Search the Community

KSP 1.12.x Near Future Propulsion [1.3.5] Last Updated August 26, 2021 This pack contains advanced electric engines for deep space travel. Generally engines split into the following categories: Gridded Ion Engines: like the stock Dawn, they have low TWR and great Isp. They run on Xenon fuel. Hall Effect Thrusters: similar to Gridded thrusters, but with better TWR at the cost of some Isp. They run on Argon fuel and are pretty cheap! Magnetoplasmadynamic Thrusters: with the best TWR of all electric engines, these engines are very power-hungry. They run on Lithium fuel. Pulsed Inductive Thrusters: similar to Hall thrusters, they run on Argon fuel and have the unique ability to dump extra electricity into the engine, increasing Isp but generating more heat. VASIMR Engines: high tech and fancy, these engines run on either Xenon or Argon fuel. They can be tuned for high-thrust, low Isp operation, or low-thrust, high-Isp operation These engines are all very power hungry - use nuclear reactors or high intensity solar to get the power you need. Their balance has been finely tuned to work with stock mechanics and to extend the KSP experience, particularly in combination with the Community Tech Tree. Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Q: The mod album shows parts that look old/don't exist. What's up with that? A: Keeping the gallery up to date is not super easy. I have it as an action item in the future but this takes time away from real modding. Q: Does this work well with KSPI-E? A: Talk to FreeThinker about this, he manages KSPI-E and its compatibility with NFT Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch Community Resource Pack Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (Github) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.12.x Near Future Electrical [1.2.3] Last Updated July 21, 2021 Ever wanted some futuristic energy generation that wasn't too... futuristic? I have you covered here. This pack contains: Nuclear Reactors: Turn Uranium into power! Attach nuclear reactors to your vessel and generate large amount of electricity. Ensure that you have enough cooling capacity with radiators for your reactors to work properly. Refuelling Parts: store extra uranium, reprocess it and extract it from Ore with containers and reprocessors. Capacitors: discharge for a burst of power! These parts can be charge up with normal generating capacity, and once activated will deliver a large amount of power to your ship's electricity banks. Very mass efficient! Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Does this work well with KSPI-E? A: Talk to FreeThinker about this, he manages KSPI-E and its compatibility with NFT. Q: The mod album shows parts that look old/don't exist. What's up with that? A: Keeping the gallery up to date is not super easy. I have it as an action item in the future but this takes time away from real modding. Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch Community Resource Pack Dynamic Battery Storage Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.12.x Near Future Solar [1.3.2] Last Updated July 21, 2021 This pack contains many concept solar panels to use on your ships and stations. There are many sizes ranging from small form-factor panels up to gigantic solar arrays. Additionally, some wraparaound solar panels are provided, for coolness. Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.11.x Near Future Construction [1.3.1] Last Updated December 26, 2020 This pack contains a good number of skeletal trusses and construction type parts for building those near-futurish ships you see in concept art. You'll enjoy: A 1.25m size class triangular truss set A 2.5m size class octagonal truss set A 3.75m size class square truss set A 5m size class annular truss set Adapters and connectors galore! Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Q: The mod album shows parts that look old/don't exist. What's up with that? A: Keeping the gallery up to date is not super easy. I have it as an action item in the future but this takes time away from real modding. Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.12.x Near Future Spacecraft [1.4.3] Last Updated August 26, 2021 This pack contains a variety of parts for making crewed spacecraft. This means command pods. Pretty much just command pods, but also monopropellant engines in many sizes! Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Q: What is up with the RPM IVAs? A: Some exist but now require the ASET props pack to work. They only function for the older (Mk4-1, Mk3-9, PPD-1) pods. Q: The mod album shows parts that look old/don't exist. What's up with that? A: Keeping the gallery up to date is not super easy. I have it as an action item in the future but this takes time away from real modding. Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch Near Future Props Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.12.x Near Future Launch Vehicles [2.2.0] Last Updated July 21, 2021 The latest and greatest (for size, perhaps) in launch vehicle components. This pack includes 5.0m Parts: a balanced and extensive part set that provides a new size of rocket parts. Comes with tanks, adapters, utility parts and specialized components for engine clustering. 7.5m Parts: an extra-large set of rocket parts for those huge constructions. Includes adapters, clustering, cargo and utility parts. Advanced Engines: several new rocket engines based on a whole set of concepts in the 0.625 to 3.75m sizes. Support Parts: new supporting parts that help enhance the large rocket experience, like heavy RCS thrusters. Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch DeployableEngines Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.12.x Near Future eXploration [1.1.2] Last Updated July 21, 2021 This pack contains a set of parts to help enhance and improve the KSP probe experience, particularly in the later game with larger probes. You will find: More Probe Cores: A set of eight new probe cores in medium (1.25m) and larger (1.875m) sizes. Probe Bus Parts: Cargo bay-like parts that match the footprints of most probe cores (stock and NFX). Useful for storing batteries, fuel and the like Probe Fuel Tanks: New multi-fuel probe tanks in stack and radial sizes that are in the vein of the stock Dumpling and Baguette More Direct and Relay Antennae: More antennae that seamlessly fit into the KSP CommNet system to fill in missing ranges and add more interesting options. Reflector Antennae: A new type of antenna that does nothing on its own, but instead bounces signal from another antenna to amplify its range. Point antenna at a deployed reflector to recieve the bonus. Available in many sizes. Small Probe Parts: A few small probe parts (battery, reaction wheel) to fill out the probe range Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Q: I'm using Remote Tech and something doesn't work! A: This mod is not compatible with RemoteTech. Some aspects may work but the reflector/feeder system would need to be reimplemented by the RT devs. Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (Github) Issue Tracking and Source KSP 1.12.x Near Future Aeronautics [2.1.1] Last Updated July 21, 2021 This pack contains large and powerful aerospace parts, such as jet engines, intakes, and nacelles. It was preciously part of the MkIV Spaceplane system but has been split off. Large Multimode Engines: Big (2.5m), powerful RAPIER-like engines for your wildest spaceplane needs. Large Jet Engines: Hefty 2.5m engines - turbofans and turbojets for big aircraft. Advanced Propeller Engines: Super-efficient low speed propfans and turboprops. Lift Fans: Designed specifically for efficient VTOL and available in many sizes, these engines can run on LiquidFuel and air, or be driven electrically for flight in oxygenless atmospheres. Nuclear Jet Engines: Massive, rewarding engines that let you fly almost forever! Large Nacelles and Intakes: Of course, 2.5m nacelles, engine pods, precoolers and advanced intakes to help out. Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: CKAN Support Questions? A: Talk to CKAN folks, CKAN is not supported. This is because KerbalActuators, a dependency of this mod, is specifically NOT listed on CKAN. Q: Will you add a part I want? A: I have defined this mod as feature complete, and bugfixes are all I plan to add. Q: I don't like the balance of *thisPart* A: I appreciate suggestions from experience aeronauts for engine balance, it's not really my specialty (Sith lords are). Dependencies (Required and Bundled) Module Manager B9 Part Switch Community Resource Pack KerbalActuators DeployableEngines Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source Special Thanks A big hand to @Streetwind , who basically designed the balance for the whole NFT suite. If you appreciate this project, please consider contributing to my caffeine addiction! I really appreciate it, and also helps justify this time sink to my wife , which results directly in more models.

Ever since the news dropped, things here in the forum have been rather depressing. Negative, questioning what is happening, attacks on other forum members. Things have taken a turn for the worse, and it makes me sad. We were hungry for KSP2, and in spite of its problems, we played it. Fired it up, dealt with bugs, went on missions. Some people are still playing it, and are still creating oddities. @ShadowZone released a video recently where he flung the four OG Kerbals into the farthest recesses of space. spacetime development might be dead, some people are still playing and getting enjoyment. With that said, I'd like to try something new here. I'd like to have a thread where people talk about things in the game that made them feel happy or good about it. Was it some mission you flew? Or perhaps a discoverable you, um, discovered? Something the game has that you didn't realize before that made you think " all righty then!"? I will start. I've got more than 1000 hours in KSP1, but I had never flown to Jool before. I've been to all the other planets, and landed on all of them. Notice I said landed; I still have not gotten back off Eve. But in KSP2, thanks to For Science!, I flew to and landed on Pol, Bop, and Tylo. I was able to return from both Pol and Bop, while leaving a rover on Tylo. Landing that rover on Tylo was the single biggest achievement in my KSP playing time. I'd like to ask that anyone who responds here to please only talk about things in KSP2 that you either never did in KSP1, or that made you feel good about the game. Nothing negative! We have a ton of those threads already; I do not want this thread to get locked because it dives into what is wrong or that TT is evil. Positivity only!

