Vl3d

Hats off!

Tech Trees Comparison (ordered by Science Points cost) KSP 1 KSP 2 Start (0 Science Points) Basic Rocketry (5) Engineering 101 (5) Survivability (15) Stability (18) General Rocketry (20) Aviation (45) Basic Science (45) Flight Control (45) Advanced Rocketry (45) General Construction (45) Propulsion Systems (90) Space Exploration (90) Advanced Flight Control (90) Landing (90) Aerodynamics (90) Electrics (90) Heavy Rocketry (90) Fuel Systems (90) Advanced Construction (90) Miniaturization (90) Actuators (160) Command Modules (160) Heavier Rocketry (160) Precision Engineering (160) Advanced Exploration (160) Specialized Control (160) Advanced Landing (160) Supersonic Flight (160) Adv. Fuel Systems (160) Advanced Electrics (160) Specialized Construction (160) Precision Propulsion (160) Advanced Aerodynamics (160) Heavy Landing (300) Scanning Tech (300) Unmanned Tech (300) Nuclear Propulsion (300) Advanced Metal Works (300) Field Science (300) High Altitude Flight (300) Large Volume Containment (300) Composites (300) Electronics (300) High-Power Electrics (300) Heavy Aerodynamics (300) Ion Propulsion (550) Hypersonic Flight (550) Nanolathing (550) Advanced Unmanned Tech (550) Meta-Materials (550) Very Heavy Rocketry (550) Advanced Science Tech (550) Advanced Motors (550) Specialized Electrics (550) High-Performance Fuel Systems (550) Experimental Aerodynamics (550) Automation (550) Aerospace Tech (1000) Large Probes (1000) Experimental Science (1000) Experimental Motors (1000) Experimental Electrics (1000) Starting Rocketry (0 Science Points) Environmental Science (10) Electronics 1 / Probes (10) Construction 1 (10) Aerodynamics & Stability 1 (10) Light Launchers (10) Solid Fuel Boosters (15) Lights & Utilities (15) Specialized Decoupling (15) Survivability (15) Orbital Rocketry (25) Basic Trusses (25) Struts (35) Power Management (35) Small Payload (35) Micro-Construction (35) Reaction Control System (50) Aviation 1 (50) Long Range Probes / Command & Control 2 (50) Research Miniaturization (50) Basic Docking (50) Mun Landing (80) Monopropellant Drive (80) Tiny Engines (120) Power Launchers (180) Medium Orbital Rockets (230) Enhanced Electronics (230) Expanded Construction (230) Precision Aerodynamics (230) Fuel Lines (300) Durable Power Systems (300) Atmospheric Science (300) Precision Machining (300) Enhanced Coupling (300) Mk2 Jets (300) Medium Launchers (400) Precision Propulsion (400) Autonomous Sampling (500) Heavy Landing (500) Medium Trusses (500) Aviation Utility (500) Nuclear Propulsion / NERV (650) Medium Truss Adapters (650) Xenon Propulsion (850) Modular Launchers (1100) Heavy Rocketry (1400) Deep Space Probes (1400) Heavy Construction (1400) Large Aerodynamics (1400) Heavy Launchers (1800) Oversized Monopropellant Fuel (1800) Enlarged Power Systems (1800) Radiation Science (1800) Heavy Trusses (1800) Large Coupling (1800) Jumbo Jets (1800) Heavy Orbital Operations (2300) Long Range Generation (2300) Large Payloads (2300) Specialized Docking (2300) Airliners (2300) Deep Space Methalox (2900) Nuclear Power (2900) Orbital Science (2900) Heavy Nuclear Propulsion (4500) XL Methalox Tanks (5000) XL Electronics (5000) Oversized Landing (5000) XL Construction (5000) Spaceplanes (5000) XL Hydrogen Tanks (6000) Aquatic Sciences (6000) XL Trusses (6000) XL Coupling (6000) Space Shuttles (6000) Mk3 Fuel Systems (6000) Orbital Report (7000) Space Trucking' (7000) XL Truss Adapters (7000) XL Docking (7000) XL Payloads (8000)

Also: https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/12/nasas-asteroid-mission-struck-its-target-but-then-dodged-a-bullet/

Simplex Kerbalism.

Problem is that you use your best calculations, pack extra supplies, do a 4 hour mission and fail right at the end because you did not get the ideal intercept and all your kerbals died.

That's at least $2000 of productive work right there!

Bug video was funny. I'll be so happy to be able to finally play KSP2 like I do KSP1 after the bad bugs are fixed. There are still some game breaking ones that did not make the list.

Why not also in the deep oceans of Kerbin?

Yes, and frankly it's a star studded team of KSP veterans.

I absolutely love this dev chat and I love Tom.. he's the most charismatic kerbal story-teller ever. Glad to see that ban which prevented him from appearing in new videos was lifted. Guess now the kraken can really be slain, eh?

Why are you killing my hopes and dreams!?

Yessss.. finally the first example of part weathering... YEEES!!!

I just want the least amount of bugs. Let them cook!

Hahaha, poor noobs don't know what they're getting themselves into...

Oh, please no. Why can't we just keep it simple and straightforward? It's not the place for lore, it's the place for clarity. It just has to explain the function of that Toggle Button.

I love it. The suit looks more natural and scorchy. Initial image for comparison:

I'm really parsing what you're saying. I get your point. What I'm answering is that a system that wants to insert mechanics that penalizes a player for time warping (or as you say, gives a bonus for players that do not time warp arbitrarily) and also deadly consumable time-sensitive LS can't work in practice if you cannot execute missions both from start to end (without being distracted) and in parallel (multiple missions taking place at the same time). Without this fundamental mechanic, there will always be a conflict for play styles and game balance - advanced players will not be able to play quickly while min-maxing, and beginner players won't be able to feel that the game rewards them without playing slowly. Besides, there is already a bonus mechanic for planning in the game - you do another mission and get rewarded more.

Sure hope for a long smoky reentry tail added. Thank you!

Wow, respect! That was a requested feature for a lot of players.

Cadet training or tutorial..

Just use "Tutorial".

It's sufficient to show the direction of rotation. That's what's missing, as it's usually counter clockwise looking at N from above. Equator can be determined using the nav ball and inclination value.

I think return missions from Eve are pretty realistic.

I think the issue is that "First Time User Experience" makes people think about drugs.

Clearly it's the player sexual orientation selection toggle.