Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by DunaManiac
-
-
15 hours ago, bobjonesisthebest:D said:
2023*
I'm sorry if I can't predict the future, but that post was made before the delay was even announced. Unfortunately I don't have a crystal ball to see a delay over half a year in advance, and I certainly don't see the need to bring up a 4 month old thread to point out something that neither me nor anyone else even knew about at the time.
-
Finished my final launch to the Kerbin Starbase in LKO. I'm adding the last two modules before it'll be complete.
Rendevous and docking went smoothly. As of yet, the gravity wheels and solar panels haven't been deployed. Now, to deploy the modules.
My loyal tug undocks (I'm really regretting the lack of reaction wheels on this thing) to take out the first module from the Beluga.
That was the logistical loose storage module. Now, to get the unpressurized storage and computer core.
The completed section. And with that docked, the 3 kerbal inspection team along for the ride is ready to do their work and get the station ready for permanent habitation.
First, the solar panels deploy.
These are followed by the gravity wheels. And it's done! 1 month in the making!
Bill seen here checking a utility crawl way. Now for the dirty work - making sure that every habitat is on (man I wish that was on by default), activating the life support systems, fixing the thermostat, unloading the equipment, getting the control centers in order, etc.
Once that's over, it's time to say farewell. Those inspectors unfortunately won't be part of the permanent starbase crew, that's above their paygrade. The real engineers and scientists will be arriving shortly.
The only problem with that, is that I plan to include a crew of over a dozen. The only crew transfer vehicle I currently have is the majesty-class SSTO seen above (below it is Jewel 2, a mothership in use around the Kerbin system). It's small and reliable, and its served me well up until this point, but as you can see, it's small, with a crew capacity of 4. If you have a crew of 16 that's going to be a problem. So I'll have to design another mk2 spaceplane, maybe even making the Majesty obsolete.
Meanwhile, the Beluga is getting ready to leave Starbase.
Glorious night reentry.
And touchdown! The greatest station I have ever built is complete (probably second only to the planned VENTURE in Minmus orbit, which was incomplete at the time of its unfortunate RUD during eva construction (NEVER AGAIN), in which where I lost not only the station but a spaceplane as well).
-
8 hours ago, Vl3d said:
If (1), using physwarp is equivalent to teleporting or using other solutions for fast-travel. Why not just takeoff from a runway closer to your destination?
That's not actually true - it's not teleporation. You're still covering the same distance and travelling at the same speed- only the time that it's taken to do so has gone down. It doesn't teleport you anywhere, and it doesn't circumvent a key mechanic that's core to the game like infinite fuel or hack gravity does.
8 hours ago, Vl3d said:If (2), using physwarp means you are cheating. Travel was supposed to take a long time.
First off, if it was, then physwarp would not be in the game. Secondly, physwarp is not cheating anymore than on-rails timewarp. Where do you see the distinction?
8 hours ago, Vl3d said:And you can see this in the fact that no other games use this artificial physwarp mechanic.
That's completely untrue. Lots of games let you increase or decrease the rate of time, even pause it.
9 hours ago, Vl3d said:Running at 4x and using a vehicle should not be equivalent. It's a game breaking mechanic.
A vehicle will always be able to outrun a kerbal. Kerbals can run at about 2-3 m/s, a vehicle can travel at much faster speeds. And my intention with that statement was not to be argumentative, just to suggest a way to reduce the amount of time spent walking without increasing the speed of walking.
-
1 hour ago, Vl3d said:
I am in principle against physwarp
Oh no, not this discussion again. I mean, this stance makes a small amount of sense in a multiplayer setting, but in a singleplayer setting, no.
I mean, have you ever done a 45 minute long burn before? Or used an ion engine? Or being kilometers away from your base and having to walk there on foot? Or been in any tedious situation at all?
1 hour ago, Vl3d said:It's called progression.
