Sirad

Well looked at the Topic, wrong thread. have to open a new one or, eh nevermind... While every version of ksp ran quite well on my rig, this one dont. No logs, because no logs getting created. (besides: where to look at ?) I wait for a new version, maybe next iteration solves it.

Fresh install on Win7 DX11 already installed No Mods. KSP 1.9 crashes. Spec: 16Gb / SSD / Geforce 1070 Fun fact: 1.8 runs fine.

Got to often burned by hype, no deal. I'll buy if its out and the reviews fit.

If not mentioned already: Large liquid fuel Tanks that doesnt look Airplanish

Hm i must admit that i start to drool over the thought of it.... :-) eh... anyway. Badges must be given then by KSP2 for: Biggest Engine Test Explosion, most Kerbals killed while exploding, etc....

Well, my original Point was using Science Points to upgrade engines. This holds many obstacles not easy to overcome. By others who gave their 5 Cents to it it evolved. I just gave the car a shove and its running down the hill now. Actually i would think about an assortment of engines (not all, but some) that can be modified by adding some modules to it (one suggestion) or swap out parts (other suggestion) maybe 3,4,5 or 6 Different parts so there is a balance between complexity and playability. No need to add all Thousands of things that are Part of an engine to it to make it fun. We have this game right now. Anyone ever Planned where to Place the Nozzles for the Orientation management for your Space station ? A lot of prior thinking has to be invested to build a good Space station actually in ksp1, so deep complexity already entered the game.... There has to be a balance between 'usability' and 'complexity' and there has to be the possibility to NOT use it if you dont want it. Something like a Engine that has a basic configuration that represents the generic ISP etc. of the Current engines. You can Mod it with additional Parts if you research the needed Points/Parts in the Tech tree. Like swapping out the generic Turbo Pump with another one that has 5% more Pressure by having the disadvantage of having 10% more weight. So any Part could have a Bonus on one Side and a Drawback onto another side. HOW it is implemented (if this idea is worth implementing, what is in any case not OUR decision) is upon the Team that writes the code. If you make it short you dont even need any 3-D Modeling for the modules, the engines can have checkboxes like the way they have the gimbal Checkbox if the 'Other Pump' gets available. This way you could instantly see what comes out your modification. Actually you can modify the Engines already a lot. Gimbal yes no and gimbal range. The idea has Potential (from my Point of view) and This wont shorten the fun for others because you can safely ignore it if you want to Play old style.

Yes. Even if my initial idea fell of the Table quite quick, i really like the idea of having an assortment of Engines that can be configured/extended/reduced whatever. Adds much to the testing and optimizing if one wants. As i mentioned, anyone would be free to ignore that feature and fly with default parameters. Like driving in GTA5, you can choose to pick up a car and crash/explode anywhere you like. You can mod the car prior to explode or not. The Fun is the same--- And the outcome is the same. Police (or kraken) shows up and start to chase you anyhow...

Yesssssssssss. Gimme more explosions!

Well There goes more energy in pulling out the hair from a good suggestion than i thought of. I hopefully think that those who want KSP2 only a Boring Copy of KSP1 because everything else would change their prefferred gameplay to much, will not make their way into the coders minds. There is always something that gets added what anyone dont likes. Any addition can be ignored but something thats not in it, can not enter the reality of the game by missing it. If i see it from my Point of view, there is also no need to put in Fairytale-Engines or similar fantasy stuff to Push a rocket. But hey, im totally free to ignore it and there is noone that forces me to use it. There is therefore no need for me to call myself more than one Person as 'we' and 'us' and tell others how this game should be played and what should not enter its possibilities. Even the fantastic engines can made modular. Whatever. The game lives from its possibilitys. If the naysayers want to limit the possibilities of gameplay for others, i can only hope that this is not the way the Company sees it. KSP2 has to be something new and not just a bland copy of KSP1 and any suggestion should be welcome...

Dont forget to add the Input of any Kerbal Worker of the 150.000 that are actually working at the Space Program and the impact of any given Stat of their Family, Education and actual Motivation to the success of the ongoing launch. Anyone mind Temperature, Wind, Air Pressure, actual manufacturing Quality of external supporters ? Hmm. Even Kerbol adds some DV to the side of the rocket that is shed by light..... And that is affected by the colour of the Rocket... Well there are many ways to make a good idea complicated. The way is just somewhere between that.

Rocket designers ? Guess how long any engine gets tested/designed/redesigned right before it will be used for eh... 5 Minutes at best ? Well.... Erm... if that is too complex for someones playing style, He is free to stay with the basic configuration that would most likely represent the actual standard Engine values. So there is an Auto-Dumb-Down function built into it by NOT using the possibility to change out Engine parts. In That case both Players would be satisfied. In Your preferred case only you get satisfied. Good for you but there are more.... Quite any choice is possible. Maybe some Players only want 1 Part Fit-em-all-Rockets to play with ? No issue. they can mod them into the game. Missing complexity is not easy to get into the game. Dumbing it down is easyer. As i already stated: To much complexity can be safely ignored by not using it. So even all the naysayers will have their fair share of it.

