TLTay

Literally anything. Even just a note that there won't be one this week because busy.

Nobody knows. They haven't said anything on specs.

I've been suffering from hypectile dysfunction lately. Struggling to get my hype up. Maybe some new visual stimulus would help, but none today...

Find a roughly equivalent amd spec to the intel nvidia spec for translation? Or run a free benchmark and compare where yours stands to the min spec. If you're asking whether even a god-tier 2008 rig will run KSP2 well... probably not would be my guess.

Anything approximating the functions of a government is purely by accident, like everything else they do.

Nobody knows. We'll get it when we get it.

1: They said no to early access/open beta. 2: What? No. There has been no indication they will tell us a release date yet. It's not done yet.

Hopefully...

I highly doubt terrain deformation, but visible and persistent tracks would be nice.

I'm not a game developer or effects artist, so my ideas are probably irrelevant, but why not... Doesn't sound like the game engine is going to cooperate. You'll have to trick it somehow? Not sure if a seperate frame of reference from the game world is even possible, but... Separate frame of reference around particle producing objects that handles only particles? I was thinking perhaps you could have the special frame of reference have all velocities (and maybe size/distance) be reduced to a tiny percentage of their in-game speed (or size), so a booster in the special frame of reference would be moving slowly enough (or short enough distance) to produce a coherent stream of smoke. Then, using fancy math, expand the special frame of reference particle effects to the size/distance travelled in simulation frame of reference. Probably not possible since I don't even know what I don't know, but I was bored, so I'm here.

I was hoping for Falling Frontier and Terra Invicta this winter, but they got delayed until 2q22...

Maybe they took the funds that would have been allocated to a mac/linux release and instead allocated it to both the outgoing and incoming console generations, which is a much larger potential audience.

What do you think we will get in terms of new parts? Twice as many? Five times as many? I think Nate said they were redesigning how parts were sorted because it was hard to find parts... I'm curious as to how many parts KSP2 will have relative to KSP. They've been very careful in what they've shown us, but I wonder if ballpark numbers of parts is vague enough to share?

You're probably right. December 2022 is probably the most likely. That's probably why T2 didn't narrow things down yet. Unfortunate, but it seems there's still some big things that need sorted out.

Landing cargo on a planet with sustained 150 mph winds is a challenge. We could use some new challenges.

About a hundred meters left of the runway at KSC... Oh, you mean on another planet? I found a nice tall mountain on puff that I want to set up on. Might be above the atmosphere. I'm excited to see the view.

I remember someone screencapping dx11 in a recent video.

We know wind is at least visual because of the blowing dust, moving clouds, and wind turbines seen in videos. I'm hoping for wind with force behind it, variable wind, and even wind sheer in severe storms.

In case you didn't see it.

Yes. That's fiscal 2023. They've also said calendar 2022, that's why I narrowed it down to the dates I did.

Hopefully a community manager or developer can fill us in for sure, but they're very limited in what they can tell us without approval.

That's outside of calendar year 2022. The data they've set publicly is that it will release in calendar 2022 and fiscal 2023. Always subject to change...

You mean fiscal 2023. Calendar 2022. Fiscal 2023. Given T2's fiscal year, they're saying it will release between April 1st 2022 and December 31st 2022. They probably intend to show up at PAX in March (they mentioned going to PAX in a job listing) and announce the release date there if they can meet production goals.

They're all based on real world tech or realistic design studies that are at least feasible. So the question becomes why would space agencies and engineers want different engine designs? It comes down to power and efficiency. Same reason you wouldn't want to go interplanetary with just RCS thrusters: slow acceleration, anemic thrust, inefficient. An ancient VW beetle will technically get you from here to there, so why improve? Better technology leads to more power or more efficiency or both. More efficiency means less fuel needed which means more payload for the same craft mass. You can't just keep adding fuel tanks to a mainsail and expect everything to work out ok... that might be doable for a trip to jool if all you're hauling is a command pod, but if you want to go to another star and bring the stuff you need to start an entire civilization... you'd need a small moon's worth of propellant and many years to burn it. It's not viable, hence the better tech. If you want to experience why, probably check out to near future mods by nertea. Lots of good stuff in there. You will have little luck making it to another star system with chemical rockets.