Search the Community

Concern about the level of surface detail on celestial bodies in KSP 2 Today, I watched a KSP 2 gameplay video with beta footage of a ship landing on Vall. Below is a screenshot from this video, which was posted on Kerbal Space Program's official Twitter page: When I first watched this video, I thought the footage was from KSP 1. Vall is a jagged ice world, yet the terrain showcased in the video is surprisingly smooth and flat. Considering that boring celestial body surfaces are one of KSP 1's biggest gameplay problems, the lack of terrain detail here is extremely concerning. Other KSP 2 screenshots and gameplay videos demonstrate the same issue. Consider this image, which was taken directly from Intercept's KSP 2 website: No surface scatters are visible--just smooth, procedural hills. The sand and rocks the Kerbal is standing on appear to be merely 2D textures with normal mapping. Here's Bop: Bop's surface looks better than the other moons because of the terrain scatters, which are spread across the ground in random, uneven clumps. These rocks are simple and samey in appearance. KSP 2's celestial body surfaces are certainly improvements over KSP 1; however, I don't believe they can be described as having "unprecedented detail" and "variety" at this point in time.

I play Kerbal Space Program since rhe beginning of the last year, and I think there are some little details that could make KSP way better, like air an air compressor, wich transforms intake air in oxidiser using some EC (it could be an IRSU feature) and the possibility to (as a cheat in Sandbox mode) add parts and edit the rockets that are already launched; another cool feature could be an air-distributing sistem just like the fuel one. Another thing I think should be changed is that you must set structural pilons for every part singularly, making this a very long process for big rockets. I think those could be small, usefull features and changes to the gameplay.

Imagine visting Duna and seeing solar glare from Kerbol. Or landing on Laythe and seeing a meteor shower. I think that the small things, like auroras on Kerbin and Laythe and small flashes visible from Jool's moons on Jool (meant to represent turbulent lightning storms). I don't even think this really has to be features in the game world; it could even be a change in other aspects. What i'm asking for really is just some small details that add to the realism and immersion of KSP2. Some more examples would be the frequent solar storms on red dwarfs; if there is a red dwarf (We don't really know what System 3 is), then solar storms would be great. Another good thing with gas giants would be the way that wind currents travel on them. Wind currents travel in bands on Jool; this implies that there are belts and zones on Jool, just like on Jupiter. In that case, the zones would be high, cold air, i.e icy and therefore lighter in color. the zones generally move slower than the belts; but their relative speed varies. They also form less storms. Again, the immersion benefit would be absolutely massive if these sort of tiny, but good, changes make it into KSP2.

1. Grid fins. They would be a great addition and help enhance aerodynamics. 2. more heat shields. This would be great for atmospheric re-entry in sph ships, like the heat shield used by the space shuttles. 3. Bulding and customizing your facility. It would be awsome if you could choose where to place your buildings and customize them. 4. Custom flags. I think it would be great for ksp 2 to be able to upload a custom flag, this would go great with the new color customization that is planned for ksp2. 5. Make manuver nodes easier to understand. This one is self explanitory. 6. Kerbal customization. I would love a KSP avater creator, maybe there could even be randomly generated kerbal avatars. 7. Sandox mode planet creator. It would be AWSOME if we could create our own planets in sandbox mode. It would be cool if we could share our systems/planets in the workshop. So thats my recomendations.

We already know that KSP 2 will be built using a newer version of Unity but have we got any information on the new technologies the game might use that weren't in KSP 1? I'm talking things like HDR, ray tracing, DLSS/FSR, VRR, etc. The only thing I've noticed myself is that they seem to use HDR Color picker in Unity in this dev diary. Does this mean the game would have some meaningful HDR support?

