GoldForest

I don't think it was, because we've seen in the Refinery show case that there is a Methalox refinery.

You're going to suffer. KSP 1 loves ghz due to its physic engine. The faster rhe CPU, the better. You're really limiting yourself with that 4.3 ghz top speed. Should have gone 10600k or better yet, 13600k or 7600x. You're I3 is not suited for KSP 1 or 2 really. I would expect low part count performance.

2 and a half months. 75 days, 17 hours, 27 minutes and 5 seconds as of the posting of this comment. (Check the link in my signature below for more accurate time) We're already technically getting them. All the Dev Diaries and Show and Tells we've gotten are KSP 2's animation showcases. I doubt they will stop giving us updates after KSP 2 EA releases,

Perhaps, but the way it was worded could have been better imo.

They said another planet. And by Squad's own admission, over like 80% of players have not even gone past Minmus, iirc. There's no need for you to criticise them like this. Your comment comes off as a little harsh imo. So what if the game is 11 years old, some people prefer staying around Kerbin and I can understand why. Especially when you use a rescale mod, things get much harder DeltaV wise. KSP 2 wants to encourage those players to go beyond Minmus by making it easier for players by giving tutorials, as well as parts better suited for interplanetary travel. Let's be honest, interplanetary missions in KSP are hard if they're meant to be 2 way. With the inclusion of better interplanetary mechanics and parts, I see more people willing to take to going to Duna or Laythe.

You are doing it wrong, yes. There's a hidden node inside the decent module engine area. You attach the decent module hidden node to the node in the adapter fairing, not the bottom of the decent engine to the adapter. Also, might want to attach the legs one by one or take the one with the ladder off symmetry.

Nice try.

That's the plan. On an unrelated note, my map view is utterly cluttered around Kerbin now. Yes, I'm launching all probes and keeping them around.

Doing all the probes offered by BDB, so it was just a matter of time before I ran into them.

OAO Family! Usually, I do these one craft a day, but I decided to knock the entire OAO family out of the park in one day seeing as there's only three of them and they're really simple to build. Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet OAO 1 OAO 2 OAO 3 Oh, @Rodger I think the OAO solar panels need a buff. They can't support the power needs of telescopes doing their surveys. This was with the space dust versions.

Oh, right, forgot all those features. Even still, I'm sure you'll be able to turn all that stuff off, while keeping high settings for other stuff. Also, 4000m long mothership? What you planning on doing, transporting millions of Kerbals?!

Nate said in the interview with PCGamer that they want to make performance on Mid-teir machines as good as possible. Mid-tier would be your X060s for Nvidia/X600s for AMD. As for CPUs, I doubt KSP 2 wouldn't do well on say a 6000 series I5s from Intel and a 1st Gen Ryzen R5s from AMD. PS5 and XBSX might have powerful graphics, but there's a downside, they're APUs instead of dedicated graphics. The chip may have the performance of a 2070, but it's not going to hit that performance all the time, if not most of the time due to thermal throttling. Though, with that being said... KSP 2 isn't graphically intense, it's more CPU intense, so 1080P 60/4K 30 wouldn't be that hard to reach or even beat as the target. If you have a high ghz CPU, like ~4.5, with a mid to low mid tier GPU, you should be fine. Also, 1050 is no slouch. It can get 60+ FPS at max settings 1080P in quite a few games and maintain at least 30+ in other games. UserBenchmark: Nvidia GTX 1050 vs RTX 2070

Poodmund did a few tests. These are his findings: You can see that unlimited FPS version loaded over 3.2 times faster. That's a significant improvement.

