shdwlrd

In KSP... I want to fly into a thunderstorm. In RL... there's no way I'm flying into a thunderstorm by choice.

That's one way to look at it, or it can be done by distance. Say X amount of time and resources/km or 10km. Possibly being augmented by skilled labor. That can work or you can have the resource flow slow to a trickle to show that there is pressure and resources in the line. Actually, that would only work on the receiving end. On the sending end, the resource flow would stop completely. Overall, the real question is how complicated is too complicated before it becomes so unwieldy that the typical user won't use it or the devs don't want add the features.

@NirgalI don't remember Nate being specific, but I could be wrong. Most of the info for colonies was talked about a while ago.

It seems like Intercept is moving to the direction of using containers. In the announcement trailer, there are FFT styled containers all throughout the video. But without confirmation, that is just an educated guess. Awww... where's the fun in that. Someone will try it, we all know that. I've seen all the demo and show n tell videos. Some of the buildings are large. (Most shown so far are about as large as a 6-10 story building. The largest building shown so far is the colonial VAB.) All but some of the smaller power generation units shown can only be built on site using either shipped in or locally collected resources. Somewhere in one of the posts (possibly an interview question) about colonies, Nate describes the vision on how colonies will be started and how you can grow them. Most colonies are envisioned to start as small MKS/Pathfinder style of bases where you have to deliver all the components. (Whether they are in containers or as full sections, we don't know.) From there, you can grow them to the scales show in the trailer video.

That's a very good point. I'm expecting colony management to be granular enough that if the player wants to invest in increasing the efficiency of their colony, they can. But simple enough where you can use the spam to succeed too. All that Intercept will have to do is make the spam method for advancement more difficult to nudge the player to invest in upgrading their colony. Ex. High initial build cost, some required resources are difficult to produce or must be shipped in. (That would make sense with the interstellar ship pictured above Jool having so many huge containers on it. That's all the difficult to produce resources required to found a new colony. At least that's what's my head cannon is pointing too.)

I don't disagree with your vision on how colonies should operate. I have a similar vision myself. I'm just paraphrasing what was said by Nate about the operation of colonies.

It's seems like people are starting to over think what would be necessary to construct and operate a colony. I wouldn't expect it to be as granular as DSP or Factorio as where you have to plan every aspect of your production, construction, and distribution to keep a forced high rate of production. In KSP time doesn't really matter. You can time warp until you get what you need or do something else while you wait. It's a huge environment to play around in while resources are building up. Maintaining your colonies isn't a necessity, the devs have said you can ignore your bases and colonies without them dying out. So if you just want to build a basic colony and never expand or upgrade it, you can. It's not going to hurt anything. It's been claimed that you can build your colonies anyway you want. Nothing has been shown about that process, nor has it been described in any real detail so it's all speculative. We just know the intended features and a basic idea how it should work. There's been nothing said about resource distribution except that you can automate it. Anything said about this subject is pure speculation. Most people are expressing their ideas on how it should work and their personal wants and wishes for resources distribution. Intercept has said colony/base building and resource distribution will have a larger part of KSP2, but it won't over shadow the true nature of KSP, which is building, flying rockets and exploration. So I don't expect anything that is related to stock colony and resource management to be overly complicated.

That's the point of a good discussion, it can foster other ideas. If you want to simulate an upkeep costs and such, as you suggested, you need some amount of resources to operate it. Nothing more. I'm seeing pipelines to be handy when the distance is too close for planes/lifters but too far for rovers to be a long term solution. The colony will have to be large enough to afford the construction and upkeep to utilize it. I'm pretty sure someone will recreate Dang it for KSP2. So if you want to play with random failures, you can.

Then why even mention inspections if they are going played away with automation? If you're thinking there will be random failures in KSP2 there won't be. Much like KSP1, everything will work unless you "the player" engineers in a failure point.

That's not really necessary. It's just busy work which doesn't fit into the theme of KSP too well. Once you have to take a raw resource deliver it somewhere; refine it to a finished product and deliver somewhere else. You have a very basic version of the games you mentioned. Now if KSP2 doesn't go overboard with the whole resource processing chain and delivery mechanics, I don't think KSP2 will have a DSP, Factorio feel to it. I do like the idea of creating the logistical connections manually. That way you can create an efficient logistics network instead of the weird nonsensical connections that a truly automated can make.

Not a bad idea. It's a more grounded idea compared to the rail based transport of resources suggested in the other posts. The hard thing to get past is that there will be automated resource transfers. I don't think the background resource transfers will only include ground to orbit or orbit to orbit transfers between stations. For the background resource transfer to be completely effective, it wouldn't matter where the bases or colonies are located. Even if both the transfer points are on the ground on the same body. On the other hand, it would eventually remove the need for cargo based rovers on planets if you are willing to spend the necessary resources to construct it and the time to plan it out. It also can fit into the whole automatic transfer of resources on the same body beyond using crafts to transfer everything. Ok, I'm torn. I think this idea is worthy for the devs to make note of.