While I was walking through the National Museum of the United States Air Force last Saturday, I was reminded of all the KSP replicas of those same aircraft. Some of them looked like they can be done with pure stock parts and no DLCs, while others (mostly the older ones) need mods that come with more parts. So, I started this thread for everyone to showcase their replicas of the aircraft that the four large hangars (plus the Missile Gallery) have on display. The guidelines for this showcase thread are simple: You are free to use any and all parts necessary, including ones that come in DLCs and mods. Vehicle has to be functional. Which means pictures/video of the craft in action. Similar performance stats are a plus. EXCEPTION: if the craft in question could not move on its own (as in it needed to be attached to a larger assembly to go anywhere) then the functionality requirement may be waived. e.g. the Apollo 15 command module. You'll only need one picture of your best replica (or half-assed; it shouldn't make a difference in that case), since it's useless unless attached to the rest of the spacecraft. If you want to make the rest of the rocket assembly, fine. Only the capsule made it to the museum, and that's what I need. Vehicle has to look as close as possible to whatever real-life craft you're trying to copy. Therefore, it is highly recommended that you have photographs to reference. Build something not yet claimed on the checklist (link below) first. EXCEPTION: for craft that appear more than once in the museum (such as the Superfortress and the Twin Mustang), you may only sign off on one of your craft's variants. Leave the rest of them for others to claim. e.g. I only do one Twin Mustang; the one in the Korean War section in Hangar 2. I'll leave it to someone else to get the other Twin Mustang in Hangar 3 and claim it on the log. If you want to show something that's already been showcased on this thread, fine - but you don't get credit for it. I don't care if you built the craft 7 minutes or 7 years ago, so long as it's yours. If you have an old stash of aircraft replicas that you're willing to showcase (and can work), great. Weaponry (e.g. guns, bombs, missiles) not necessary, although I won't object to them either. If the original aircraft was manned, so is your replica. If the original aircraft was unmanned, so is your replica. I won't object to a probe core for your manned aircraft if it doesn't deviate too much from the aesthetic, so long as you include the appropriate crew module/s. You don't need to match the passenger/crew capacity of your original aircraft, so long as your replica comes close to looking like its real-life counterpart AND it's functional. e.g. if you use one or more Mk. 3 Passenger Modules for an Air Force One variant, as long as your aircraft makes a convincing replica I don't mind you exceeding or falling behind its real-life counterpart's passenger capacity. Those things weren't designed for carrying a lot of people anyway; just provide comfort for the president and his staff. (SIDE NOTE) Whoever builds the Douglas VC-54C "Skymaster," I'm not requiring you to install an elevator in the back to load polio-stricken passengers in and out. If you do and the plane still flies smoothly, even better. The one housed in the museum was designed specifically to transport then-president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who needed a wheelchair. Craft files a plus. Below is the link for the replica checklist: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tA9IGsSCQIuTFjw9eNHYcgv8JboCxKiAy9ep5-nflR0/edit?usp=sharing Here are the instructions on how to use it: Pick an aircraft that has not already been built Like I said earlier, if you want to build something that's already been done here, don't steal credit from the original kerbalnaut. And for duplicates, you can only claim one of the type. Once you're done, write: Column D: Your KSP Forum name Column E: The link to the specific forum post showcasing your replica/s It is acceptable to put more than one craft in the same post. Just leave a link for everyone to find it. Column F: Whatever DLCs you used to make the replica If this doesn't apply to that specific craft, leave it blank Column G: Whatever (parts) mods you used to make the replica If this doesn't apply to that specific craft, leave it blank Column H: (IF YOU WANT TO) Additional notes that other readers may find interesting Please don't modify someone else's notes. If you want to debate/talk to someone about their craft, don't do it on the spreadsheet. Source for my list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_at_the_National_Museum_of_the_United_States_Air_Force Click here to see this thread's replicas assembled on KerbalX As a prize, if you make at least one replica from each of the four hangars (not counting the air park or missile silo since they're too small; specific hangar category (e.g. Early Years vs WWII, Experimental vs Space) doesn't matter), you'll earn this sweet badge: I made it myself. It's a representation of all four hangars by using a combination of the following four logos: U.S. Army Air Corps, whose planes dominate Hangar One. Classic U.S. Air Force, which became mainstream at the time period Hangar Two covers. Modern U.S. Air Force, which has a lot of planes in Hangar Three still in service. NASA, since the space gallery is in Hangar Four. Entries from the Missile Gallery can be used as "wild cards." They're ultra-rare, so get them while they last. Depending on what hangars you lack, it can be used as either a Hangar Three or Hangar Four entry. To make things fair for everyone, only one Missile Silo entry per person All Four Hangars Badge Recipients @Mars-Bound Hokie (Me, the OP) @swjr-swis I'll start us off with my favorite, the SR-71 Blackbird. The SR-71 Blackbird on display in the SPH Picture taken February 2020. Ted Kerman enjoying himself flying at high altitudes at a speed higher than the aircraft's real-life counterpart. There you have it, folks. Have fun, and I can't wait to see what you got. Build a plane from each of the four hangars, and you get the badge.

I know I've been in a particularly bone picking mood lately but I saw a Thunderf00t meme and long story short I watched his IFT-4 stream and wow. I knew he had some bad takes, but I assumed he was a couple steps above a conspiracy theorist. It is more like 1-1.5 steps above. Hopefully this will be the last sort of this post I'll be making for a while. I cannot stress this enough, do NOT take your space news or opinions from this channel. I saw someone posting his stuff earlier but as a summary so you know better: Opens stating that this is launch will blow up a billion dollars worth of taxpayer money Says they are burning 2 billion a year and will be bankrupt soon (Starlink revenue alone is over 4 billion a year from just normal users) Says the only technical challenge to solve with reusability is relighting engines and that the real problems are economic So many times he decries something impossible because they haven't reached a certain milestone yet. Decries SpaceX for delays, when delays in space are normal, Starship program isn't even abnormally delayed compared to other ambitious programs (SLS, Dragon, Starliner, JWST). Constant comparisons to different development programs, still in "must work first try" mode "SpaceX has not revolutionized spaceflight" although this does depend on your definition of revolutionize. "Everything SpaceX sells is at a loss" Holds promotional videos up to the standards of a full flight simulation Says the darkness in the engine trail isn't right (To my knowledge has been seen before) "Green flash, bad engine ignition" either camera artefact or the metal in the hot stage ring burning Confused by shutdown venting of engines Mistakes the jettison of the hot stage ring for reaction control thrusters (???) "Clearly the booster is not gonna make it, it is in an uncontrolled descent with not enough oxygen left to light up the engines" with no indication of control loss after a lecture of how inaccurate the fuel gauge can be in zero g "As a general rule I don't like gases escaping from my rocket" "Gases aren't supposed to be leaking out of a rocket" plenty of valid reasons for that, emptying main tanks for landing, RCS, engine purge "We're not gonna see inside the starship because it is a completely empty vessel" Yeah, and? Suggests use of AI for writing postgraduate theses (admittedly only for fluff/introductions) "The bright white flashing is the engines burning" Statements during re-entry: "We've lost attitude control" "And there goes the control" "It's gonna go pop in a second" "It's over" "Send in the clowns" "The feed will go blank in a second" "We've lost aerodynamic control" "It's gone" Thinks it is day during the landing "This is falling way too slow" during landing, insinuating that it is just a piece of debris, that's about how fast it fell on previous tests, actually faster because it is still decelerating Does not realize the ship conducted a landing burn, thinks it hit the ocean Thinks the illumination from the landing burn is the ship on fire Calls the cheering employees morons "This flight has shown that Starship is a complete non starter" "Starship has cost 15 billion in government funding" is only true if it actually cost that much and you assume every single government contract went directly to Starship dev, that's like saying my college education cost $15,000 in government funding because I drove buses for the city and used my wages to pay for school. In fairness, he does have some valid points: Validly debunks lack of orbital refueling on the published Dear Moon flight path (in defense was the possibly the optimistically massed carbon fiber version of Starship, possibly with an expended booster) Valid points about Cybertruck, Roadster V2, supersonic electric jet, hyperloop, and Tesla's business practices City on Mars is something to be skeptical of Launch pads should probably not be as close together as they are in the promotional video Does take it all back (talk about the booster failing) when the booster lands successfully There has been a tide change with respect to public opinion of Elon Gets physics of re-entry correct "The top stage doesn't work and it can't get anything to orbit" is a correct, if lacking context, statement (no payload door) "You can't do rapid iteration with billion dollar vessels" is a valid statement, but if the 30+ vehicles they have made actually did cost a billion they would be bankrupt. "meters per second is the appropriate unit for this" The one thing he said I wholeheartedly agree with. This man is living in another reality.

I've noticed a few people on this forum play Ace Combat games (like five lol) and I also noticed that you could make threads about specific games here. Seeing as there is no dedicated Ace Combat thread, I made this for Ace Combat players to talk about... well, Ace Combat and such. How do you do the campaign, what's your go-to fighter and special weapon, etc. Ace Combat is a series of games that take place in the alternate universe of Strangereal. Strangereal's Earth has different continents and countries. The player's character is a "silent protagonist" and is always a fighter pilot from one of the fictional countries. Common traits of Ace Combat and their campaign-based gameplay involve: a wide spread of aircraft and weapons, enemy ace pilots, and giant superweapons. Not to mention the excellent storytelling (usually), graphics and music. Also, fun fact: more players play KSP than Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown by monthly average from Steam, but roughly the same number of games have been sold for each. AC7 released five years later than KSP, however.

I already had plans to upgrade my graphics card. KSP2 did not add much to that because I knew the media event PCs were absolute beasts and even then they struggled. What did push me over the edge was the AMD+Starfield promo. I went for a 6750XT Qick Ultra. I was very happy about my purchase, as I got it for an amazing price before the economy hit a huge snag in my country. However... turns out the devs followed another bad practice: None of them had AMD gear to test the game on, and KSP2 was working really bad if it even worked on exactly the 6700 and 6800 series GPUs. Talk about stuff piling up.

