Tw1
-
Posts
4,550 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Tw1
-
-
Five main things. Well, kinda six, one thing has two parts. None of these are a deal breaker in itself, but they could add up, and put me off.
1. If they change the stock solar system and KSC too much and I feel alienated.
I know these planets and these places. I want them improved, but if I turn up and they have drastically different maps, or are missing key features, I might be a little put off.
2. If career is the same mediocre thing as now, or there is no equivalent to science mode.
Sandbox does feel a bit aimless, and only good for making contraptions. But career is full of immersion breaking stuff like that tech tree, and game mechanics which hurt the verisimilitude of running a space program. I like to play science so I have a record of what I've discovered, but cheat away the tech tree.
If they do overhaul career so that it feels more like you are playing as a space program, then that would be great. I'll be all for that.
3. I would like all parts that touch each other to have ridgid connections. No more parts passing through each other at launch due to vessel tree structure issues. This is a complex problem to solve with parts that move, but they should attempt to find a solution.
4. Working wheels. Please. Players shouldn't have to understand unity limitations to make reasonable rovers. Also, I'd like to be able to still drive when the ground isn't flat.
5. Better implementation of exploration and science. Ksp1 has been a building and flying game. The planets have long been underdeveloped, as have the reasons for actually going to space, like discovering stuff, and doing experiments.
Make this a science game, not just an engineering one. This could even be a future expansion. In this area Ksp1 never lived up to its full potential.
-
I do hope they move away from relying on contracts, as a game mechanic, and make them a smaller, suplimentary thing.
This is my rant about the old career mode, and why it really does need to be expanded quite considerably. KSP2 is the chance to do this.
As I've said before, I would rather have reasons to do things in places, opportunities to achieve goals of my own, rather than being mostly just the delivery guy. I want to be directing the program myself, more than being a service provider.
The way contracts worked, especially before they started adding things like Researching in the lab always seemed like a cop out to me, in place of fleshing out the game fully.
Clearly, in the world of the game, the contract offering organizations are achieving something through the results of what they ask you to do. Why can't your own organization (your space program) also achieve those things? I want to play proactively, not reactively.
I'm hoping the colonization mechanics and the hinted at requirement for reasources achieves this. Progression should be about achieving stuff in space, not ticking of arbitrary lists the game imposes on you.
Career mode really breaks the 'you vs the laws of the universe' by reminding you that you are playing a video game. It's not immersive. I play the game to feel like I'm doing space stuff, something no other game can offer, and feel career should be contributing to that.
I want a fluid system of goals which you can meet in many ways, in any order you like, without external pressure. Just you vs the universe.
Career mode and science mechanics should be there to bring to life sides of the game which are still underdeveloped. I care very little about arbitrary tech trees, but love the idea of expanding kerbal knowledge of their universe, so I still play science. But I wish it was more of an experience than just point scoring and my own imagination. Breaking ground to me, was a great step in the right direction.
I want science to be an experience, part of playing, not just a click to score points.
I don't think KSP doesn't need a way for you to "win", or even entirely "complete it". Irl, space exploration isn't truly going to be over, it's going to evolve, and eventually become space civilization. There needs not be a game over, because it would be possible to put yourself in a position where you cannot continue due to poor planing, too many failures, and bad management.
Career mode should make it feel like you are running an organization, managing the funds, planing the next steps, and all this should be done to achieve your own spacey goals. Running an organization is like a whole other design challenge, where a rocket needs to have stages sequenced, fuel to weight optimizated and so on.
I think it would be wrong to bog the player down with lots of budgeting and spreadsheets. But the economic aspect should at least be presented in a way that feels authentic.
This is what I've always felt career is lacking. It does not bring to life this side of running a space program. OK, it does sorta, but only a little.
The simplified scanning, science which is just delivering parts to locations, stuff like paying for kerbals as a one of... (if it still works like that?) really put me of career because it didn't have the same verisimilitude as the rest of the game. While not entirety realistic, most of the time it sorta made sense.
Simplification of the flight sim are usually omissions, like reaction wheel saturation or life support, rather than something which seems quite different to what might happen in real life, which is what a lot of the career mode seems like.
Needing to find something more common in space, because it's unaffordable to get from Kerbin? That makes sense. Can't use a part because earlier versions haven't been tested in enough space environments? That could also make sense.
I argue that a regular payment, based on achievements / time, would be a much better way to fund the program, rather than just individual contracts. That's something I'd love to see added.
This would need to be balanced by having ongoing costs, and a need for more money should you expand operations, be they on the ground, or in space. Kerbals deserve a salary.
The tech tree, contracts, or building the space center, should not be the main reason for players to go to space. Give us reasons to explore things to discover, changeable environments to monitor, and reasons to develop places for ourselves.
Kerbal could be far more than a building and flight game. It could also be a science game. And a perhaps even a proper tycoon game, like in the original pitch.
To sum up, I wish for KSP2 to feel like less of like a fairly average game tacked on on top of a fantastic contraption builder and spaceflight sim, and more like a full space program, space exploration experience.
-
20 minutes ago, Sandstorm said:
I enjoy building amphibious rovers in KSP 1
There never seems to be that many amphibious rover builders around, which is a little bit of a pity. But maybe it makes the ones that do get made more special.
I've been rebuilding and tweaking "Evepod" for years now, and am unsure if I will remake one in KSP2. That would require remaking some very old mod parts anew.
It's probably my favourite vehicle, but might have to meet its destiny in KSP1.
KSP's water is so lovely with some aesthetic mods.
I like the suggestion of finding rocket parts under water. On kerbin, I wouldn't mind rudimentary coral, or seaweed, but think they shouldn't be a big priority. If they do it with re-used textures, or leave it to mods, that'd be ok.
. . Perhaps something to see through a glass bottom could be cool though.
Undersea channels, thermal vents, that would be cool abiotic features they could add. Maybe some caves, deep pits, canyons, the sort of thing that would also be useful as aboveground features could be recycled and adapted for underwater.They've got to include the Kerbin Smiley, for sure.
-
Similarly, picking just one is hard. I've built and even launched all manner of things, from Space Opera houses to Cathedrals, stealth rovers, radio towers, and aquatic mobile bases, represented this forum years back in the Kerbin cup, and built all sorts of things for kerbal fanfics.
Plus, more stuff I want people to go and see is in my forum signature.But there's one thing isn't going to be beaten, and that's the world's lightest Eve ascent vehicle. Actually, it's barely even a vehicle.
This ladderforce glitch powered Eve ascender will get you of that planet in under 220 kg. It works in pure stock, no cheats required, and it is 100% a valid way to leave Eve.
-
2 hours ago, ModZero said:
as a person who used to help my grandfather with beekeeping, I am extremely angry about the way we're misusing the term "drone."
And now you have me wondering what a queen UAV would look like
-
6 minutes ago, Gydra54 said:
Seems we will be getting a gameplay demo. Wonder if its the same pre-alpha build we've seen or a much more recent one?
Someone grab lots of screenshots. I want to see if they've put in the VAB and rest of the buildings yet, and if there's enough of the flat area around KSCI I use to test rovers
And if you like, and if they haven't included it already, persuade them to put back the ksp mountains I like flying over them they're a great landmark. I'll give you a sandwich.
-
On 6/1/2014 at 12:20 AM, guigui30000 said:
I think axial tilt would be great !
And there would be no issues for beginners. As my english is poor, here is an amazing drawing for everybody.
This is the one. Let's bring the diagram here to discuss. I don't think it would be much harder, like this.
I do hope the new devs have spend some time picking the ideas from discussions past. There's a lot out there - a wide range of people will come up with far more ideas than just a few.
-
Kerbin is the beginning planet so for convenience, keeping it close to zero makes sense.
I recall a post from years previous which suggested something like Kerbin could have the same axial tilt as Minmus, but Minmus sit in the plane of the solar system. But IDK.
I'm a fan of keeping the familiar system close to as is. That set up works well for introducing you to spaceflight.
If you land anywhere on another planet other than the equator, you already have to think about incination, so I don't think it's going to be a bother, but with new planets, they could do some pretty exotic things. A targeted landing on a planet with a strange rotation would be quite a challenge.
-
I hope it's between the two. The original planet, same basic design and same general landforms, but enhanced in the ways you describe.
-
14 minutes ago, Xd the great said:
Also, make large ships more physically stable. No wobbling, please.
As long as this means when logical. If you are putting a lot of mass around a small, weak seeming connection, you're going to want some reinforcement.
-
Also, hold down Shift and you can drag the whole thing from any part.
-
3 minutes ago, airtrafficcontroller said:
I was worried too but then I see this:
Sure, but all that does is confirm that it's in the same place. We've only seen glimpses that show an expanded complex, and that they've added some waterways, but as for the rest, we still don't know for sure if they're going to muck it up.
2 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:It also confirms that Harv doesn't even have a partial ownership of Kerbals, otherwise he would have been informed. It's sad he seems to have lost all rights to his creation. Though, that was probably a misstep early in the process, far before he knew what KSP and Kerbals would become.
This too is kinda sad. It's probably all private stuff we won't get to know, but it would be nice if he had some part in the deal.
-
Oceans of Eve is returning in 2020
Sets and vessels have been rebuilt. Outlining has begun. Let's see if anyone's still reading, shall we?
If you've just seen this, there's a while to go before the next bit drops, but I have written up a little thing to help you recall what's happened so far:SpoilerA quick summary:
It is the near future. Kerbals have made their first steps, and found footholds on both of Kerbin's moons.
All the rocky planets have been walked on - except Eve.
With toxic clouds, high heat, pressure, and gravity, and currently no feasible method of return, the authorities refuse to authorise a mission to that planet.
KSC, eager to continue their record of historic firsts, rebels and makes a secret deal with the semi independent Mun Prograde City. Exploiting a loophole, the mission proceeds, with all the backlash falling on MPC.