It's not progression to increase the amount of tedium one has to sit through. And again - "build a torchdrive lol" isn't a solution to every problem. The game shouldn't have to make you build a needlessly large rocket just to reduce the amount of tedium when there's physwarp right there. And how is phys-warp cheating, while ordinary timewarp is not?
I mean, this is a classic example of "if you don't like it, don't use it," (although I suspect that will be hard). From what I can tell, the majority of the playerbase is completely fine with it.
But this is not the place for that, so to stay on topic, I'll say that I personally don't think they'll be any speed boost to EVA at all. It's perfectly fine where it is right now. If there is a slight speed boost, I'll be pleasantly surprised. In the meantime, use a vehicle, use the kerbal jetpack, or even another vessel to collect them, or just turn on 4x warp.
-
I spent most of saturday and a little bit today flying 3 missions, delivering the fertilizer and supply tanks for the Starbase. I'm lifting them 2 at a time. The last of the missions takes off.
The early morning launch allows us to see the sunrise as the plane passes 300 m/s.
Orbital insertion and rendevous take a few in-game hours to do.
With rendevous and docking complete, it's time for the next phase of the mission.
The tug stored at the station undocks and enters the cargo bay, docking with a logistics module inside.
Then, the tug maneuvers the logistics module to the desired port.
Afterwards, it undocks for the second one, re-entering the cargo bay and pulling out the second logistics module.
With all modules out attatched, the tug returns to its port.
-
Banned for outsourcing the banning to others rather than you banning the poster yourself
-
1 hour ago, Vl3d said:
The essence of everything you build and everything you do in KSP1 is you playing multiplayer - but you do it with yourself. One part of your brain is proud of another part of your brain.
Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.
Well, firstly, saying this is saying that your creation isn't real or valid without approval from others. You can be creative and build things without needing other people to see it. While some proffessional artists make art for others' approval, art is made mostly for self expression. People don't make art to show-boat their creations, they do it to express themselves. Not showcasing it doesn't make art less important. Art, and making things in general is for the enjoyment and expression of self, or in some cases for the betterment of others through real life invention. Gamesa are similar; most people don't play KSP so that they can post it on youtube or show it on the forums. They do it for fun. So saying that you can't have fun in a game unless you can show others in an MMO multiplayer is like saying that there's no point in self-enjoyment unless others can see it, which honestly defeats the point of self-enjoyment in general because self-enjoyment is for YOURSELF. Not for others. Therefore, you don't need a multiplayer to make meaningful things in KSP. You don't need others to see your things to be good. As long as it pleases the creator, it's 100% real. Nobody should be obligated to showcase their fun to make it "real", period.
31 minutes ago, Vl3d said:It's more than validation - it's also the co-op building process, the learning process when seeing what others have built and, most importantly, it's the first time technology is good enough to actually allow players to build and expand the game world. After which comes exploration - the main KSP single-player reward.
You seem to be under the impression that the most important thing in multiplayer is the the ability to show others our work, which will give us the opportunity to make our work "real." Well, there are so many other places where you can do the same thing. Your argument hinges on the MMO-style multiplayer that you've proposed, while it is possible it could be simple co-op with friends. We already have a community, we have youtube and the forums to share what we've built and we have already expanded the game world with mods. Saying that a multiplayer is so important that it would make self-enjoyment real is saying that self-enjoyment as it is right now is deluding yourself with fantasies that your creation could ever be worth something. Art isn't worthless just because no-one has seen it, or no-one collaborated with you to create it. Because it was already great and valid before you showed it, multiplayer or otherwsie. Self-expression without showing other people is completely fine, because it's about what YOU make. Nothing changes when other people see it, or when you can collaborate with others to make it. What difference will a multiplayer make to a co-op building experience when we already have it right here, on this very site?
-
53 minutes ago, Vl3d said:
Now realize what that means when everything you create can be seen by the whole world. Your thoughts become real.
What's the difference between achieving that in multiplayer and simply making a youtube video or livestream in KSP1?
