Incarnation of Chaos

I don't think metallic hydrogen itself is nonexistent; like you said it's predicted by the same physics we use in astronomy and KSP. My main concern is that because we haven't been able to consistently produce it in the lab and experiment with it there's a massive margin for error on any estimates. And from a design perspective makes me curious about why it was implemented at all; especially since Orion drives and fusion are confirmed and don't suffer from these issues.

The vector, mammoth and mastadon already make most engines in KSP obsolete; it's pretty hard to balance end-game tech in any game. Let alone in a game where tech defines what you can do at any given time. As for the OP; Metallic Hydrogen engines did really throw me for a loop. We have no idea if it can even be metastable; therefore we have no idea what would be required to return it to gasous form. So any performance figures are barely estimates; since they're estimates derived from estimates of the properties of a completely unknown material. As for the more exotic stuff; aren't they mostly just fusion torches? We know fusion works; performance would just be scaled to work within the kerbin sized universe. But tbh i'm not making any calls (Other than Metallic Hydrogen is BS) before launch.

Iv'e never used the actual LES; by the time you're flinging multiple ton landers around it's somewhat pointless. But i have done plenty of aborts to orbit; where something goes horribly wrong and i just stage the lander engine, which then burns off the stack below and forces seperation. Then i'll normally have a nice low periapsis that i'll use to aerobreak down with; ofc this is only really possible because i massively overengineer these things to have decent TWR even in the atmosphere but meh.

I don't buy merch (Rather put that money towards GPU's and HDD's) but i don't see an issue with them getting some novelty items made and putting them in a store.

If the probe core is pointing down selecting "Control from here" won't fix it; you would have to have another command unit (Like a pod etc.). Also i seriously doubt his rocket is that unstable; it takes some really silly geometry to make aero forces flip a stack in KSP (Even with FAR) and most times just throttling down until you get higher up will be all that's needed.

Also be advised; if you have a lander with a probe core attached on top of your stack it will often cause your stack to think it's upside down when launching. So if you can't figure out why your rockets are going kamikaze for no reason that's likely the culprit; and pretty easily resolved by changing the orientation with the context menu or just reverting to VAB and physically flipping the core (This will mean you have to remember your lander is reversed though).

My issue can't be memory; KSP crash log even says it's only 68%. I'm almost certain it's a mod conflict or just KSP leaking memory like it always does and eventually angering UAC and throwing an access violation.

The solutions tend to ship with the mods; if someone develops a crazy planet pack that has planets multiple parsecs out then I can almost guarantee that someone will make an SR implementation.

It will happen the same way it always does; some modders will stick with the older game until the bugs are hammered out. Others may decide to leave; and new ones will rise. The KSP modding community is awesome; so all in due time. You may find that you miss a mod so much that you become one yourself xD

Even if we had the most optimistic performance of Orion and Daedalus you're looking at 10% C for Orion and 40% C for Daedalus. Neither of these matter for us because kerbals don't age; so until we get >70% C we can safely ignore SR. Because of the scale of KSP I actually think even 10% of C will be less useful than people think; what use is getting where you want in days or minutes if it turns a lander into a kinetic impactor because you can't slow down fast enough.

I'm using 16gb.....what

I mean there's literally nothing preventing someone from just making a mod with the mother of all thermonuclear weapons which would only be a single part and cranking up the particle effects so much that once activated it would take down a server. I think that the idea that we should implement things to prevent griefing is the wrong way to approach it; measures should be in place for certain but we should accept griefing WILL be a thing. And offer the host of the server/game a suite of tools to recover from it when desired; save states or something similar. This way people can still derp around but it's no harm done if your "Fun" becomes a projectile with orbital velocity bearing down on someone's colony they've been building for months; they watch the light show and then cut the server to restore it from a backup or something. Or they decide to deal with the situation at hand and rebuild. That being said i think whenever a server is created/hosted there should be a ROBUST panel of filters and tools available; you should be able to exclude modded installs or randoms from joining. You could also have it to where HOST can add/remove mods but GUEST cannot; so they could only play with the selection you already combed over. This is all assuming KSP multiplayer is an actual lobby/server system and not just social features bolted on the outside.

I have a feeling that regardless of what comes stock; n-body and multiple star systems will be far easier to implement in KSP 2. The latter because if the trailer is to be believed KSP 2 is being built from the ground up with it in mind; the former because of the statement " giving modders access to things they haven't before" which implies much closer access to the game. Ofc it could all be lies and n- body physics will be in a l00tbox.

They've said numerous times that saves won't be fowards compatible; I wouldn't get your hopes up for any type of save transfer.

