stephensmat

https://www.yankodesign.com/2023/07/26/kerbal-space-program-gets-its-own-lego-set-with-a-detailed-modular-space-shuttle/

Here in Australia, it's the anniversary of the original landing. The dateline means I've got a different date to most of you; but here it is. I celebrate the occasion every year with two movies. One is a 2019 documentary, using all the 'previously unseen' footage from the mission. The other is an Aussie comedy called The Dish, which is a truly fun film. I tried this four times in KSP before I succeeded in the Mun and Back. Apollo 11 did it on the first try, with the computers messed up.

I've never tried to capture one of the larger Asteroids. It just doesn't seem possible to steer one with any of the craft I've built. I have craft big enough to push them into different orbits, even large digger/converters. But it's hard to visaulize this sort of thing. I'm told that only one AGU at a time bothers to latch on to the asteroid. Does that mean that having *many* RCS thrusters will actually rotate the whole thing for manoeuvre alignments, or do I need to build a craft with rocket engines pointing out to the sides?

KSP1 has Colony Part Mods, Life Support Mods, even Interstellar mods. KSP2 will have half these things as stock, given time; and already has Mod Support. Anyone who really needs a Greenhouse Module to feel like they're playing a realistic space game will be able. It's the difference between the Studio's vision of a personal space program, and the player's. They've gone out of their way to make it possible for everyone to have both.

Also, there's a list of over a hundred or so fixes, many of which came from direct player feedback. if they hadn't released it, they'd have a hundred less players on various systems. Just sayin'.

Found something interesting on the Mun.

When Science is out, I'll have way more invested in KSP2. About as much as I have in KSP1. When Colonies comes out, then I'll have everything I really want. Interstellar will be icing.

Granted, but that's for entire stations. Until we build an O'Neil Cylinder, that's not a big deal. Right now, I'm talking about 'living quarters'. The theory for shows like B5, and Books/Movies like The Martian? They have rotating sections where the crew lives/sleeps/exercises/meets/etc. But the centre of mass is ZeroG, specifically for course corrections/docking with other craft, etc. I'm wondering how ridiculous such things are. Does the rotating part have to be so far out, or moving so fast that there's no way you could keep them secured? And if it's doable, then why isn't that a higher priority? One thing that I'm clear on from my own reading is that there are two major roadblocks to space: Gravity, and Radiation. We can fly to the Moon, we can fly to Mars; but astronaut careers in space are determined by how much radiation they soak up; and how much harm freefall does to them in the long term.

Talk about colony parts and other star systems has me excited. It means they aren't going "We all work on Stage One, then we all work on Stage Two". I know we've been told that already, but finding out about progress on the Roadmap gives me hope that the delays are in bugfixing the 'Foundation', so that the rest of the Roadmap will be faster.

I've been looking for Real World research on ships/stations with gravity formed by rotation. Thing is, there's remarkably little about future plans to do so. The ISS is billed as a 'Low Gravity' Research Station. The only speculative information I found was the idea of putting two Starships on a Tether and having them pinwheel their way to Mars. There are some that say that building rotating sections is impossible because there's no way to keep them secure/balanced, and the rotation speed would rip apart any existing spacecraft designs. Thing is, I'm an amateur. I know just enough to know I don't know nearly enough. A hard-sci-fi novel from someone says that it's doable. A few science YouTube videos say it isn't. This board is full of enthusiasts who have spent a lot more time on this topic than me. Assume that (for example) Starship gets working, and we have material to work with, in the opinion of the hivemind, is having 1g on long space missions doable or not?

This is why I'm looking forward to Orbital Construction in KSP2. We can build Stations to *be* Stations, instead of Rocket segments. No doubt at all an orbital fuelling station will be the first thing I make. Honestly though, my Refuelling station is in Minmus orbit; due to the low gravity. It's a regular station, but on the end is a segment with four docking ports on struts, extending far outwards. I have large 'Tankers' with a drill on one end, and a mini-converter on top, just below the docking port. I've been mass producing them, and using the same design (minus the diggers and converter) as heavy boosters, to get my ships out into Interplanetary space. It's a design that's worked for several planets and moons; once I get them off Kerbin. Pictured here is the Digger (on the right), and the Booster version. I believe this flight was sending the Digger towards Ike. I send four or five such Diggers to Minmus, and have them cycle. Empty one lands, filled one takes off. Since the Station itself has docking ports on the front, any ship that docks with it can refuel.