Oh don't talk that way about yourself! I'm in exactly identical situation, my KSP modding experience is basically just a couple MM patches and reading the forum, learning it all as I make stuff.

Calling 911 to talk about the thing I can't talk about.

When I was at AMZN, there was one manager that a coworker and I used to talk about. My coworker once said of him, without one shred of irony, "that guy would stab his own mother in the back for $5." I completely agreed. Capitalism has been good to me, but man, it sets up some really toxic people to be in roles with power that they should never be able to wield.

Real Talk, there is already a mod that has the F-104 nose, inlets and wing... If I recall correctly (checking now will update the post when I find it or fail to) *** Best one I found... is the dropbox link on the OP here... So my memory was not great But it looks like full IVA if that helps

Yes, it could be possible that these assemptions are to maximaze safety, but we don't quite now. Maybe starship can survive with a little number of tiles missing, with internal damages and the need for refurbishement. But it could be possible that SpaceX itself don't know if the ship can survive to that without actual testing in real life, so who nows ? It's also possible that these safety margins for crewed flight to mars will be implemented later down the line, whith block 2 or 3. We will talk more about this subject Tomorrow, when we will have (HOPFULLY) an example to look to

And it is. But, unfortunately, it's on the job description: once you gag yourself on a NDA, you accept the risk. Been there, done that. My team The team which I belonged took the blame for a pretty stupid mistake made by an overseas team because we just couldn't talk about, and our colleagues (from the same Company, but different projects) assumed it was our fault because we refused to talk about. Sometimes, you just can't win. Indeed. But consider that it was his duty on that previous jobs. Literally, it was on his job description. To what extend this would affect our perception about his working ethics it's something we can debate about. Again, been there, done that. Fortunately I wasn't in a position in which I had to lie to 3rd parties - it was enough and sufficient to stay shut and let people conclude whatever they wanted. But, seriously, between the choice of lying or losing the job and get my cheeks ripped appart on a lawsuit that potentially would cost me my home, the choice would be obvious. It's pretty hard to rise a kid without a roof over their head, you know?

*Raises hand* I will first admit I wasn't right in all the things I said, but I was right in a considerable majority of the things I said. I could probably write an hours-long "I told you" post delineating every single thing I called that became reality, but it's always been wasted effort when people just handwave you away as a "toxic doomposter". During the "delay era", I was worried because the trailers had performance issues. During the "post covid" era, I was worried because they were showing barely asset mounts and no real gameplay of anything but rockets flying (they ended up having to stick a "not real gameplay" label on a lot of videos). During the "it'll come out as early access" era, I was worried because why would you remove everything from your game you already allegedly showed working?. Finally, after release, I knew it was mediocre garbage and looking at the sales numbers and reviews it was obviously gonna need a lot of work to be exceptionally good mediocre garbage. Then the work just never came, they were exceedingly sluggish. Some time after, the AMA series came out and I realized it wasn't even gonna be "maybe fun mediocre garbage". That's when I realize the game was creatively and technologically bankrupt. Every devblog talked about dumbing stuff down, every other devblog was just some dumb deflection instead of showing real work... "here's how we made an algorithm to draw a pretty circle" like dude, really? "here's some ms paint mockups of how we made the heating system less complex which somehow means it's better." They were not putting in the work or creativity. Plus it was around the time people started to discover massive foundational issues like save bloat, performance rot, and so on. They also teased that the solution to wobble was just gonna be autostrut again... Then the buildup for science started, whilst we still had an unreadable UI, heating wasn't still in almost a full year after launch, all they had added along the way were some engines and fins... They just couldn't get anything visible done. The FS! media event kinda looked good, until people here began analyzing it in detail. It was obvious there was no thought applied to the tech tree, and it was much more linear... dumbed down. Science itself was dumbed down to a single blinking light and all in one parts. For Science was probably when the meter changed from "I'm worried it's gonna be a really bad game" to "there'll be no game." The update just completed the vision of how slow, amateur, and incapable they were, and I'm now even vindicated in saying that since it's been revealed that they were indeed just hiring juniors. It also didn't really sell... only about a thousand new reviews popped up on Steam, some of those indicating refunds as well. That's when I became 100% sure the game wasn't making it if they didn't violently 180º. They didn't. They kept dripfeeding us meaningless "sneak peeks" of lazy all in one parts, they refused to talk about anything colonies, and they made a killer devblog about... how their game doesn't even have eclipses.

Last time I got problems on College, I had to drive half the campus to talk to different coordinators - each one on a different building, each building about 5 to 6 KM from the other. Send the emails and stop complaining - trust me on this one, you are good!

It's especially sad because if you have to say those things it usually means you haven't done any of them, so you have to convince people by telling them. That's why people use the phrase "Those who do, do. Those who can't, talk."

