Icegrx

While I’m also unhappy about KSP2 progression this post does absolutely nothing. You gave no finer details besides “the game is still no different to KSP 1.” You provided zero insight, didn’t mention any features that you feel are lacking or any ideas to improve upon, fix or implement. Have you provided any bug reports? What was the goal here? What if a developer decides to read this post, what do you expect to happen? “Oh OP99 is unhappy, let’s get the ball rolling right now!” This is not the way… Also you compared this to a game that’s not even in the same category, has entirely different gameplay etc. move along, you won’t be missed.

I typically try to stay as mod free as possible, I’m not against mods, but I try to keep them to a minimum. It’s such a hassle ensuring a particular mod works with game version X.zz.25 Plus the performance cost of running mods, ensuring things like additional UI’s stay cohesive to the stock UI’s and finally if I do feel like installing a particular mod, ensuring it’s compatible with other mods I may have. While this may be great for you, and that’s awesome! A sandbox game should have endless replay ability. While we do have sandbox modes for such things, I really enjoy a sandbox game with progression. This severely lacks progression replay ability in its current format. There’s really only a single direct path to progress the tech tree and that severely limits ones desire to do it multiple times. Ive ran dozens and dozens of KSP1 campaign runs, there’s many different ways you can approach it and progress. I’m on my 4th full KSP2 run currently and it’s getting old fast.

While I agree with this statement, they need to come up with some better handmade options. I can only visit the same POI’s so many times before I am bored. while generated missions get repetitive fast, there’s at least a reward for doing them continuously. Steady stream of cash and science. what we have now are single playable missions with one time payouts. I’m over running the exact same missions each play through in order to progress the tree. We need a dynamic way of generating science besides the exact same missions. I don’t think we need procedural generated missions per say. But if colonies just adds a handful new missions of the same variety we have now, I’m going to be disappointed.

They do look even more impressive, but Blackrack is famous for his KSP1 mod Volumetric Clouds.

Can we unpin this, and let it die now?

This was a nice communication. Especially highlighting the bugs that are getting dev attention. PQS optimization is also awesome to hear about! The shiny stuff is indeed shiny! The clouds look amazing, I’d like to know more about their impact to performance though. I’m not too keen on not giving a time frame, that hurts. I get why you can’t drop a specific date, but giving us an estimate would be nice. We need more of this type of communication. You have shown exactly what kinds of information we have been asking for and communicated it nicely here, please don’t go radio silent again and keep these rolling please!

Two more days till we get some information… fingers crossed

Yeah I like the drop down idea with sub saves being saved under a main workspace.

1. Please don’t remove craft auto saves, or change how they work. They have saved me countless times. 2. Workspaces are a bit wonky, and could be optimized, but as of right now they work fine. 3. With how long it takes them to release updates, I wouldn’t want them spending any precious time working on any of these things at the moment. Bug fixes and content please. Do not overwrite my manual saves or I will RAGE

Life support, and the need to ship food and supplies to your space station would be oh so so sweet. I really enjoy pretending that I’m running a real life space program and that would go a long way. I normally run fake supply runs just for the role play of it.

Just for a little clarification here. in most cases for KSP2 you don’t need a top of the line GPU. GPU likely isn’t holding you back. If you have an outdated or very underpowered GPU thats another story… You can test this in a few ways, but typically you want to turn down your in game textures. If you see a large frame rate boost at a lower texture quality then you can point the finger to your GPU holding you back. Lowering game resolution can also give you insight into your GPU. The thing I see holding most people back is CPU & Ram selection. 32GB of fast low latency ram vs 16GB of slow ram made a pretty good difference for me. Another thing to consider if you’re shopping for parts is a CPU with high frequency speed and high cache. High core count seems to make little difference in KSP2. You want the physics calculations to happen as fast as possible, you can achieve this with high frequency and high cache CPU paired with high frequency low latency ram.

Wow, explosions looked so much better back then

Could you tell us which day this week?

It shouldn’t be an issue, but for KSP2’s sake it’s the processor holding you back mainly here. The way the cache is split between the two CCDs on that architecture hamstrings the performance of games that cannot utilize all 12 cores. KSP further limits that down to a rumored 1 core. So your single highest performing core can only utilize about half the processors available cache.

Gotcha @Stephensan sorry for the confusion. I only run 1-2 campaigns at a time so I have no experience with that. How many campaigns have you noticed before performance is an issue? The auto save issue I’ve noticed is when 6+ auto saves start to pile up, with performance dropping further with each auto save. not sure if it’s related, but when you delete a vehicle build within the game, I have noticed that it keeps files within the games folders. This is true for vehicle auto saves as well. The folder just keeps piling on more and more information. These do not disappear until the campaign itself is deleted.