-
The Grand Starbase project is nearing completion. All 5 major modules are now attatched, and I'll be relying on the Beluga for the smaller modules. Today, I launched the first of these launches to deliver 2 fertilizer containers for the (yet un-added) agroponics modules.
Unfortunately, a wing flap was destroyed. That'll probably come back to haunt me come reentry.
Manuevering in for docking, at night, unfortunately.
Docked at Kerbin Starbase. None of the gravity wheels or solar panels have yet been deployed.
-
On 4/24/2022 at 1:44 PM, t_v said:
Back in 2019 and 2020, Nate Simpson was interested in adding underwater exploration to KSP 2, though probably not at release. The reason I personally think that underwater exploration should be a prevalent part of the game is that a big portion of space exploration is actually planetary exploration. A lot of our missions to mars (aside from relay satellites) were to deliver rovers, which initially might not seem immediately relevant to space travel. But rovers and planes, and by extension boats and submersibles, are very important for fully exploring celestial bodies, and underwater environments on any celestial body would give us immense amounts of information. What is the difference between the rock on Titan’s surface and the rock at the bottom of its oceans? Knowing that could help us answer myriad questions on planetary evolution. So, I definitely wouldn’t consider it a peripheral feature to spaceflight, any more than rovers or bases. But at the same time, despite it being probably more relevant than rovers for the next few decades of exploration, I could see it being developed after the game releases.
Well, I believe the opposite, but that's probably from personal bias on my part rather than objective reasoning.
I'd like to ask you, what are some practial applications for submarines that you could see?
On 4/24/2022 at 1:44 PM, t_v said:But at the same time, despite it being probably more relevant than rovers
I'm also interested in the reasoning behind this comment. Not many planets will most likely have a liquid ocean to explore, so I at least see rovers being more versatile in that sense.
-
7 hours ago, EndIris said:
I decided Kerbin should look better.
Interesting. Can we see the new Kerbin as a whole?
-
On 4/26/2022 at 3:28 PM, DunaManiac said:
To continue the mission, I began the Beluga-class' first descent. It had performed well in testing, but many of my mk3 spaceplanes are unstable once their fuel has been depleted (which once led to the death of Bill in a mk3 spaceplane crash, I couldn't EVA him in time), which is why I was anxious.
It ultimately survived, but I found that it did need some weight readjustment, as when banking it threatened to become unstable. Towards the end, in order to avoid overshooting the KSC I had to dive steeply down.
Just as I was coming in, however, I found with a horrible discovery that the front landing gear could not deploy. As it was below a cargo bay, the game considered it to be inside it, causing it to remain locked. This always seems to happen to me. So I was stuck, with a broken front-landing gear, and about to land.
After some quick thinking, I used the plane's exceptional pitching power to keep the cockpit from destruction.
Thankfully, the plane survived the landing, with the only part lost being the OPT RCS nosecone at the front.
Meanwhile, after I edited Beluga 2 to remove the front landing gear stowed issue, it was ready for launch with the Laythe relays. Due to it being so long, I had to actually leave the cargo bay open so it would not clip through. I anticipated that drag would be an issue, and so I activated all 12 engines instead of the ordinary 8 rapiers.
Eventually, drag became to much for it and it stalled at about 300 m/s. So with great reluctance, I actually had to close the cargo ramp so the drag costs wouldn't be probhibitive.
As I reached space, I reopened it. Those relays sure are getting toasty...
In orbit, I separated the relays. However, I quickly found it was actually clipping into the structure of the Beluga. So I simply timewarped so that it would leave the bay without incident.
However though, these two missions had shown me the limitations of this craft. Originally, it was actually designed for Laythe. I assumed that since it could haul 2 Jumbo fuel tanks into orbit on Laythe, it would be similarly capable on Kerbin. That was not so, with these missions leaving me barely any fuel in orbit to work with. More oxidizer in the fuel mix is needed.
During reentry, the KSC was covered in a thick layer of clouds, obscuring i from view.
And touchdown! That concludes the launch of the Laythe relays, next is the launch of Deep Space 2.