Hello guys, gals, and nonbinary pals! The purpose of this thread is to act as a place where we can brainstorm ideas for how we would want to see an eventual sequel to KSP be developed so that it can avoid the pitfalls the current KSP 2 fell into. That is to say, I want to try identifying what went wrong with KSP 2 development, and much more importantly, figure out a plan of attack for how a hypothetical future attempt to develop a KSP sequel could work. After all, there is an argument to be made that a lot of the issues that occurred with the KSP 2 development were from the people in charge not understanding the community and what it actually wanted, so by getting together as a community and brainstorming all of this now, if someone does try making a KSP sequel in the future they’ll already have this as a good jumping-off point for what they should do to make us happy. So, without further ado, to start us off with here are my thoughts: Based on the recent digging by ShadowZone along with trawling acorss the various threads on these fourms, I think it’s fair to say that KSP 2 failed for the following primary reasons, in rough decreasing order of importance; 1 - Company upper leadership not understanding how game design works, leading to such problems as a refusal to commit to changing engines or refactoring code despite the scope of the project requiring it 2 - An overcomittance to secrecy causing years of work being wasted on reverse-engineering KSP 1 code rather than just asking the KSP 1 devs, among other associated problems 3 - Improper management resulting in massive efficacy losses (e.g. developers being moved around constantly and not being given time to settle) 4 - An unwillingness to pay developers respectable amounts 5 - A lack of interest in community input resulting in prioritization of the wrong things When designing a KSP sequel, there are basically two options. The first is to use the unity engine, reuse much of the KSP 1 code, and essentially aim to run a short, cheap project that delivers a highly polished version of KSP 1 with a bunch of the best mods being incorporated into the stock game. This is, to put it mildly, a bad idea, given that the KSP 1 engine and code is almost completely incapable of properly handling that, as anyone who has played heavily modded KSP 1 will know. Implementing anything like interstellar, colonies, and especially multiplayer, would require so much work to update the existing code and systems, and work around the limitations of unity, that it would be cheaper and faster to go with option 2. Speaking of which, the second option is to start from scratch in a new engine, and develop a game that is a true successor to KSP 1 rather than a polished version. I think this is the objectively correct course of action to take, however it seems the upper leadership for KSP 2 disagreed. The original plan as I understand it was to do option 1, delivering a better version of KSP one with some mods made stock, using the same engine and code. However, scope creep then very rapidly increased the goals to include interstellar, colonies, and probably the thing that killed it; multiplayer. This would require a new engine and refactored code to work, but the upper leadership was made up of business executives that had never coded a game in their life and who decided to explicitly make that not an option. Thus, the KSP 2 team was forced to develop a game of impossible scale using old, outdated code, and a bad engine, and to make it worse, while they were handed all of the KSP 1 code to work from, they were not allowed to talk to the original KSP 1 devs. That decision alone probably cost them a year or more of development time. With all that out of the way, if a development project for KSP 3 was announced tomorrow (or if KSP 2 was restarted from scratch), and I was somehow placed in charge of setting the development goals and pacing, here’s what I’d do. Firstly, start from scratch in a new engine, probably Unreal. As far as I’m aware the only good alternative to this would be building a custom engine, but from how I understand it the development costs and amount of time required would be incredibly prohibitive, so Unreal it is. Secondly, don’t have any secrecy. Have all of the developers talking with the public, be very transparent about what people are working on, and what the roadmap is, and be prepared to listen to community feedback and change accordingly. Release to EA as early as physically possible, and while we would probably have to charge full price for it, make it exceedingly clear (and in legal writing) that if we don’t fulfill our roadmap goals within a certain amount of time we’ll refund all the copies sold regardless of playtime. Also set realistic goals, and prioritize getting code and core system mechanics working first, then optimisation, and only then user experience and graphics. Of course in reality all of these would have to be developed in parallel, but I would want there to be a heavy emphasis on leaving anything that's purely visual/graphical for as late as possible (though obviously you still have to develop your systems so the visual stuff is fully integrated when the time comes and isn’t just duct-taped on top like most KSP 1 graphics mods are). Design the game's code and systems from the start for modability. I’m not sure if we could do something quite as far as what, say, Hades and Hades 2 do, where literally all of the game's code is unencrypted and open for anyone to see and edit, but if that’s possible it would be great (I’m not aware of actual downsides to doing this, it’s just that there’s so much cultural momentum in the industry against it that it would be hard to the leadership to allow it even if it would make the game way better for no extra cost). Pay the developers properly, and don’t put people in management positions who don’t have the experience required to fulfill that role properly. In fact, if possible a worker-led development program, such as one done in a cooperative or other worker-led company, would be ideal. All empirical data collected to date indicates that worker-led companies are multiple times less likely to fail, are more stable, produce higher-quality products, have way better working conditions, and the workers enjoy their jobs orders of magnitudes more. Interestingly, the people in worker-led companies usually vote to reduce wages rather than lay people off in times of hardship, which is usually the right move because losing talent is really bad. The only downside is that the per-unit cost of their products is usually higher because they pay their workers more, so even if they never go out of business, they have trouble climbing up the ranks in the market as it were. Still, for developing a game like this a high amount of workplace democracy would seem to be key. Oh, and don’t implement multiplayer. From what I’ve seen, everyone on here who’s familiar with game design seems to agree that it’s a massive undertaking that would take an insane amount of effort to pull off even when starting from scratch, and it’s not super clear to me if the demand is even remotely high enough to justify that. I would love to hear all of your thoughts on that though. So, with all that being said, here’s a rough roadmap of what I would expect from release onwards. Of course, I’m not a software engineer, so I may be overly optimistic or pessimistic here. Also, keep in mind that while I lay it out in just a couple of major updates, I think in reality it would be better to do this with a much larger number of individually smaller updates, but I don't have the patience to write all of that out, sorry about that. Oh, and I would love to hear all your thoughts on the order I've put all of this in, especially the career mode release, since I'm not certian myself if it's the best. Initial full release (1.0) - Recoded from scratch in Unreal engine, utilizing 100% new code, and heavily optimized. - Graphics on par with KSP1, but using all-new systems and with allowances in place for them to be properly improved in the future without it just being a series of patchworks and band-aid fixes like it is in KSP1. - All new parts, most redesigned from the ground up to be more internally consistent and fill gaps, and with most stock KSP1 parts represented out of the box. - Complete UI revamp across the entire game to improve user experience as much as possible, including a redesigned parts window and filters in the VAB so that when thousands of parts are added in the future finding and sorting them doesn't become a pain. - New resources and resource systems, including new ISRU systems, for a more detailed and realistic experience while still being streamlined and easy to understand. - Systems in place to allow for easy integration of robotics parts and kerbal-deployable parts in the future, maybe with some limited number of them already implemented. - Very basic science mode implemented, but no career mode yet. First major update (1.1) - Graphics improvements. - More parts, think stuff from stockalike station expansion, planetside, the near future mods, etc, along with all the KSP1 DLCs and some of the stuff they planned for KSP2 (Orion etc). - Basic life support system, with 5-6 new resources, as well as simple crew habitable volume requirements, all togglable in options. - Interiors properly modeled and visible through windows, and going on EVA fully animated with the hatch opening and everything. - Kerbals now only carry small SAFER-style jetpacks in their inventory, and go on EVA by default using by fully modeled tethers and climb along the outside of vessels using a completely new set of climbing mechanics. MMUs are separate parts like command chairs that they can get in to fly around properly. Second major update (1.2) - More graphics improvements (now up to the standard of heavily modded KSP1). - More parts, mainly focusing on high-tech stuff. - Other star systems and interstellar gameplay mechanics. - More structures on Kerbin, including entire cities, along with new launch sites. Third major update (1.3) - More graphics improvements. - More parts. - Career mode, completely overhauled to use a better progression system that feels more like an actual space agency, with programs instead of contracts, and part unlocking based both on science collection and the programs you’re running. - Colony system similar to what was planned for KSP2. - FreeIVA polished and implemented into stock, maybe with VR support. Real History DLC - Basically Bluedog Design Bureau, Tantares, SOCK, KNES, and every other stockalike historical parts mod you can think of, but all put on several metric tonnes of steroids. - Virtually every spacecraft ever conceptualized or designed, let alone actually flown, in the history of the human race, all meticulously modeled to 99% accuracy (more accurate than BDB for example), while maintaining a stockalike style (though they would all be fully in scale to each other, not shifted to conform with KSP's 2.5m, 3.75m, etc diameters). - Plus all the launch stands and pads to go along with them. - And a revamped VAB parts list system to allow for you to actually navigate all that. - Would probably require a significant team of 3d modelers working around the clock for years to complete, hence why it’s a paid DLC. - Full compatibility with the RO DLC mentioned next if you have it installed. Realism Overhaul DLC - Pretty much RSS/RO, but with the polish one would expect if it was properly integrated into the game itself, and even more attention to detail and features, for example: - Procedural crewed pods and modules, with editable interior layouts and systems. - Procedural engines on top of a selection of most real ones. - Procedural tanks, with the internal bulkhead arrangements and all that being customizable. - Human rather than kerbal astronaut models (togglable if you don’t want that). - Improved structural simulation system, with internal part stresses properly modeled, so the weight of your tankage and structure now actually depends on what it’s supporting and how many gees it’s expected to endure, etc. - An aerodynamic simulation system that could make FAR blush, plus a thermodynamic simulation system to match (togglable). - Principia-level n-body physics (togglable). - The option to play in either RSS (plus real nearby star systems) or 10x stock. From what I can tell KSP 1 got developed to 1.0 in around 4 years, by about 12 people, and KSP 2 went from having all work on it restart to 0.2 in a little over 3 years with a team of 70 people, while also dealing with massive management inefficiencies and trying to work systems into the KSP engine and code that would be faster to just do from scratch. Therefore, I would optimistically estimate that we could probably get from development go-ahead to 1.0 on my roadmap here in about 3 years, assuming a development team of 70 people like KSP 2 and it’s properly managed and well-funded. From how I understand it the fully burdened cost (e.g. the entire cost the company pays, not just their salary alone) of a software development employee for this sort of role is typically about 200k per year, and the KSP 2 team had it capped at 150k by upper leadership that led to severe issues. For some margin of error, let’s say 250k then. That means, for 70 people for 3 years, the total dev cost to 1.0 will be about 52.5 million dollars. To get to 1.3 and then the DLCs is harder to estimate for me, but let’s assume 5 years, so 8 years total. That means the total dev cost from development go-ahead to DLC#2 will be 140 million dollars. KSP 1 has around 100,000 reviews on Steam. On average, games on Steam have 63 sales per review, and though this can be lower, it increases the older a game is so it’s probably actually higher. In any case, going by those figures that means KSP 1 sold 6.3 million copies. The price of it changed a bit over time, but was usually around 40-50 dollars. That means we have an existing playerbase of 6.3 million players to attract, not counting new players. If we price KSP 2 at 50 dollars, and only half of them transition over to KSP 2, that’s 157.5 million dollars. If the two DLCs each sell for 10 dollars and attract a total of 0.5 million players, that’s another 5 million dollars for a total of 162.5 million. That gives us a total profit margin of 22.5 million dollars, which is very tight, but might be just about doable. Keep in mind, that was assuming 70 people and a total dev time of 8 years. Given the DLCs are unlikely to be very profitable relative to the cost of making them, if we delete those and scale down to, say, 3 years to 1.0 and 2 years to 1.3, so 5 in total, and redo all the math, accounting for no sales from the DLCs, we get a total dev cost of 87. 5 million and a profit of 70 million dollars, which is much more workable. So, does anyone have any thoughts on these ideas? Am I being completely nonsensical and not understanding how game design works? I would love to hear some input on all that, and also if you have completely different ideas on how to go about redeveloping KSP 2 I would love to hear them as well! There was after all also that recent tweet after all from Jundroo, the Juno New Origins devs, about potentially getting some of the KSP devs onboard and reworking Juno into essentially a KSP sequel, I would love to talk about that but unfortunately I just don’t have the knowledge about Juno to be able to comment, especially given I’ve never played it or followed it’s development, but I'd be happy to hear others discuss it. EDIT: Okay, so, I wrote that post pretty late last night, and I’ve now had the chance to think about some stuff, and I want to expand a bit on my thoughts. Firstly, timescales. I’ve gone crawling across the forums once again for some more information, and I realized I misremembered some of the stuff relating to KSP 2’s development, specifically they didn’t restart development in 2020 but kept on using the old work they had, but started refactoring it. However, given the way people talk about how this decision cost them time, I think it’s fair to assume they could have restarted from scratch code-wise and still gotten to the point they did, or even further perhaps, in 3 years with their team of 70 people, so my estimates still seem reasonable. Also, apparently the KSP 2 devs were really close to having colonies and interstellar in the game for the initial EA release, and the fact they’re still not out even now was mostly due to them getting tied down fixing things and optimizing and whatnot, along with a lot of mismanagement. So it’s possible we could aim to have those in the base game for the initial release of this hypothetical reboot, though I still think it would be a better idea to build the game’s code ready to accept that, but not actually include it until a future update. Also, I must have been really tired yesterday because it seems I missed this, but there are actually already a couple of threads on here talking about pretty much exactly this. Sorry about that, if the mods deem that this one is redundant and close it I fully understand. Now, the key question. What do people actually want from a KSP game? There’s been some talk of a colony-designer game where you start out with something akin to cities skylines or something like that, and then start launching rockets later. I don’t agree with this idea personally, while I do like the idea of something city-builder style for the colonies I think that should be a late-game thing. However, one thing I am thinking about would be for the KSC upgrade system in career to be replaced with a city-builder style system where you get to actually build the KSC. So you start out with just, I don’t know, a small airfield and tiny pad for sounding rockets, and you get to, using a cities-skylines style system and interface perhaps, redesign and expand it over time until eventually you have an entire space center. Of course, unless you just want to be placing down upgraded versions of the same 8 buildings over and over, we would have to find new buildings to add and things for them to do. Maybe have it so that placing multiple launch pads could have an actual benefit, such as introducing a system like kerbal construction time where refurbishing pads take time? You could have that be togglable in settings as well - I know adding togglable stuff like that massively increases development costs but for stuff like construction time etc it doesn't seem like it would be a massive issue compared to some other ideas. And maybe we should make the players put a lot of thought into how they lay out their space center, with the way buildings are connected to each other and the distances involved all being important. For example, make your crawlerways too long, and it takes a while for the rockets to get to the pads. Make them too short, and if a rocket explodes not only does your pad get destroyed but your VAB might as well. While we’re talking about this, I may as well brainstorm other ideas for career mode as well. Instead of contracts, maybe we could have programs, which each contain several goals and milestones, and give you research benefits. And instead of like it is in KSP 1, we could lay the programs out on a tree. Selecting a program to do could give you research benefits to the parts that would be involved with it, like a lunar landing program reducing the unlock cost of the LM-style lander pod. And to stop the game from becoming linear, we could make it so that you can skip further down the tree and initiate a later program if you want to without doing the ones leading into it, but that would incur penalties like lower rewards or less research benefits. And we could make it so that if you landed on the moon without ever actually selecting the lunar landing program, it would autocomplete it but not give you any rewards for doing so. I think a good way of doing this would be for each program to have a set end goal, or maybe multiple, and also have several milestones along the way. For example, if you take the lunar landing program, it will give you individual missions for a crewed lunar flyby, orbital mission, and the landing, each with their own rewards and research benefits, on top of the rewards and benefits from the overall program, which could be set so that the more of the individual missions you complete in a program the higher the total bonus reward you get will be from the entire program itself when you complete it. I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts on this though, given I’m pretty much just spitballing here. I’m also not sure if this would completely replace the contract system, or if we should still have some conventional one-off contracts as well to supplement it. In any case, to round all of this off, I think there should be three main difficulty settings for career mode. In easy mode, the city-builder elements of the KSC are disabled, and it just expands automatically over time or maybe it starts out really big. The core gameplay loop here would be similar to KSP 1. There would also be no life support, no commnet, and no construction time. On regular default difficulty, life support and commnet is enabled, as are the city-builder elements for the KSC, but construction time is still turned off. On hard difficulty, not only is construction time turned on, but life support now takes into account not just the resources you have, but also how much livable space there is, and also radiation becomes a factor. When starting a new game, after picking career mode large buttons would appear for these three difficulties, with description below them fully explaining all of this to avoid confusion, and of course there would still be the option to go into the advanced settings and mix and match all of this. Next, changes outside the space center part of the game. Going over to spacedock and looking at the most popular mods can give us an idea of what the community seems to want most, and so let’s go over that real quick. Firstly, visual improvements. Given we’re switching to a new engine and rewriting everything from scratch, building these into the base game to a level that even surpasses KSP 1 should be possible. I would prioritize getting the underlying systems needed for the visuals to work done first, and then actually adding all the visual stuff later though. Next, stockalike parts mods, especially the near future series along with some others. Adding a much larger selection of parts in a stockalike style should be possible, hell it’s probably one of the easiest parts of the entire development process, though if we’re redoing everything from scratch I think we should take the opportunity to completely redo the stock parts as well rather than just copy them. However, after doing some thinking I do believe the stock 1.25m, 2.5m, etc scales should stay, but with additions like 0.9375m, 1.5m, 2.1875m, 3.125m, 4.25m, and 6m, along with maybe even larger scales than that. We would need a new parts sorting system to deal with all that without it getting confusing, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near impossible to come up with one that would still be easy to use and beginner-friendly. I considered upscaling everything by 1.5 to 2 to be more or less actual scale (in terms of the spacecraft), but I think part of the kerbal charm as it were is that they’re slighter smaller than humans are. This decision may come back to bite us later with RO/RSS DLCs and mods though. Oh, and more spaceplane parts sizes would be nice, right now we just really have three. If we’re really clever with how we choose them and model the adapter pieces for them, we could even allow people to make unusually shaped vehicles like an X-33 by stacking various adapter pieces in front of each other. After that, we have interstellar extended, which again should be easy to implement compared to everything else. There are also a lot of quality-of-life things, better burn time and docking port alignment indicator for example, which again should be relatively easy. Kerbal attachment system, kerbal inventory system, and ground construction as well, we’re already close to that with the braking ground stuff anyway for the former and the latter would come with colonies. You have to keep going a while before finding any planet mods, even kerbalism seems to come before that, but nonetheless I think an overhaul and expansion to the stock kerbal system, along with more star systems for interstellar, would be nice. Actual asteroid belts, way more asteroids and comets, rings that have actual particles in them, all sound like amazing ideas if they could be properly implemented. Another gas giant as a Saturn analoge, and an ice giant or two, would also be really nice, and completely revamping all of their moons to be more realistic would be awesome. Jupiter has almost a hundred moons and thousands of smaller objects orbiting it, and Saturn has even more. Most of them would be very small, but even then, it would add a lot of interest to those systems I think, and I can’t imagine it would be hard to implement compared to all the other stuff we’re talking about. It would also be nice to see some more interesting features on the planetary bodies themselves, especially ones that require specially designed equipment, and effort and skill, to get to, like deep ravines that require kerbals to bring climbing equipment or winches to get to the bottom of. Also, stuff like FreeIVA and through the eyes of a kerbal are really cool, and it would be neat if we could get those fully implemented at some point, maybe even with VR support, though for all I know that might be as difficult as multiplayer would be. But in any case, fully modeling the interiors of spacecraft and having them be visible through windows also seems like an awesome idea, and since KSP 2 did it it probably is possible, though we might want it to be togglable for low-end computers. Also, I really like the idea of having kerbals go on EVA properly, by getting in an airlock, depressurizing it, and opening the hatch to step outside, all fully animated. We could have it so that kerbals can’t just exit from any random hatch, thus making having actual airlocks important on larger ships. Some smaller pods, Apollo-style ones for example, obviously could just have the entire thing depressurize as they did IRL. And once on EVA, it would be cool if we could have fully modeled tethers, and redo the climbing system from scratch so the kerbals have to clamber across the sides of the spacecraft until you unlock EVA jetpacks. I’m not sure whether the EVA packs should be modeled like they are in stock, or if they should be large, clunky things that have to be stored externally and entered like an external command seat, like the real ones are, I’d love to hear your thoughts on that. Of course, we could still give the kerbals smaller and less powerful SAFER-like packs that they can carry on them. Alright, that’s about all I can think of for now. I’m sure I’ll come up with more ideas in the future, and I might keep on posting them, but for now I’d love to hear some feedback on all this. I’m trying to figure out what the community wants most from a KSP sequel, not just what I do personally, so it’s important I don’t just ramble on about my own thoughts unchecked.

