RalphKerman

I have had this issue from the very beginning of KSP 2. Please consider an option to turn off these warnings (maybe make them part of the "new player experience" so you don't even have to implement a new option switch ?). But for anyone who has played the game for a little while and has learnt that solar panels won't produce EC in the dark this message spam becomes very annoying and distracting. The same should apply to any kind of message that state obvious things, please make these messages optional with some sort of configuration option to turn them off entirely (or maybe a kind of "message level" option with "all" / "verbose", "critical only" and "none" as values?). Or (the deluxe version) make it an attribute of parts (with default = "off"!) so you can configure a part to show more messages if you think this part is vital and needs to be monitored (but this solution exceeds what KSP 1 had so I consider it a non-priority and deluxe version into which I would not put too much development time) you can switch it on and only for this part you will get a message.

I only had a little time late yesterday evening to test the new update but I have a good feeling so far. I started a new Exploration mode save and went through half the T1 tech tree in a few launches. Performance was much improved compared to earlier versions (I did not play much since 0.1.5 where it was already improved) and my old (but for the time of purchase very very powerful) system of 2 x 1080s, 32 GB RAM and an i7-6700K (all bought in 2016) is now running the game very well and I enjoy it. So far I did not encounter any game breaking bugs, sure it's rough around the edges and from reading the bug report forum I guess I will run into some stuff along the way but the game is playable and fun and that is what counts for me. And finally there is a gameplay loop, an incentive to play. Sandbox is not providing long-term motivation for me, Explorarion mode is! The QoL improvements are great, having a TWR and Delta-V readout for each stage in the VAB is essential to building vehicles and I am really happy that it is now implemented. My 2 main items on the "wish list" are still: A UI-Redesign. The text font, layout style, readability and "waste of screen space" are still issues for me and I think with more and more complexity being added and more information needs to be made available to the player the whole UI needs a redesign to be more compact. This is a long-term wish and I am sure there will be improvements over time. More control over the message pop-ups. Please add some switch in the options page to turn off the pop-ups for stuff like "Your solar panels are not producing any EC" and similar re-occuring messages. Overall, the "For Science!" update is a huge step in the right direction. I for sure am glad I stuck with the game and did not refund it after the initial launch disappointment.

I do not get this bug anymore in 0.1.5 Tried a simple craft and launched it, I zoomed a little out and turned the camera about 30 degrees in each direction so I looked from a little above the vehicle down to the surface. I entered the map multiple times and switched back (always using keyboard "M") and also did stuff on the map like rotating, creating a node etc. When I switched back to the vehicle the camera was exactly where it was before I entered the map mode. So in this scenario it appears to be fixed completely but I read in the K.E.R.B. topic that they wrote that some refactoring is needed to fix it fully.

Thanks for the update! I have been very critical and frustrated in some of my posts so I guess I have to throw something into the other side of that scale now, too. I am very pleased by the improvements of the 0.1.5 patch, on my old rig (2 x 1080s, 32 GB RAM, I7-6700K) the performance is really nice now. Having done some simple missions (like landing on the Mun and driving a small rover there) I have not had any Kraken attack or RuD or anything that just blew up my craft for no reason. That's nice! And the bug that drove me crazy (camera position reset after going to map and back) has been fixed to an extend where I did not have it happen yet at all (I read in the patch notes that some camera refactor is needed to fully fix it but I have not encountered it yet in this release). Really enojying the game right now and eagerly awaiting the "For Science!" update.

I am not sure how to interpret the tech tree screenshot. The top row has "Mun Landing" as an 80 point "technology" in it, but you don't "buy" a Mun Landing, you achieve it via the technology you have bought and resarched in the other parts of the tree. So why would it "cost" 80 points to unlock? Or is that a description of technology you absolutely need to be able to land on the Mun and that technology costs 80 points? And there appear to be 4 pages of tech tree for now (guessing by the 4 numbers on top and the scrollbar in the bottom).