In the game now in the pause menu there is only a button to "Exit to the menu", but in most other games there is also a button to "Exit to Windos". This is very important because it saves people time so they do not have to load the main menu before closing the game

I imagined how will look like space skycrapers with fusion engines in KSP2, and remembered a beautiful serial from my childhood: Space Odyssey: Voyage to the Planets. I saw that I wasn't alone and many another people watched it. The most coolest moment from serial is starting sequance, the beginning. I have looked for OST for a year and finally I found that Don Davis downloaded complete OST on Youtube I believe it is perfect music to feel like a discoverer who starts voyage to kerbal system planets on your interplannetary spaceship with thermonuclear engine to research worlds far beyond your homeworld

They should have destroyed ships floating around in space stuff Like in Career or Science mode you can recover them and get Science and Reputation and also fun thing to find on the tracking station I would personally LOVE THIS!!! Let me know of your thoughts

It would be so cool if there were rouge planets that where all different and orbited themselves so they would stay in place NAME IDEAS: (sorry if there all bad I am not the best at names) Twier Maybe pink and blue (maybe ice) Noover Maybe green Lipe (Idk what color it would be) IDK what else so yeah

So I was thinking about it and was wondering if there could be an optional Water requirement for Kerbals like you could collect water and stuff from like the oceans and ice from Duna or other and that I think would add another reason the use ore/maybe ice Tanks for missions and such

I thought about KSP2 game mode, which will replace career mode, and decide that this "progression" mode must have some important details to correspond to its name or/and meaning When you played career in original game, you after achieving records have messages in game mails from Kerbin World-Firsts Record-Keeping Society about your achievements. You could see them in your contracts journal. But in KSP2 I'm not sure we will have contracts and journal, maybe only archive with science notes. And I suggest my idea of improved journal After reaching orbit or surface of some celestial object or another important event you will have in your journal date and description of event: where and what you did, name of spacecraft, names of kerbals if it had it. For example: Year 245 Date 5/6 11:34 First landing on Mun by autonomus spacecraft Lander-1 Year 245 Date 7/9 22:57 First fly-by of Duna by autonomus spacecraft Dun-3 Year 246 Date 2/1 16:04 First landing on Mun with crew Jeb Kerman and Bill Kerbal by spacecraft Mun-lander Year 246 Date 4/3 00:48 First fly-by of Minmus with crew Bob Kerval, Bill Kerbal and Tim Kervin by spacecraft Orbit_minmus ... Year 259 Date 9/1 08:45 The Duna colony Duna-Startown population reached 500 kerbals How it will fit into the game depends of developers' view, maybe it will be in archieve with science or there will be another special journal This will highlight all your steps and achievements on the path of space exploration, and they will not be forgotten, but rather enshrined in the journal. You can easily turn your gaze to the past and see all the path you have passed. This journal will be the history of space exploration of kerbalkind It will encourgae players to reach new limits, thereby adding to the list of achievements in the journal. It can be comfortble fuction for speedrunners because they will have be able to record their achievements in pleasant form. For multiplayer space race can be also added name of player's agency in message Overall I expect also improved writing in game, and not only parts, but agencies, sciences experiments, bodies will have interesting and important descriptions with lore of game

Hello dev team and Kerbalers! I feel like probes and satellites in KSP1 are quite not worth the investment, it is always better to build a manned rocket to go to a planet to gather science, rather to send a probe to that body. I think it needs to be looked at and reworked, rather for science probes to be limited in science transmission, it would be much better to implement a system, where you first need to scan the planet or it's surrounding area first, to know what to get, so first you would send a probe and that will allow you to pick more science, whenever you send a manned mission. But to avoid situations where you send a manned vehicle with probing-grade stuff, I would make those probes parts really not worth the investment in a situation, where you want to send a manned mission (like, the cost or some limitations like that - like an option to calibrate manned mission equipment for that particular planet, so the price spikes up with manned missions a lot (similar cost with manned and unmanned so combining those two are basically a waste of money). This way the player is encouraged to do things like in the real world. It's obvious we scan planets or objects of interest first, transmit the findings, where we build upon a manned mission to that object, based on the data we have got from those probes. Other than that, the entire idea of space telescopes would be neat! Like, to find a planet, first you need to build either a ground telescope or a space-based one, to find it, analyze it and then probe mission to map it to see what to expect, then and only then, a manned mission is the next logical step. So to summarize: Mission cost where probe equipment is paired with manned mission is ridiculously high To get full science, you need to analyze the planet/object Manned science equipment needs to be calibrated for full science return The only way to get calibration data is by analyzing the data coming from the probe Implementation of telescopes to find new bodies