Honestly, having built forums multiple times over, this is not an easy thing to do. There's so much to talk about like picking the forum software, any sort of hosting or domain names, rules, moderation guidelines, etc. The kind of community we'd want to build making sure it's a safe enough environment for everyone that loves KSP, as well as worrying about any possible legal takedown action from the IP holders whoever they are. I'd be up for it, and I'd support and offer my hand in building it, but I don't know what sort of hunger there is really for the community. Also, as already stated, there's a lot of history here in this place. Including my first posts as Community Manager that I sometimes look back on to remember the good times. All the mod threads, the WIP mod threads, all the vessel sharing, missions, stories, et all. There's just, way to much here and we don't and will never get access to the database to mirror it or save any of it. As the others have suggested, I think the best course of action is a new dedicated KSP fan ran community discord server. That also, is something I have a great deal of experience in building and running and managing, but it's also a lot of work to really set one up well.

Hey there. Thanks for the wonderful mod, amazing to hear you're still working on it! Just going to talk about a problem I encountered with Parallax version 2.0.6 where I would get crashing/freezing/out of memory issues during load screens, and what someone can do to resolve it. From the sounds of it, the upcoming version of Parallax may not have this problem, but I thought I'd post a little write-up anyway in case it helps anyone else using 2.0.6. My system: Intel i5-13600K / 32GB memory / Radeon RX 6600 XT 8GB / Ubuntu 22.04 I had been playing with a fairly hefty mod load for a while and thought everything was fine because framerates were good and "top" never showed KSP going over about 10GB memory usage. However, after a while of playing on that save, I started getting issues where my whole system would lock up during load screens and I would have to restart the computer. This was very confusing to diagnose, as I could see my system memory disappearing somewhere but it wasn't going to KSP. It also hardly seemed to matter how many mods I removed from my mod list With the help of the "radeontop" utility I finally figured out what was happening. Essentially, with Parallax installed, VRAM usage was spiking massively during load screens. It was maxing out my card's 8GB of VRAM in a few seconds, then maxing out the GTT memory as well. I'm not an expert, but from what I understand GTT is part of system memory and can be used as overflow for VRAM. By default GTT was set to 0.5 x RAM = 16GB. Once that filled up, the system was getting low on total memory and started paging things out. Obviously that's terrible for graphics performance, and resulted in everything locking up. No idea if it's an AMD-only issue or a Linux-only issue or both. All I can say is it happens during load screens. After scene transition is done, VRAM usage drops down to a very sensible 25-50% (Without Parallax installed, VRAM hovers around 70-80% at all times and doesn't change during load screens) So, if you're reading this and have the same problem, what can you do? Here are the options I figured out - Stop using Parallax 2.0.6 and wait patiently for the update... Reduce your system's GTT allocation. I don't know how to do this or if it's a good idea. Didn't try it myself. Close all other apps that may be using a lot of RAM (looking at you Chrome!) Reduce your mod count so KSP uses less memory, leaving more room for GTT. Not a good solution for me, as I wanted to have more than just the stock planets. Set 1/2 resolution textures in your graphics options. This is actually a pretty good solution... cuts VRAM usage by a lot, doesn't look as bad as you would think. Worth trying. Upgrade your graphics card to one that has more VRAM. No guarantees it won't also get completely filled up. Buy more RAM. Personally I was looking for an excuse to upgrade my system to 64GB anyway, so this is what I did. Now the GTT fills up to a whopping 32GB but there's so much room left over, nothing bad happens. I guess that's a win? Worth noting that even if you don't actually run out of memory, this weird VRAM behaviour does seems to slow down load screens by a lot. Anyway, thanks once again @Gameslinx for the awesome mod, and I'm very happy I can keep using it even if I did just end up throwing more RAM at the problem! And on the off chance any of what I wrote above is new information for you, I hope it's useful for your dev work.

