GoldForest

I wasn't asking the question with the assumption that they were in a line, no, it was with the assumption that TBR was in a different direction. My bad for not stating that. I was thinking they were close though. For example: Debdeb could be, and for this example I'm assuming Kerbol has fixed position and is not rotating, 25 degrees off 0 with TBR like 50 degrees off 0. So, past Debdeb, but not behind it. As for how far, I'm just speculating/guessing. 10 just popped into my head. I'm guessing 8.66 has relevance to an IRL system that is that far away from Sol?

I recently went back and looked at KSP 2's feature show case Episode 5: Interstellar Travel. And I noticed something at around 1:20: "-And you see, like in the real world, closet star is about four lightyears away." Now, Nate doesn't outright call the 'closet star' Debdeb, but seeing as Debdeb is the first interplanetary system, it would make sense to make it the next one over and the closet. If Debdeb is 4 LYs away, then that means we're going to be spending a LOT of time in empty space. Yes, we'll have time warp, but we don't know how fast time warp will be in KSP 2 yet. I doubt they'll make time warp fast enough to get us 4 LYs in a few seconds, even with the Daedalus which would theoretically take us to 7% to 12% the speed of light. Now one could make the argument: "Well, it's kerbal, so the distances will be shortened. 1/10 the size remember?" To which I say, no. Again, I quote, "-And you see, like in the real world, closet star is about four lightyears away." Like in the real world. That to me tells me that, no, the distances aren't cut down. We have a full 4 lightyear journey to look forward to with Debdeb. Which brings me to my next speculation: The "To be revealed" solar system will be beyond 10 lightyears from Kerbol, possibly 10 lightyears beyond Debdeb making it 14+ LYs from Kerbol. These are just my thoughts and opinions. I would like to hear from the community about these speculations and whether you feel I hit the hammer on the head or if I'm off center. I would also like you know 3 things: 1) Will you go to Debdeb when it's added or wait for the "To be revealed" system to be added? 2) If waiting, why? 3) If waiting, will you shoot for TBR first, skipping Debdeb entirely? Why?

I've never seen Shuttle II with engine mounts on the inner tanks. Is this artist license or do you have a spec sheet showing those engines? This image shows it with two canadarms. idk if the arms are smaller or if the shuttle is bigger.

Just because it sold 5 million copies, doesn't mean it's not niche. KSP is very niche. Its target audience is kind of small, and focused. Space simulators. Literally the definition of niche. As for promoting the game, they have been, for the last 4 to 5 years now. All the youtube videos showing off the game could be considered marketing and/or promoting. The reason they aren't going heavy on it is because it's not a finished product imo. When EA is almost finished, I'm sure we'll see a ramp up in marketing. At least a launch trailer or two to be sure.

Is it just me? Or does Faith of the Heart fit KSP 2's situation very well?

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet X-Lab makes it way to the Mun, enter a low 50KM x 50KM 90-degree orbit.

For games like KSP, it's kind of required to load everything into memory, otherwise you'll be sitting at load screens for minutes while assets load and unload. You think loading times are bad in KSP with fully modded installs? It will be worse if the game has to load and unload. The best we can hope for is optimized storage of parts on RAM, or even VRAM.

LUA Scripting isn't that great as the mod has to go through a middle-man before interacting with the game, so a little slow, at least from my understanding. It's good for some stuff, but direct control modding is best. Thankfully Nate said it's completely optional whether modders use LUA scripting or not.

Because MM came around before the devs could impliment one. That goes without saying, seeing as KSP1 was a homebrew project that grew into an Indie game/AA game. A lot of stuff they wanted to add couldn't because past Squad kind of screwed over present/future Squad. Also, to kind of further expand on your already answered question, having a in game patch manager is FAR better than having one that is a mod. Module Manager can do a lot, but there's still a lot that it can't do because it simply doesn't have access. Having an in-game patch manager, built into the system day one, will get far better access to KSP 2 than MM could ever dream of in KSP 1. It's not a waste of time and money, because A) The devs WANT more moddability, therefore a patch manager is kind of required, and B) the community wants it.

Because a built in MM would be better than needing to have MM added by a mod. Remember, they want to make KSP 2 more modding friendly. Having a built in MM will definitely do that. I feel like they will already have a version MM in the code, since again, more moddable.

Mac support is planned for full release afaik, just not for launch of EA. EA will be Windows only at launch, though EA may expand to Linux or Mac.

Nah, we've seen that ice moon in the "To Be Revealed" background. It was part of the annoucement trailer. At least, that's my opinion on the matter. I could be wrong.

"Over the course" to me means that modding will be updated along with every major update and will get its own minor updates. "Release updates", plural, so this supports my previous sentence. Also, we're not seeing the full roadmap. Multiplayer isn't the final stage, as you put it. If you look at the far right, you see a title card that is mostly 'off screen' for lack of better words. That very well may be an update dedicated solely to modding, but I doubt it as modding support kind of needs to be put in along with the other updates. For instance, it would be far easier to put modding capability and access to colonies during the colony update instead of doing it months down the line. Same with interstellar capabilities and other aspects. Modding can't be an afterthought, nor can it be a 'down the road' update, at least imo. It has to be put in alongside other code so that the doors are easily available. So, to answer your question, with my opinions: Modding support will be added in at launch of EA, and then expanded upon with every update. An update solely dedicated to modding may be down the line, because again, we're not seeing the full roadmap, the roadmap doesn't end at multiplayer, we're just seeing it UP TO multiplayer. Said modding update may add tools making modding easier, which would be nice as hell tbh.

