JoeSchmuckatelli

Yup That's the killer app / awesome sauce of the KSP experience.

Fun fact: Noah and crew set off with 4 of every animal - but 40 days is a long time, and Noah had a big family.

We are all literally just doing this to pass the time between now and Feb. It's called quibbling!

A whole lot of these ideas sound like something fun for a mod or DLC - or for people who want to Role Play their KSP2 experience. Like - I get building a part of your Colony should have some kind of greenhouse; they've even shown similar in renders. But I don't think that part of the game should be '1/2 of your Colony Died b/c Jeb fudged the landing'. <Revert to Launch?> I also don't think you should have 'MarionKerman, In Orbit Around Jool is Running Out of Oxygen' missions; 'You have 3 Months to Save MarionKerman' - Sadly, if that mission comes up in my game... Marion is buh bye.

Es gibt kein Wort (We would have to make one up - so I chose 'Shmurbeling'. It combines the 'woosh' sound of a rocket with the cavitational 'burbling' sound I imagine a sub makes when going really fast. Thus from now and henceforth we shall describe the movement of rocket propelled subs as 'to shmurbel'. "The Royal Swiss submarine shmurbeled quickly through the heaving heart of the sea to escape the Malian flying dreadnought." Oh - and as for missiles fired from the sub? We simply say 'launched'.

Hear hear!

Interesting. Your post, in reference to mine to Vl3d has prompted me to think about what I expect from KSP2. I fear that I have very modest hopes for the game. Essentially, I want KSP2 to be KSP - with the kinks worked out. With better tutorials to help people understand what they are doing and how 'space works'. So I can introduce the game to my teens and offer them the same sense of wonder and accomplishment that I got from KSP waaay back when. I want my rovers to behave at the destination the way I designed them in the VAB and tested at KSC before launch. I want the wheels to act like they have traction and to remember which way they're supposed to turn when I press a key. I just want them to work. I want the science to approach having a purpose - and to be educational as well as fun / 'something to do.' I want to build crazy craft just to see if it will fly, or make SSTOs, or fighter jets, or recreate crafts from history, or make racecars and robots and helicopters and X-Wings or whatever and have fun with them. To be able to Kerbal something up and make it work - regardless of how inefficient it might be, but that by God I figured out how to do something and it worked! I want it to still be difficult - and still be fun. And, on top of it I'm looking forward to the New: I want to visit the 'new worlds' - the recreated Kerbolar Systems and the other systems as they're added - just to see what wonders the Dev Team created. I want to build big orbital stations and huge craft and colonies - because they've said that we can - and I want to Kerbal that stuff up. I may want to join an MP session to fly with my kids or race them and see what they have done. But what I don't want - is something that uses the KSP name, calls itself '2', but is a totally different game that has a core focus of being a multiplayer resource management Sim. Or something else. You write that KSP does already have resources to manage - and that's true... But in KSP, you can always get around that problem by adding MOAR! you can add more powerful rockets and give your craft more fuel and bigger batteries and better solar panels and if all else fails - you can learn from your mistakes and get help on the forums to know how to build a better, more efficient craft that can do what you want it to do. ...and it's that last little bit that I feel is the core value of the game. That challenge and learning, based on real world problems that can be solved by really smart people being offered to the masses and Neanderthals like me. Too often games have hidden metrics or arbitrary rules that force players into the desired direction... But KSP basically said 'here's orbital mechanics, it's hard but doable... Have fun!' That was the awesome sauce of KSP. If that part is lost trying to give resource managers resources to extract, transport and manage - and that system is tedious to the player who just wants to go places? If the core is lost trying to horn into a single player experience the option to play multiplayer because a loud minority wants it? Then KSP2 won't be KSP too - it will be something else. So... I'm keeping my expectations modest. If all we get is KSP - but better? I'll be happy.