No, in the video you can see Nate briefly switching through multiple pages. I think they have different backgrounds, the one in the screenshot is the Mun, the one briefly seen in the video has a Duna background. I guess they represent some sort of "progression".

Wow, this is crazy. It took my system (installed on a pretty fast M.2 SSD) about 5 seconds to load and display the registry node (and I hardly play KSP 2 ever). I had so many entries that I was wondering how my system still works.... Please fix this. The registry is a crucial part of the operating system and seeing it being (ab)used to store masses of not needed data is "concerning" (the only word I can think of that does not get me banned here instantly....). I will not touch this game anymore until this is confirmed to be fixed. Thank you so much, @Anth12 for finding and reporting this bug!

Reported Version: v0.1.4 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K | GPU: 2 x NVIDIA 1080 | RAM: 32 GB All new campaign file, started fresh from scratch after today's patch. When I revert to launch this simple craft (parachute, MK 1 capsule, decoupler, fuel tank, swivel engine, decoupler, solid booster) the decoupler fairing shrouding my swivel engine is rendered as if it were broken into pieces (see screenshot). It works fine, just a graphical bug. Reproducible: Yes, tried it multiple times, every time after "revert to launch" it looked shattered into pieces. Included Attachments:

Yes, it does no longer flip around 180 degrees but it resets the translation values to 0 every time you return from map view. So you are looking at your craft exactly from the default position and any camera translation you did before entering map view is reset. Not as annoying as the original bug but very disappointing that this slipped through considering how often you go to the map view and back.

Reported Version: v0.1.4 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K | GPU: 2 x NVIDIA 1080 | RAM: 32 GB New campaign started after the patch, deleted everything and started from scratch. Symptom: In the Resource Manager window for all resources (fuel, oxidizer, EC, MP etc.) you can only see a "fuel ..." / max number instead of the actual current value. The "vessel resource" window and the stages show correct values. Reproducible: Yes Just build any craft with any component that has resources and open the Resource Manager Window. Screenshot attached: Red Arrows = wrong display, Black Arrows = correct values Included Attachments:

I think the "funny" messages that pop up when failing a mission were created with a new and fresh audience in mind (for whom maybe the tutorials were also made in this very comical-like style). Personally it does not really bother me what kind of message pops up when a craft is destroyed and you are about to hit the "revert to ...." button for the 100th time to tweak something to make your craft work. KSP (1 and 2) can be played in a "serious" way with real goals of orbital flight in mind and with the intention to learn new stuff, experiment and get enjoyment from that or just in a totally over-the-top crazy silly way by making any sort of ridiculous contraption and get enjoyment from that. So I don't mind what message pops up (no one reads them anyway after the 10th time....). It's all in the player's head and his/her imagination how "serious" this current situation is. Unrealistic scenarios (as mentioned by PDCWolf a few posts up)? I don't care either. I like the "freedom" to do that kind of stuff. If I want to dive more or less straight down from the Mun to Kerbin, why not? Orbiting the sun in a craft with windows, yeah, why not, if I want my craft to have windows? That's just freedom and nobody "has to do" these kind of things, you can work out a smooth re-entry curve, build an (imaginary) fully-shielded craft to orbit the sun, whatever makes the player happy. And the "seriousness" can be added via mods. I guess no one who plays KSP 1 with all the RSS/RP-1 stuff (and whatever all those realism mods are called) is complaining that the game does not take things serious. There will hopefully be a time when KSP 2 reaches that state where all those mods become available and then the quesion is a non-issue anyway. But for now the level of "seriousness" does not really matter and if the light-hearted tone it uses right now helps attracting a few new players, all the better (unfortunately new players will leave the game at the current level of quality very quickly). What I really DON'T LIKE however: Ingame over-sized messages that state VERY obvious facts and can't be switched off yet (without mods). I don't want to be notified EVERY TIME that my solar panels don't produce any EC because I enter the shadow of a planet or any time I do EVA I don't need a message pop-up to tell me that my craft is no longer controlable. I really hope they will implement a switch for all these notifications to turn them off or only keep them enabled if "new player experiecne" is chosen.

