Jaypeg

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Seems like 70% of this is just issues with the AA system Maybe an option? Also I think they might mean more like the overexaggerated fuel effects in war thunder

I also think planets are a little bit too bright on their sun-facing side. Your example is much better than ingame in my opinion.

Bop does look glowy rn, but not every planet sadly. Also clouds need to be a lot better. And in-atmosphere plumes are wayyy too bright vs irl. They have a lot of detail but you just can't see it because its too bright!

Seems to also happen when under high gee forces (100+)

get rid of unused crafts for now

There are no missions for vall sadly ksp is all about making cool solutions to problems, planning them, then completing them. I feel ksp 2's missions could reflect this by having more difficult/wacky missions that require more thought imo

Its fine at the start, but I think maybe there should just be more filler between the mun and duna and etc

Dakota.

Hell yeah

I really like the new frosted seethrough look. Hope they keep it up for the rest of the ui

yeah, def not anything unkown before starting

I'm just talking about ways to make missions more engaging/fun/interesting. I understand the want to move away from ksp 1 contracts (they sucked) but I'm just saying ways they could make the gameplay more deep/engaging. Right now missions don't have much more depth from doing just one thing then the mission is over, but players I feel should be pushed perhaps to do more later on. Players should be inscentivised to do some of the coolest and most mechanically engaging things you can do in ksp - modular space stations, rescue missions, etc. I'm not saying to bring back procedural missions (god no) and my example of the 1-year kerbal station was just to show how it could become harder/more interesting to have the game be more fun/difficult to those who feel at times difficulty/depth is lacking at certain stages of the game. Let me know what you think.

I had 2 ideas today for ksp 2 missions and I hope someone takes note of it haha: People miss having a reason for planes in the mission mode of ksp 1, and though the kerbinwide tour missions are sorta that, they don't really inscentivise planes as much as orbital-drop-podding. I propose a mission where you must fly to multiple locations around kerbin in order to reveal a mystery of what happened to the KSC from ksp 1, getting multiple fragments/parts of buildings around kerbin together, and when you complete it it adds maybe some kind of tribute to ksp 1 to the KSC or such as a cool bonus. Another thing would be to also show how kerbals live on kerbin (despite there being no cities). This would be having massive easter eggs of ventilation shafts from their underground cities, giant radar dishes and wind/solar arrays. Just to make it cooler More missions that require multiple steps. Missions that are "go to X location" then after doing so the mission updates and then says "also to Y" as a way to make things more interesting. This could also mean "bring 10 kerbals into orbit around kerbin, THEN wait 1 year without losing EC" so that people have to make more complicated designs. A bunch of other things can be done, but those are the main 2 things to expand missions greatly. Also missions to have to do with previous missions. Like put a space station in orbit, then a mission to add a new module to that space station or to make it so the space station has 5 more kerbals on it.

all good, just trying to say the devs don't want to work on it now because of prioroties - dakota forgot to link them saying that they have much bigger fish to fry rn. would love to see commnet back though!

Welcome back, Director! Another successful mission in the record books! And what a monument you've found! The figure looks a little like Kerbal. but what's with the squid mouth?

I'd really like a marking system. Would be useful in multiplayer, too

community voting, i guess lol

it seems to be caused by like 7 different things. Most likely means they fixed like 3-4 causes of it but some remain

ORBITAL DECAY FIXED!

that would be a friction/drag problem I believe? Or maybe wheel rotation graphics doesn't have to do with the actual wheel itself

Edited it, let me know if it makes more sense now

thanks

I'm not quite sure what category to put this in, but I'll go and put it in this one anyways as it is a compilation of science-related balancing issues about celestial bodies in ksp 2 after 2 playthroughs I had, one on normal, one on 50% science. I'll make it quick: eeloo gives too much science for its difficulty and so does dres moho gives too little science jool itself gives too much science for multiple biomes, should only have 1 biome but have the same overall science - incentivizing the player not to use multiple jool probes jool's moons should give more science for their easter eggs overall, currently they are pretty low, despite them being hard to get to dres quarterpipe gives way too little science, same happens with other easter eggs (other bug reports should handle/report this on their own as this is maybe a bug?) duna needs more easter eggs due to its story-mode and gameplay importance with players going there more often than other planets, but currently doesn't have many ike should have more biomes but the science should be more spread out among them due to how the terrain on ike gives a challenge for rovers and such eve ocean gives way too little science, so do all the other eve sample returns, but this may be a bug bop should give more science than gilly, not less because it is much further away from kerbin than gilly, requires you to do more and also has a higher gravity bop should have a discoverable in the supercrater - just a personal gripe Reply to this report with any of your own discoverable/celestial science balancing gripes!

This is a graphical issue bug not 100% sure if it is a bug or an oversight though, please let me know. Currently in ksp 2 when you go into water there are special affects to audio and visuals, but as you go deeper that doesn't change as it would in real life and how it would in real life. In real life as objects get deeper into a liquid substance, light gets absorbed more and more into that substance, and also that substance gets denser due to pressure. The image shows how a torch deep underwater looks - illuminating what is ahead of it in a cone, but the environment is otherwise dark as the environment is not getting light from the sun. In ksp2, no matter how deep you go the environment, and your craft, is the same brightness, and lights (floodlights and otherwise) do not get the water-based light scattering that happens not only in real life but also in ksp 1 (with scatterer). This is disconcerting, and takes away from the creepiness and the coolness of deep water that was in ksp 1 when using buoyancy, especially since ksp 2 has awesome SFX for being deep underwater. This happens in every version of the game, tested on multiple computers. Example mage shows environment (from CVUSMO on discord) deep underwater past where any light should be seen without light generation, but no change happens to how water and the craft/terrain look. Finally also solar panels work perfectly fine within bodies of liquid underwater, when irl and in ksp 1 they wouldn't work as light would not reach them. This would also incentivize putting RTG's on your subs - a cool design challenge! Also more stuff underwater would be neat. Included Attachments: