whatsEJstandfor

I mean, if I didn't know any better, I'd say that this aspect ratio is what it was designed for. The UI felt cramped before (I've seen people say it looks like it was designed for touch controls, because of how big the elements were), but this is luxurious

After nearly 2 days of fighting against frustration and bugs, I wanted to see how the game would handle my 32:9 ultrawide on High and in HDR, especially since 5120x1440 isn't an option in the settings. However, by editing the settings.json file in AppData, I forced it to that resolution. I was extremely surprised that my RX 5700 was actually handling it, and at (sort of) playable framerates! Now that I'd had a better grasp on the bugs that were frustrating me, and now that I knew some workarounds, I was, for the first time, able to actually enjoy playing the game. I feel like this is what the devs talk about when they say how they can't stop playing it internally. For just a moment, as I approached the Mun, I saw what this game will be one day, and, reader, it evoked a feeling that I've only experienced in video games a handful of times. It was sublime.

Ahhhhh, I see what you're saying; I hadn't even considered that. I'm assuming, because they said so, that whatever solution they're using is able to handle this gracefully, but I'm definitely curious now to know how they're doing it.

Version 0.1.0.0.20892, Win11, Ryzen 9 3900X, Radeon RX 5700, 32 GB When opening the Aeris-K2 workspace that's built-in, the launch location is set to a launchpad instead of a runway. This is extremely minor and it's pretty funny when you launch it and realize it inadvertently got sent to a pad, but I thought I'd mention it for completeness' sake.

Version 0.1.0.0.20892, Win11, Ryzen 9 3900X, Radeon RX 5700, 32 GB This started happening a few hours into playing, and closing/relaunching the game doesn't seem to affect it. Whenever I send a vehicle from the VAB to a launch area, the camera defaults to "Auto: Orbital" mode and I need to hit V a bunch to cycle back to Auto: Ground. I thought maybe I had misclicked a setting somewhere but, if that's the case, I can't find it. Once the camera is correct again, if I revert to launch, it stays correct. However, if I revert to VAB and then send the vehicle to the pad, it goes back to Orbital. Below is a screenshot showing the "Auto: Orbital" camera immediately after sending a vehicle to the pad from the VAB (the popup started to fade because I waited a bit too long to screenshot it):

I wondered if this was an anti-aliasing thing but cranking AA to 8x didn't affect it. Glad I wasn't the only one having it!

Version 0.1.0.0.20892, Win11, Ryzen 9 3900X, Radeon RX 5700, 32 GB When on a suborbital trajectory (in this particular case, I just launched a Kerbal-K1 vertically to an apoapsis above the atmosphere and then killed the engines), the time-to-apoapsis countdown is correct up until the actual apoapsis. At that point, the time is still listed in terms of T minus, but the timer starts counting up. In my screenshot, I reached apoapsis 38 seconds ago, and the "AP in" readout says T-00:00:38. Note my retrograde marker and vertical speed indicator; I'm now on a collision course with Kerbin. I suppose I would have expected it to either read "AP 78,270 m in T+00:00:38" or "AP 78,270 m in N/A"; whatever would most clearly convey that I've passed apoapsis and won't be reaching it again since I'm suborbital. Incidentally, I actually believe it'd be clearer if the "T-" was dropped altogether. As in, if I were reaching that same apoapsis in, say, 60 seconds, I think it should read "AP 78,270 m in 00:00:60". I think adding "T-" gives it some flavor but it also doesn't make much sense, and it doesn't add any information.

This new subforum might interest you: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/forum/144-ksp2-bug-reports/

They said they're using a bespoke solution, and you could treat Rask/Rusk/your spaceship as a restricted 3-body problem, for which exact solutions exist EDIT: I just had to look it up and I might be wrong. Exact solutions exist for the case where two bodies are in circular orbits around a common point, and the small third body orbits them in the same plane, but, if that's the solution they used, you wouldn't be able to approach Rask or Rusk from the normal/antinormal directions I guess. So, yeah, I guess they still must be approximating, but, still, being a special case of the 3-body problem, it sure does seem like it'd be pretty trivial for numerical solutions to be computed by modern hardware.

I was having the same issue with the stock Kerbal-K2. Like some others in this thread, I tracked it back to adding landing legs. If you open the vessel in the VAB and launch it without touching anything, it's fine. If you add a landing leg, the fuel flow breaks and has this same behavior, where fuel from all tanks drain evenly to the core stage.

Boy howdy, this one took me so long to troubleshoot. I was having such a hard time getting the RC Sparrow to take off. Before I could reach a takeoff airspeed, I'd spin out of control and crash. Eventually I noticed that the controls were inverted; hitting S pulled the elevators down, and hitting W pulled them up. Not only that, but hitting A would make me yaw to starboard, and D would yaw to port. I thought that maybe the COL was in front of the COM or something, but after fiddling with wing placement and checking to see if the Invert Controls option for those wings were enabled, I couldn't figure this one out. After some more troubleshooting*, I found that the g*sh d*ng probe core is flipped around. If you remove the probe core, and use Q or E to rotate it 180 degrees, and put it back on, the controls become what you'd expect. It's still hard to takeoff, but not impossible like it was before, and I found that lowering the friction of the wheels definitely helps.

I would have thought that the launcher is literally just a window with a button that acts as a shortcut to the KSP2 executable. What is it doing that could possibly affect performance? And why does it spawn like 10 processes?* *These are rhetorical; I know you and Intercept don't have any say in this stuff. I'm just venting; this is all just extraordinarily stupid to me

• My kingdom for a built-in transfer window planner. Gimme them porkchops • Either disallow staging while time warping or give some kind of feedback that it happened. When time warping, hitting the space bar doesn't appear to do anything, but when going back to real-time, the next stage will immediately go. This has boned me a couple times when I've been time warping, tried to stage, thought it didn't work, hit the space bar again, realized I was time warping, slowed back to 1x speed, and I've now activated two stages • Dunno if this is covered in the tutorials, but I would love detailed explanations of exactly what each camera view does. Usually, I just hit V and cycle through until I find one that doesn't make me vomit depending on whatever situation I'm in

But amp hours is the correct unit of electric charge. Since it's (C/s)*3600s, an amp hour is 3600 coulombs. Idk which one is more intuitive for a normie, whether it's energy in terms of joules or charge in terms of coulombs, but I think semi-tech-literate people are already used to batteries being in Ah.

I see this icon on engines and, as far as I can tell, clicking it does nothing. Anyone have any intel on this doodad?

I've been playing around with the stock Kerbal-K2 vehicle because I thought that the vehicles I had been making were broken because of something I had done, but I've now had several weird bugs occur with this built-in one as well. I've submitted these through the PD launcher, but I wondered if anyone else has encountered them. First, and this seems to happen even if I revert to VAB, to launch, or restart the game, the upper stage sticks to the core stage's decoupler if the upper stage's engine and the decoupler are in the same stage. In other words, once the core stage is spent, and I try to stage it, the engine cover falls off and the twin engines fire, but the core stage is still stuck to the rest of the vessel, as if the decoupler didn't decouple. I've found that if I place the decoupler in its own stage just before the upper stage's engines fire, everything seems fine. Likewise if I decouple it from the Parts Mangler before firing the upper stage. This one is bizarre and took a lot of trial and error to track down, but it seems to be repeatable. If I load the Kerbal-K2 into the VAB, and do nothing to it but add four landing legs to the upper stage, the fuel flow breaks. After launch, it will appear normal, but right after the first staging event, the core stage engine starts pulling fuel from the upper stage's tank. In the screenshots, note how the core stage's engine has 9.6t total fuel available to it just before staging. And then, right after staging, that suddenly jumps to 12t. And, if we wait for the core stage to expend all its fuel, we'll find that the upper stage (which can hold 2.4t) is now empty. Also, and this one is probably unrelated to the Kerbal-K2, but my camera now defaults to Orbital whenever I send a vehicle to the pad or runway. I have to hit V a bunch of times to get it back to Auto: Ground. I thought maybe I had borked a setting somewhere, but couldn't find anything in the settings that would cause that.

Devs, please implement this fix or I will be requesting a refund post-haste

This would also be a great learning opportunity in general, to help players get an intuitive feel for what changing a wing's characteristics does to the craft

If a home user is part of a domain and has a roaming profile, I'd assume that whoever set that up for them is a close family member and turbonerd and would be able to find a way to redirect the KSP save folder to a network location as well

idk, KSP1 didn't have flaps, and I think having them might be overkill even for KSP2. That would add a level of complexity that, tbh, I don't think would actually add any fun or function to the game. That kind of stuff is way more suited for a dedicated realistic flight sim

If you mean that you're seeing where you're predicted to enter and exit the SOI, but don't see the trajectory within that SOI, my understand (per @ShadowZone's latest video) is that this is one of the priority fixes coming up.

This doesn't much apply to you, but if anyone else is in a similar boat, here's an anecdote. My CPU and RAM are far beyond the minimum, but I wanted to try an experiment since my RX 5700 was sort of struggling at 1080p high. I change my resolution to 1600x900 and set the Low preset. About an hour into gameplay, I had forgotten I had changed it. There was definitely some aliasing, but the framerate was solid for the most part and the game was still beautiful. I'd suggest giving 1600x900 on Low a shot if you're at or below the minimum.

Yes, you can adjust the control surfaces separately from the body of the wing. As far as I can tell, each wing can have, at most, one control surface, so it's not like you'll be putting flaps or slats or spoilers on them

I didn't realize it until you said it, but 1000% I agree.

What are your specs? If your PC crashed, this kind of sounds like faulty memory. You may want to try running Memtest86+