It is tragic that such a question is a serious one nowadays..... I wanted to laugh hard when I read it but then I remembered my first 10 minutes with the last update...... My 2nd keystroke after building a one-part rocket (just a capsule and then hop to launch pad to just check that nothing is fundamentally broken or crashes): "M" to look at the map for fun and then "M" again to return from it made my camera position being off by 180 degrees in the middle of the launch tower..... the infamous "camera position bug" (which you claim is fixed in the update, well my 1st and 2nd keystroke in the next update will tell me that ......). That was minute 1 and 2 of patch 3...The rest of the 10 minutes I built a dummy craft (from the bookt "Rockets for Dummies".....), sent it to beyond the atmosphere, let it re-enter and discovered that capsules had zero drag, did even accelerte in the atmosphere and were magically catapulted back to space shortly before smashing into the ground...... So these 10 minutes showed 2 serious (one game-breaking) bugs that ANY QA play session should have been able to detect with a probability of 100%, it is to this day completely beyond me how these bugs made it into patch 3..... So coming back to Kerbart's (rethorical ?!) question: My faith in the QA process is shattered. I am still very hopeful that many bugs are fixed but I am very worried that new (and old) bugs will emerge and we enter a new cycle of numerous bugs being reported by the community and that "after the patch is just before the next hotfix because something is horribly broken". And I really really hope the team understands that this upcoming update is (imo) one of the last chances to salvage the game. Please show that the long time you had since the last patch has been used to produce a product with a clear step forward, stay true to your statements above ("Fix implemented and verified" means it WILL work for all of us once the update is installed!) and please double-, tripple- or whatever-many-times- check that the announced fixes are working properly. Credibility is what the community now needs to experience. Please show us that QA works and developments are going into the right direction by providing a significant and functional update to the game! (not PR blah blah or tweets that announce an announcement of a preview of some basic feature "soon"....) If that next patch delivers on multiple fronts and the announced fixes are really in the game and work I am sure we will have (some) faith in the future of KSP 2 development restored.

I am not sure the numbers are correctly representing the player count. Most experienced KSP 1 enthusiasts do not start the game from within the steam launcher I would bet. Making several different installations of the game with a variety of mods and starting the game directly from each different location without the steam client running (and therefore the ability to track player count if I am not mistaken) will be the preferred choice of launching the game for many players. The loyal player base who invest so much time and energy into playing KSP 1 modded is certain to stick around for a while waiting for KSP 2 becoming more viable to play. At the start of KSP 2 I (and I guess many other players, too) switched to it, tried it, saw it was "in need of improvement" and let it sit on the side and switched back to modded KSP 1. And with the state of KSP 2 and the long road ahead that will be needed to make the game "good" I guess even more players looked into modding KSP 1 and as stated above switched from launching it via Steam to separate installations thus "lowering" the player count through Steam. So I would no rely on any player count derived from steamdb in order to judge how KSP 1 is doing. And, @VlonaldKerman is right, KSP 1 is in a wonderful state, the modding options are endless and will carry the game for a long while and still providing new challenges and fun.

I have searched this forum and not found a topic about this, I apologize if I missed the relevant posting (I can't imagine that I am the only player who noticed that). Question: What can be done about the frequent notifications (e.g. when the solar panels of your craft stop producing electricity because you enter the dark side of the planet)? These notifications should be (imo) only part of the "new player experience" or be configurable. I am pretty sure that after a while of playing we know that solar panels do not produce EC when in the dark. Having a window pop up every time (and in such large size) is very distracting and very annoying. Suggestion: Some kind of option to disable certain or all notifications for more experienced players. Thanks!