Explorer-Astronaut Watsan Kerman arrives on Eve, and establishes himself. On the way, he discovers he's not entirely alone in his mobile amphibious base.
On the Mun, city Leader Dontop Kerman becomes increasingly erratic, trying to prove the Mun base's worth through ambitious missions. The base attempts to survive on its own, and solve the mystery of the craters ( which suddenly appeared after an update to the game)
Meanwhile on Eve, Watsan and his pet have just had a bit of an accident. A potentially deadly accident.....Important Recurring Characters:
Watsan - The guy sent to Eve
Dontop - Prograde City's appointed leader
Seetop - Dontop's Brother, second in command
Joefel & Mallie - Scientists from Prograde cityJeb, Bill, Bob- appearing as themselves, celebrity astronauts currently working for Prograde City
Gene & Wernher - You know them. Here, they're basically running KSC.
Gene's Dad (Alfene) - An important politician, and KSC's political influencer.
-
1 minute ago, GoldForest said:
No, because Squad makes KSP 1, and Star Theory makes KSP 2. You can't make KSP 2 KSP V2.0, because there's already a KSP heading to V2.0. That and it would be super confusing when KSP 1 got to V2.0 and then you have another KSP that's V2.0 as well.
It just doesn't work.But with the way naming conventions work, should KSP1 continue to update, it may well go to 1.20, rather than ever click over.
-
23 hours ago, garwel said:
Career mechanics that rewards interesting missions instead of grind
I personally hope rather than issuing missions, aka, telling you what to do, the game gives you enough information to work out opportunities for yourself, and rewards you for acting.
It seems a pity Harvester wasn't a consultant on this. Then again, he helped shaped the first game, and perhaps new minds taking a fresh look at it, having already seen how the game goes, and the fan discussion about it.
My current concern I want relaved is what they plan to do for the space center, and Minmus.I want to see the same old islands, mountains, and a similar campus of buildings somewhere as part of it, so there's continuity with the existing setting, and less confusion when you seek to represent it in fanworks.
I do want to see it expanded, and maybe even rebuilt to an extent, but I would like to be able to see it as the same place, you know? -
This. This is one of the things I love about this game, it's so open, so moddable, it truly can be all things to everyone.
-
I just hope they don't spoil places like the space center, or favourite features on planets.
So much can be done just testing things, or mucking about at the space center between launches. It's like a home town if you've played long enough. And there are so many videos in which it features.That is my concern, that while the game may technically be much better, it looses something of the heart and history that has been built up along the way.
-
7 hours ago, Loskene said:
I'll spill the open secret: we only do aerobraking for cool points.
Basically.
Sometimes it might be justified, like if the heat shield structure doubles as something else.
Like recently, I sent a support orbiter to Eve, with lots of little sub-probe landers hanging of the back of the shield. The sheild was BD armor panels, so idk if more fuel and a lighter structure would have been more optimal, but I did it that way for style.
Aerobraking might be more popular than it should be as in the pre-release days, it was by far the easiest way to capture, thanks to the Crude aerodynamic model, and lack of heating. When those came about, continuing to use the technique became a real challenge for long time players.
-
As the owner of one of them - the Jebs were limited edition? Cool.
Perhaps they could bring back the old print your own ship thing.
-
I wouldn't mind if loading speeds were faster, but I do hope they keep saves and craft files human readable, so we can fix glitches and errors, and have a little leeway with mistakes. One of the great things about KSP1 is how open and modifiable it was.
A mod switches names? Maybe you need to strip a mod part for some reason? Just a find and replace and now those error causing gadgets are cubic struts.
If they do compress these files, an included converter would be nice. -
5 hours ago, Kerbart said:
pretty much anything is going to change!
I hope it does get a fair amount of revision. KSC original was iconic, and an easy landmark to spot from orbit. It' was a great little campus, all those buildings were full of detail which you could explore with planes, boats, and rovers. I've no idea what the cumulative amount of time I've spend testing things on those buildings must be.
Basically, needs mountains, needs the landscape tidied up a bit, and needs more buildings.
They must not forget KSC's dual role of being a testing ground. Plus, I like it being a self contained HQ for the kerbals. TBH, a little science and admin campus, and a few VAB and I'd be me happy.
Like at kenady, they have the VAB and stuff a little bit away from the launch facilities. They could just remake the existing buildings at a distance to what we've seen. Whatever they do, just... keep it kerbal. Don't copy Earth. -
I recommend the mod Protractor.
-
IDK I would not mind them a bit bigger, tbh, even just so that the planets don't look so small from low orbit.
-
2 minutes ago, Eskandare said:
make it more to the likes of Kennedy Space Center.
See, I don't much like that. Why copy something from Earth? What's wrong with it being its own thing?
Hopes and Wishes for KSP 2
in Prelaunch KSP2 Discussion
Posted
This is my Headcanon too. Whether or not this counts as a space program depends on what you consider a space program.