mattihase

it's like 30 minutes into the 0.2 announcement talk iirc.

I'm sure we remember a lot has been "mentioned" by the devs. However little survives contact with the realities of gamedev. I'd just think it neat if when 1.0 rolls around I could start a save file in 0.2 and then upgrade versions with each milestone kinda like I've seen happen with some minecraft LPs where, if you do it in steps, save files from way back in infdev can be upgraded forwards to the current version of the game.

fuel lines and decoupler make fuel flow actually work from tank to tank depending on the direction of the fuel line. similar to ksp1 except without the manual fuel flow editor that got added in at some point after 1.0 (yet)

Dakota mentioned in the discord tracker that the tech tree may change between versions. how are save files created in an older version of the game going to be handled by new versions of the game when it comes to tech tree changes. Will it handle what parts you have access to by node or by parts previously unlocked or just by crashing the game? Will crafts you could make in an older version of the tree still be launchable or will they grey out like how ksp1 does with temporary unlocked contract parts.

depending on how easy it is to add pages, you could have a mod that splitst he tree into pages, one for rocketry, one for structure parts, one for plane parts, one for rover parts, one for probes and unmanned, one for specialised propulsion (nukes and xenon and whatever hydrogen engines we're getting for interstellar) and one for new science modules, maybe pages dedicated to specific mods too. Reallly let vets who know all the parts well enough to make informed decisions, looking for a different kind of progression from the default tree, choose which bits of the game they want to focus on.

I'm somewhat coming around to the idea of using the "tiered tree" framework for modded trees. If you ignore the idea of tiers and instead set the "critical path" nodes to all be free you can seperate different branches of the tree onto different pages.

One thing I am noticing from the build used in the vid is that there doesn't seem to be an "astronaut complex" at the ksc yet. do we have any confirmation as to if persistent kerbonauts are going to be a thing in 0.2?

I will second the idea that it's a little bit ridiculous that it looks like we need to unlock as-yet-undeveloped-by-humanity nuclear propulsion tech before we can figure out how to make we-definitely-already-have Mk3 cargo planes with ramps, planes and spaceplanes are something I absolutely love playing around with on kerbin and later laythe. Especially with all the things you can do with procedural wings. However perhaps I'm assuming too much and the later spaceplane nodes are more about engine unlocks than part sizes. I suppose there's a degree to which early game aerospace can be added to or changed with mods but it'd be nice to have more opportunities there on a level playing field with everyone else. EDIT: NVM I see jumbo jets/airliners under tier 3 tech. Still pretty silly you need to get your a** to mars duna if you want to be able to take a rover to the north pole without going full KPE. EDIT EDIT: wait, no, the ramp/cargo bays are under tier 4. GAAAAAAH!

Reported Version: v0.1.5 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Windows 10 | CPU: i7-10870H | GPU: RTX 3070 | RAM: 16GB no idea what's triggered it but whenever I return from map view I find myself staring out from the centre of my vessel. Included Attachments: .ipsImage { width: 900px !important; }

KSP2 is a very beautiful game and it's really nice to take screenshots in. The camera tools are (a couple bugs aside) really nice for getting the perfect angle on craft. what's a little bit more difficult is getting the light balance right, especially when the sun is in frame. It'd be really nice to have an exposure slider to be able to take even prettier screenshots. Maybe some other photo mode sliders too. Obvs this kind of thing should be pretty low on the priority list, probably not worth investing time in before the render pipeline switch too, but I figured it worth bringing up for later reference anyway.

I'm not super caught up on the trajectory bugs as I've mostly been messing around with planes but now that I'm back to working in space and I've been running into those I'm wondering if there's a way to force the game to have another attempt at remembering it needs to draw orbit lines without restarting the whole game. Vessel state is in orbit so it's not the landed bug.

Reported Version: v0.1.5 (latest) | Mods: Micro Engineer | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Windows 10 | CPU: i7-10870H | GPU: RTX 3070 | RAM: 16GB The message for trying to warp too fast activates whenever warp is slowed down after using the warp to maneuver node option. Included Attachments: .ipsImage { width: 900px !important; }

One thing I've been running into a lot recently is that the "point prograde/at target/at maneuver" SAS options seem to have very little respect for the original roll orientation of the craft when wrestling it around to point at the selected marker. This is quite a hinderance for both spaceplanes (where you want something to be right side up on reentry) and docking (lining stuff up being important here in general). I'm not sure this would be considered a bug as the system does function, but I do think it is something that could be improved upon.

I've had this happen on me once. Very odd how rare it is.

One thing I've noticed using ME recently is that TWR doesn't seem to take any occlusion related problems with the vessel into account meaning ME wasn't giving accurate TWR results when I was dealing with this bug Similarly it doesn't seem to do much better than the base game in calculating hidden Delta V from engines in hangar bays I know these are likely problems with how the base game calculates numbers for things but it'd be really helpful to have ME double-check the game's logic so that when dealing with bugs like this we have something correct to fall back on.

Ah, so this is what's going on. Surprised I didn't get any of the thermal overlays from this. I had them turned on. weird.

Seems like a design hold-over from KSP1 that hasn't been redesigned to work with KSP2's tracking station button. Although at the same time I've had this happen with craft that aren't in-flight but were near a craft that was still in flight (and that craft itself too) so it could be a new deloading bug.

did he land on his head? everyone knows kerbals can survive any fall if they land on their head. And... don't burn up in the atmosphere.

In the experience I had they did stop dropping off after a while but they didn't ever "catch up" and start getting faster again.

Reported Version: v0.1.5 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Windows 10 | CPU: i7-10870H | GPU: RTX 3070 | RAM: 16GB In the included craft file, the Afterburner mode of the Panther provides less thrust than the Cruise mode. Swapping modes leads to the craft's speed rapidly decreasing. On other craft I've built to test whether I was misunderstanding the panther, it seems like it works the way it's supposed to (like in KSP1) so I think it's something to do with the craft. (relevant action groups: 1 toggles engines, 2 cycles modes. If you want to close the open cargo bay doors with the landing lights in after take-off, press 7. This also retracts the gear) Craft file: UO Bigcat Prototype.json

I'm kinda loathe to agree with setting-specific systems of measurement, because at the end of the day from an audience perspective, using real human units that humans use is kinda important to understand what something is at a glance. However I will agree with aNERVASman's suggestion of having them available from a dropdown.

I'm having a bit of a time working out how panthers work in KSP2. As far as I thought I understood it, putting the panthers into wet/afterburn mode should give the vessel more thrust, and on smaller vessels this seems to be the case, but when trying to use them on a larger vessel, whenever I swap them to afterburning mode, the vessel's speed starts to rapidly drop. Is there something about the Panthers I'm failing to understand here or is this just some craft specific bug?

"The Kármán line is 912 football fields high"

Interestingly though I have had a poke around in the file format for crafts before and the file system at least seems like it could handle representing loops, but I doubt the game engine would be happy about it.

I swear I remember hearing some talk in the past about KSP2 using a graph style representation for ships rather than a tree representation, that would allow for stuff like multi-docking but it seems like that isn't the case so same limitations as KSP1 at the moment am fraid.