It was there in the UI for KSP 1 but if I remember correctly not from the beginning. I hope the interface will evolve a lot for KSP 2 as well. It certainly needs to in order to accomodate all the new stuff that comes with science, you need many more elements and a bunch of stuff will need to be added for that part of the game. Maybe around that time they can add this (crucial) information to the Engi. Report window as well and to the individual stages (again, devs, please look at the KSP 1 interface and steal ahm ... "borrow" as much as you can from there. It is excellent!).

And that is what concerns me a bit. The game should (after this long time of development) be much further down the road in terms of getting the core engine upgraded. The current 0.1.x engine feels too much of an early prototype from which to start building a new engine before adding any new features at all. For the long time the title was in development this is very underwhelming and fuels my fear they will simply run out of time (time == money as well ...) before this switch can be completed and features become added. I also hope they have a new engine almost ready to release and were just caught off-guard with the demand for an Early Access release. If that's the case however they could maybe communicate it and say "ok, we see all the many bug reports but we have a totally new engine almost ready, give us a bit of time and we switch to that." What I am seeing instead is however the efforts to fix the current engine which leads me to believe there might not be a new engine ready and waiting to be installed. Why would they invest that much time in fixing the "interim engine" then?

I think we are at the start of a long road to optimizations. However I am (slightly) pessimistic. I fear there are a lot of problems with many core game features at this early stage (the bug reports get more and more comical each day and IMO indicate some real trouble with the physics engine "under the hood") and with (as some users above already said) for example the delay of the heat system mechanics (which surely eat some computational resources) we are not getting much more optimization out of the current game engine state and may even lose some with more features. With prior knowledge of KSP 1 and the challenges that it brought I was really hoping the devs would have found ways to be much more prepared and efficient, especially given the really long development time that was extended due to the pandemic (technology has advanced so much yet the code base seems to be a (poorly?) modified KSP 1 base with many errors introduced that I can't understand at all as they are not new aspects of the game: Atmosphere physics, drag, save file corruption, simple parts like decouplers or docking ports not working etc....) I hope we can stabilize at or above the current 0.1.3.1 level of performance with many game-breaking bugs eliminated and many features added. If the performance keeps stable and I can run a Duna lander and base mission in KSP 2 with science, heating and no Kraken attacks every 5 min I would be happy for some time till the long-term refinements and cool mods become available. And I guess a lot of the community would be happy, too, and maybe even new players would join the journey. But at the current stage of the game I just don't see this happen anytime soon and within a financially stable time for the publisher. KSP 2 is no lovely Indie title as KSP 1 was that had time to evolve and grow slowy. My biggest fear is that the high bar the devs have set for themselves and the high expectations of an impatient community (which I am guilty of as well, I want KSP 2 feature-complete rather sooner than later) will lead to economical problems and someday long before all that optimization is being able to be implemented the money will stop flowing and the title will be abandoned in a very poor state. I want my prior paragraph to be 100% false and really wish the game gets all the time and resources it needs to become what we were promised. I still want to believe KSP 2 will be a great great game someday..... Over the weekend I have completely re-installed KSP 1 after watching several new videos and I set up a nice 82-mods heavy install with a huge tech-tree, stunning visual mods and some non-base-game stuff like life support and new planets (no RO/RSS, just Kerbin system, I am not a real life NASA guy, hehe) that I have never tried before and I am having a blast. It runs on a PC from 2016 (it was a monster back then, now it's "old and outdated but still decent") with good FPS and in the 16 hours I played since Saturday I had 0 crashes or Krakens. So my desire for sending green little guys to space is satisfied for now. I will hang on and follow the development of KSP 2 and hope for the best.

