Incarnation of Chaos

Didn't know that was possible; thanks!

The following is my opinion after reading this thread- Honestly i think the best solution is having a VPL for those with no coding experience, then have an API expose an actual editor which can be toggled in advanced settings. I didn't learn Java or C++ in a day for sure, and i wouldn't have learned any of it just for a single game. So i think having a universally accessable option for people to make them learn code without even knowing it is the best option, eventually they'll "outgrow" it and realize they just need to do more of what they already have been. Or it'll be all they will ever need and we'll see wonderfully complex contraptions as a result. But anything should be grounded in an actual language, none of this custom slop. Most of it's just a dressed up Python or Lua anyway.

It's not trivial, they would still need to find the balance points for each scale (10X, 3X, RSS) and then implement them as patches. Then make sure any bugs or anomiles are ironed out in QA, while also assuring that the only patches loaded would be the proper ones for a given save. But i doubt it would be months of development.

Are there even liquid explosives stable enough to survive a rocket launch but burn on reentry?

I think people are really overblowing the difficulty of balancing these larger systems, the easiest brute-force option is to have a set of config files that are loaded via whatever module manager analogue they've implemented depending on the save settings. You just patch the same set of parts to bring their performance and mass ratios in line with the selected settings, this is what we already do in KSP1 for the most part. I think the much more insightful discussion lies in the question of if it's worth actually spending development time on a feature few would use, and not everyone would like or agree with the choices made for balance or realism. People tend to forget just how darn configurable KSP is, how much effort modders take to make their mods just as if not more configurable, and how it's taken years for it to reach that point. At the moment you can download and configure a suite of mods to make your game exactly how you want, within reason. Would a hastily implemented RSS do the same? Doubtful. KSP2 is supposed to make this level of modification even easier, so it stands to reason that if KSP2 proves to be the game we've been promised that we'll likely see superior versions of all of these mods within time. And they'll run better to boot.

I think the primary reason some people don't know the kraken's wrath is that it appears most often when pushing the limits of KSP or while using mods. If you rarely use ships with more than a few dozen parts that will make encountering it far less likely. But it does exist; mine really likes the taste of nuclear engines unfortunately and will eat them during interplanetary transfers even though multiple large radiators are activated. Also had a 2.5 M docking port spontaneously collide with the attached mothership and obliterate it for no reason while orbiting Ike. Nothing reloading the previous save couldn't fix, or in the worst cases editing the save directly. But the kraken is the only reason why i save compulsively when playing.

The vector length would mainly be constrained by the GPU architecture; though i'm sure you could find the most common implementation and use that.

That's what i mean by "The next gen" They're confirmed to be using Ryzen APU's; even Zen 1 is well above the current performance of the garbage Kaveri cores in the current machines.

The current generation of Consoles are using fairly weak CPU's; i could see crossplay on the next gen using Ryzen. But the Xbone and PS4 will crumble under loads even 5 year i5/i3 CPU's can tolerate. So just from a performance standpoint i don't think it'll happen; especially since we don't even have a solid timeline on the console release. They're building for PC first; consoles aren't even going to be a consideration till much later.

Any vendor agnostic solutions? GPU PhysX requires support at the driver level which even though the source has been opened up AMD hasn't made any effort to support it due to the lack of GPU PhysX in games.

If you want to get DMCA'd into the next spiral arm then there's no issue. Even KSP1 supports 100+ systems with pretty interesting hacks to make them work; KSP2 will be built from the ground up to support them and won't require these workarounds. The biggest problem will be avoiding the wrath of Disney.

No; sell merch seperately. Seperate editions only exist to further segment already existing features and content; they aren't needed.

I'm a Patient Gamer; i don't pre-order anything because there's no reason to do this in 2019. And i don't buy anything upon release; if they want beta testers they can pay me. I'll watch the release; if it seems decent i'll buy in a few months down the road. No sooner than that.