If you want recolor in KSP 1, best to get a recolor mod. KSP 2 will have recolor support built in, though I doubt it will affect mod parts unless the modder allows it in the config settings.

Ah, so that's MM's Advance Design Nova R10R-2. Ah, I see. So the image was a split cross-section showing two different modes. I thought it was just a single rocket with half a shroud on one side.

Well, unless Cobalt or the others decides to model engine stacks like SSTU does, having an already modeled engine will cut down on workload. In other thoughts, I'd like to point out that some of those giant Novas got ridiculous... but I absolutely love the concepts. Like, OOST and ROOST. OOST on its own isn't too bad, single stage to orbit is perfectly fine. But then you add reusability to it, and you get ROOST. Like, imagine something bigger than a Starship and Superheavy stack. Now imagine it being reusable. Like, yeah. Starship Superheavy is what? 120 meters? ROOST is 160 meters! SSH is about 9m across, ROOST is 21.30 meters! More than double! And then on top of ROOST, you have stuff like this: Astro! A freaking space shuttle larger than ROOST itself. Oh, and for anyone wondering about all the Novas; Along with the Douglas studies above, these are it: Also also, anybody know what's up with MM Advance Designs Nova R10R-2? Like, is that a rocket or a modern architecture project? @Pappystein Any info you got on that one?

I don't think of any of the NASA Novas had aerospikes. I think MM or GD used some, but not NASA.

If you consider the NASA designs, you have most, if not all, of the engines already. F-1, J-2, Nerva, and M-1.

Maybe do a poll for each of the four lists and make the top 2 or 3 from each list to make it easier on you. There's like 50 Nova designs lol.

The rocket or the space shuttle?

@CobaltWolf Congrats on 1.11's release! It has been a journey, definitely, one that hopefully wont end anytime soon. I'm sure you'll figure BDB2 out sooner or later. Maybe focus on interstellar projects from the past? Orion, Daedalus, etc. I know these will be in game for KSP2 as stock parts, but stock and historic are two different monsters. And let's be honest, stock historic is a little different than stockalike historic. I.e. Stock SLS and Ariane 5. Maybe you could throw in a Nova or 2. I'm not talking the C-8 Nova. I'm talking about those monster ones that make Saturn V look like a medium class rocket. Martin Marietta Basic and Advanced, General Dynamics and NASA. I know you don't like going off spec or schematic, but just a suggestion. Whatever you decide, I know one thing: it will be great, and the community will be here, waiting and willing to play with whatever you decide to give us. So please, take your time. Take a break if you, Zorg, Invader and Rodger need it. Figure out what you all want to do. When you're ready, we'll be waiting.

Well for 1: Those errors are mostly for Artemis Construction Kit and not BDB. 2: Looks like you're missing Photon Corp 3: You can delete the ICPS folder inside the Benjee_Orion folder if you have BDB already installed to get rid of the dupe error 4: Make sure you have the latest download for all your mods involved. BDB, Artemis Construction Kit, Photoncorp, etc.

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet Delta V 6074-H3 launching a heavy 41-ton payload into 111.291 km x 111.222 km 90-degree orbit. Had to launch it manually because Mechjeb apparently hates the Delta V series I'm kitbashing, but what else is new. Oh, forgot to mention, on top of the 4-digit system, there's a suffix system as well. H denotes "Heavy" and the number after denotes the number of cores. So H3 means 3 7m CCBs. @CobaltWolf or @Zorg would it be possible to get a modern DCSS styled S-IVB? Also, KSP 2 got an early release date, so might want go get to work on BDB 2.0. You got until February 24th. Chop chop. /joking about getting to work obvoius

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet Having fun playing around with 7m Delta IV core (Which I've been calling Delta V), testing its limits. Previously I used Delta 7m with DCSS 4m and a single RS-68. This version has DCSS 5m and 2 RS-68s, and no SRBs. It can lift ~11 tons to ~149 km x ~151 km 90-degree orbit. Though, Mechjeb didn't like the circularization burn, so I had to take manual control. The orbit ended with 266 m/s Dv still in the tanks. And with the Delta V, returns the 4-digit naming scheme, yay! 1st digit - Number of engines on cores. Can be RS-68s or RS-800s 2nd digit - Number of SRBs. Gem-60XLs 3rd digit - Denotes which DCSS is used. There are 3. 4m, 5m and a new 7m (Still WIP) This number also denotes the size of the fairing. Fairing size matches DCSS size. 4th digit - Number of engines on the DCSS. Mostly RL-10s, but possibility of RL-20s or even RL-60s.

No need to apologize. You're welcome