-
This was the rover that I used for my Minmus elcano. It's mostly stock, except for the pod in front, a few cameras, the storage bay, and the KIS containers. I've learned from my previous designs to make it as wide as possible. It's by far the most reliable rover I have ever designed. Honestly, I was surprised at its performance. During the entire elcano, it only crashed once, about 90 kilometers in, and that was only because I was careless and wasn't paying attention.
-
I'd say pretty large.
Even with KSP1, a vessel that can support perhaps a dozen kerbals and carry a decent amount of cargo on an interplanetary voyage stretches 70 meters across, and that's an interplanetary vessel that operates via hohmann transfer with ordinary NERVA's. So I'd imagine 50-100 meters being the FLOOR of sizes for even intra-system travel. Interstellar vessels will probably dwarf this.
-
This is service station 1. The station in question is beside the larger vessel, seen here with it holding position next to SS1. Service Station 1 was actually constructed in two parts by these motherships, which also carried parts for bases. Service Station 1 includes a few amnesties, like a gravity wheel and generous living quarters. It also has room for the Service lander, which right now I keep at the surface base rather than up at the base.
-
Took the MKFT-1 down from Service Station 1, where I have currently moored Jewel 1 in lieu of the Kerbin Starbase, which is still under construction.
Unfortunately, when I transferred the fuel around, I accidentally unbalanced it, with me only noticing 20 seconds away from my suicide burn, causing me to almost crash it while I hurriedly pulled up TAC fuel balancer.
However, it landed safely, and I had Irsey get out and attatch another joint socket to hook up the MKFT-1 to MSB1.
Meanwhile, I took up the Beluga-class SSTO carrying the Laythe Exploration and Operations Satellite.
I have the LEOS stowed for now.
-
On 4/25/2022 at 12:14 PM, Vl3d said:
When I crashed the vehicle in a huge crater while returning to my lander on the Mun near one of the arches after misplacing the jetpack in storage.
Well, my question was technically asking, "when was the last time you had to walk 3 kilometers on EVA while there was a functional vehicle around," but I suspect that even faster EVA speeds wouldn't help you in that circumstance.
-
While I don't really see kerbal running speed increasing ever seriously making a vehicle impractical, I don't think it's speed will change at all in KSP2. I mean, when was the last time you had to walk 3 kilometers on EVA when you could have used a vehicle?
SpoilerIn fact, that's a good idea - a crew ferry rover to take kerbals back to the central base if their craft landed a few kilometers away...
-
15 hours ago, intelliCom said:
Huh, didn't know about textures. I guess that explains why it's so easy to have so many fully-fledged celestial bodies with terrain; the data for it is literally just a 2d texture. I'm curious, what's the resolution of the texture, and what's the ratio between pixels on the texture and km on the planet/moon? Terrain seems half-decent for a 2010s game, so the ratio might be something like 100:1 (pixels : km), right?
It really depends. The planet's fine terrain is actually randomly generated, which makes up most of the rolling hills that you see, the heightmap only makes the overarching terrain like the flats on Minmus and mountain ranges on Kerbin - the noise is mainly there to hide the pixels of the heightmap and to give the local terrain a little flavor. Most stock planets, like Vall were actually generated through procedural noise and don't even have a heightmap.
14 hours ago, Fletch4 said:you can see a very obvious repeat at a certain height(especially over water) so it may be less than that.
That's not actually the texture itself, that's the transition from the terrain to the texture. The texture by itself is what you see when you're far away from Kerbin, simply because its less resource intensive, but when you get close the game switches to the terrain generation system, where the texture is overlayed over it.
-
I see interstellar debri as part of random failures, which I'm firmly against, or at least I would support making it optional if its included. In my eyes it wouldn't add anything new to the game and instead cause rage quits and force you to quickload more often.
-
49 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:
Technically an arch is just a very short cave.
Although since a cave should be enclosed in all directions except 1, I would consider an arch to be a very short tunnel rather than a cave.
