Vl3d

The coolest thing would be an in-game system of adding new (player created / modded) star systems, with the ability to vote your favorite.

90% sure there will be at least one new planet in the Kerbol system. Just a hunch.

No to signal delay, explained here:

At 18:30. He specifically mentioned automating rover deliveries.

Also it's ALPHA footage, not pre-alpha.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CmcNnJRD_is/ That building with the dark coloured dome next to the VAB, is that the Planetarium / Observatory? And what's that the building with the helipad? Are those two blue pools next to it?

[snip]

[snip] [snip] As you can also read in other posts, some of us in the community thought a new trailer may be coming out this Holiday Season. Now we know it's not, case closed. [snip]

@Ghostii_Spaceare we getting a new KSP2 trailer for Christmas? You're the only person who can quell the rumors.

I'm not sure but it sounds good!

So are you guys hyped for the new trailer allegedly dropping this Christmas?

Also.. there are a lot of cars with bi-fuel engine conversions. https://www.doityourself.com/stry/how-to-convert-your-car-to-run-on-natural-gas

This one is very straight to the point: in science and adventure mode allow for upgrades to runway / launch pad to improve maximum supported vessel weight and height (keep using weight / height as a progression limit), but please remove the VAB / SPH limitations regarding the maximum number of parts. It is an outdated KSP1 idea for slowing progression and mostly applies to fuel tanks and wings. It does not make sense to artificially limit craft complexity even at lower tech levels and also consider that with the introduction of procedural wings and hopefully length-step-wise procedural tanks, most part duplicates are removed from design anyway. Also, vessel weight overlaps with the parts count if we consider number of boosters. Progression is also slowed down by the tech tree, by the wobbly rocket mechanic (lack of struts), by the craft diameter, by the need to discover celestial bodies, by the lack of a comms relay network and by the amount of resources available etc. The parts count limitation is no longer needed and could be replaced with a system of progression regarding number of assemblies in a workspace or number of stages (or whatever else, it's not my aim to propose an alternative). PS: And I don't like the fact that we have to modify our first stage / booster subassemblies when we unlock longer fuel tanks just to get the part count down because previously we used 12 short tanks instead of just 3. Fuel tanks should really be procedural length-step-wise and all lengths for a certain diameter should unlock on the same tech tree node. Please streamline this, we have enough to worry about in the game!

Or maybe Puf..

No game has one true objective purpose, as you imply. Perhaps it was word-choice though? If you meant "how it feels to play", then I totally agree. The fundamental obiective is in my opinion to make you, the player, curious about space. Going deep into the details and learning about space/aero technology is emergent behavior. I was not referring to "world building" as a character driven narration mechanic. I was referring to exploring the unknown, discovering a surprising universe / game world. Going out there! That's what motivates me - the exploration element. This "universe building" needs a lot more effort and attention than KSP1 could afford. Searching for anomalies only to discover plain monoliths is just disappointing..

@Nertea please allow me to quote some of my previous questions in the hope that maybe you can tell us something more. Also I would add: Q3: Are there going to be difficulty settings introducing any limitations to engine run time, number of relight cycles, throttle control? Any chance of engine wear / damage / failure (not random)? Are there other ways to encourage using engine redundancy in the designs? Q4: Are the engines going to change visually over the course of a mission? E.g. look dented if damaged or worn out after being used? Q5: In gameplay videos I've seen that some engines have a very small delay when starting up (probably simulating turbo spool). I think this is great! Can you share any more details about it? Q6: Sound is a very important part of an engine's "feel". Anything you can tell us about how the engines sound? Will we be able to hear the turbines at startup? Is sound dynamically changing depending on camera angle and atmospheric density? Will we hear the engines run in space? Q7: Will the engines still gimbal when using rotational control inputs if they are turned off? (hope not)

Would you mind posting your mods list Bej? I'm curios.

Which sci-fi / space movies do you think have the best scriptwriting / story? Any (recent) favorites? I think Prometheus is great, but only if you see all the events as being narrated by David.

Land your Kerbals on Eve! It's easy, just use a heatshield and parachutes.

I feel like everyone should play stock KSP1 again before KSP2 EA releases because everyone is so used to mods that they forget what the purpose of the base game is. It's my strong desire to not need to install ANY mod to have fun in KSP2. Except for some visual and QoL improvements I only really use 2 gameplay changing mods: 1. Unkerballed Start because it fixes the tech progression. 2. Simplex Kerbalism because it fixes the repetitive science system with mini-games, it creates incentives for differentiating between probe missions and more complex crewed missions, and it encourages learning and using engineering principles: prototyping, testing, including redundancy, iterative design and reuse. And I should add that I feel like there's no mod that ever really improved the world building, adventure and discovery aspects of the game, despite some cool planet packs that have been created. Other than these issues stock KSP is a wonderful (incomplete) game. The most important and hardest things to get right are the progression tempo of the game and adding incentives for exploration. The "lego" parts are just tools. Learning in the game should be fueled by the curiosity of exploring the stars! So be mindful about spending too much time on the ground, squabbling about fuel naming conventions.

@Laikanaut, if you have such strong opinions, why not contribute some feedback to the KSP2 wishlist?

Kerbonukes