Vl3d

You would be able to repeat the mission only when the orbital parameters are exactly the same (like for Mars every 2 years). If you want to haul more, you do another flight that also gets repeated automatically - so now you have 2 trips every 2 years etc.

Set to appear in the 2023 Preview: Kerbal Space Program 2 (featuring an exclusive interview with creative director Nate Simpson). https://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-show-2023-preview/

Always fly to test and once for the whole mission. Automate subsequent identical missions to avoid repetition. Simple and it seems to be the way it's going to be done. But... again... without a proper reveal and marketing campaign we're in the dark.

Calm down friend, we're just talking between ourselves about where the franchise could be headed. In general, I see that there's still a vocal conservative point of view that rejects any evolution or change to the KSP1 way of doing things. That's great, I see it as my role on the forum to challenge you with (mostly preexisting) ideas about what the Kerbal Universe could become in the future. The franchise has immense potential, I hope Take Two takes the initiative and expands it with other quality games. Intercept Games can take care of KSP2 for years to come and also create DLCs and good quality spin-offs. My main point is that the "mod packages" way of doing things is ad-hoc, difficult and buggy because of how hard it is to sync compatible versions of mods. I want to be able to play Kerbalism/RSS/RO/RP-1 by just installing a stand-alone project with a unified focus and identity, without needing so much knowledge about specific mods. This also applies to the multiplayer warfare game and the role-playing KSP first-person / VR game with cool cockpits and IVA environments - I don't like trying to find the right mods to install by spending hours researching the forum and Reddit, just to have a buggy game in the end. At least we're getting the Interstellar version of the game in KSP2.. but there are a few more games hidden in KSP1+mods that should be (at least) correctly packaged or stand-alone spin-offs. There are multiple games inside KSP at the moment, each one deserves to live!

100% agree. Career Mode is flawed because of the grind, but at least it gives you progression beyond the science points system, design incentives and reasons to be creative. I just don't like strapping X boosters to a rocket with no regard for resources to have it be as just powerful as more advanced propulsion tech. That being said, I think replacing funds with material resources is a good idea, it forces us to design efficiently using what we can gather. I think we should also gather resources on Kerbin, but that should be play tested. As for the contracts, these are useless as long as we have clear exploration milestones, as long as we have to find and exploit resources, as long as there are interesting anomalies to discover, as long as the tech tree nodes are linked to the knowledge gained from different types of experiments instead of abstract science points.

I'm not talking about DLC or extensions, I'm talking about independent spinoff games, based mainly on the technical foundations of KSP2.

And KSP can continue to be about space (that's why I think the Realism branch will probably stay in mods pack territory as a flavor / extension of the base game) but we can also think about separate, stand-alone games that focus on other aspects. I would be very interested in the warfare game (kerballed stock and realistic flavors) and the Paradox type grand strategy / city builder spin-off. And of course the RP game with specialization based campaigns and stories would be amazing (there are some clues they're already working on this, based on hiring announcements). It's a way for Intercept Games to grow as a company and create a very successful extended kerbal franchise.

Besides talking about the core of KSP that will be available in the Early Access version of the game and also the Roadmap chapters that will slowly turn KSP2 into an improved version of KSP1 Interstellar (extended mod pack), we should really also talk about the other major branches the game has aquired over the years. So we have the following spin-off ideas: A: KSP2 (Interstellar, Near Future Tech) B: Realism (RO / RSS / RP) C: Warfare (BD Armory, multiplayer focused, FPS or RTS) D: Roleplay (a type of Kerbal RPG game, controlling a single character on missions, with IVA focus) E: Grand strategy / city builder (like a simulator game with focus on city building and resource / transport logistics overview) So basically Intercept could successfully create at least another 4 games in the Kerbal family tree, based on work done for KSP2. And I believe they would have great success for each particular niche. What do you guys think? Should it really only be left up to the modders or should these be actual spinoff games, nicely packaged, with their own identity? PS: There's also the trackmania / circuit racing / competitive flying focused idea but that I think can be done in regular KSP2. Nate during a podcast also talked about an "engine designer" extension to the game. PS2: 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.

A lot of ideas in this thread, I'm also adding:

Skip showing the last name if it's the same for everyone. Add some default face / expression variety (like grins, scars, glasses, tattoos, piercings).

Emotes have been confirmed, so we can expect some greater level of customization for kerbals besides the default variety, especially for multiplayer.

This should be taken into consideration for Early Access. We have procedural wings, radiators and fairings but we could also use procedural parts that like add good as the non-procedural ones: - tanks / booster segments - cargo bays - structural parts (trusses, walls etc.) And also we could really, really use part merging (welding, grouping).

Someone pin this.

I agree with this, sometimes I just want to keep using an older model of a booster instead of upgrading it right away. It all starts with the incentives to build - if it's for exploration, world firsts, creative projects I'm engaged. If it's only to do some experiment to get 3 more science points to unlock another tech node, I already feel like I'm bored. I've been also thinking about a system where we have a certain base Research Speed, we just prioritize (guide) what to research but we need to do certain experiments for each technology branch to speed things up. I feel like kerbal scientists should be the ones that ask for experiments just to be able to research parts (and maybe improve their reliability), and new discoveries (like a new resource) would unlock the visibility of new tech. Something that mimics real life more.

True, it's probably going to be a lethality option. But the most important thing is that we get life support.

I think I'll buy KSP2 EA, I'll subscribe to KSP2 multiplayer and also buy all the DLCs.

There are no interstellar rescue missions. Kerbals die all the time (blunt force trauma, burning, suffocation). They should also have other causes of death (freezing, hunger, old age etc ). I don't see what the problem is, I think it's fun.

If individual modders can make something this incredibly beautiful for KSP 1, then of course I'm going to expect better from the actual dev team for KSP 2. It's actually in the name: KSP 2=1+1. There's a +1 that automatically invites comparisons.

But you have to start a new rescue mission anyway. Its punishing in actual real time and effort.

You do realize it's actually more punishing to the player to have kerbals hibernate when out of LS waiting for you to plan and execute a rescue mission than it is to kill them?

If we use versioning the current working versions of designs are displayed in a craft family list and every previous iteration is hidden in the "git" like tree. I want to be able to just import my 100 ton to LKO booster into the current workspace and just slap it on my new upper stage. I want each assembly (craft design) to be imported into the current workspace with just 1 click or drag and drop when needed. I want the option to cascade improvements to parallel designs that use a specific assembly. So I can just duplicate a Jool mission workspace and just replace the science module on the upper stage but have everything else use the latest and greatest versions of my designs. And then I want to see how everything evolved in orthographic view. ... and I also want to be able to weld / merge / group parts logically, while keeping the volume/mass ratio realistic. You want really efficient CPU usage? Allow us to merge parts and create a new (structural / tank) part from that (but keep the archive in an assembly / craft file so we can un-merge later). Allow us to build custom command pods in the editor, without having to be modders.

I feel like this topic should not be forgotten and should be discussed for KSP2 EA. It pops up everywhere. Workspaces and assemblies (grouping) are some of the most important and fundamental changes compared to KSP1. It's so important to have an easy way to do iterative designs and craft families. Also this: Also give us git for rocket designs please!

Another simple argument for LS: I disapprove of sending kerbals on basic one-way missions to get world firsts and farm science without moral penalties (they just stay there forever).