In KSP we fill tanks with two combinations for liquids - kerosine and kerolox, and in ksp are special tanks for each combination. I would like to suggest a more complex but more comfortable mechanic for future. You can fill tanks with any (I mean liquids) type of resource and limit is only volume of tank and total volume of your resources. Here how it will work You open settings of tank and choose what you want to fill the tank with - specific mix (methan, metalox, hydrolox, hydrogen), which provides right proportions of components, or your custom mix. To avoid confusion in which tank what fuel I propose to make a filter that when you turn it on the tanks displayed the type of mix. So that a beginner is not confused by all this at first, it is possible to make methalox as the basic mix There aren't mentioned xenone, ores or exotic fuels becuase for these resources the special tanks are needed I think that function will reduce amount of tanks -> amount of parts and simplify using of different fuels for all spacecrafts

Hello, if KSP2 will have more advanced manoeuvre planner than KSP, why not to add landing prediction? On the eye it is hard to predict where you land, because you can't really know how atmosphere resistance will affect on trajectory and how point of landing will move because of planet rotation. It would make game more easier, which can damage spirit or/and experience of ksp I think, but it can reduce another not so pleasent routine and you can concentrate on more interesting things. And it doesn't cancel process of creating your mission's route, when you plane all maneuvres and where you will land and start. Also you always have choice to not use this function if you don't like it Maybe you can balance this function by unlocking it only when you reached certain level of space center or have certain amount of navigation satellites on orbit

The rings and centrifuges that create artificial gravity on ships are very important parts for colonization ships, so I want to write some suggestions Variety of parts: In the gameplay demos, we only highlighted the rings. I don't know how many kerbals require one ring, but maybe the number of artificial gravity spots depends on the number of kerbals. Why not add rings of different diameters Also why not add other centrifuges besides rings for variety, different number of kerbals and with different characteristics. These could be discs, dwelling blocks on either side of the beam, and so on. That way you'd have an easier time choosing the right part just for your ship Physics: We all know that a centrifuge will have a kinetic momentum as it rotates. But since the system is closed and the total kinetic momentum must be conserved, the rest of the ship will rotate in the opposite direction, which will be uncomfortable. In addition to the centrifuge, it will be necessary to put more parts to compensate its rotation But the first thing that comes to mind is the gyroscopic effect https://pressbooks.online.ucf.edu/osuniversityphysics/chapter/11-3-precession-of-a-gyroscope/ If you have compensated the centrifuge as I described above, this effect will not appear. But this effect is very important I suggest that all these effects will be different because of different angular momentums of different centrifuges. So angular momentumsof disks, beams, rings will be different I wish that all these points were taken into account in the KSP2 and the physics would be more realistic and truthful

It always struck me in a bad way how in KSP 1 Kerbin is an always sunny, dry and life-sustaining planet, because realistically, any planet that can sustain life, especially advanced life, is going to have rains, thunders, snowstorms, etc, but Kerbin doesn't even have seasons, it's always sunny and the perfect weather for playing sports and launching a rocket which I think makes it too easy and boring in my opinion, even if I still like KSP 1. Another thing that would be cool for KSP 2 to have is renderizations of other lifeforms or animals, at least on Kerbin, and I don't mean bird noises at the space center like in KSP 1, I mean animals that you can see while launching a rocket, like birds, insects, carnivores, herbivores, more varied plant life, etc, it certainly would make evolution and life on Kerbin much more interesting, especially if some of these animals could interfere with your perfect launch or reentry, although that is more of an ideal dream of mine, still, even animals that you can phase through would be an improvement compared to the empty, vast grasslands of KSP 1. What do you guys think?

