that KSP1 career is front-loaded, all the difficulty stands as a wall at the beginning, past that you're basically in sandbox and that happens before you leave the Kerbin SOI.

I don't pretend to know how every veteran plays the game. But multiple sources stated multiple times that most KSP players, veterans included, never leave Kerbin SOI. It may be because interplanetary missions are difficult and unexplained by tutorials, but sure enough the complete lack of gameplay once you reach that point is a factor in this.

What I see in this system is not the lack of money, but them moving the economy/management gameplay later down the line, into the interplanetary phase of the game.

[Pthigrivi]

 

On 11/18/2022 at 4:29 AM, jastrone said:

ok i think this answers a lot of speculations of the exploration mode. there is no money.  its not just science mode. but now i have the question: what limits me from making a big ship the first thing i do? will i have to get resources on kerbin? basically the only limit to how much you can build is time.

I think this is a good question. One thing mentioned early on was tighter restrictions on vessel height and weight early in the progression. Ive also imagined you could have raw resources available at KSC in the form of a fuel farm and resource stockpile. Depending on how other time-based game elements work it could refill after each launch, and the cap and recharge rates could be upgradable with science or boom event unlocks. It might be good training for players early in their program to know what to plan for as they set up colonies and ISRU setups, because they’d already be familiar with the resources they need. In a show and tell you can see tanks and warehouses at KSC… maybe those could be useful? 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[tstein]

32 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

 

I think this is a good question. One thing mentioned early on was tighter restrictions on vessel height and weight early in the progression. Ive also imagined you could have raw resources available at KSC in the form of a fuel farm and resource stockpile. Depending on how other time-based game elements work it could refill after each launch, and the cap and recharge rates could be upgradable with science or boom event unlocks. It might be good training for players early in their program to know what to plan for as they set up colonies and ISRU setups, because they’d already be familiar with the resources they need. In a show and tell you can see tanks and warehouses at KSC… maybe those could be useful? 

 

 

One thing that  can easily be done is that the improvements in the KSP center (launchpad and the VAB) be unlocked with science points. Money was mostly irrelevant in the ship. One just saved money in the ship so It could have money to  upgrade the buildings. If upgrades  be done with  science, then the gameplay itself is kept and the  secondary resource can be  abolished.

For me the important part is that the gameplay of evolution and unlocking tools is kept.

[magnemoe]

6 hours ago, Master39 said:

Not arguing for the removal of either money nor career mode. I don't care what kind of progression system they implement, I just want something that's fun to play, regardless of how things worked in KSP1.

Call it money, resource, science, potatoes. It doesn't matter. What matters to me is that KSP1 career is front-loaded, all the difficulty stands as a wall at the beginning, past that you're basically in sandbox and that happens before you leave the Kerbin SOI.

I don't pretend to know how every veteran plays the game. But multiple sources stated multiple times that most KSP players, veterans included, never leave Kerbin SOI. It may be because interplanetary missions are difficult and unexplained by tutorials, but sure enough the complete lack of gameplay once you reach that point is a factor in this.

What I see in this system is not the lack of money, but them moving the economy/management gameplay later down the line, into the interplanetary phase of the game.

That is an excellent point, KSP 1 career limit parts you can use and the size of rockets in the start.  But after doing the standard progression of getting to the Mun then land, land multiple times and landing on Minmus all parts are unlocked and taking on various contracts all buildings are also maxed out. 
Now the real cost is just buying kerbals who was an problem and unrealistic, better paying them wages and have the wage go up who longer they was out simply to encourage crew rotation .
And yes having 60 kerbals the next one is more expensive than any ship I build including stuff who was a bit to large for the vab.

Now I also played a lot with extraplanetary launchpads and OSE Workshop, and yes they are OP because how easy it it to build stuff. But the same is true for ISRU in KSP 1, yes plausible for water ice but you need an  solar panel farm or an nuclear reactor to make hydrogen and oxygen. Also solar panels and fuel cells are idiotic op, no you can not run an high performance electric car of solar panels on the roof and fuel cells breaks the rules of thermodynamic as is petrum mobile, you can run an mining and splitting process of an fuel cell and get positive result. 

[magnemoe]

On 11/18/2022 at 7:42 PM, Alexoff said:

It's hard to understand exactly what it all means. What resources will be mined? Where will we spend them? How will the colonies function in general? It’s a pity they don’t show us anything, they only say meaningful phrases

This is unknown, my theory is that its kind of two stages, generate liquid fuel and oxidizer like we do in KSP 1, this is that Musk want to do on Mars and NASA on the Moon. 
Like in KSP 1 an heavy lander/ mobile base could do this. Second is creating parts for ships and colonies also more advanced fuel, making nuclear bombs is hard, making metallic hydrogen is way harder. 
This is nice as it keep the chemical engines and the nerv relevant. 
Also unknown is how many raw materials is needed and how complex the chain will be. 

[ZAJC3W]

so... 3 years work went into pretty UI.

And it sounds like RoveDsde's MKS/WOLF will become stock sometime down the road when we get colonies to work. Judging by progress so far colonies will become a thing in 2033 and mutiplayer in 2050. Removing KSP2 from my steam wishlist.

[t_v]

2 minutes ago, ZAJC3W said:

so... 3 years work went into pretty UI.