I don't want to turn KSP2 into a resource management Sim. Too often they bog down on trivial stuff - which in turn means the end of fun. Cases in point: *. Cities Skylines - at first you are trying to build a cool, functional city... But at some point you no longer need to make hard decisions (money is too free) and the game devolves into a traffic Management Sim and its no longer fun. *. Satisfactory - by the time you reach Aluminum you not only have a traffic Sim (bringing in resources from different parts of the map) but it gets increasingly tedious with less and less reward for doing the work required to build the Factories. Absent being a person who just wants to build unfun stuff for purely aesthetic reasons the games stop being games and are just work. KSP'S (and by extension KSP2 's) purpose /core feature is NOT resource management - it's building crazy craft to explore the cosmos. Therein lies the joy. Force players to do unnecessary resource management for an ancillary part of the game (Kerbals are literally just there to humanize the game) and you rob the joy from the core. @Vl3d I respect a lot of the stuff you write - but you seem to want a very different game than we are likely to get.

This is very long and quite technical, but his conclusions are compelling. Sets out a good argument that Team Red is the winner for the next (next-next?) generation due to the architecture choices. You might find it interesting

Googling that now

Good news out of China on a potential 'game changer' in extracting Rare Earth Elements via electricity (electrokinetic techniques) vs the common polluting methods that involve leachates drawing the minerals from adsorbed clay deposits (pollutes ground water and requires strip mining). It’s electric! Technique could clean up mining of valuable rare earth elements | Science | AAAS

Any audiologists or sound engineers here? Would adding a Bose-like 'noise canceling speaker' to a computer case (something that would detect the noise of the computer and all its fans and put out the reverse frequenc(y/ies) work to reduce the impact of the constant white noise fan whine?

Satellites with Satellites? (I'm guessing the big thing had the ability to move itself somewhere)

Sorry, I thought he said Seven of Nine and my mind wandered.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjBrrvGyo37AhU-jIkEHd3OCI0QxfQBKAB6BAgOEAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencenews.org%2Farticle%2Fmom-voice-kid-brain-teen-neuroscience&usg=AOvVaw3-o-SY8-68x-D65xA2Wscw ...and somewhat related science news: appropriately 'fun' fact: In these same brain regions in teens, unfamiliar voices elicited greater responses than the voices of their own dear mothers. The shift from mother to other seems to happen between ages 13 and 14.

Would bulldozer sized work probes count? And could we give them a little plutonium battery that would keep them warm and working during the long night?

This is more of a computer-nerd question than something particular to either KSP or KSP2. I'm hoping to hear from folks who've previously looked into the hardware limitations that affected some users when they built high part-count craft. My understanding is that these became CPU bound (given that the graphics demands of a 10 year old game should be slight) and as such dramatically reduced frames on some machines. While I haven't delved effectively into KSP's issues to know what the issues were - in other games I've heard the problem is inefficient use of multi-core processors or threading of processes. Anyone already done a deep dive into this and can comment? (Bonus points if you can explain the problems observed with KSP's design and how you hope KSP2 will handle similar requirements). TIA!

Last in this series: Sitting together and drinking coffee while eating purloined chocolate goodness... I realized I'm mildly disturbed by my spouse's complete lack of interest in SpaceX's side by side booster landing this morning. I showed her the video, and she was like, 'huh... cool.' Of course that's the exact reaction I give her when she shows me a 15 second video of a chinchilla in a hat holding a sign.

Radeon 7k series should hit the streets in numbers by Jan. 4080 starts coming out later in the month. Both are projected to be significantly better at 4k than the current Gen (6k&3k - still not comfortable calling 4090 'current gen' as the Gen isn't fully streeted). But gawd the price! I'm sticking with my 3070 for the foreseeable. FWIW - GN basically said that with the modern CPUs you really need to work to functionally see any real performance differences between current gen and last gen... And if you are running games at 1440p or 4k where you are effectively shifting the bottleneck to the GPU - the expensive CPUs aren't really buying much more in performance. Relevant part starts abt 23:24, but is a bit later - maybe 24:something On phone so can't link directly

Eyeroll. Isn't that where you go to post a question if the answer you want is scorn and miscomprehension?

I tried to look into this and there isn't a brief review of the pros and cons I can find. Seems like if you really, really want to play MP in KSP it allows this. Seems fairly good for atmospheric flights with 2 or more, and you can do orbital... But from what I can tell - the practicality of trying to play parallel career mode is not recommended

8o

I'd be disappointed if they weren't. Kind of the job.

Epic.