With today's "show n tell" got me thinking of a couple things. One) a way to quickly reload a part to test without having to reload the whole parts database Two) all resource conversions use a defined formula, format, and definitions.

Thanks for sharing I hope the part modules and the options for them are better documented than they are in KSP1.

Lol, then say your point as plainly as possible. Because the point I'm thinking you are trying to make is that the distance and time required are impractical for new star systems if done with a realistic scale and will destroy the game play.

Are you also taking into account that Intercept is adding a more levels to the time warp and adding the ability to thrust under time warp? In KSP1 the max warp level is 100,000x and you can't thrust. (The current max warp for KSP1 works to about 6hrs game time to 1sec real time.) If going interstellar you will need to increase the warp amounts. If they increase the max time warp to say for example 1 light year takes 5 min real time, the distances we're talking about won't be a much of a game play issue. Add in the ability to thrust unfocused and under time warp, the craft itself will be able to achieve a reasonable amount of C before you have to turn around and start decelerating. Between increased time warp levels and accelerating during time warp, the mind boggling distances that we are talking about won't drag down the game play of KSP2. You have to remember, you can't base everything that KSP2 will be doing to KSP1. Intercept is changing and expanding on a lot of the base functionality of KSP1 for KSP2. Well, in KSP1 the Kerbals were no more then fun little pets to get sad about if you killed them. (OK, they did have some usefulness beyond piloting, but Squad never let it be known. You had to figure it out on your own.) Then the mod KIS/KAS was made. Actually gave the Kerbals a good gameplay purpose. But Squad came along and added professions. Instead of helping because of their professions, they limited what the individual Kerbal can do because of their profession. That was stupid. It's the limited capability of the individual Kerbal by professions that I don't want to see continue into KSP2. In KSP2, it's looking like Intercept is turning the Kerbals from little pets to an actual usable resource. As being a resource, the limiting of what a Kerbal can do because of their professions needs to go away. Intercept can make much better use of the professions by adding bonuses to the activities that are related to the professions. A scientist will help find resources faster and more accurately. An engineer will add bonuses to ISRU, power generation, and construction. A pilot would add efficiency and reliability to the background resource transfers. Under the control of the player, they can do anything the player wants them to do. But when left to the background processing, their professions would dictate how efficient the task is performed.

But what amount of time are you thinking of with light year? Are you thinking a year in Earth terms (365, 24hr periods or 8760hrs) or in Kerbin terms? (426, 6hr periods or 2556hrs) The reason I ask the question is because a light year to the Kerbals would be a much less distance than a light year for us.

We're lucky the devs have looked at the shortcomings of KSP and decided to address them with the expansion of the game. I can't imagine doing interstellar in KSP1 without using mods. This has already been confirmed to be a stock feature of KSP2.

It's common knowledge that they are adding more levels for time warp. So the expected distances will be large enough to take a very long time even using time warp steps in KSP1. Most of the speculation is putting the distances between the stars at about 2-5 light years apart.

That explains their need for speed.

The colonies are necessary to be able to build crafts that you wouldn't be able to get out of Kerbin's gravity well. They will also be necessary for when you reach a new star system since it will be a one-way trip. (At 1st anyway.)

Just because someone is hired for or has pursued a certain job, it doesn’t mean they can't do something outside of that job description. That's the problem I have with the professions in KSP. It's annoying that Jeb can't use a screwdriver but Bob can. It's adding complexity in something that isn't necessary. I'm not one to judge how you like to play your game. I prefer not to have the unnecessary complications with the Kerbals job descriptions and limitations. I create more than enough problems for myself.

So a person with a PHD in astrophysics and astronomy can't be a pilot or vice versa? A pilot can't change a tire or MacGyver a fender? An engineer can't operate a mass spectrometer and understand the results or place measuring equipment properly? A non professional gets merits for a scientific discovery. It doesn't make sense in RL. Why add that type of baseless job separation to the game. It just adds a layer complexity that isn't necessary.

Lol... most long term players can say that. I think the sediment is not failing a mission because the Kerbals died or having a colony fail because you were ignoring it to do something else.

Intercept never confirmed that the professions from KSP1 will be in KSP2. I don't expect the professions will continue to KSP2. They were unnecessary in KSP1, and Intercept is seemingly not going to continue the some of the half baked ideas Squad implemented.

Nope, not going to happen. Nate did say in an interview that they don't want players to worry about dead Kerbals if you ignore a colony or on a multi year interstellar journey.