Please watch today's video of one of KSP's most famous content creators: Matt Lowne He explains in a very good way why wobbly rockets that do this on purpose have no place in KSP! I agree with him 100%: Rockets that are built with serious intentions and follow a solid design pattern should not wobble at all and should not need 100s of struts. KSP (despite being in a cartoonish style) can be a very serious and respectable physics sim. And if people spend time to build stuff correctly the game should award this by being physically correct and not introducing artificial wobble. [A KSP 1 instance with RSS/RO is no "game" anymore, it teaches science and it really needs smart thinking to get a vessel into orbit let alone fly to another planet or moon. And that is amazing! This point is not in the video, it is my own opinion and emphazises the first point.] Fun creations of stupid things may wobble all the way and can provide entertainment but as Matt says: "This is fun for 10 minutes when you encounter it the first time". Not a gameplay loop for a game that so much more to offer! And here is the link to his excellent video that came out toady (July 1st 2023): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpK_jGTJG3k

That is my biggest wish for improvement as well. The KSP 1 interface was so much more compact to fit a lot more information and control into the same or even less space. There were so many useful functions all in one place. I would love to see that in KSP 2, too. I personally find the font in the new UI too large but the most "waste" of space in my opinion are the separating lines between each section. They are not there in the KSP 1 interface and yet it is still very clear any easy to navigate. I hope there will be a future iteration of the new interface, especially when (e.g. via science, staring and gathering experiments) we get many more options to control from there. To be completely honest, if a mod named "KSP 1 interface" existed I would be downloading it the moment it is released. But: I know there are so many features still missing that require UI interaction that I am confident the devs will take a good look at it and rework it. Question for modders (I have no knowledge of the complexity of modding): Are the UI elements easy to adjust? Not just like building own dialogs with the same font and style like some mods already do but I am thinking of completely re-styling them? Or is that not possible with the given framework.

I have no particular expectations but it would be interesting to see if science is not treated as a "currency" as in KSP 1 but more specialized. Like some people here wrote, maybe make material science experiments have a greater impact on unlocking new construction parts (larger hulls, pods etc.) and other types of science having an influence on the progress of different parts of the tech tree. But even if it works exactly as in KSP 1 (an experiment yields x amount of science that can be used to "purchase" new tech) I will be very very happy once science mode arrives as it is to date my favourite mode to play KSP 1.

I support this point of view. For me it was really baffling that the camera bug that is currently in the game was not spotted (camera is facing in a fixed direction after returning from map screen and not where it faced when entering map screen). That is such a normal thing to do while playing the game (do something, check map, go back and do more stuff) that I can't really understand why that was not found during testing. It supports the theory of testing isloated cases with special setups (debug menu to get there) to test a specific issue and not look besides that point. I am working in tech support and often clash with my devs as they develop and test with "blinders over their eyes" (developing something or testing it without looking 5 millimeters left or right, just straight ahead and therefore miss something very important to the customer that could have easily been detected if they looked a little bit around). The 6 steps that Kerbart has mentioned in his post are really good and cover a lot of what is needed to enjoy KSP and covers (I would bet) 95% of all missions players want to do right now. If they work reasonably well the acceptance of missing features and delays will increase as players can enjoy a good amount of core gameplay. But from reading the bug report forum my understanding is that none of the above 6 scenarios can be completed right now without encountering at least one serious issue or RUD. Even veteran content creators who do the most crazy things in KSP 1 are struggling with the basics in KSP 2 right now, so please think about the "normal" player base who may even be new to the game and wants to learn about rockets and space flight. Give them and all of us a "basic stable game" (the 6 steps above with no kraken attacks) that we can enjoy and players will come back and/or convince new players to join.