KSP never had realism to begin with, well, not the kind you're talking about. It's first and foremost a space game that's supposed to be fun. That's why the size of planets are 1/10th scale and the engines are 25% of IRL thrust. The parts are super OP in stock. Going from Kerbin to the Mun is drastically easy once you get the fundamentals down. Going from Kerbin, to Duna, then back to Kerbin is almost just as easy with the right planning. The devs of KSP 2 want to make the game, in your own words "More plausible and fun." Interstellar travel won't make things easier, if anything it will make it harder. And you're not going to use an interstellar ship to go from Kerbin to the Mun. Metallic Hydrogen engines and Torch engines will make going from Kerbin to the Mun a lot faster, but no easier. You'll still have to plan out your maneuvers and timings and all that jazz. If you do use an interstellar ship for going to the Mun, you have to worry about turning a ship the size of a sky scraper around and maneuvering something that size is not easy. Colonies can be done without interstellar. Heck, we NEED colonies BEFORE interstellar. Helium-3 has been confirmed to be a fuel resource. There's only one real place you can get He-3 from. Jool. You'll need to put a collection and processing plant in orbit around Jool to suck up He-3, H-2 and H-3. If anything, Interstellar will give us more reason to go to the other planets in the Kerbolar system. Duna for metals and CO2 ice. Jool for He-3, H-2 and H-3. Etcetera. As for far future and speculative tech, Nate has said before, clearly, that the game is about NEAR future tech that is VIABLE. That means anything that can't be physically built in the next 100 years won't appear in game. I.e. Warp engines, Wormhole Drives, Blackhole Drives, etc. So don't worry about that, it won't happen. KSP 2 won't lose any nerdiness of KSP 1, I'm fairly certain of that. If anything, space trade will enhance it. Because Nate has said you have to do at least 1 run by yourself in order for the automation to work. I don't know about you, but Kerbals becoming basically space truckers is hilarious to me, and I can picture tons of wacky situations the Kerbals can get into, let alone the player. KSP 2 isn't trying to compete against the mainstream games, simply due to the fact that there are no mainstream space simulation games. Star Citizen, EVE and Elite Dangerous aren't really space simulators, they're more space MMORPGs imo. KSP 2 is not looking to go after them, simply because KPS 2 isn't the same game as them. KSP and KSP 2 are single player space simulation games at their core. You can have RPG adventures in them, but that's due to the player's imagination, not the game's mechanics. I wouldn't worry about KSP 2 'competing in the mainstream'. Not against those three games mentioned earlier. Both because it's not trying to, and it simply couldn't. There is no game like KSP, and none in the foreseeable future afaik. KSP 2 will go mainstream against itself, not against any space MMORPG. The only game that might compete against KSP is Simple Rockets, but that game would have to step up its game if it truly wanted to compete against KSP. And pardon the pun.

Mmmm, I say leave that up to the modders to do. That seems like an advanced feature that some of the newer players will have trouble with. Like, only people who know rockets will know what a 'balloon' tanks vs a regular tank is. Furthermore, you got several different materials. Steel, aluminum, carbon composites, insulated, non-insulated, etc.

@Invaderchaos has been MIA for a little bit now, at least in terms of modding from what I understand. I doubt we'll see Viking any time soon, especially since they are working on like five projects at once. As for the probes plus/BDB collab, haven't heard much about it since it was announced, afaik anyway. Haven't been watching the BDB forums that closely, so someone feel free to correct me on either point.

Inb4 people complain about fuel refineries not being in game at EA launch. On a serious note, we will probably see a lot of assets that won't be in game until down the line like you mentioned. Like fuel refineries. They're for colonies, but they may not be in game until the Exploration update since resource gathering won't be until said update, and refineries need resources. Now, they might give us an all-powerful convertor until then, like turning hydrogen into methane or methane into mono, etc. Unlikely, I know, but it would be a bridge to the gap between Colonies update and Exploration update. To keep it somewhat on topic, I don't imagine a lot of engines being held back. I see all engines shown to be in game when the Interstellar update drops since there will be no need to hold back any engines by then. Though, the engines will be less useful until the resource update with Exploration hits. (Just realized we'll be ditching reusable engines like the Metallic Hydrogen engines possibly. Imagine ditching a billion-dollar REUSABLE engine on some rock lightyears from home so you can make it back to said home... ouch)

Mariner family is here! Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet Mariner 2: Mariner B: Mariner 3: Mariner 5: (Warning to people using their phones in the dark, flashbang photo incoming!) Mariner 10: Fun fact: The Eve Mariner 10 and the Moho Mariner 10 are two separate Mariner 10s. I didn't feel like waiting for the long burn of the Eve probe under infinite fuel. Also, infinite fuels causes engines to overheat for some reason, so the engine would shut down... yeah, decided, screw it, just launch a centaur with a new Mariner 10 and use Centaur under infinite fuels to get to Moho.

