shdwlrd

What type of depth will the resource system have? (Like factorio, few basic resources but a lot of processing, or like astroneer, a lot of resources, but little processing.) Will the building choices for ground colonies move beyond just cylinders and domes as the colony grows and advances?

That's good to know. So all the discussions about features and what not have a chance to be noticed, and may help dictate the direction on whatever topic is being discussed.

In all reality, I'd rather see the old procedural fairings mod become the new stock fairing. The current stock fairing is useable, but kind of a pita to use. The procedural fairings mod created the fairing automatically upon attaching the base. If you had to make changes to the payload, it would automatically adjust to fit the payload.

Caves would be interesting to see. As mentioned above, there could be real reasons to have and use them.

Some type of automation would be appreciated at some point, just don't know when you should be able to access it. I'm at the point where I just cheat stuff into orbit because even with MJ, I don't want to sit around and wait the 5 or so minutes to reach orbit yet alone manually fly the rocket into orbit.

My only real opinion is leave life support for the modding community. If anything, add hooks into the core software for it, but don't implement it for stock. It's something that I've played around with and got sick of it very fast. It turned the game into a supply mission simulator, instead of a exploration game.

We will at some point, but the politics will have to shift or some entity(ies) will have to pay for it to make it happen. We should have some type of outpost or base on the moon by now, but you know, politics get in the way.

No, if you check out the propulsion thread you'll see that star theory is grounding all engines in the current and near future science and technology. Also from star theory, there won't be any FTL, warp drives or warp gates.

I have to say, that pre alpha footage plays better or the same as my old AMD APU system did. I was lucky to be able to keep above 30fps when I was doing anything when a planet was in view. Even with my newer system, I still get stuttering when explosions are in view or when transitioning from the atmosphere to orbit and vice versa. (Damned AMD single thread performance.) My point is this, if that is pre alpha footage and it plays as well as KSP1, I would love to see how they get it tuned when they get past the alpha stage and get to beta releases.

@nikokespprfan thanks for posting the translation.

A few posts up I mentioned that the Flapjack would look better if it was flush. Here's Angel-125's response to that "The problem is with how docking works in KSP. A recessed saucer’s docking port would be buried and inaccessible. I have a part in the planning document that is a cradle for the Flapjack. It solves the problem. Also, once the mothership’s cargo bays are done, you’ll be able to fit a Flapjack inside." So there is a special part planned for docking the Flapjack. Also the cargo bays for the Excalibur are going to be huge. You should be able to park a couple in there and not worry about it.

Now with the colony growth explained a bit, I wonder how it would work with sandbox mode? (If it's included, star theory mentioned that as far as I know.)

Malamute, NF construction,

I understand the whole "that would be cool, but KSP doesn't allow it or it won't work the way you would expect" thing. I was thinking of if someone decided to use the Flapjack as a bridge module for the Excalibur. It would look better, that's all. Personally I would be using the cargo bays as hangers to avoid adding external docking ports to the Excalibur. Oh, since I'm thinking of it. I have a couple questions regarding the gravitic engine. What do the keys mean for the throttle/thrust curve? When setting up a model, which thrust type do I use, engine or RCS? (I'm figuring the standard engine, but I'm asking just to be clear.) I would give you the module names, but I'm at work and can't look it up.

I like, but I think it would look cleaner with the Flapjack docked if the Flapjack was recessed flush with the rest of the Excalibur.

Wow... this whole micro transaction/drm/dlc thing is getting out of hand. There are pages of circular arguments. Not only in this thread but also in the actual KSP2 section too. The world isn't black or white, neither is the wording they used for the statements about the aforementioned topics. It's about star theory's intent. If star theory's intent doesn't match their actions, then go ballistic about the topic. The people at star theory are avid fans of KSP. Do you think they want to destroy a game they love? Do you think they want to liquid off the well established; very passionate community they are creating the game for? Huh? This isn't some free to play pc, android, or iPhone game they are making, it's going to be a paid product. There's no reason to have micro transactions in the game. They will get paid once the game starts selling. The only thing you should expect to see in the future is dlc. At that point you can choose to buy it or not. As for the whole DRM thing, the worst thing they can do is force you to launch the game through whatever service you bought it through. But again, why would star theory screw over the modding community by only allowing one instance on a machine or account. They know KSP is all about mods. Why would they muck that up? I know some have their reservations about take two and private division, some are justified, some aren't. So far they have left KSP1 alone. If they continue on the same track, they should do the same for KSP2. But we won't know that until the game is released, so why argue about it now. You can get the pitchforks and torches at that point. No they're not. All propulsion methods will be grounded in current and near future technology and science. No FTL, warp drives, warp gates.

We'll have to wait and see. Star theory hasn't released any recommended or minimum specs yet. It would be good thing if KSP2 was true multicore capable game, but we just don't know at this point.

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.

You can do that if you like. I would recommend using a mod like janitors closet or filter extension to hide them.

Its probably star theory is being careful on what get shown at this point. They don't want to show their whole hand just yet, they are going to tease us. They likely want to build as much hype as they can before launch. So far they have shown parts and locations that we should recognize from KSP1; and new parts and locations we should look forward to. I'm sure they have a lot more to show us before the release, but I can guaranty that star theory won't show us everything before the release.

Yes Blender can export FBX, but Unity will import the native blend format.

My only real hope to see in KSP2 is support for multiple monitors. Either it could be modded in or stock. It would be nice to toss the map screen, info, control windows on to a second monitor. That way you can keep your flight screen as clean as possible.

I can see flying saucers in the new KSP. Parts will seem easy to port over, but who knows what changes will have to be made for any code used. Too early to tell at this point anyway.

No they won't.

It would seem like perfect timing... if mods for KSP1 were going to be compatible with KSP2.