Hello, this topic has probably already been discussed, but it seemed to me that it is still suspended in the air, because there is no clear confirmation of adding a new type of heat shield The tools available in the game you can not protect every ship from re-entry, because for this you only have heat shields. I've had many instances where my mk1 shuttle would overheat and be very difficult to land from space. I cheated and reduced the heat exposure in the settings . What if players want to create a starship that will enter the atmosphere of mars from the second space speed or other heavy landers that can't use standard heat shields? Why not add the ability to cover aircraft hulls and tanks with heat shields in addition to the standard heat shields to start with. For example it could look like covering a certain surface of the underside of the craft with heat tiles. Definitely need a parameter to control the amount of coverage. For example the angle of 180 degrees is half of full coverage, the angle of 240 degrees is 4/3 of full coverage. Of course this would change the location of the center of mass, shifting it to the heat shield, and increase the weight, significantly. Obviously the surface area of the plane would be larger than that of the capsule. So they could be balanced in terms of gameplay I think this could enter the game as organically as the other procedural parts - wings and radiators. It will be easier to create spaceplanes, shuttles, gliders like esa spacerider or SUSIE , and others, which will increase creative freedom Honestly I think the issue of procedural heat shielding should be approached in a more advanced way, as about an arbitrarily shaped hull protecting the craft at re-entry into the atmosphere. Probably the mechanics of this part would be similar to the fairing mechanics. Just look at the source of inspiration - NASA's Havoc Venus mission UPD: I created a concept for heat protection for different surfaces, like wings and, plane cabins and hulls Here is a conception for heat protection for wings or another hull type details. If you want to apply heat protection for wing, you open heat category in redactor and choose icon, which looks like an abstract plate with specific texture. This icon with plate means a material you cover your detail. In information window it has a description, temperature and other limits, cost on surface unit, density and graphic of square density on square unit from material’s thickness. When material is chosen you click on wing, and lower surface of wing is covered by this material. Clicking on material you open its properties window, where you can change thickness of material on detail. Also I think there can be advanced settings if you want to cover not only bottom, but front of wing or cabin, and make cover as on pictures below Heat wear of material will be individual for each detail of craft which has it (individual wear of protection for every detail). Concerns, that there will be more calculations, I believe are overstated. Temperature overlay (f11) already exists and heat for every detail is calculated individually already. Other argument that wing now doesn’t consist from many details – it is one detail and probably heats as one detail. Less details – less calculations It will not conflict with traditional heat shields, they are details. I suggest a function of covering of detail by thermal protection Another bonus suggestions: Inflatable shields could be also improved by adding new shields with different diameters and adding wear for inflatable shields:) Also it will be cool to see GIGANTIC heat shields for atmosphere breaking like in bbc voyage to the planets or sun dive The heat details must have significant improvements, becuase reentry is important part of game. I like that radiators will be procedural, it is very useful improvement. I would like to see significant developments in thermal protection, it will change game in good way I believe that it will improve of creation of gliders, shuttles, spaceplanes and other non-capsule type crafts

There is an interesting moment in the game. I watched the spent rocket stages and noticed that although their periapsis is about 30 km, but they do not burn up in the atmosphere, unless you switch to them, or fly close to them. I would add a function so that the game recalculates the orbit for such cases. The game looks at the intersection of the orbit with the atmosphere and decides exactly how to recalculate If you do not observe the device with a periapsis <30~50 km, then for some time the game simply removes it on the first turn. If you suddenly want to look at it, then the game, knowing the parameters of the orbit, approximates the movement in the most rough way and builds the trajectory of re-entry into the atmosphere, without simulating anything in real time. At least you all saw that mechjeb perfectly builds trajectories of re-entry into the atmosphere. The spacecraft in the global map will move along the trajectory until it intersects with the surface For the case when the periapsis is not too low, you can do another. The game calculates a new orbit after passing the atmosphere and the time of exit from the section of the orbit passing in the atmosphere. And when that time has passed, the game simply changes the old orbit to a new one, and the spacecraft finds itself in a new orbit at the exit point from the atmosphere. The case when you observe the passage of the spacecraft in the atmosphere can also be adjusted by approximation, rather than calculating the resistance force in real time

BDarmoury was THE weapons mod for Kerbal Space Program. With a sequel coming up, it will be interesting to see what gets improved. The original mod was good, but the variety was a little low. Also, there were no space-based weapons or items, apart from that one missile (if you were going to add 1 thing specifically for space, why not add more?) One of the features I am most excited about adding to BDarmoury will be colonies. The potential the has is massive. Firstly, it will be possible to set up colonies, then go to war with others. This may add an interesting aspect to the mod, especially if unique mechanics are integrated to facilitate this. Another thing that is harder but wayyy cooler is extra structures for colonies that are military focused. Examples include: AA guns Ammo storage depot Long-range (perhaps interplanetary) Missile silo Short to medium range missile battery I don't know what could be added for interstellar travel integration, but it would also be interesting. It could allow for grand conflicts across multiple systems, with many Kegadeaths of casualties. For this to work, the tech tree must have a decent progression path for weapons/other equipment (unguided rocket goes to laser guided goes to active radar missile that impacts at retavitlistic speeds). Let me know if there is anything you would want for BDA 2.0