At the risk of sounding condescending, accusatory or offensive (I'm not trying to, sorry in advance), and not knowing how much you can talk about... You mentioned Shana was still hired and working when you joined, pointing to you joining prior to September 2022 where she says (on linkedin) that she left Intercept (something we never discussed in this forum as it was never mentioned IIRC). This means you saw the Design Director leave. Who else did you see? Didn't those consistent layoffs and/or people just walking not set off any alarm?

This is an entire speculative timeline of KSP2 development based on Investigative Journalism done by ShadowZone, extracted from this video. A thank you goes out to @ShadowZone for doing thorough research on KSP2’s development, while remaining neutral and preserving integrity in the reporting of his finding. Recurring names and important concepts or events are in bold. Abbreviations are noted between brackets in (cursive) next to full names. Problematic events are denoted with !. All markings are applied by me and represent my own personal opinion. A PDF version of this summary is available at the bottom of this page, for easier reading. Pre-production, 2017 – 2018 (Star Theory) Take Two (T2) chooses Uber Entertainment, Later renamed Star Theory (ST), to develop Kerbal Space Program 2 (KSP2) T2 allocates 2 years and 10 million $ to ST to develop KSP2 This was supposedly seen as doable by the Studio Manager Jeremy Able)and ST Owners Bob Berry & Jonathan Mavor (referred to as ‘ST Management’ from hereon) ST Management’s plan at this time was to do a Revision of KSP1, meaning; take the original code, polish it up to modern standards, add new graphics and content and sell it as new version The creative direction, Nate Simpson, has a broader vision: a Reimagining rather than the Revision planned by ST management This would have included Interstellar and Colonies. Nate was a long-standing fan of KSP at this point Nate Simpson is able to convince T2 to approve his Reimagining ! Despite this, the timeline and budget already allocated by T2 would not be sufficient for the studio to pull of this Reimagining This is regarded as the start of a cascade of problems for KSP2 development At this time, the only engineer on the project is Principal Engineer Chuck Noble, an experienced software engineer with a degree in aerospace, aeronautical and astronautical engineering ! T2 keeps development of KSP2 highly secretive This forces ST team members to do recruiting and hiring in addition to their normal duties, hindering development ST team members are not allowed to tell potential hires what game or even what type of game they will be working on ! Due to budgetary constraints, only a few junior engineers with little to no experience are hired (senior engineers are brought onboard eventually, but much later on) All but one of these engineers had never played KSP1 before ! The junior engineers were considering building KSP2 on Unreal Engine instead of Unity, but were ordered by ST management to stick to the original code and engine (Unity) used by KSP1 As a result of this, some early prototype builds of KSP2 were done on KSP1’s user interface and graphics Early Production, 2018-2019 (Star Theory) Scope Change: Colonies, Interstellar and Multiplayer now considered “must-deliver features” ! Spring 2020 release date is communicated to the development team, and is considered Non-Negotiable This causes stress within development team, which possibly contributed to some wrong and hastily made decisions ! The decision to cram all these features into KSP1’s code, as ordered by ST management, ends up costing the engineers a lot of time People working on the project during this time estimate this resulted in around one year of wasted development time, compared to if they had been allowed to rewrite the code Multiplayer especially turns out to be incompatible with this framework ! Contact with Squad, the developers of KSP1, is prohibited (possibly by Squad upper management) This leads to nobody being available to guide the KSP2 engineers through the KSP1 code they were ordered to work with, forcing them to work in the dark and figure it out themselves The KSP2 engineers at ST would have loved to talk with the engineers at Squad, but they fear for their jobs being terminated by T2 should they do so ! This fear turns out to be warranted: a developer from ST is let go after answering a community question AFTER the game was announced, with T2 claiming it was an “unlawful disclosure” and that “communication to the public was not star Theory's decision, but the Publishers” Ultimately, the two previous points prove insurmountable and the engineers realize a significant Refactor of the code is needed to support Nate’s Reimagining ! This decision does not go down well with ST management, who do not understand the reasons behind it From this point onward, it is assumed new code is being written from scratch T2 continues to give ST pass after pass in Milestone meetings, despite people familiar with these meetings believing they should not have passed ! The most likely reason for this is that ST management had convinced T2 that they were sitting on a potential goldmine, claiming they were working on a ‘cultural successor to Minecraft’ These claims drive T2 to see Kerbals as their version of ‘Minions’ (A.N. The yellow creatures from the ‘despicable me’ movies), even planning a collaboration with a toy manufacturer Nate Simpson tries to appease both T2 and the existing KSP community by aiming to have the game be more accessible to a new audience and expand its player base, while also sticking to the core mechanics of KSP1 ! ST Management meekly goes along with the secrecy ordered by T2; one of the reasons for this being the aim to keep people familiar with KSP1 away from ‘interfering’ in the sequel They explicitly did not want KSP1 Veteran and well-known Youtuber Scott Manley to have any input in development Another reason for staying silent was that Uber Entertainment (now ST) had a bad reputation for previous games ! T2’s reasoning for keeping the project silent so long was apparently driven by a desire to avoid conflict with the community until it was too late At this point, due to the complete lack of outsider input, Creative Director Nate Simpson is basically the only person making gameplay decisions espite developing his first game at the age of 13, Nate is not an engineer; he instead has a bachelors degree in Arts (people working on the game describe him as a ‘very visual person’) ! This in turn caused a lot of focus to be placed on the visuals of the game, sometimes resulting in fundamental design and gameplay decisions to take the back seat Nate sometimes had a tendency to micromanage (something he admitted to in an interview) single elements of the game; one of which was wobbly rockets. Even before the Refactoring of the code, it was discovered the original KSP1 code could support significantly reduced wobble while also maintaining the option for joints to break under high stress ! Nate however was convinced that the difficulty from wobble and breaking joints was necessary for a fun game and made executive decision to keep them in the game Despite these flaws, Nate is considered by everyone spoken to by ShadowZone (SZ), be it someone who worked on the project or other content creators who interacted with him, to be a KSP Superfan with nothing but the community’s best interests at heart in his decision-making. The occasional disagreements between him and the engineers are attributed by the latter to Nate’s inexperience with aerospace, not to any form of malice. ! This inexperience, combined with Nate’s desire to expand the audience of the game to new players, somewhat resulted in the opposite happening; it reduced the capability of the game to serve as a teaching tool for people going into aerospace engineering and spaceflight, and overall reduced the priority of realism during development KSP2 is officially announced to very warm reception, with a release date set for the next year (2020) Content creators like Scott Manley, Matt Lowne and SZ are also brought onboard for the first time Hostile Takeover, 2019-2020 ST finally bring some Senior Engineers onboard. The Refactoring of the code is still only halfway done at this point in time ! By this time is has become clear that the release date of Spring 2020 is not achievable; despite this, ST Management continues to communicate to the team that this deadline and key features like colonies, interstellar and multiplayer are non-negotiable Chuck Noble, the only senior engineer who had been with the project since the start, leaves the team ST Owners Bob Berry & Jonathan Mavor begin negotiations with T2 to sell the studio to them, which are well underway by late 2019 ! Late 2019: Negotiations with Take Two break down and Star Theory loses the project ! ST’s Owners, Bob Berry and Jonathan Mavor, raised their price last-minute betting on T2 being willing to cash them out before finding another studio to work on KSP2, making them multi-millionaires in the process In response, T2 pulled the intellectual property from Star Theory and started a poaching attempt, offering everyone on the team to transition over to continue working on the project ! Partially due to the complete lack of emotional attachment to the KSP franchise on the part of most engineers(they still had not played ksp1 at this point) and partially due to T2’s refusal to budge when senior engineers tried to get better deals and compensation, the poaching attempt mostly failed, with only 4 engineers initially making the transition to the new studio that would become Intercept Games(IG) ! A total of around 20 people ended up making the transition eventually, but most of these were either junior engineers, artists or production people, resulting in a small and inexperienced team once again Star Theory continued to survive for a few more months, but ultimately failed to pitch new projects ideas (supposedly due to Covid cancelling an expo they were planning to attend) to publishers, resulting in their closure not much after. Technical Director Paul Furio is brought aboard the newly created IG with the mission of rebuilding the development team and setting processes in place to allow KSP2 to succeed Bumpy Road To Early Access, 2020-2023 (Intercept Games) ! T2 gives IG the stipulation to keep the old, broken code from Star Theory and work with it instead of starting again from scratch Apparently this was done because T2 management felt uneasy about ‘Refactoring’ the code yet again, so the decision was made to keep the existing code There is some debate as to the ‘broken-ness’ of the Star Theory Code; A person working on the project under Intercept Games said “they had 0% chance of releasing anything with that" about Star Theory code. A person working on the project under Star Theory, on the other hand, said with a little more time it would have worked. This person does however agree that it would have been better for IG to start again from scratch, not because of code quality but because of fresh team and still no contact to KSP1 devs. In general, everyone SZ spoke to agrees that not starting from scratch was the wrong move Not starting from scratch also meant Multiplayer remained one the biggest challenges to making the game feature-complete In an interview with Nate Simpson, it appeared that KSP2 already had working multiplayer when he said “as we've been testing it internally, I have never heard people laugh so hard”. Apparently, this ‘testing’ was actually done using a multiplayer mod in KSP1. It is however worth pointing out that KSP2 did have some form of rudimentary multiplayer by this time, inherited from ST, but it was incredibly buggy, unstable and nowhere near shippable. ! At this point, multiplayer remained a secondary objective while the main focus was still very much on art and visuals. This lack of baking multiplayer into the design remained a problem throughout this stage of development. They did however make progress during this period; later builds allowed multiple players to inhabit the same world and launch rockets together A few months after the game released into early access, the entire multiplayer team was let go. The developers claimed they were still designing the game with the thought that multiplayer would one day be a big part of it in the back of their minds, but it essentially was put on the backburner entirely Despite the old code hindering development and Covid hitting the globe, progress was finally being made and experts like Dr. Michael Dodd, a physics engineer, and Chris Adderly (also known as Nertea), a prominent KSP1 modder were brought onboard the project. ! It would still be until mid 2021 before KSP1 developers could finally join the KSP2 team. The ban on contact remained in place until then. Upon joining the team, apparently their reaction was “you should have asked us a year ago!” (which the KSP2 devs wanted to, but still weren’t allowed to) This ban may be explained by Squad not wanting KSP1 developers to be distracted from the final KSP1 updates This does not however explain why ex-Squad employees who had left years prior, like KSP1’s original creator Felipe Falange (known as HarvesteR), were never contacted ! Problems continue to become apparent as development goes on. Some of these are exacerbated or even caused by producers changing priorities for developers, often forcing them to switch between very different features This was later addressed withing IG when the ‘feature team structure’ (detailed here) was introduced. This structure was something Paul Furio has tried to establish before Early Access, but it was only established after his departure Take Two forces a release deadline of February 2023 by this time, the project is already over its allocated budget It immediately becomes apparent that all key features would not be ready in time for this deadline. It is believed there was a chance Colonies could have made it, but this was foregone a few months later In September 2022 the decision is made to go to Early Access with a stripped down sandbox version of the game ! This causes a massive upheaval of development, as the project was never intended to be released in parts. Product managers started pulling developers from their tasks and assigning them new ones, causing even more problems An example of this is an engineer who was weeks away from finishing a colony builder tool being pulled from the task and assigned to another item that had to be ticked off a project list, as colonies were shelved ! Yet another problem presents itself; software engineers, in high demand at the time, could make $200 to $250K a year at large companies like Microsoft or Amazon, but at IG their maximum yearly pay was kept at $150K due to budgetary constraints. Not only does this result in difficulties with recruiting, it also drives several people, such as Dr. Micheal Dodd, to leave the project The biggest blow comes from the departure of Eric De Feliz, a Graphics Specialist working on shaders. Nobody was present to pick up where he left off, resulting in the game being shipped with seriously unoptimized shaders GPU engineers especially were in high demand around this time, resulting in even worse optimization ! Despite being requisitioned multiple times, the IT team is not able to provide the necessary tools to test performance in time, further contributing to poor optimization and a late release of minimum and recommended specifications to the public Early Access, 2023-2024 (Intercept Games) Take Two and Private Division put their marketing into full gear, encouraging the ‘hype train’ even more An event is held in the Netherlands where content creators get their first chance to play the game. The first problems start to become apparent to the public as the creators give mixed reviews. Meanwhile, tensions are high at IG and PD. Some people are not happy with some of the decisions made, and they are aware the game is not at the level they wanted to deliver. Anxiety about community reception is large. In spite of this, steam sale numbers are put on a big screen in the conference room as they hope to breach 100K sales on day one. KSP2 Officially releases into Early Access. The game receives mixed to negative reviews, and it becomes clear the secrecy pushed by T2 has hurt the relation between developer and community A person working on the project later admits not getting community feedback was one of the biggest mistakes. They go on record to say “We wound up shipping the wrong product and not focusing on the right features” T2’s marketing campaign backfires as people start to realize the flaws of the game they bought for (nearly) full price ($50) and negative reviews start pouring in from angry and disappointed customers Sale numbers fall short of the numbers hoped for, only reaching 80K. This number does not account for the many refunds that happened ! A few weeks after the early access release, Studio Head Jeremy Ables and Technical Director Paul Furio were let go by higher-up management, which deemed them as the most expensive people in the studio. Furio left immediately while Ables stayed on a few more weeks. Michael Cook, previously Brand Manager at PD, took over the job of Studio Manager. It is also around this time the multiplayer developers were let go. Multiplayer was still janky and buggy at this point, but it was functional in some capacity. Despite this, there was a silent understanding that the layoff of the multiplayer team might have meant the feature was now shelved indefinitely. Focus shifts to bug fixing and working towards the first milestone update, later dubbed ‘For Science!’ (FS!) FS! came out in December 2023 to generally positive reviews, 10 months after the game entered early access. This was a significant delay from the internal estimate of 3 months, brought on by the shift in focus after community backlash about the state of the game. It is during this period that Furio’s cross functional feature team structure is finally implemented Studio Closure, 2024 (Intercept Games) In late April 2024, a WARN notice appeared indicating T2’s Seattle office, where Intercept Games is located, is being closed with 70 people (about the size of KSP2’s full dev team) being laid off starting June 28th. The studio went into near-complete radio silence, with the only statement made on @KerbalSpaceP’s X account “We’re still hard at work on KSP2. We’ll talk more when we can.”. This is a developing situation, and the impact of this on the future of the game is still unknown at this time. Conclusion (ShadowZone’s Opinions) KSP2 development has been plagued by a multitude of issues from the very beginning, ranging from diverging vision to corporate takeovers to mundane issues like tools not being ready in time The project was based on the wrong parameters from the start Technical decisions were made by people that had no business making them The developers were not paid accordingly There were a lot of assumptions about gameplay and mechanics that the community might have wanted that were not verified until it was basically too late The lack of open communication and extreme secrecy did severely harm to the trust of the already existing fanbase, especially after the game went into early access Speculative: the total cost of the project so far is assumed to be around 40 to 60 million dollars so far, compared to an estimated revenue from Steam of Only 30 to 40 million Notes (from ShadowZone, LinuxGuruGamer, Matt Lowne and Scott Manley) Nate Simpson should not take the blame; this was a passion project from him, and he genuinely appeared to want to deliver a great fun game for the existing KSP community, but he might have bit off more then he could chew, and made mistakes such as wobble. A big part of why he might not always have been able to deliver what he promised (despite wanting to do so) are technical and business constraints (example: modding API) Opinion from LinuxGuruGamer, Matt Lowne and Scott Manley: KSP2 can not reach completion under Take Two. The best way forward might be to focus on the modding API in the remaining time, but; mods have their limitations and they will not suffice to ‘save the game’ **PDF VERSION** KSP2 Development Timeline.pdf

