A pile of suggestions from a >4000 h player

[lajoswinkler]

Here are some things I'm kindly suggesting for KSP 2, most of which are very simple and have great consequences, something lot of people have been asking for years. Most of these have been made possible by mods, but now there is no reason to leave them behind. Let modders deal with fresh ideas.

(Order of suggestions is irrelevant.)

 

Cosmetic enhancements:

• realistic sound behaviour - gradual transition to muffled, deep sounds of rocket engines in low pressure, screechy rumble in IVA during chemical engine operation, Kerbal breathing on EVA with sounds they would hear in spacesuits in vacuum
• part explodiness inequality - lots of reactive fuel in tank, big boom. Little fuel, small boom. Parts without reactive components, no boom.
• pitch dark, starless sky in daylight conditions - do not underestimate the aesthetics of real space. Universe is a black void that reveals its beauty only in darkness, making such reveal special. Please don't paint the sky with brown-gray goop and splotchy stars.
• no convection in vacuum - gases and powders follow ballistic trajectories in vacuum. No swirling. It looks very interesting, it's easier to simulate and teaches you physics.
• illumination by engine action - simple and looks nice for screenshots
• planetary body shine - immersive and beautiful
• realistic engine plumes - looks amazing in screenshots and teaches physics of fluids
• reentry trails - it's time to use something beautiful that KSP already has, but has never been officially unlocked
• atmospheric scattering, simple clouds and weather - beautiful and can be done with little downsides
• visible partial damage for parts - squashed fuel tanks, bent wings, punctured fuselages? Immersive and fun.
• proper naming of astronomical objects - Kerbol, not The Sun. Mün, not The Mun. Ditch English vicissitudes and pay respect to old, recognized Kerbal goofy names.

 

Gameplay enhancements:

• astronomical body tilt - it's time to implement it
• angular momentum conservation - make those RCS thrusters more useful and allow constant spinning. Immersive and useful for centrifugal ships.
• camera action in docking ports - way more useful than any indicators, immersive
• simplified thrust curve of solid rocket boosters - no need for complications, a nice neutral curve creates less stress for launches.
• radioisotope thermoelectric generator power decay curve - one radioisotope with fixed halflife is enough
• raycast ionizing radiation model - simplified, but powerful in its gameplay impact, just like this WIP; powerful when coupled with Kerbal mortality, makes ship designs elaborate
• atmospheric curves adhering to same physical laws - in KSP, they are not
• a balloon - has implications on taking measurements or types of launches
• cryo-sleep - necessary for interstellar travel if we want same Kerbals surviving
• Kerbal interaction - chatting, movements, EVA following
• thermodynamical model with reflectivity - stellar missions with sunshields
• make Kerbol an active body - Kerbol has been neglected since it turned from a glowing spot into an actual body; this would be great, coupled with Kerbal mortality
• new planetary bodies - I know it has been mentioned, but I need to remind about great concepts early custom planetary body designers envisioned (a periodical comet, a Vulcan-like sungrazing dwarf planet, ringed planet, binary planet)
• dangerous surface features - lava, geysers
• life support, Kerbal reproduction and mortality - it opens vast gameplay opportunities - colonization, difficulties for interstellar travel, etc.
• sample museum - displaying all the collected and returned items in a special building
• Kerbals adding mass to vessel when boarding it - immersion and mission planning opportunity - to leave Bob behind on Mün surface, or to strand the ascent crew in orbit?
• Kerbal EVA building struts and resource transfering - loads of fun playing
• ballasts - for both airflight and ocean exploration
• inline parachute - we've been waiting for this for years, come on
• realistic start of career mode - unmanned start that progresses into manned missions as reward
• variable sphere of influence - useful for comets

 

At the end of everything, my best advice, and I see it has already been announced, is:

• no magic stuff, only physics - please, never give up on this crown rule of KSP

Edited August 24, 2019 by lajoswinkler
added more stuff

[KerikBalm]

8 minutes ago, lajoswinkler said:

• part explodiness inequality - lots of reactive fuel in tank, big boom. Little fuel, small boom. Parts without reactive components, no boom.