Ah, well this is the right way, and just another way to think about upgrading engines! a real fine thought. Much more evolved than my initial idea. Engine could maybe be updated/assembled with Pumps, Sealevel or Vacuum Bells, nozzles etc. GREAT idea! This *is* a GREAT idea! The more you evolve in techlevel the better Parts you get for your Engines to change out, all with pro's and Cons. You start with a excrementsty 1.25m Case with bad parts and can upgrade the Engine to your needs (for vacuum, for greater thrust, for better isp etc) So the drawback of not being able to 'brag'bout'my'rocket' on steam is some minor detail that could be fairly ignored, from my point of view, because There will be enough possibilities to share unmodified or modified rockets. And crafts can not be shared if you dont have the required tech for all parts anyway. Or the required Additional Packs. And all Parts for the Engines could be part of the Tech-Tree (if any exist) or be expanded by modding.

As far as i follow here, my initial topic was something else nor ?

Maybe that. I would like that Feature and if others do as i, maybe someone write a mod for it. Whatever, those were just my 5 cent. Good to know that anything can be suggested :-)

A lot of us do not share their builds on any platform. So it would be a nice addition and would represent whats going on in real rocket science. Any 'Pre Build whatever that needs to get shared' can have the modified stats be saved to the shared model. whatever, at least i am thankful that i was allowed to state my opinion...

Why not making any engine Upgradeable ? So you can invest some additional Science Points (lets say 100) to have 1% more ISP out of one Engine to choose ? This could be a good sink of any unspent Science Points later on...

Thank you all for all the answers! I will fiddle around a bit with the settings posted some posts ago.

Okay, i was asking for making it standard all the time but its implemented in a way one could think of eh, forget it. It eats up to many ressources on my PC so i rather use MJ (and mj gets it done right...) So how to disable ?

Same here. I can totally safely accept the new Eula because the new Terms are too 'Surprising' and will never went valid. Its just about the bad joke that this Eula is now....

As i see it, EU Law prevents to get to the Point where the New York Convention would come into Use. As the change of the EULA does not get valid here. Maybe this is something for the Pro's on that Point. Generally it fails on the Simple fact that you are automatically added to a List that 'agree to that change' even by not being noticed about it (forum post does not legally count) and have to opt ouf by writing a physical letter. If this company would reside in the EU this would be fairly enough to bring them into trouble. Thats business behaviour that suits companys that live upon scamming bitcoins from unwary users claiming they have watched Porn on the inet. Well they can write me a physical Letter if they want me to agree to that change.

They dont know their trade. Its illegal in the EU.

So what's up with all the Buyers that are not here present in the Forum ? Just like 'the plans were available for viewing at alpha centauri for several years, noone complained, now your Planet gets destroyed' This may not come into validity in EU. Maybe in Zimbabwe ? North Corea ?

Hm Sorry for the Clipping, it was only for visual appealing :-) This rocket flies quite well without the Science container clipped into the Battery Thanks for the Badge, I already proudly added it.

Well. Now im adding my Contribution to this Challenge. Played with 1.45 I did the Caveman Challenge at Hard. These were my settingd And my Flag :-) First research is done the usual Way. Slab together some stuff and try to get as high as possible. One of my major Rockets a bit later. Orbiting Mun, Orbiting Minmus High and Low Science. Not Capable of Returning Physical Science. only transfering Science. Looks weir, but i havent researched the small decoupley by now Performing. In Orbit. View in Orbit. Landed At Minmus Trying to get back, but not enough DV left so quickly transfering what i got from the Ground. Now this is the S13, 2 Generations afar, this Rocket is able to land on Minmus and Return Physical Science from there. This was the Workhorse. Each Biome just returned 90 Science from Minmus. Orbit View While Landing Landed. (well i managed to get off the Planet even being topped over) Praise RCS And Off she goes In Orbit of Minmus, quite enough DV left to get back to Kerbin 6-7 Rounds breaking Orbits have to be flown because the Top of the rocket is very vulnerable to Heat Made it. First Return of Science from Minmus This is the Precious S13 Looks just... Cavemany This got Routine and the S13 brought me back 90 Science from each Biome of Minmus. This rocket was even capable of landing at Mun (some science returned from there) but not take off. Last Entry to Minmus Atmosphere for the last bit of Science. Done! For the Statistic 2 3 4 5 Thats it. inbetween there was a high hurdle where i'd have to take a line of some testing contracts but in case that this dont count i have 2 Biomes left at Minmus so i could even get some additional Science there.... Well. now im feeling.... hm.... having lost my knowledge of everything beyond the Use of Fire. am i Valid for the Badge now ?

What proof i have to provide to getting added to the Caveman List ?