Incarnation of Chaos

Yikes; would RealChute make any of this better or is it just a limitation of KSP that can't really be avoided? More asking for my own curiosity now.

You couldn't even have 4 seperate parachute modules on a single part? Similar to how radial symmetry works?

Scatterer does something like this procedurally; adding fog/dust effects. If you just wanted something like that then it could be reasonably done, but i'm not sure how. You'd need some kind of particle system to represent the "Dust", and then calculate how it would accumulate over time on a surface. Perhaps modify FAR to handle it?

I mean the thing is you're basically asking for a procedural weather simulation, and the thing is that would require a very specialized skillset to create and implement unless you wanted it to be nothing more than textures. Like Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launches have been canceled in clear skies because the upper level winds were not favorable. Atmospheres have layers, and you'd have to simulate them all to get anything even approximating a realistic result. Now the NWS and other forecast originazations get around this by doing what's essentially a 3D matrix. Where they take the tempature, pressure, winds , direction etc and plot them to points at specific heights and positions; then run them foward in time. No one of these simulations are entirely accurate; no one point ever comes out to be exactly correct. But the average of many simulations over time begin to converge, and from this we can predict the weather fairly reliably into the week beforehand. More stable and larger patterns can be predicted accuretly for much longer (Sometimes decades). But these are ran on literal supercomputers with highly specialized people actually programming the simulations; many have both a CS and Meteorology background. It's definetitly not impossible, but......i'll let this speak for it's self. Last post from the creator was in SEPT 2017, and he did some fantastic work. But it appears that the lack of various skilsets eventually doomed the project; or he lost motivation to work further because burn-out is a beast. Only way i could see weather happening in KSP2 is as a DLC, and only if the NWS or similar agency agrees to assist them.

None; because the game isn't actually out yet and i don't know if these "features" will actually be there or fleshed out enough.

It's not taking up three pages anymore, so i'd call it fantastic.

Indeed; though i would've put the videos in spoilers along with a description above saying which one they are. But i figure that's from it being a rough draft more than anything.

Yeah; iv'e gone thru it. I was more thinking like literally just a link dump; new posts locked. Mods would update it whenever new info hits.

@Snark Could we by any chance get a sticky with direct links to the various KSP2 interviews? Some are rather difficult to track down; like the PC gamer interviews. It would be nice to have links to as many of them as possible located in one place for easy citation.

"Career" mode is basically the biggest wildcard of KSP2 right now; since all we know is they're "Combining Career and Science modes"...what the hell does that even mean? Science is just Career without funds and all buildings maxed, but still the need to go get science to unlock nodes. Career has funds, contracts and all buildings are LVL1, so it's already intergrated science mode in essence while also adjusting it to be a bit more difficult and adding career-specific features. So are they going to just have a roll-your-own career menu? Where you can adjust the level of buildings, science earnings, funds or disable them completely? Are they going to manipulate the Tech Tree to be more realistic? Probes before crew, Aircraft parts early etc? Are they going to completely re-do it? We don't know; which i actually finding exciting.

Nah it would be pretty easy to roll my own S.M.A.R.T like system in KSP, but that comes with extra part count, weight and also just from a appearance standpoint the bottom of a large cluster is already pretty busy visually. So the benefits here would be mostly weight reduction, simpler staging and looks. But i also forgot what a nightmare chutes are in KSP, so making them part of a single part may not be that great of an idea..

#1- N-body was already denied, and they also confirmed they're not planning on departing too far from KSP1 aero; now procedural plumes are in so that's 1 out of 3 D: #2- I wouldn't mind some procedural wings #3- The physics LOD system should remove the need for something like this for performance reasons, but as far as preventing noodling ships it wouldn't help. I'd figure they're going to provide autostrutting like KSP1 does; or even a stock KJR. #4- I wouldn't be surprised if something like this is already implemented; they confirmed that career and science modes were going to be essentially combined. #5- While i can't say they denied this outright; i wouldn't get your hopes up for anything like the RSS in KSP2 on launch.

Wow......this is......beautiful Now i know you generally don't take requests, but since this is a major overhaul of the >3.75 M parts and i have a 1.6.1 game where i'm pretty sure there's enough 5m tankage stranded on various planets to alter their local gravity i'm gonna ask anyway. I'm almost always making massive clusters underneath these tanks, and this means i'll normally end up with a rocket where i have literally half a million in engines strapped to the bottom. Now in this career i had transitioned mostly to reusable launchers exclusively, but it was extremely difficult making the jump from 3.75M boosters to the 5m boosters due to the sheer cost of the required engines to make them actually outperform the previous booster model. Coupled with the fact that you get much more cross-sectional area; making them more difficult to control in atmosphere..blah blah blah Basically i want to request a S.M.A.R.T - like system for 3.75, 5.0 and 7.5 M parts; that could detach and return the engines from a large booster. Perhaps intergrating a thrust plate for making massive clusters with parachutes and a very basic probe core and reaction wheels to help it on the way down. I totally understand if the answer is no, but i figured it couldn't hurt to ask.

