Vl3d

"Liquid Fuel -> Methane Before we get into this, a bit of terminology. Let’s start with talking about… methane and methane accessories. KSP1 gave us an abstracted resource to run our most common workhorse engines: the well-regarded Liquid Fuel . For KSP2, we’ve decided to take this resource and… name it. It’s methane. For their space program, Kerbals have passed over the brutish kerosene, toxic hypergolics and seductive lure of liquid hydrogen to settle on this nice middle ground fuel. It’s a good choice – a number of commercial companies are currently moving engines using methane and oxygen propellants to operational readiness. When we talk about engines you might recall from KSP1 that sported the Liquid Fuel/Oxidizer moniker, we’re always talking about methalox engines. Yes, this nomenclature change applies to jet engines as well for simplicity, so jet engines are now methane engines." That's why I thought all of them are methalox, but it's weird for the Vector...

Yeah I asked in the post, it's not clear.

I think Vector's gonna be just hydrolox. It's not mentioned as a methane engine. Later edit: Although it works be cool to have at least one hydrolox engine, the Vector is probably methalox as well. I just hope it has the same large gimbal range.

Nah, all those engines are just methalox. It's clearly stated in the OP. Also jet engines will use methane. And there are some unrevealed deep space engines that use methalox as well. Liquid hydrogen will probably be used for nuclear thermal. Other more advanced fuel types will be used for other engine types.

HYPE!!!

I think everyone completely missed this post... Amazing! PS1: Somewhat related to engines - a quick question. Because we have a few preset diameters and length steps for fuel tanks - can the length be adjustable from the tank properties instead of each fuel tank with the same diameter being a separate part? Not asking for completely procedural tanks, just step-wise for length. It would declutter the part picker list. Same for solid fuel boosters.. PS2: "For their space program, Kerbals have passed over the brutish kerosene, toxic hypergolics and seductive lure of liquid hydrogen..." - does this mean the mentioned fuel types are not going to be in the game? I'm surprised, because Nate mentioned liquid hydrogen as being a fuel type used for the nuclear thermal engines. A little confused.. PS3: Will there be fuel switching for engines, will we have engines that can use multiple fuel types? Is the Vector a methalox engine?

No hype for this Friday?

Reality check - we don't even have weather.

This please, please!

Interesting game you never heard of.

Something really hard to do but amazing would be an interstellar logistics network using transports that link colonies built on Oort cloud objects. Meaning you jump from asteroid to asteroid and from stellar debris cloud to stellar debris cloud. This way you don't need huge interstellar ships to get anywhere. You just need a couple thousand years.

It's not just this or just that. It's also a colony building game. Some players will probably spend more time designing buildings and cities than building rockets. I'm super excited about it!

I think you should be able to also solve problems using better colony design and tech. We're not building just rockets anymore in KSP2.

I agree that parts wear and failures should always be optional as a difficulty setting. Parts failure is fun in the design phase because it forces you to think about redundancy and it increases craft complexity a little bit, which forces you to reuse your designs more, which increases the sense of accomplishment. It's also fun when redundancy pays off and you save the day like a hero. I play with parts failure but when it really causes a disaster I usually revert to launch or load a previous save. So the game design trick is how to introduce a mechanic that has the benefits mentioned but is not frustrating. One solution is to have parts failure only after parts wear. This way there's no randomness. But then it introduces the concept of maintenance and re-doing missions, and worst of all - you can't time warp for long periods at will because everything breaks down meanwhile and it kills your progress. So how would you circumvent this? Simple. Have parts failure only after wear and only on the currently controlled craft. For manned craft part maintenance should be done automatically if you have enough repair kits and engineers. For unmanned (or craft without repair kits) you have to include part redundancy in the design. I think this solves most issues.

There's no bug, I installed Antenna Helper to check the distances and the relays were just too far away. Sorry for the confusion!

Found this visualization tool - might be useful. Could be adapted to work with Kerbalism, to also display transfer speed.

I really like the idea of seeing the range of the antennas. In my opinion something like this should be in KSP2 (of course the circles should be spheres). This is from the KSP1 mod called Antenna Helper.

The point is to have situations in which you have a limited time window to land and do science, or events which force you to takeoff and leave quickly, or just really cool looking visuals like the Shoemaker-Levy 9 impact (which was observed by a lot of telescopes).

There is no bug, I apologize for my mistake. I forgot that DSN increases range for sending and receiving (greater signal power AND sensibility). I was expecting a HG-5 and a Communotron 16 to be able to communicate with one another at 2.8 mil. meters (KEO and low orbit) just because they each work from the Mun with direct connection to DSN. I'll place my relays closer to LKO. Kerbalism Companion Calculator does not help when thinking about bounce signals. Is there anything that can help with relay signal calculations in game except the CommNet table?

So for a relay I don't really need 2 antennas? Let's say 1 HG-5 that would be (let's pretend) pointed at a probe and another omni or HG-5 pointed at Kerbin? I can just use 1 HG-5 and it relays like in a normal game?

@theJesuit I think I might be a Kerbalism noob without realizing it. How many antennas and of what type (relay/direct) do I need to (1) be a relay; (2) communicate through a relay?

I think I might be a Kerbalism noob without realizing it. How many antennas and of what type (relay/direct) do I need to (1) be a relay; (2) communicate through a relay? I can't find the answer on the official https://kerbalism.readthedocs.io

I was thinking about D: Roleplay more along the lines of an RPG: controlling a kerbal avatar (third person), experiencing the game IVA/EVA and VR (first person), having diverse roles (actual pilot, scientist, engineer, medic, remote probe pilot, flight controller), interacting with other characters, having a campaign with missions, living in the Kerbal world, with a focus on lore. It could be a spin-off game.

I added a suggestion that is very obvious and would be amazing in the game: The Planetarium A separate building, easily accessible from Map View and Tracking Station - containing all information from the R&D Facility scientific findings archives and the Tracking Station Knowledge Base. All scientific experiments should unlock interactive graphs, images and animations showing the evolution of the Star System, how the planet was formed, its internal layers, atmosphere / seasons / weather, biosphere and other properties. Something like augmented map view: