shdwlrd

I was thinking of a good response to this, but Dstaal has already summed it up quite well. It does confuse me from time to time. If the motor doesn't call out the fuel type in the description, I'll assume its LFO. Most of the time I'm looking at DV and TWR values, not the type of fuels used. Also it's true that people don't read instructions and dismiss pop-ups without reading them. Its a case of "get out of my way, I'm trying to do something here." That's why you don't see real instruction manuals with most consumer products anymore. We just expect them to work the way we think they should work.

Not a bad idea, but I'd have to hear it before purchasing it. If the soundtrack doesn't catch my attention, or annoys me while playing, I won't buy it.

Yes, people will accidently learn things playing KSP. But the point is, if you make it too complex, no one who is new to KSP will continue playing do to frustration. If I had to match certain fuels to certain motors in the beginning, I would have quit after a few tries of building a rocket and having them not working. It's one thing to start up the rocket and fail to make orbit, but it's another thing to get it on the launch pad and hit start and nothing happens. Failure like that to a beginner is enough to think the game is broken and they will refund it. That's what I would do with a broken game. My MP example is something that almost made me rage quit in the beginning. What saved me was I tried another motor and it worked. I didn't know that there was MP in the beginning, I didn't figure that out until a few months later. All I knew was that those motors were broken and the game was early release, so stuff may not work. If it was a full release, I would of kicked myself for buying it.

The only reason I played and got hooked on KSP is I like building my own planes and rockets and flying them. I can't tell you what the motors included in KSP are modeled after. I have no idea what specific rocket motors use for fuel. I learned about the different fuel types after I got hooked on KSP. I still can't tell you which fuel type is better. Even to this day, I will put a MP based motor on a stack of LFO and question why there is no DV. I learned a lot about space after I started playing KSP. I learn about orbital mechanics, the rocket theory, and all related info after I started playing KSP. All I knew in the beginning was keep the pointy end forward. If KSP2 does add complex fuel and motor combinations, I will either not by it, or more than likely, I will mod it to strip out the extra fuel types and use the generic term LFO for the chemical reaction rockets. I don't what to have to deal with the extra complexity of using only certain motors with certain fuel types. I'm only willing to deal with the extra fuel types for the Orion and fusion based drives. Not all players are die hard rocket and space nerds or professionals in some field related to space/aeronautics. Some of us are regular people who like flight/space sims, building our own planes and rockets and flying them. (Because we can't do it in real life.) I learned something today.

Why do we need more liquid fuel types though? Just for realism? Because someone's brain is exploding because both turbine engines and rocket motors use the same resource? Why can't petroleum, alcohol, cryogenic based fuels be under the generic term liquid fuels? Why can't the thrust and ISP be changed to reflect the different fuel types? (I do agree the plume should reflect the fuel types that the motor should use.) Squad did do that, scaled to the Kerbal universe and for game play. People are still complaining that it isn't real, or good enough. What is good enough at this point? The dozens of known fuel types used? We know that KSP2 is getting different fuel types for the more advanced rocket motors, and Orion drive. Why do we need to complicate engine selection/fuel combinations even more for turbine engines?

I'm going to take them saying "predicting" as a educated guess. Since it's a guess, I would add some salt to it. I have to say that site is interesting, I checked my A10-7080K against some of the games I own. It says I can't play them on my A10 using the on board graphics at the minimum settings, but I have at medium settings or above. That just adds proof that some salt is needed with their guesstimate. (The games I checked was BSG Deadlock, Cities: Skylines, BattleTech, No Man's Sky, Astroneer.)

tracking station doesn't seem to be on spacedock

I'm in the same boat. But I'm thinking the earliest we see it would probably be mid 3rd quarter, early 4th quarter. But PD's fiscal year ends in March, so next year isn't off the table yet.

Its a good idea. I've used the ejection mod before and it did save my Kerbals from my poor flying skills.

That's technically one way to do it.

Liked that they shared their intentions for colony operations.

There are several threads that discuss colonies and logistics with the various options on how it should work.

I play on PC not consoles, but I can agree on having some type of mod controller in the game. I play Cities Skyline and I love the fact you can enable, disable, search for, and download mods from within the game. A central hub for all mods be a boon for both PC and console players. If there is little difference between the two versions, mods maybe interchangeable between the two. (Consoles usually get ignored when it comes to mods and hacks.) As for needing a beefy PC for KSP2, we'll have to wait and see. The stuff that makes KSP start chugging may not be present in KSP2.

Thanks. I was hoping that the dev's dropped more info somewhere and some how was missed.

Source please.

Nope, not going to be in the game. Its already been said that there won't be warp drives, wormholes, gateways, or any other type of FTL propulsion.

At this point, they shouldn't be listening to the community about what should and shouldn't be in the game. After the game is released, they should be listening to community about bugs and things that could enhance the game.

Why is MJ bad? Please give an example? I'm not going to argue about the whole automation versus manual flying thing. There are plenty of arguments throughout the forum on that subject.

Why not?

Turning the kraken from the scourge of KSP to something than can be helpful. I like the idea. Treat him well, he'll help you. Treat him poorly, here comes his bigger relative to ruin your day.

Thinking back to when I started playing, the biggest thing I was missing (and in some cases, still need) was inflight, on screen guides. An example of what I'm think of would be the navball guidance that MJ uses for gravity turns. Or for some games, use rings or whatever to show the typical flight path you should be using. An easy flight mode for planes. Basically it auto levels the wings after turning or banking. When turning, the plane automatically banks, and adjusts to hold (as best as possible) the pitch you have. Basically, make the in flight stuff easy for beginners. The rest, the typical tutorials work. Just make easy to find for the situation the what's info for. Like building in the VAB, have a permanent button that say something like "for more info".

After reviewing how to use Kos, I actually got to test it. It works pretty good, but there are some oddities. I'll need to run the scenarios over again to see if it will preform the same. But I do have a couple suggestions. Add in holding patterns near the KSC and desert runway. That way you can guide planes into the pattern from anywhere and then do the landing approaches from there. Also, if there is missed landing, the ap can directly fly you back to the pattern to try again. Add a check see if the SAS is on and turn it off. If the SAS is on, the ap won't take control of the plane.

Thank for that little tidbit, I didn't know you could do that.

I wasn't trying to compare a Kos script to a .DLL plugin. I was just curious if the could tune the PID's and max limits to different crafts. The planes I make are stable, but some are underpowered. They can't do high amounts of positive pitch for very long before stalling. I was planning to using it to send planes to a set of coordinates and have it land near by. That is kind of moot at the moment, I'm getting errors left and right with Kos. I haven't had time to scour the Kos threads for the wiki to see if it's a bad install or just user error.

That was what I was looking for, thanks for the clarification.