I'm very excited to hear that automated delivery routes are confirmed and can't wait to over-engineer a logistics network. Positivity First: It sounds like resource routes will be established by performing a delivery with a truck or rocket manually first. Once a single successful loop is completed, a new delivery route will be unlocked. This is an excellent design choice because it requires a player to achieve sufficient mastery for each route, and since some routes will be harder than others, the available wealth for a player will grow in proportion to their skill. Even better, the tedium of repeated manual hauling missions is eliminated (I've certainly done this in KSP1). There are two aspects of delivery routes that could cause problems if not implemented well: #1 - Variable dV requirements for routes that cross multiple SOIs If you want to get from Kerbin to Eeloo, the dV required will depend on the relative positions of those planets and the order you perform your maneuvers. This gets even less repeatable when gravity assists are considered. One potential exploit could be a player manually running a delivery route at the optimal time with very favorable gravity assists, and then getting future deliveries for less dV than they really should cost. Personally, I wouldn't mind this, and if a player is smart enough to exploit this... maybe they should be rewarded for it? This is one of those cases where I believe satisfying gameplay is better than realism. That said, I think there should at least be some sort of in game acknowledgement of this issue. Another possibility could be imposing some sort of handicap on a player while proving a delivery route... such as 10% greater fuel consumption. #2 - Will automated vessels be under control of the Physics Engine Please don't do this for the following reasons: It will cause delivery routes to spontaneously fail off-screen at no fault of the player due to kraken like bugs. Even if KSP2 has far more robust physics than KSP1, delivery routes would also greatly expand the number of failure modes. It wastes CPU - The rigid body physics calculations are computationally intensive and may be fundamentally limited in how much they can be parallelized. This cost is worth it for craft the player is actively looking at and piloting, but not for stuff off screen. Even if different vehicles far away were give their own physics threads, it would wouldn't take long to saturate even a high-end CPU. One possible exception - It may acceptable to physically simulate delivery vessels while they are close to a player. For example, if a player is piloting a space station and an automated freighter comes in to dock, this could be a reasonable because it only needs to scale with the number of players and if a kraken occurs, the player will witness the failure and learn something immediately. Discussion of possible deliver route implementations Since it hasn't been explicitly confirmed is exactly how the automated resource routes will behave. Let's consider 3 possibilities (there are many others): Exact Record/Playback This implementation would be like trucks in Satisfactory. You press "record", pilot your craft manually along a delivery route, then "stop" the recording when you close the loop. The craft would replicate your actions exactly. Tradeoffs: [-] Please don't implement this [-] Would only work for land-based routes. Orbital targets would change relative positions between iterations of the delivery route, so rigidly executing the same maneuvers at a different time would not work. [-] Not robust - It is not realistic to expect a vehicle to perfectly execute recorded instructions each time. If the player barely grazed the edge of some scatter while recording, it may cause a collision during a random playback. Ghost Ships on Rails - After recording a resource route, your craft will repeat that same route, but will be non-collidable and on rails [+] Robust - Players still have to prove route viability but don't have to worry about spontaneous failures due to FP rounding errors or kraken-like bugs. [+] Moderate CPU - This should be little more than viewing a bunch of craft in the tracking station, or rendering a few ghost ships docking at a resource depot. [+] Provides visual feedback/beauty to the player to appreciate as they build up their industrial infrastructure. [-] Still has the problem of different maneuvers required depending on relative celestial body position. Since these are ghost ships, some cheese is allowable here, for example "draw a curved path from Kerbin to Jool that looks reasonable". These automated ghost ships should achieve these paths "magically" without burning their engines (except maybe for visual purposes). Abstract Network - Delivery routes would behave like the KSP1 relay network. After manually executing a loop, the UI could draw a line between the source and sink and you could utilize this link in some sort of logistics/production management UI. [+] Very robust - No moving vehicles means no spontaneous failures [+] Very Low CPU - All you need are some new UI elements but no actual craft to render or track [-] Not as cool - It may be hard for some players to suspend their disbelief if a stack of ore magically appears every 6 hours in their station without seeing anything dock.

