All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I was kinda hoping for FTL drives so that I could send a message back to Jeb telling him to send an expendable Kerbal instead.
  3. That's a question that can't be answered with out seeing the min specs for KSP2. The systems people use to run KSP run the gambit from old laptops to modern pro grade workstations. Too much variation in system setups to answer a simple yes or no.
  4. today first used robotic arm to deploy rover from a minmus lander https://imgur.com/ktArT3x
  5. SR seems like a pretty niche thing to get hung up about. And it only really starts to become noticeable near the speed of light (which is what would really matter in the game). As far as I'm aware, the only interstellar drives that will be in the game is Orion and Daedalus. Both are limited by 10-15% of the speed of light if it's modeled anywhere close to real life, so I feel SR would be irrelevant to gameplay. As for things like antimatter (which I suspect will only be in mods), you could get to 50-90% or higher depending on how much fuel you have, but how would SR enrich the experience? How would adding those calculations and everything in the game make it better? (especially if the only drives capable were in mods, not stock. Why would the devs bother?) And why would you add it for odd situations for when the game bugs out? I honestly can't see a reason why we'd need it. It really comes down to fun gameplay, and accuracy (and the learning curves associated). Where would things be more worthwhile? Where KSP is now, I think is mostly good. You could take a page from realism overhaul, and make the aerodynamics better, make reentry better, make reaction wheels not as op, so you need RCS more, and so forth. And that could add to gameplay, but things like SR would be irrelevant most of the time when you aren't traveling between systems with sublight drives, and (another example) N-body would just make the game harder to learn, and (from what I've seen) be more tedious to play.
  6. You know, the KSC in KSP2 is reminiscent of the space center in 0.7.3, with the forests, and swamps...
  7. I love the poster! I am going to set it as my desktop background until I get a better KSP screenshot.
  8. I'm not sure I see how having stars and planets closer together would reduce the maximum practical speed to be lower than 0.1c. Could you elaborate?
  9. I'd love to see a nod to SR, but I doubt that they'll want to get into time dilation. There's always the "interstellar dust drag" speed limit instead.
  10. When it's needed I would recreate KK. I really hope I can use a shiny new API that will result in less ugly code and less bugs. First step would be some editors for statics. the rest really depends on the implementation of KSP2.. its really to early know for sure * Placing static Objects... Its still Unity, so this will be not an issue. * Launching from multiple launchsites... this should be stock. * Switching to other bases: might be stock * editing Terrain: this might be done differently. The format of the statics and the shaders might change. We might need provide some community assets for the existing buildings --> Builtin textures are no longer existent. Shaders and stuff might be changed on the fly. The format for 3d models might change... But overall.... I'm hopefull that there will be many new Airbases on Kerbin.
  11. It would certainly be extremely hard to balance the fanfics and pick and choose bits of lore. To take the example of the Kraken, Revelations of the Kraken has it as a malevolent force, while TSoES has them as a warlike civilisation which nevertheless isn't Always Evil (tm). And completely differently, Kerbfleet has invisible krakens in a few parts of the story, including the Space Beet (bete de l'espace) and the thing which ripped a Kerbulan warship apart. What is, then, truly the Deep Space Kraken? (Answer: All you need to know is that IT EATS SHIPS and ITS COMING TOWARDS YOU, RUN!)
  12. Hi, this is what you can recover from the pre alpha footage, I hope it serves something
  13. That's a fair point, although one could say GR is a generalization of SR that accounts for spacetime curvature, while SR presumes flat spacetime. But that wasn't really the point of confusion. It had more to do with people presuming I wanted FTL, when I thought I had made clear that I didn't. No. N-body physics has to do with the collective gravitational influences of more than two bodies in a given system. And as @chaos_forge pointed out, I mispoke. I meant Special Relativity, since SR is where the speed of light was first set as a hard limit. That hard limit holds true for General Relativity and I tend to refer to GR more than SR, but all the same, my main question has to do with whether it's possible that KSP2 will prevent FTL travel by any means at all, even accidentally through glitches, or if that loophole will still exist in some sense.
  14. First you need to be in a proper position to start a rendezvous, which is as circular an orbit as you can get that's either 50-100k lower or higher than the target's orbit, which itself needs to be as circular as possible for best results. It doesn't really matter whether you start above or below the target. You should have the MechJeb button at the top of your screen, click on it, it will drop down and give you lots of choices. Click on Maneuver Planner. Then go to the map view, select the vehicle with which you are trying to rendezvous and click on Set Target. On the Maneuver Planner there is a drop-down of various maneuver types it can execute. Select Match Planes with Target, click on the Create Node button and then on the Execute Next Node button and it will perfectly execute the maneuver node which will make your orbital plane match the target's. Remember to click on the Auto-Warp radio button so MJ will time warp to the node. Next select Bi-Impulsive Hohmann Transfer from the maneuver drop down. Again, click on Create Node and then Execute Next Node. Depending on your position relative to the target, this can mean several hours and several orbits before the correct phasing relationship is achieved. Very important to have auto-warp on. That maneuver will either be dropping the periapsis to match the target orbit, or raising the apopapsis, depending on whether you started above or below the target. After that maneuver is complete, select the Match Velocity maneuver type, and make sure At Closest Approach is selected. Again tell it to create and execute the next node. The end result should be your vehicle parked within a couple hundred meters of the target. You can take over with RCS from there. All that said, MechJeb features aren't all enabled at the start of the game, you have to progress through the tech tree. So if you don't see the Maneuver Planner option on the MJ menu, you need to do some more sciencin' until it's unlocked.
  15. It's not being published by EA so we should be ok.
  16. Yes. They are useful relative to rovers for the same reason aircraft are useful where there are no roads. They are slow relative to jets, but in KSP can be solar powered which gives them flexibility that you will probably enjoy. They can be tricky to hold together in flight, so when I made a sufficiently robust plane I put it at <kerbalx>
  17. It's a genre. A genre with very few games, but a genre none the less. Simple Rockets isn't a copy of Kerbal Space Program, and KSP2 isn't a copy of SR2.
  18. See, I don't much like that. Why copy something from Earth? What's wrong with it being its own thing?
  19. There is a value in the savefiles that you can edit to fix this ("ScienceTimeDelay"), or install that:
  1. Load more activity