Vl3d

I tilt it ~3 degrees when between 50-100 m/s depending on TWR then lock to prograde and let it do the gravity turn. If it's turning too fast I keep direction vector to the left of velocity vector circle up to 12 km. After 20 km I start to control the angle or the throttle to keep the AP closer than 1m30s. Never go faster than 1600 m/s at 60 km. I shoot for 100-200 km depending on TWR. Ideal orbit at end of burn: ~150 km X 70 km, SLS style with no separate circularizing. It takes a while because you ride the AP but I time warp.

I will not even tell you what happened... the story is in the photos. And this is just the beginning!

It happened to me also. I had to restart the game.

Try KSP 2 and you'll see what I mean..

Game needs more spice like this great material:

And that's without going into text for later missions, for R&D nodes and for parts. There are also all the funny easter eggs with cultural references - like the toilet, the car, the crashed saucer etc. even the Squad logo military gorilla face monoliths (which I hate). Here's more: Jokes about AI takeover: Joke about nuclear war: And of course there are jokes about crashing: And of course there are all the official animations which have a lot of gutsy humor and awkwardness: The snacks references originate from the contraband sandwich on Gemini III, the golf ball experiment actually happened on the Moon... KSP 1 is a really funny game for me with a lot of references to astronaut pranks and dangerous situations.. Squad actually had the courage to do something interesting with the game, they made the kerbals awkward go-doers by design. Unfortunately KSP 2 is going out of its way to be a "cute, silly, colorful" toy for children with a lot of it's awkwardness and humor toned way down. If you think this is all in my head and you can't understand the feeling I'm describing.. so be it. KSP 2 does not have enough edge.

Please stop constantly harassing me. You have all my arguments above about why there's a better learning progression with Stayputnik, a small SRB and control surfaces and why the Starting Rocketry node is currently bad. If you want to talk, bring counter-arguments. I've been very explicit and clear in my reasoning.

No, it is the most valuable learning experience for a new KSP player, and the Starting Rocketry node in KSP 2 is messing that up.

I did not forget about those. For the first suborbital flight it's enough for the player to only have aerodynamic control surfaces and the engine's alternator as an EC source. When the engine stops, EC goes to zero and control stops; when you get out of the atmosphere, control stops. When it comes down in flames, you learn about heating. When it crashes into the ground or ocean, you learn that you need parachutes. That's how you learn about the basics of suborbital flight, before all the other complicated stuff.

I think this is great:

Was it not clear I was talking about the first flight? It's right there in the text.. But still you're mentioning Mun landings..

Which part of this statement is false? Well then that seems to be a failure of research into the years of talks about the matter. Also which part of this statement is false?

Players who killed Jeb or Val during their first KSP 2 FS! flights would disagree. Well then that seems to be a failure of research into the years of talks about the matter. It is just illogical to think it's easier for first time players to learn about liquid fuel engines, throttle control, kerbals, pods, reaction wheels, parachutes, experiments etc. on the first flight.. instead of just a probe, a SRB, staging and maybe some control surfaces. It's a classic case of putting the carriage before the horse.

I agree, that's something I also like very much about modded KSP and it's part of it's DNA. I feel like that part is preserved in KSP 2.

Play it for a few dozen hours and you will see it's presented as a game that fathers would play with their 6 year old children to get them into science and space. That's a great thing! The problem is that a lot of the writing is also for 6 year olds and the game insists on only triggering addictive dopamine hits with "cute silly feel good vibes" without also having enough grounded astronaut humor edge and spice. This comes from a new interpretation of what kerbal means - for Squad they were little green animated courageous and sometimes stupid crash-puppets that you put on actual rockets and shoot them up into the unknown... for Intercept they're cute and silly diverse green aliens with emotions and helpful personalities. Squad kerbals talked back and had scientist and astronaut tongue-in-cheek jokes.. Intercept kerbals just want to be your friends and be happy. But that's just my opinion. At least for me there's an obvious difference. KSP 2 lacks that "je me sais quoi" that gave the first game so much "chaotic good" charm. That's not stock KSP, that's a totally different game akin to RO and Interstellar Extended. Different gameplay, different focus, different vibe.

Disagree with specific arguments and bring counter arguments please.

Which proves you have not read any of my posts in this thread.

It's not just that probes are lighter, it's also the RCS strength and feeling the weight of the rocket, using control surfaces before depending on electronics and RCS to experience what happens when you exit the atmosphere, learning the basics of staging before learning about parachutes. There are a lot of reasons why launching a command pod with a kerbal first is premature and does not let the first time player learn the game in a good rhythm.

Yes, the ultimate goal is to put kerbals in space. But what we're talking about is basically the first 3-4 nodes that are unlocked in the tech tree, not the whole game. What's wrong with being able to first fire up a Stayputnik instead of a pod with a kerbal? It just makes sense historically and gameplay wise. The game should allow players to learn the basics, to ease into it, to test before committing the life of a kerbal.

And what, KSP is more accessible because it looks like a game for 6 year olds? Nonetheless, I have no issues with it. What I am pointing out its that there should also be that meta humor level which adults understand and find amusing. You know, like the Disney movies of old. Make it timeless!

Forever classics!

Nothing special? The VAB is a timeless classic that you can listen to for hundreds of hours and never get bored of it.. and it never gets on your nerves. I'm surprised you think it's "generic and nothing special". What do you think about the VAB music in KSP 2 then?

Also please post locations of anomalies that do not have missions related to them here (so other players can easily explore them):

I found out why my RCS was not working properly for docking...

Well, I've crossed the 200 hours total time spent in KSP 2, so the game is worth my time. Surprisingly, it was not the exploration that got me hooked.. but actually building first stages of various sizes and tonnage to LKO and also designing more and more complex science return missions. So basically most of my enjoyment came from the VAB. Executing those missions is somewhat painful - from bad dV data to bad maneuver node control, buggy RCS which makes docking a PAIN.. which means that for me KSP2 is up to the level of KSP1 Science Mode but just below designing multi-vehicle missions which require orbital assembly and refueling. Besides bugfixes and QoL improvements, what I feel is missing: - more edge, spice, adult humor - many more discoverables & asteroids-comets - better terrain and environment graphics + weather visuals - better science utility and planetary discovery and survey progression - CommNet missions which require launching satellite constellations to have unoccluded signal in a SOI - extra survival gameplay mechanisms like radiation - being resource constrained and a resource collection game loop - previous and next points are closely related to delivery routes - more reasons to build vehicles other than rockets, probes, pods and landers - the orbital colony system + EVA construction to make building in space easier and faster. Only when the game will have all this will it really be just above KSP 1's level. And only after that does it make sense to talk about interstellar exploration.