In the KSP you have constant value of different types of radial simmetry (radial n-symmetry, where n = 2, 3, 4, 6, 8). I suggest that it is possible to make unlimited number, so you use all numbers, for example 5, 7, 9, 10, 13 and others (imagine 28 or 33-symmetry!) I think this feature could be implemented as a line (e.g. in the bottom left corner as usual) that shows the number of symmetry and circle, divided into n parts. This parameter can be changed by entering another number from the keyboard to the line I belive that realisation of this function will be very easy (just attach each part through the corner 360 / n automatically), except problem with big numbers, where details can cross each other. The most important that it is of course obviously make construction much more comfortable and you don't need to use several times one n-symmetry mode and level parts by eye (I think you can also level details in new scheme mode?). It would be nice to see this feature in ksp2, which would make the constructor even closer to the ideal;)

To make the simulator more realistic, shouldn't we add regular stars in addition to star systems with planets? I believe that if you add N star systems in a game about interstellar travel, and you will have only N stars, it will look unrealistic, unprofessional and not in line with the concept of the game The game would feel fairer if you had more freedom to fly to different objects in the galaxy, such as that star kebler23878 over there, even if it has no planets. I believe it takes much less resources to create stars than planets because for stars we don't have to think about topography, geology, concept. You could make an autogenerator of stars along the lines of a star catalog that would randomly set radius, age, mass, type, and maybe location. Stars can have similar textures and other features because they are not as unique as planets Perhaps in science mode, you will be added to the eyes or other bonuses for studying a star of a certain type In my opinion, filling space with stars makes the game more realistic and similar to what you expect from such a game than just having N more systems with planets

My idea is to make the arrangement of modules in the kraft more meaningful Logically, if the habitate modules are not connected by any tunnels or corridors, then to move between them, you need a minimum of EVA. But according to the logic of the game, since these modules are part of the same craft, kerbals can still move between them. For example kerbals can move between modules of this craft I propose to make a system that resembles the fuel delivey system for liquid engines. If engine not connected to fuel system, then it can't waste fuel. And if module is not connected with the interior living space of the spacecraft, then kerbals can't move to this module from anothers. For example right connected modules look like these: On the second picture you can see that modules are connected with tube. And I suggest that tubes can connect habitate modules and/or this function can be made by another parts I propose this change to make the assembly of kerbals crafts more meaningful. This adds a new layer to the assembly process, related to the proper planning of module placement and it will add a bit simulation to the space exploration simulator. I think with this fix will make game immersion is felt stronger, if I may say so. I assume that such a system is being developed for the colonies, but I am not convinced and do not know if it applies to spaceships I thought about this idea after seeing this interstellar ship with planes Of course, although it is pre-alpha, but it is unclear how the crew will get to the planes, except through spacewalking And now my fantasy, which may not appear in the game: if you can't connect some modules on interstellar ship, you can make transport, which is connected to ship's structure and can to drive on it like on rails 500m from the living bays to landers, which saves weight on the long 500 meter corridor I hope you found my idea about realistic movement between habitate modules interesting and convincing

What if (in at least multiplayer) you needed to transport materials, parts, etc to other KSC's? Maybe you could even transport Kerbals to other KSC's to be launched in different places, and maybe run different airports? Just an idea from making different passenger planes in stock ksp and realizing there's no use for planes (not SSTO's, just passenger or cargo planes).

Are all up to date rockets like Saturn v, shuttles and other lifters like Russian one will be included in game as prebuild and ready to use? Are current and past spacecraft like Voyager, Sputnik will be included and prebuild? Are space station like ISS and Mir will be included and prebuild in base game. Maybe in cat example like. Mir-> each part( stage) separate ISS -> each part(stage) separate. It would be a good start to be able to replay cards of history form start (as learning curve) it would be more progressive ( from first rocket in space through establishing mission to moon and building space station stage by stage to landing on Mars) and then once achieving those steps new players would be able to carry on exploring further in to space. If this thread( questions where already asked) exist please point me in their direction and I do apologize for inconvenience.