Anyway, to stay on topic I would not be opposed to any underwater features. The only problem is I don't see underwater exploration or colonies as really being part of the scope of the game. KSP is a game about space travel as its core, and I would rather have that be prioritized rather than a peripheral feature. It would make good content for a later update, a mod, or a DLC, but I don't see it coming out on release.
-
3 hours ago, intelliCom said:
I think the Mun has one or two maybe. It's been a while, maybe I'm just getting mixed up.
Perhaps you're misremebering the arches?
But no, caves and overhangs aren't possible in KSP by definition because KSP uses 2D textures to create terrain. A cave would only be possible by making a mesh or some trickery with groundscatter.
-
You forgot to put on the lubricant, and your crane is locked in place.
Crew Transfer Vessel.
-
I've completed a new batch of about a dozen probes to send out to several planets. I dislike the prototypical probe core + small battery + oscar-B + ant engine landers and probes that I usually use, and tried to make unique looking satellites and landers. I only have about a year to wait for the next Eve and Duna windows and 200 days for the Jool window, so since I have KCT I actually have a chance to use my Beluga-class SSTOs to deliver them into LKO to save time.
Mun:
Spoiler
The Mun Communications System. 4 relays that I'll deploy over Minmus, using 3 and with one I'll be leaving attached as a backup. Its of identical design to my minmus relay launcher.
The Mun Operations Satellite: A simple scanning satellite. Its identical to the Minmus Operations Satellite.
Munar Operations Science Stations 1, 2 & 3: These science stations will be the forerunner to the Minmus Colonial Base. They have a crew cabin for monitoring, a communications array for acting as relay stations, a computer console, some ground science, and KIS cargo containers containing components to build a drilling unit nearby.
Duna:
Spoiler
DEPTH 1 with its SMART Tug II attatched. Its of similar design to its sister probe, DEPTH 2, except it carries a small lander.
DEPTH 2 with its SMART Tug II attatched. Its only difference to DEPTH 1 is that it carries the Ike General Lander rather than a rover.
The Duna General Landers 1 & 2. Two identical landers which will be landing at the same time DEPTH 1 and DEPTH 2 arrive. Both of them are Identical in design. Its seen here with its nuclear stage and aeroshell.
Jool:
Spoiler
The Laythe Planetary Universal Network - Some relays around Laythe. It's pretty long, so it actually hangs out of the spaceplane. Getting this into orbit will be fun....
The Laythe Exploration and Operations Satellite: A satellite specifically designed for Laythe exploration, it'll insert itself into a polar orbit around Laythe. It's being transported aboard the Beluga-class SSTO.
Deep Space 2: The successor to the original Deep Space 1, of similar design. Its only difference is the Outer Moon Explorer which is attached to it and will land on Bop and Pol.
Eve:
Spoiler
The Eve Operations Satellite.
KSP 2 Multiplayer Discussion Thread
in Prelaunch KSP2 Discussion
Posted
It seems that you and I have a very different idea of what Multiplayer should look like. I see it as a small co-op between friends where the group works together to accomplish various tasks, because maintaining large servers adds undue cost and burdens that are better spent somewhere else. On the other hand, you see it as an MMO-style game where hundreds or thousands of people play together and trade between one another in some kind of galactic scale marketplace. Which there's nothing wrong with, and I can understand the appeal, but I would draw the line at a marketplace where you pay for things with actual currency for two reasons. Firstly, that would be an easy springboard to add micro transactions into the game or other mobile nonsense ("buy 1000 kerbucks for only $9.99 to buy those funds to keep playing!") Secondly, KSP is first and foremost a spaceflight exploration game. An in-game marketplace would put the marketplace first and spaceflight second. You can't make the same argument about career mode because economic management adds another new and fun dimension to the game, but if you add the marketplace then it becomes all about saving up to buy someone's fancy rocket subassembly. Frankly.... it just doesn't feel very KSP to pay 10000 funds to buy someone's craft.