Jump to content

Theory: Robotic Parts WILL be part of the game - because Rovers are too big for space.


JoeSchmuckatelli

Recommended Posts

I know there's some concern that we don't have any robotic parts during the EA.  But we had them in KSP and we're gonna need them in 2.

v2rIaTl.jpg

They're gonna have to give us the ability to fold stuff up.

Otherwise - we're left with this:

ILOws2C.jpg

 

...which is just hideous!

EDIT:  

Oops notice.

I goofed in the top picture.  That's just a Large Cargo Bay.  Mea Culpa.  

Too lazy to go back and FIxit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Sequence said:

I've been able to fit largish rovers inside the biggest fairing. 

But you're right, making them foldable so they can fit in a cargo bay is much more fun. 

Really hope robotics are in the works. 

You could simply has suspension who fold in like the rover wheels from making history.  They was also nice for avoiding jump after time warp. 
Yes I obvious want robotic parts anyway. 

Edited by magnemoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KSP’s history, including the micro-history of version 2, is full of “should have but doesn’t” subjects. That alone is not a viable source for “it will be there.”

However, someone will mod it, and it will be DLC either to beat the modders to it (unlikely) or to cash in on the proven demand for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Sequence said:

I've been able to fit largish rovers inside the biggest fairing. 

That Eve rover was in an absurdly bobble-head faring.

40 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Not to mention that the stock rover design is weird

My TR-4 testing explains it; can't climb without a rocket on its as butt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

That Eve rover was in an absurdly bobble-head faring.

My TR-4 testing explains it; can't climb without a rocket on its as butt

Yeah, I've not managed to stop things wobbling out of large fairings no matter how many struts I add. 

I've been putting the xs radial mount engines on my rovers and turning on infinite fuel as a work around for now. I really love the look of the TR-4's but they just have no power on a slope. Hopefully it'll get fixed in the next patch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Kerbart said:

KSP’s history, including the micro-history of version 2, is full of “should have but doesn’t” subjects. That alone is not a viable source for “it will be there.”

However, someone will mod it, and it will be DLC either to beat the modders to it (unlikely) or to cash in on the proven demand for it.

Yeah agreed.  Expect it as DLC rather than a 1.0 feature, if KSP2 ever makes it that far.  They already promised more than they could deliver back in 2019 with the same things that are far in the future on the current roadmap.  Expecting such a large thing to be added either before or after the roadmap is finished, for free, is unreasonable levels of hopium.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

Yeah agreed.  Expect it as DLC rather than a 1.0 feature, if KSP2 ever makes it that far.  They already promised more than they could deliver back in 2019 with the same things that are far in the future on the current roadmap.  Expecting such a large thing to be added either before or after the roadmap is finished, for free, is unreasonable levels of hopium.  

I can accept it as a DLC.  Presuming they get the core stuff working as intended and the Roadmap underway.

Science is likely make-or-break for me.  I'm hoping for some nice changes and having a progression system again will make it a game - not just a Sandbox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I can accept it as a DLC.  Presuming they get the core stuff working as intended and the Roadmap underway.

Science is likely make-or-break for me.  I'm hoping for some nice changes and having a progression system again will make it a game - not just a Sandbox.

Yeah I was surprised they released without it.  I don't have any idea how they expected to ship without all these caveats (as Intercept) back in 2021, and now they don't even have a bare bones tech tree system. 

Guess we'll see what they come out with, whether each new feature added comes out as a bare-bones EA versions of the feature or whether significant work is done and they come out as more finished features.  If they do come out as just bare bones EA features though, it'll be a further indicator that they've been BSing about things for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

bare bones tech tree system

That's a concern I did not have back when they announced EA.  I figured Sandbox would have some proofing and balance work to do (nothing this bad)... but then Science would introduce a revamped (and hopefully interesting system) with a part of the new progression system.