That is an awesome plane! We at Beyond are ecstatic to see this in flight for the first time, and the pilots in the astronaut complex are abuzz with talk of this plane. Many have started arguing over who will fly it first. We have plans to continue flying the Talon as well, and maybe even add some of own modifications to the plane. Thank you to CalSpace for this amazing plane, and thank you to CalSpace for continuing to work with Beyond!

I think there's a widespread misunderstanding about this stuff by people who don't manage investments for a living (i.e., most people). The board and the executives are different groups and sometimes at odds with each other. The executives make the day-to-day operating decisions about the company, the board is rarely involved in any active way unless the executives really mess up and get fired. Leaving aside the misunderstandings about the board, let's talk about the executive leadership of a large company. It is commonly the case that executives and even middle managers of large companies care about 3 goals (with the notable exception of founder-led companies, which sometimes have a long-term vision): Their compensation; The metrics by which their future compensation is determined; and Their personal success metrics, usually the size or revenue of the group that they manage. Not the quality of the product, not the customers, not the shareholders, not the employees, none of those things except as to game any related metric for goal 2. So, you'll often see decisions that from the outside seem utterly baffling and self-destructive, but that's only if you think in terms of irrelevancies like reputation or long-term profits. Executives at large companies are generally really good at optimizing for their goals, it's just that those goals are mis-aligned with anything useful to anyone else. Also, this isn't specific to companies - it's the problem with any large, old organization of any kind. IMO, fixing this would be the most important advancement for the future progress of humanity. In the mean time, the best shot at good games are founder-led studios where the founder is still chasing a vision of great games and the publisher isn't ruining everything.