And it sounds like RoveDsde's MKS/WOLF will become stock sometime down the road when we get colonies to work. Judging by progress so far colonies will become a thing in 2033 and mutiplayer in 2050. Removing KSP2 from my steam wishlist.

Right, I can pretty much tell that you have not taken a look at the game and you won't change your opinion based on evidence, and I don't have to try to understand you any more than you've tried to understand the situation. But on the off chance that you really want to like this game and you are willing to look at the game to decide whether you like it or not, this forum has lots of photo and video evidence of work that the team has done beyond UI. 

You can check the Show and Tell and Dev Diaries subforms (within the KSP 2 section that this subform is in) to see some examples of this. The UI has indeed ben overhauled in all scenes, from the VAB/SPH to flight to map mode, but there is a lot more.

The physics and collisions systems have also been overhauled, making collisions consistent even at very high speeds.

The terrain, atmospheric, and other visual systems have also been revamped, bringing KSP 2's base visuals up to par with visual mods, and implementing technical features that enable modders to make the next generation of visual mods even more spectacular.

A plethora of new parts, many procedural, have been added which will make building and flying craft much nicer, even without the UI improvements.

If you are tired of the bugs and annoyances that KSP 1 is filled with, KSP 2 has already shown that it fixes many of those - something that I would pay for on that fulfilled promise alone. The remaining ones, such as kraken attacks and lag, are either not provable until we get our hands on the game (I haven't seen any unintended behavior yet, so I'll have to test it for myself) or not able to be determined at this stage in development. 

All of that is at release. If that is not enough for you that is fine. But, if you are making your decision based on the assumption that the remaining features will take decades or more to implement, then I would advise you to look at some of the evidence.

First, we have been shown assets for interstellar scale parts, along with related engine effects and interaction with other parts. We have also seen assets for other star systems, which pretty much means they are done since the planets don't have complex machinery going on in them. And we have seen assets for colony parts, including animation for a crane part that could be scrapped by now.

Beyond that visual evidence, members of the team talking about progress on the game have mentioned that multiplayer has been working in various states for a while now, and have talked about testing various systems that are not there on release. You might wonder, "if the assets and coding for these systems are done, why not release them right away?" Well, once again there is evidence to help inform our decisions.

The conclusion I've reached is that these systems are not done, mostly because of a few lines in the latest feature video. The team needs more time to focus on polishing individual sections rather than releasing all of it in an unbalanced mess. We have seen they have the assets, we can be reasonably certain the technical foundations for multiplayer are there, the only thing left is optimizing and balancing the half-finished systems. Coding takes a long time, but certainly not decades long from this point in development.

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, t_v said:

The conclusion I've reached is that these systems are not done, mostly because of a few lines in the latest feature video. The team needs more time to focus on polishing individual sections rather than releasing all of it in an unbalanced mess. We have seen they have the assets, we can be reasonably certain the technical foundations for multiplayer are there, the only thing left is optimizing and balancing the half-finished systems. Coding takes a long time, but certainly not decades long from this point in development.

From my experience it's also such a wise move to not make too many of these decisions without feedback. Games are like music. You need to see how the crowd is reacting and feed into the way they're reacting and see what's emerging. The way they're structuring things its going to be difficult because its all off-leash from the outset and all the constraints come later. I just hope they have the discipline to be a little ruthless, to not be scared to put tight rules in place that drive hard decisions and complex strategic forks. Don't be afraid to nerf, even if it breaks saves by the time we reach 1.0. That kind of brutal fat-cutting is how you get really iron-clad game balance. 

Edited November 20, 2022 by Pthigrivi

[t_v]

53 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

From my experience it's also such a wise move to not make too many of these decisions without feedback. Games are like music. You need to see how the crowd is reacting and feed into the way they're reacting and see what's emerging. The way they're structuring things its going to be difficult because its all off-leash from the outset and all the constraints come later. I just hope they have the discipline to be a little ruthless, to not be scared to put tight rules in place that drive hard decisions and complex strategic forks. Don't be afraid to nerf, even if it breaks saves by the time we reach 1.0. That kind of brutal fat-cutting is how you get really iron-clad game balance. 

Yep, this is it. At this point, these systems can be published, probably with about as many bugs as KSP 1, but they would work and it would be a comparatively good game. However, the remaining piece is to get the balance just right and iron out the last few bugs and unoptimized code that would make KSP 2 way better than it otherwise would be. 

[Gex]

it seems to me that the lack of a career will affect the game for the worse, my friends and I do not like games where there are no goals, where construction is for the sake of construction, without any purpose, and I think there are many like us. and the lack of science at the start essentially turns the game into a sandbox, which is not very good. I hope that the developers will make changes and make the gameplay meaningful, and not just aimlessly launching smaller rockets for the sake of later launching larger rockets, it will be a failure. those who play EA often pass the game completely by the time of release, so when they announce the release of the game and solemnly clap their hands, there is no one to play it, so the start of EA should already be like a full-fledged game

Edited November 20, 2022 by Gex

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Gex said:

it seems to me that the lack of a career will affect the game for the worse, my friends and I do not like games where there are no goals,

Good thing they're not removing career, just changing around what resources you need and when they become a concern in the gameplay progression.

On the EA thing you're free not to play an incomplete game, just wait for 1.0 before buying.