The simple answer is these will almost always work better on CPU's. The more complex answer is while threadsafe physics implmentations exist; these would be better used to exploit multicore CPU's because they would be almost universally supported. GPU Agnostic Physics is something i have no clue if it even exists; most stuff like this (Which mostly lies in the academic spaces) is written with CUDA or OpenGL. CUDA is only supported with Nividia GPU's; AMD GPU's often struggle with OpenGL unless careful attention to optimization is taken. So i seriously doubt GPU physics will be a thing for any game; and before you say "But muh Vulkan" much of the performance Vulkan gains is from being a hard break from OpenGL and lacking much of the backwards compatiblity and precision that OpenGl has. I would love to see Multithreaded Physics; but that's because i know there's ways to accomplish it. GPU Physics is likely going to remain an extremely specialized solution that's talior made for a specific set of hardware and simulations for a very long time.

SRB's are dirt cheap in career compared to a reasonable LF booster; and they generally are much simpler to utilize than bundles of asparagus. That being said I do agree that stock lacks the variety of SRB's to make them really attractive where they should be used (early game); 1.875 tankage with a engine or two and 6 0.625 boosters can deliver small probes (< 20t) into heliocentric orbits. In stock you would need to use a triple core LF booster stack which is way overkill for this application; yet not terribly useful for many payloads. But the main limiter for rocket sizes in my case is the size of tankage along with KSPs wet noodle physics; engine clustering is a brute-force way to get past the tyranny of the rocket equasion but it still works. And with 5M tankage you can build pretty impressive launchers; but at that point a joint reinforcement mod becomes literally required to prevent the entire stack from obliterating it's self.

People REALLY irritate me when they toss around words they don't understand; and from this thread I don't think you understand what Fraud means. Fraud is when I start a company with no intention of ever delivering a product, then proceed to make promises and claims I know I can't keep. Then after the money pours in from investors and other sources; I pack my bags and wisk myself away as the authorities bust my corporation wide open and realize there was nothing there to begin with. Fraud is also when I manipulate or trick people into giving me money for a service and never provide it, or even better get their information and use it to create dozens of credit cards in their name and rack up the charges. Fraud is not making a fairly solid game, then making two fairly solid DLC's while being fairly open with the development process the entire time. Fraud is not getting something different than you wanted; otherwise the entire software industry would have been sued into the ground well before 2019. Fraud is a very specific term; for very specific actions and behavior.

If Duna is supposed to be a Mars Analogue then it should tumble on it's axis; this would be observable over years. Tbh it would be awesome if KSP2 had like a "Planetary Encyclopedia" that started off with a bare minimum of information based on direct observations with telescopes and you could get science by doing long-term probe surveys revealing little things like this. Also getting science for discovering additional moons (Voyager 1&2 discovered dozens of previously unknown bodies) or just finding interesting stuff in general (Ice VOLCANO BOIS). This could also tie into colonization; Geysers could be used as potential sources of geothermal energy for colonies but only if you had known the lay of the land decades beforehand and perfected systems for it. If not then you're stuck with nukes or solar.

That sounds a lot like a memory leak somewhere.

So the VAB is just generally unstable? Hm

I knew the latter; but i figured it was still worth asking anyway. There's so many scatttered tools and documentation i guess i was hoping it had been put into a nice package or something.

Does KSP not have a SDK or something similar?

I'm normally fairly good at troubleshooting issues but this one has had me stumped, i'm getting random crashes around the KSC and in the VAB but not while controlling an active craft (I can confirm it works for literally hours rock solid; i may have a KSP problem) Also solar panels won't extend; which kinda sucks. I was only able to find one crash log buried in various folders; the crash dumps aren't going into the main KSP directory as intended. Below is the most recent. Mods installed are the following 000_ClickThroughBlocker 001_ToolbarControl AirplanePlus Astronomer's Visual Pack B9_Aerospace_ProcedualWings B9PartSwitch BetterTimeWarp Chatterer Community Category Kit Community Resource Pack Community Tech Tree Contract Configurator ContractPacks CryoEngines CryoTanks CTTP CustomBarnKit DecayingRTG's DeployableEngines DistantObject DynamicBatteryStorage EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements FerramAerospaceResearch Firesplitter FMRS FShangarExtender HeatControl KAS KAX KerbalAtomics KerbalAtomicsNTRsUseLF KerbalJointReinforcement KerbalReusabilityExpansion Kopernicus KSPWheel (Not supported on this version but issues were present before installing) ModRocketSys ModularFlightIntegrator MouseAimFlight NearFutureAeronautics NearFutureElectrical NearFutureElectricalNTRs NearFutureLaunchVehicles NearFutureProps NearFuturePropulsion NearFutureSolar NearFutureSpacecraft OPM PhysicsRangeExtender RealChute Realistic Atmospheres ReStock ReStockPlus Scatterer SMURFF SpaceY-Lifters TextureReplacer Trajectories TriggerTech WaypointManager WildblueIndustries WorldStablizer Any help would be welcome!

I feel like a KOs script could accomplish what you want; it would be a bit of work though.

Awesome