[snip] So let me clarify that for you. The thread is about refunds and if one should go about getting one. Primarily for Steam. But you literally brought up Epic and how if someone bought on Epic you wished them good luck. I was merely pointing out, for anyone who didn't already know, that Epic has the same refund policy Steam does. With the same option to talk to a human being if you get shafted by the automated system. If talking about Epic's policy is pointless, then it's on you for bringing that pointless topic up. Speaking of things that are pointless in this discussion... No, I have not chosen some arbitrary date for no reason. The layoffs and the building closure are effective on June 28. That was set by the company itself as outlined in the WARN notice we are all aware of and have read. I am waiting until that time - or, rather, giving them the extra 2 days to the literal end of June - to see if they release a statement or not before deciding if I'm going to ask for a refund. Why? Because if they do release a statement, I can read it and see if there's anything in there that could potentially be used to help bolster a case for a refund this far out of policy. Will there be a statement? Probably not. If there is, will there be something in there I can use? Again, probably not. Does it hurt to wait to see what happens knowing that the likelihood of a refund at this point is pretty close to zero? No, it doesn't. Which begs the question: Why do you care if I wait or not? It has literally zero impact on you and what happens in your life, so why do you care? Why throw all this anger in my direction over something that means zero to you? You feeling lonely and need attention?

Well, there is a playstyle called 'Caveman' where you can only play with the parts you can get with No facilities upgraded, no use of Mechjeb, Cheats and other Tools/Mods. So, any Craft is limited to 18 tons, 20 meters in height and 30 Parts. As there is the normal Caveman Challenge (getting all Science unlocked on different hardness levels) I, for myself, took this to another level in trying to Land on Celestial Bodies around the System where its not so easy to get to with this limitations. Landing on Mun ? No issue, landing on Minmus, either. Landing on Duna ? Thats a Task. I did that once and i may have regretted my last words, saying, i was currently building a Caveman Mission to land on Tylo and safely return. Do something, maybe noone has ever done before. Luckily, there is the Clamp-o-Tron Junior Docking Port. As other already Exercised, with this device you can Assemble Big Ships in Space (and even on Ground, you will need it!) to Get to destinations where others haven't gone before while being restricted to the limits of the Available parts, size, weight and number of Parts. As the Words, once they leave the Mouth, couldnt put back there again, i uttered it, so i had to Build it. I had to Fly it. And i did it. The Setup: I will not get into Details, but it can run 4-digit number of parts Craft. At least you need a Rig that can run a 500 Part Craft. The Software: KSP 12.5, both DLC installed, Plain install, no Mods. I have a Savegame here with all Craft Files linked and a ready-to-depart-Vessel, so you can REPLAY the Mission if you want.... Here is The Save File with all Crafts I had to Plan in advance a Long Time, had to design the Crafts, had to take into account to not exceed the Software and Hardware Limits, and had to create this Mission in a way that it stays into the boundaries where tha Risk of getting Krakened is marginal. I had to redesign the Ship several Times because i ran into the 'need too much FLT-400 Tanks' at all etc. So i ended up to get the overall Number of needed FLT-400 tanks down to 100 for the main Mission (really, 100 tanks docked to the Craft, Guess how much Time i wasted on that, Launching and Docking all that stuff ? I didnt took this as a Fulltime-Job but at least, with some creativity breaks where i had to think over the Concept, it took more than a Year. In total, somewhat between 200 and 300 Rocket launches where needed to Assemble everything together, with several complete restarts of the main Project. So in Total i may have had 1000+ Rocket Launches until i Found a suitable way for This Mission. All those failed iterations, we wont Talk About here, but the one Mission that Succeeded--- As there may be others that want to Torture themself, there is also a Savegame here added, so you can Replay the Mission without going thru the slog of Assembling the Craft in Space. The Craft has 500 Parts and is currently in Orbit, ready to Fly to Tylo. Dont forget to decouple the rescue ship after getting to a Higher Orbit for the endless Jool Burn. - i had to retry the Jool Burn 1 Time, the First Transfer was not useful due to Shifted Planes. so i had to wait for a Transfer window where Start and Arrival are on the same axis. But as the difficulty is normal, revert/retry is allowed. - i had to retry the Kerbin Burn 3 Times, the Tools Online for Eyeballing the Transfer from Jool to Kerbin does not take into account that Jool has a Tilted Plane and excentic orbit. - docking ports seem to fail using as decoupler somehow, anyhow. This led to some trouble with the Lander but i evaded it, by manually decoupling it. this led to a very hard ascent on Tylo, i barely made it back to 25km orbit with nearly zero fuel left. I will, nah, maybe may Try to Comment every Picture, that needs a comment, this will take Time... But at least, everything stands on its own. Now here is the Line of 342 Screenshots. Here we start with all the Scienca gathering because the Nodes needed to be unlocked. didnt wasted too much screenshots on them. The first part of the Tylo lander In Orbit Some FLT-400 Launches The Landing Part of The Lander. Too big to Start Alone On Ground Assembling needed Ready for Start Docking to the Main Lander Docking the Fuel tanks for Tylo Descent to the Lander Now the main Structure of the Spaceship to Tylo need to get into Orbit. I created another 2-Stage Rocket that can be docked to existing Rockets on Ground.... The Main Spaceship Structure. Rolling the External Rockets to Dock. second Rocket Docking I try to start the Main Ship with 2 Rockets. Hmm. Better, i misconstructed the External Rockets so i failed to dock them all 4. I Tried... Barely made it to Orbit... Reworking that Set would have taken a few days First, Docking some additional Fuel to the end and trashing the external engines. Adding the Lander to the Top, Facing Backwards Now the adding of the remaining 48 Fuel tanks started for the Main Ship. Asparus Staging, i knew the docking Port issue now, so the decoupling is done by the small decoupler This were 2 additional missions because i need 2 3-Star Pilots. Now the assembling continues Main Ship Ready with 8 sets of 3 FLT-400 in asparagus staging. For the Starting Burn to Jool, i had to add another 2 Stages of 24 FLT-400 each. Now we have 100 FLT-400 Docked Now the Rescue Ship needs to be constructed. It has 2 Purposes: - help to push the Main Ship to Higher Orbit and then stay at kerbal Orbit in case, its needed in Jool SOI for a Rescue I notices i had the 2nd Solar Module docked to the wrong end, so i have to swap it out to the other side. Ship Is completed. Main Ship has 100 Tanks, Secondary Ship (rescue ship for first Push) has 24 tanks. 500 Parts, 293 Tons Caveman Vessel I First lifted the Vessel up to 300Km Orbit Now the Push for a High AP starts. Goal is 5M Succeeded. remaining Weight of Ship is 205 Tons, all 100 Tanks still fully Loaded Starting the Transfer Burn to Jool 36 Tanks Left, Burn Complete That was the Perfect Burn But i had to waste a Bit Fuel because i came in directly hitting Jool. i had to Burn outwards to get 67M PE Planes need to be matched Getting near to Tylo to get a Catch Argl, again a direkt hit I had to get 27KM PE Slowly burning Down to 25 KM Orbit around Tylo Success. Orbit Around Tylo reached. Jeb has to Go. This Lander is Built to work from 25KM around Tylo. Yes, i simulated this. Prior coming all the way along, but This Burn was Real and it Worked. Erm. no small Step. Even some Fuel left, but i can not reuse it for the ascent due to the un-docking issues witch the docking ports. After Ascent you see, due to the issue of having to ditch the 4 Outer tanks on Ground, there is barely fuel left for docking. So i have to come around with the main vessel to pick the lander up. That was really sharp Coming in for Docking. I have to delete alot debris.... Docking to main Vessel Transfering Jeb and Ditching the Lander Now we have to leave Tylo SOI Unfortunately i had Chosen a very High Orbit around JOOL for the transfer. It Took Eons to find a suitable Window This'll Do Many Course corrections needed. Planes and retrograde Burn wasted much Fuel. But i had sme saved from the first Transfer that went Great A Hit. Having To Burn until i have an orbit. No way of trying to Aerobrake this and not Burn off. Now i can Aerobrake a good 1000KM of in several rotations. barely... but it worked around 60KM PE Until i got the PA small enough to stop aerobreaking and getting a stable orbit with the remaining Fuel. Rescue ship is coming for help. Some Tanks for the rescue ship needed. changing planes to match both ships Docking, Transfering all Crew Aand Deorbit Burn Only 2 Meters to Got :-)- Where is the watered screenshot ? Ermon had Orbit Around Tylo. He was the Guy in the Main Ship Jeb has the Landing on Tylo. So he is the One that Went to Tylo, landed and Returned on caveman Level. Hurray Pilots Summary. Facility Summary Science summary. I didnt bothered to take any science from Tylo. Its caveman. what for i need additional science ?

Some civilized countries (and some very civilized steam employees) do not allow developers to just charge money to say they're going to make a game and then abandoning it. Everyone has the right to ask for a refund, and thanks to Steam, they've got the right to ask many times for a refund, making different or the same case. Which is not the point since most people are way past that, in which case Epic support is definitely one of the worst places, if they even bother replying to you. Steam allows you to talk to a human for refunds after the automatic system fails you. Some people have been waiting since 2013 for an official statement on 2K Marin's situation. You've arbitrarily chosen a date as an ultimatum with almost zero reason, hoping they've chosen the same, or any date, to spend resources responding to the ~120 people still waiting to hear whatever. They've merely respected the law by giving their employees paid heads up time before firing them and have no further obligation with the project or the employees, much less their customers.