The issues with GTA IV come from Games For Windows Live; which was M$'s failed attempt to bring console-like subscription based online services (Think multiplayer and XBL Gold) to PC. From what iv'e read it's similar to FO3 in this regard, as it actually can run on modern hardware with some effort on the User-End. But essentially while GFWL could be considered DRM; it isn't the fact that it's DRM that's the issue. The primary issue is that GFWL was built with Windows Vista in mind, is intrusive, accesses things it shouldn't (Causing UAC to throw fits), makes a massive web of registry entries, and causes a headache for anyone wanting to install it on a PC running anything from Windows 7 and up. This is creating a support nightmare for Rockstar; even though the game is technically not supported anymore. Because people still play it actively, and often come to them for resolving problems. So they yanked it from the Steam Store; because it's too much of a hassle currently. I suspect they're going to comb thru the source, purge GFWL from it, and re-release it on Steam; as that would be in line with what other developers have done. I also suspect they'll charge for the privilege; since GFWL has been patched out easily in the past. So we'll see what they end up doing. As for the entire discussion on Multiplayer, DRM, Modding etc. I'm almost positive Multiplayer will have some extremely basic DRM; since you have to have something to confirm credentials, find and track cheaters etc. But it also doesn't mean there couldn't be a custom server client that you could mod; DRM would then be restricted to the "Public" servers in that case. I'm also not completely sold on the whole "Mods kill the idea of selling skins"; because as much as i loathe the Creation Club.....it's proven people will still pay 10-20 bucks a pop for something a modder could make in a lunch break. It's also available to Consoles; where traditional mods aren't. All without making the games less modifiable mechanically (The constant updates do make it more difficult from a user standpoint doh), and all with robust modding support. So while i'll be watching KSP2 carefully for MTX, DLC and other schemes; i honestly don't think if Star Theory/T2 wanted to monetize the games that mods would get in the way. If anything making the game more modifiable just makes it easier to implement a CC like approach, and have essentially both.....even if it's still really scummy and annoying.

And mind you A && B aren't mutually exclusive if C is approaching and the publisher decides to extract as much profit as possible from the withering husk.....

I can almost assure you the income from donations would be barely enough for a burrito or two on a yearly basis; the overhead for setting it up isn't massive though so i won't say they shouldn't do it. But it's no replacement for DLC's; not even a contest in terms of income.

Release a good foundation; then a couple months later they can consider some DLC.

Or OP could use KJR next which would automatically place invisible struts per part, and increases the rigidity of craft markedly. Seriously i was playing stock a couple days back and realized how much KJR next helps. Your solution would be cool as a stock option though.

I want Kraken graffiti on the bottom at the very least!

I'll forgo the game as a whole; i'd rather them delay than ram a half-cooked game down the throats of an already suspicious community. With that all said; what i would like to see is a Preview/Beta/Debug build handed out to the modding community several months in advance. Along with whatever SDK's and utilities they need bundled alongside it; easing the transition of the various modders and incredible community members would be the #1 thing Star Theory could do to relax suspicions in my eyes. Though they'd need to sign an NDA more than likely, so this could've already happened and nobody but the selected recipants and Star Theory would know. But i think it would also be nice for making the best of a bad situation; PR could spin it as such and not look too bad in the process. Oh but i forgot i was on Earth for a minute there, and the current year is 2020.......so none of that has a chance of remotely happening. My initial point stands; i don't want a release until it's finished. No Pre-Orders, Early Access or any other garbage; i have plenty of mods to explore in KSP 1 in the meantime. Though on a side note i feel the only reason we'd see a release instead of a delay in this situation would be 2K being 2K.......

Drag and Friction heating are a major factor; also i disagree on the "Wouldn't create much in the way of political tension". In Peacetime and War controlling major Economic Hubs is a massive boon, and often a constant source of friction for those who have them. Also all the various contractors that would be involved in making and maintaining a structure such as this would also be ruthlessly cuthroat; likely resorting to violance or intimidation to keep their contracts, deadlines and reputation. So it's not lacking for tension; it's just lacking someone to explore it in story.

Lower resolution textures increase performance, so 4K > 8K. As for other settings; look at cloud height, AA and others. If you're using KSP's AA you could even increase performance by forcing AA from your GPU drivers control panel

SVE- Stock Visual Enhancments only affects the "Stock" systems, and from what iv'e seen is a bit less performance intensive. AVP- Astronomer's Visual Pack can be used in conjunction with added systems, but not without a configuration made for it (Most mod systems have one made by the creator themselves or the community). And will absolutely eat any hardware you throw at it without any hesitation; it's one of the few times where i saw increased performance by forcing Crossfire for KSP. Now for the catches; SVE actually can work with other systems since it has code making it compatible with Scatterer and Kopernicus. Indeed it's often used as a performance alternative to AVP, but just like AVP will require configs for this. AVP also is pretty tuneable, so much of the performance can be clawed back by reducing textures and other methods. Both are fantastic, and which one you use should be really decided by the strength of your hardware, the mods you decide to shovel into memory along with your own personal preferance. They aren't intercompatible, so choose wisely. For the more subjective side of my post i do think AVP looks far better, but only after a certain point. When i ran it with more conservative settings closer to "Medium" for stock KSP; it just didn't "pop" the same way. While SVE seems to look rather good even when settings are cranked way low.

Right; forgot you could build a ring without a giant railgun inside........ Never let me anywhere NEAR a space program

Also, you're basically describing a launch loop.