If they do, it won't be for KSP 1. KSP 1 BDB is, for all terms and purposes, pretty much done. There's one last update coming with a few things, but in terms of any big updates like rovers, they'll have to wait for BDB 2, and that's IF Cobalt and the team want to tackle them. A big thing about rovers is KSP 1 wheels... well, they suck, bad. I mean, hell, it took Cobalt until now just to give us a lunar rover. So yeah, we'll have to wait and see if KSP 2's wheels are improved, which it looks like they are, considering the dev team has been making 'race cars'

Good god... going 4 lightyears on a Nerva... no thanks

Those too.

You're a freakin mad lad then. Good luck with all the problems, like the creation and docking (if the second ship can't be constructed fully loaded) and undocking in the span of an hour, or less. Oh god, I'm just picturing... crap, I forgot what show or movie it's from, but this one ship literally changes to suit the needs of the mission by scrapping and reforming parts of itself. I know that REALLY narrows it down. /s But in seriousness, being able to do that will break this challenge. The problem is, you'd have to calculate the losses and bring the right amount of resources to offset the losses, because you never get a 1:1 scrapping.

Would we be able to sacrifice parts of MS 1 to create MS 2? That would be... interesting if they thought to put a mechanic like that in. I was assuming that the shipyard would use the metal storage and fuel storages to create a new ship, not pry parts of MS 1 off to create MS 2. A vessel that isn't alive, nor has an AI computer? Oh, definitely. Tons and tons.

Page 101, 81 days to go, time to add fuel to the fire!

I've been thinking about that as well for a while now. Can we strap engines to an orbital colony and just push it around? If so, that would truly break the game. I think a rule against that will have to be put in place for official challenges, because where's the 'challenge' in towing around an orbital VAB and just going ham, spamming out orbital colony and landed colony modules? Of course, this is in sandbox mode. A career run of this challenge would be exponentially harder thanks to the need for resources. A self replicationg mothership? That would be... expensive in career mode. Not to mention that you'd have to bring materials on the first mothership to replicate into... actually, only one other mothership. Huh. If Mothership 1 replicates Mothership 2 on the way to Deb Deb, Mothership 1 could break off, go for a sling shot to To Be Announced (TBA) while Mothership 2 broke for orbit in Deb Deb, or vice versa.... ah, but you'd need Mothership 1 to carry all the supplies to make at least one colony in both Deb Deb and TBA. And then there's the thing about resource storage. Will we be able to create MS2 so it has full resource storage tanks or will they be empty and need to be filled after creation? If the latter, then you need some way to dock the two-giant craft (Sunshine Icarus 1 and 2 docking vibes). On top of that, you have to worry about your braking burn for Deb Deb, so you'll have a very small window of opportunity to: create MS2, dock, transfer resources, undock, setup slingshot for MS 1 to TBA and start braking burn for MS 2 to Deb Deb. I mean, yeah, you could stop short of your top speed to Deb Deb, or even include a few more engines to help with the braking burn so MS 2 doesn't overshoot Deb Deb, but you would still want to keep your speed high. At minimum you want to keep the coasting period down to about 30 mins to an hour. Oh, another problem, this all assumes that Career mode won't have Unrapid Planned Construction involved. If you have to WAIT for MS 2 to be built, then you have to plan out everything even MORE. Oy vey, that is complicated. I do NOT envy anyone who goes for this replicating mothership idea. I think I'll just stick with the supersized Mothership that carries 50 Colony modules idea.... And actually... come to think of it. Doesn't MS 2 break the idea of a grand tour? Doesn't a grand tour entail having ONE craft that can do it ALL? Having a lander on a mothership is fine I feel, but having a second mothership? I think that goes against the nature.