Jump to content

KSP2 Hype Train Thread


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, WelshSteW said:

 

Is the stuff playing behind ShadowZone stuff we've seen before? Or are we getting an extra sneaky sneak peak?

 

 

 

Some of it is either really old and I've forgotten about it, or it's new.

 

Thanks for this.  He NAILS a lot of the problems players like me get frustrated with as well as the issues that make people walk and not look back. 

 

He's playing released images, btw, with KSP content to illustrate old problems he hopes are fixed. 

(this is clearly NOT a 'new insider info' vid) 

Good, though! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

Crossposting here, but a new TikTok showing off a dope rotorcraft just dropped: 

I wasn't sure if you'd have the ability to build this kind of thing with the new aero system, but I had hopes. Those hopes were not in vain!

Has anyone seen a claw yet? Asking for a friend.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

Crossposting here, but a new TikTok showing off a dope rotorcraft just dropped: 

I wasn't sure if you'd have the ability to build this kind of thing with the new aero system, but I had hopes. Those hopes were not in vain!

This works in  real life and in KSP 1, so I expect it to work in KSP 2, not very useful however. But an spinning helicopter like this but using reaction wheels could be nice for an lightweight Eve launcher. 
Wonder if anybody did that? Landing it might be an challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

I wasn't sure if you'd have the ability to build this kind of thing with the new aero system, but I had hopes. Those hopes were not in vain!

I'm very sure they would have had to actively work in order to make an aero system that doesn't do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I'm very sure they would have had to actively work in order to make an aero system that doesn't do this.

I don't think that's true. There's a big spectrum between full CFD and "make the nose rise when the S is pressed and make the nose fall when W is pressed", and we don't know exactly where KSP 2 lands there. Yeah, it's probably safe to assume it's far closer to the former than the latter, but, and I'll be frank here, I wasn't actually confident about that based on the very limited in-atmosphere gameplay we had seen so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, whatsEJstandfor said:

I don't think that's true. There's a big spectrum between full CFD and "make the nose rise when the S is pressed and make the nose fall when W is pressed", and we don't know exactly where KSP 2 lands there. Yeah, it's probably safe to assume it's far closer to the former than the latter, but, and I'll be frank here, I wasn't actually confident about that based on the very limited in-atmosphere gameplay we had seen so far.

Anything more sophisticated than a student project will see emergent behaviour like this, else the programmers would be actively suppressing realistic behaviour (and probably end up messing up some other edge case as well).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Snafu225 said:

I'm baffled nobody has talked about the sound yet. The clunk when the engine was out of fuel, the wind noise and the crashing sound all sounded really good! 

I suspect that the crashing sound might have been edited in, there's about a frame before the video cuts out where you can see that the craft actually bounces rather than crashing, and it seems like the other sounds cut out before the crashing sound does. There's a small smoke cloud though, so it is possible one of the landing gear broke and the sound is from that. Generally I agree though, all the sounds we've heard so far have been great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, i dont know how to forum said:

the craft actually bounces rather than crashing

I'd suspect a massive structure like this bouncing from such a height would make a crashing sound.

I'm guessing KSP has conditioned us into thinking something crashing down should only make noises when damage of a catastrophic nature happens :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

It's amazing how much people hate something they obviously love.

KSP1 frustrated the excrements out of me sometimes.  But I still logged an embarrassing number of hours and did a lot of really cool stuff.  Sequels rarely live up to the hype but if it's a different version of "more of the same" I'll still be happy.  Anything above that is a bonus.

I haven't read a damn thing about KSP2 aside from it's releasing in <14 days, I'm only here because the forum sent me a password reset email.  But I will grab KSP2 on release day and have some spectacular failures, you can count on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2023 at 4:32 AM, GoldForest said:

Not really, not unless you want to do really really slow interstellar transfers. I doubt Orion Drive can get up to even 1% the speed of light. 

Yes really it does, right now the Orion drive is the fastest way we have to reach multiple percentage of light speed, it can get quite a bit more than one percent, From the Wiki  " An atomic (fission) Orion can achieve perhaps 9%–11% of the speed of light. "

 

Edited by DwightLee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DwightLee said:

Yes really it does, right now the Orion drive is the fastest way we have to reach multiple percentage of light speed, it can get quite a bit more than one percent, From the Wiki  " An atomic (fission) Orion can achieve perhaps 9%–11% of the speed of light. "

 

I was already proven wrong earlier, no need to bring up an old discussion. 

And those numbers are theoretical. 

Realistic numbers, shown right above the paragraph you quoted, shows two numbers. 0.0033C (0.33%) and 0.033C (3.3%).  And that's using up all the fuel, and not stopping for Alpha Centauri, so even more realistic numbers, meaning actually stopping at Alpha Centuari, would probably be around 0.00165C (0.165%) and 0.0165C (1.65%) for a one-way trip, and even lower than that for a return journey, around 0.000825C (0.0825%) and 0.00825C (0.825%). 
(These numbers are not scientific, just pure speculation and doing math. Halving the speed for a one-way journey (Stopping at Alpha Centauri) and quartering the speed for a return journey. I am not a scientist. These numbers also don't take into account the deltaV gains from having to push less mass when some or most of the bombs would be used up. If I am wrong, someone please correct me)

So, while Orion MAY be able to get up to a percentage of the speed of light, it's not really practical. Not unless we can hit those theoretical numbers. 

But this entire conversation should be reserved for another thread or PMs, so I'm going to stop here and switch to actual hype. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are just over 13 days away from release! That's a baker's dozen! Thirteen days... I can hardly believe it. It's finally happening. We are almost at terminal count down! (I would consider 5 days from release Terminal countdown, but that's just my opinion.) 

T-Minus 13 days until we all get to experience what KSP 1 could have been, and possibly should have been! Ladies and gentlemen, check your rockets! Clear your schedules! Blow off that date you had with your girlfriend/boyfriend! We're launching soon!

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...