Reported Version: v0.1.3.1 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K | GPU: 2 x NVIDIA 1080 | RAM: 32 GB Synopsis: A craft landing in water sinks down a few meters and then stops moving completely as if stuck in a giant "blob of gel". Switching altitude modes shows incorrect values. Reproducible: Yes, tried several times, always the same result. Test scenario: Simple craft: Mk1 pod, small heat shield, small stack separator (yes, for fun I used this instead of a decoupler), Hammer solid rocket motor Flight path: Launch from pad, turn towards the ocean, angle does not matter After Hammer engine runs out stage via space and let the pod fly on its own Switch SAS to retrograde, when velocity is reasonably low stage parachute via space bar Parachute opens and pod glides down slowly as expected Touchdown on water with about 6 - 7 m/s velocity (no timewarp enabled) Pod sinks about 9 - 10 meters deep into the water and then does not move anymore, no buoyancy at all 2 Screenshots: Craft landed and under water (it does not move or bobble, it is stuck in position), Altitude above Sea level = -9 meters so it sank down a bit before being stuck Same scene, click on the altitude mode button to switch to AGL (Altitude above ground level) -> Expectation: the same as sea level -> Result: It displays 327 meters AGL which can't be correct. The AGL was correct while flying, it slowly descended to 0 while I was on parachute, just after landing it shows 327 meters all of a sudden Edit: It seems only one picture got uploaded, the first one is missing, it is exactly the same but the altitude reads -9 meters and it is with mode "above sea level". Edit 2: After some more testing I can say with high confidence that the "327 meters" bug only happens with the MK1 pod (100% of the time with that). Larger pods do NOT show this problem and display 0 meters in both AGL and ASL after landing. But they also feel like "stuck in gel" as they are not moving around and stand upright in the water. Included Attachments:

(Un)fortunately this problem is no longer reproducible. I tried KSP 2 again this morning (after having switched off the PC over night of course) and in all my test launches the engine audio was there and at the correct volume level. The test scenario was exactly as in my original post but the bug did no longer happen. Please delete this post or mark it as "resolved / not reproducible reliably".

I am sorry if that idea or request has been posted already but I could not find a topic for it. If it exists please merge this posting or delete it as redundant. Are you planning to create a separate widget for planning manoeuvers on the map screen (like in KSP 1, this was perfect)? The reason I am asking is that when I focus my target (other ship or planet) and want to zoom in to get precise plannig this means I can't see my current orbit and the node with the controls that I need to manipulate in order to adjust the manoeuver. In KSP 1 I had the widget with all controls (and the slider to change their sensitivity -> genius design !) separately from the one on the current trajectory so I could easily manipulate the manoeuver node and still stay in the zoomed in view of my target to see the effects without having to make sure I can see the current orbit with the node. Is that already in the game and I just have not found it or does it not yet exist? If it is the latter, are you planning to add it or do I need to wait for the first "precise manoeuvers" mod (which I believe already exists but I would love to see that functionality in stock KSP 2 as I don't want to add mods yet while the game is in EA and I want to write bug reports for unmodded scenarios).

Reported Version: v0.1.3.1 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Intel Core i7-6700K | GPU: 2 x NVIDIA 1080 | RAM: 32 GB After today's hotfix (June 29th, Version 0.1.3.1) I have audio problems that I had in no version before. Test scenario: New campaing save file All audio volume settings to 100%, nothing changed here since I installed the game. New rocket consisting of 1 capsule, 1 decoupler, 1 solid rocket motor (sizes and types do not matter, can be reproduced with any capsule and engine (solid/liquid fuel)) Build rocket in VAB Go to launch site Press space -> result: The engine fires and is audible but the audio cuts out very soon after launch, about 5 - 10 seconds it goes to nothing, complete silence (the music is still playing) despite the engine still fireing and working normally For the rest of this flight, no matter if there are any other stages with more engines that are subsequently fired, no more engine sound is audibe, music works and changes according to situation End the flight by landing or crashing or in mid-air by selecting "revert to launch" The flight is reverted back to launch as expected Press space to start -> The engine fires but there is no more sound audible, music plays as expected but engine sound is completely gone This lasts for any number of "revert to launch" cases End the flight by "revert to VAB" Launch again -> sound is back for the first launch but we are at step 2 here (sound cuts out after a short while and then it's silence for all subsequent launches) until you go back to VAB Tried it 3 times with all new vessels and a new save file -> 100% reproducible