I've never put anything in 'Stationary' orbit before. I've checked the wiki, and I think I can put a Station in orbit over a specific spot above Minmus. Minmus is my refueling spot now. Low gravity means I get my best return on my Digger/Converter. Large tank fills up on Minmus, and I launch it up to fuel my interplanetary vehicles. Any reason why I can't send a dozen oversized diggers and attach them all to a Station in Geosynch over my best drilling site, and then just launch straight up/down; cycling the empty tankers out and the full ones in? As I said, I've never tried synchronous orbits before. If I go straight up, will I be able to match velocities enough to dock into a station, without having to go full into orbit first?

Some of these ideas are more RPG than space sim. To be honest, I expect to see them pop up as Mods, or in the Multiplayer expansion. I could see it in Multiplayer. I mean, KSP1 never had weapons, but that never stopped anyone determined to make warships. Some people are going to create a multiplayer game specifically to play out 'Expanse' fanfiction. I look forward to the YouTube videos.

Until KSP2 gets a Science Update, I still play KSP1. Finally made it to Dres for the first time. Had to make half a dozen flight corrections, and my 'Drive Section' has less than 200 DV left, but I'm in a solid, circular Dres orbit. During the deceleration burn, I thought my lander, still topped with fuel, was gonna rip off the docking port, but it held just long enough for me to kill the engines. I've decided that the ship is now an orbital station. That's fine. I've done it before. I've got every experiment in the game, as well as a Lander with all the science gear, and a Mobile Lab with Two Scientists in it. The 'SS Molly Cobb' is now 'Dres Orbital'.

Whatever the number is, add one; because I can't play tomorrow.

I want a reason for science to stay relevant after the Tech Tree is unlocked. KSP1 has that with options to turn excess points into funds, and that works for me. But if KSP2 isn't going to have regular 'cash', then I hope they replace it with something else; if not in the Science Update than at least in the full game.

In my KSP1 game, I've long unlocked the Tech Tree. I've put a Mobile Lab on every ship and Station, and I'm basically farming science points to trade for credits. It's my most profitable export at the moment. We know KSP2 will have 'Resources' instead of 'Credits'. But Resources are slated for the Interstellar Upgrade. I'd like to think excess Science points will be able to get you something. Reputation, more Kerbalnauts... I'd also approve of a Tech Tree that needs specific 'Points' for specific rewards. Learn more about landing sites to unlock landing gear. Learn more about a planet to unlock Colony parts, etc. It would future proof the EA a bit if you had to do specific tasks to get specific parts. You don't have Colony Parts until that Update, so the Missions to unlock those parts aren't in the game yet. Know what I mean?

I think there is, in the 'New Game' option. Turn off 'First Time User Experience'. Not certain, but I think that's Paige.

So thrilled to get even a mention about the Science Update. Whoever's talking about 'Live Player Counts', I'm expecting a big jump when that one comes out. It's definitely what I'm waiting for to spend more time in KSP2. If the Dev's are listening, I'm a big fan, and really looking forward to sinking a big part of my life in the new game, but I'm still playing KSP1 for now, because it provides structure. Building rockets is fun, but without Science or Missions, it's somewhat directionless; at least for me. The flame is more than alive in this fan, I promise. I just prefer to 'build to purpose'.

No. Still fixing problems. Whenever we get science, we're going to want the least amount of bugs when we use it; let alone Colonies.

Nate, I'd like to add my appreciation to you and the other Devs for updating us on the how's and where's of buxfixing. Talking about progress is always preferable to long silences. The really good news is that when we get to the expansion stages, all these bugs will be fixed at the coding level. While I imagine Science and Colonies will have their own bugs to patch, we won't have to worry about stable orbits and SOI glitches again.

I'm looking up tutorials for building bigger ships, and space stations. The OAB is something I'm really looking forward to. There's no reason I can't get some practice in building things whole, instead of trying to figure out how to launch them in segments.

I've actually gone back to KSP1 for a while. I do better with a structure/progression to follow. So I'll be back for the Science Mode. In the meantime, I gave my PC a major upgrade for KSP2; so I'm starting an all new KSP1 game with the more intensive graphics mods that I never had a chance to play before.

I'd say most/all of the bugs and gamebreakers would be gone. In that event, the Roadmap updates would come a lot faster.