Prior to that a WHOLE LOT of us got into a bunch of lengthy discussions and suggestions for revamping Science to make it interesting, relevant to science-interested-new-players and relevant to the game, without being 'crew report on Minmus to unlock aircraft engines).

But they have been SILENT on what Science is going to be.  Clearly their excitement is reserved for Colonies and etc... but I'm still crossing fingers for Science to be worthwhile.

...

But...

Yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

But they have been SILENT on what Science is going to be.  Clearly their excitement is reserved for Colonies and etc... but I'm still crossing fingers for Science to be worthwhile.

...

But...

Yeah.

Yeah I think it will be a good guage of the quality of their design team.  The current EA release has very little gameplay design to it.  Some design went it the UI - for better or worse  - but I think that had a specific UI/UX designer on board. And obviously there is some high level design to what they decided to keep or change from KSP1, but for the most part theres no gameplay at all to judge by, it's all juat a copy of KSP1 with prettied up graphics and unnoticeably tweaked tuning. 

This will be the first 'new' KSP2 thing (probably, if it's a copy of KSP1 science that'll also be indicative).   And this is also the first place no one can claim the Star Theory thing forced a reboot - the same core design team was there from Uber entertainment days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of the big rovers, I suspect the long-term intent is to have them built in place at colonies. Just like huge interstellar ships are to be built in orbit. Much easier to handle physics there, too.

Edited by Jarin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Jarin said:

On the topic of the big rovers, I suspect the long-term intent is to have them built in place at colonies. Just like huge interstellar ships are to be built in orbit. Much easier to handle physics there, too.

Yeah I think orbital construction in general will relieve the biggest use case for robotic parts--fitting very un-aerodynamic craft inside a fairing. There are, of course, tons of other interesting uses for robotics, but the inability to make folding spacecraft is the one that I've missed the most. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Man this OP aged well. 

 

DLC... De ja vu? 

Is the only 'new thing' colonies and resource management?  Science is the same and interstellar is just moar difficult, but the same... 

8/

And multiplayer, that I have the feeling they're pretty clueless on.  I don't think they really knew what they were biting off in terms of gameplay, much less the tech side, when they decided on a multiplayer feature.  I can't imagine the average user wanting to sort out 'timelines' with their friends.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Man this OP aged well. 

 

DLC... De ja vu? 

Is the only 'new thing' colonies and resource management?  Science is the same and interstellar is just moar difficult, but the same... 

8/

Yeah, it is a real bummer that we won't get robotic parts as part of stock.  Looks like the modders have some work ahead of them on this front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

And multiplayer, that I have the feeling they're pretty clueless on.  I don't think they really knew what they were biting off in terms of gameplay, much less the tech side, when they decided on a multiplayer feature.  I can't imagine the average user wanting to sort out 'timelines' with their friends.  

I've never been positive about MP.  Not really a priority for me. 

 

But for a game with the legacy of being a 'science introducer' - that is a core feature they should have worked on.  MP is a business boondoggle 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Yeah, it is a real bummer that we won't get robotic parts as part of stock.  Looks like the modders have some work ahead of them on this front.

If you read that open letter, a lot of modders don't want to jump into this mess for a while either.

1 minute ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

But for a game with the legacy of being a 'science introducer' - that is a core feature they should have worked on.  MP is a business boondoggle 

100% agreed.  Given how much they talk about connections to the science community, I would have loved to see a more genuine science system, with a gamified spin.  Even if they were just stealing ideas from Kerbalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I'm not as enthusiastic about this as many of you .   I found the robotics, as implemented in KSP1, much too fiddly  and glitchy to be practical for a lot of what I wanted to do 

Craft would dance around and destroy themselves simply because I had a connection through a single piston etc .   So I tended to find I couldn't trust it to behave when I needed it to and found it more trouble than it was worth to me.

That said, it did (in theory) open up a lot of possibilities and there were many fascinating creations  from a lot of other players.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...