I wouldn't mind a more in depth system for fuel, we know IRL how "Lean" or "Rich" rockets runs affects ISP and the condition of the turbopumps, engine bell etc. It would add a whole new dimension to building rockets; allowing finer balancing of engines. Perhaps even making some engines "OP" but forcing you to run them on non-optimized mixtures until materials could handle the ideal configuration. But at this point i would start asking why we're not just desigining the engines themselves; something like this feels like it would be part of a procedural engine system and not just standalone. It's ideas like this that actually get me pretty excited; i know KSP1 wouldn't handle procedural engines well......but who knows how KSP2 will. Iv'e been bitten by the modding bug before; i'll be watching closely at what KSP2's tools shape up to be.

....And i think iv'e realized where the disconnect is here; basically you're talking about something you learned in a Engineering/Aeronautical pathway. While we're only focusing on the application; which won't work because at least from my end i don't really understand the concepts and i fully admit that. I have a programming background, and i have a hobby/enthusiast understanding of physics and aeronautics. So to do what you're saying you would basically need Aeronautical Engineers to work with the programmers, so the correct implementation could be derived. I WANT to understand, but it's pretty clear this is something you've studied in depth and can't be imparted in a simple fourm post. I suppose you could spin up a thread in one of the Science/Spaceflight sections if you really felt determined to outline this stuff.

And mind you most of this requires you to know how previous interactions affected them; all of this runs away into exponentially increasing numbers of calculations even when assuming we can get around this. Which makes me really wonder even if you were running matrix multiplication on the GPU if it wouldn't quickly saturate it to the point where we're right back into stutter and lag.

Got any examples of a actual implmentation in a Simulator/Game?

Well if you need some assistance sailing the digital ocean to grab it; hit me up in PM's and i can point you in the right directions. *Wink*

I would look into Windows LTSB https://www.howtogeek.com/273824/windows-10-without-the-cruft-windows-10-ltsb-explained/ Technically it's not possible to buy it off the shelf, however given how experienced you are with tech i feel like you know what channels to search. You could also try to obtain Windows Server 2016; this is available at retail at a fairly large expense. My school gave it out for free so if you're doing scientific work your tech department may be able to hook you up; from your description however it seems LTSB would be the ideal fit for your use case. As Windows Server still gets updates; even though you have way more control over them.

RX 570 isn't a 1440p card; it's better suited to 1080p. So ofc you're going to have issues pushing 1440P; also what's your basis for literally any of the rest of this. Like i get being cynical; i get being nervous around a game published by 2K especially since it's going to be developed by a team we've never heard of. But they're communicating with us on a regular basis; they're relatively sure they have solutions to performance and have described them in some detail. Could it all be lies? Could it all be nonsense? Sure; it's happened before. But until the game releases; with the information we currently have there's absolutely no indication of KSP2 being for "People with RTX 2080 Ti SLI" or that it's "KSP1 with mods" or that it's going to "Tarnish the reputation of a great game" all of this is exaggeration or even just straight up false. Let's take this all the way; let's go ahead and just say in spring 2020 KSP2 drops and it's a buggy performance hog with way too much RTX and VFX that turns into a slideshow. The reputation of KSP 1 wouldn't be tarnished; nor would the reputation of Squad. It would be the reputation of KSP2 and Star Theory, and mind you KSP1 is confirmed to still be recieving updates. Star Theory has wayyyy more riding on KSP2 that would encourage them to push out a great game; KSP1 and Squad have a product already that will stand on it's own. So i really can't see KSP2 being anything other than a medicore game at worst, potentially great at best.

I can only find one released mod for KSP weather; it's been abandoned since 2017 and the license is all rights reserved; only looks like one other person was building one but i couldn't find a release page. This is a suprising hole in KSP 1s mod library.

Even top-end rigs struggle to push KSP once the part count increases; optimized code doesn't just benefit those on the low-end it benefits everyone who want to play!

Unity's implementation is on the CPU It's unlikely that this will be implemented on release, so anything like this will be reserved for a major update. As changing unity versions wreaks havoc compatibility wise.

I honestly gave up on CKAN once I realized it would not install the majority of mods properly. So as long as manual installation is a thing I'm happy.

Star theory is under no obligation to provide a console port; the PC version is the primary focus of development. So when you buy the console version; you accept that you are buying a version that is not getting the same attention as the PC version. It's not fairness of elitism or anything else; it's just the reality of development.