You're in luck it seems:

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/kerbal-space-program-2-interview/

Quote

... we're talking about what happens when rockets blow up. "That's actually my favourite part to work on," he says. "We want the explosions to be a little bit more relevant to the contents of the individual parts that are being destroyed. Our goal is for every explosion to be a snowflake … The explosions have gotten very exciting."

 

Quote

astronomical body tilt - it's time to implement it

simplified thrust curve of solid rocket boosters - no need for complications, a nice neutral curve creates less stress for launches.

new planetary bodies - I know it has been mentioned, but I need to remind about great concepts early custom planetary body (a periodical comet, a Vulcan-like sungrazing dwarf planet, ringed planet, binary planet)

life support, Kerbal reproduction and mortality - it opens vast gameplay opportunities - colonization, difficulties for interstellar travel, etc.

no magic stuff, only physics - please, never give up on this crown rule of KSP

Body tilt Yes, it would be much appreciated.

SRB curves would be great, but I a neutral curve is essentially what we have with a softer start and end. I'd want a regressive curve. Note that the graph is thrust, not TWR. A neutral curve keeps near constant thrust- we have that.

The new planetary bodies: of course. And they already showed us ringed planets and a binary planet (N body physics is needed for this to work properly???)

^ the above seems to be what they mentioned in the dev video, a new stellar system where many planets have rings, and there have been violent collisions. They mentioned a planetary pair that had recently suffered a massive collision that hadn't cooled down yet, nor spiraled inward/outward yet. To me the size is too similar. We really only know of a few examples.. Earth and the moon being one, and the closest to a binary system being pluto-charon, which is still not very similar in size (Pluto is still 8x the mass of charon)

Colonies with kerbal reproduction are confirmed

[Kernel Kraken]

My suggestions:

Keep the old easter eggs, but add in new ones.

Hinges!

An option to get more classic kerbal graphics.

 

[KerbolExplorer]

Some of my sugestions:

Add a story mode like the one that was going to be added in KSP 1(Wow i never thought i would say KSP 1 someday!)

*If* posible a simple terraforming mechanic.

I would see it as the following:

As more the terraforming advances the planet textures/terrain scatterer chances.I'm no developer but it shouldn't be too taxing on a PC to change the texture of a planet after a certain condition is met.

Along the lines of terraforming:

if life support is added(Witch less face it if we have colonies life support is 99% going to come) that there are stuff like open air farms when you reached a certain,wind turbines(this doesn't even need terraforming for worlds like Duna,Laythe and Eve)

And i think that Kerbals on EVA would need electricity in their space suits to survive,the power consuption could even vary with the tempeture on where they are!

Better crashing:

when you go 1000M/s to the ground to leave atleast the grass burned or a small temporary crater on the side of the impact.

Weather.

please!..I want rain!(and tsunamies)

Failures:

With the new aspect that you will farther than ever from Kerbin I think a failure system would be nice to have.Imagine an engine failing when you are about to aerobrake!.This would bring a lot more of a challenge to the game and would add a lot more to add to ships.

 

[SpaceFace545]

8 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:

• part explodiness inequality - lots of reactive fuel in tank, big boom. Little fuel, small boom. Parts without reactive components, no boom.

Like this we need things to go wrong like, part failures, engine failures, more explosions, cabin pressure dropping, and just simple malfunctions to make the game more immersive and lets the  player be involved in every second to make large decisions.

[m4ti140]

Since they've likely solved problems of time sync (they're adding multiplayer) maybe they can implement special relativity? If we're getting realistic interstellar travel (no FTL) then we're going to need something to keep us subluminal during long trips. Running objects on rails at different time step than the focused ship should be possible after all. Lorentz contraction could be a bigger problem.

[Yakuzi]

12 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:

• planetary body shine - immersive and beautiful
• part explodiness inequality - lots of reactive fuel in tank, big boom. Little fuel, small boom. Parts without reactive components, no boom.

From the IGN interview video, it seems like planetary body shine is included (youtube link). Specific part type explosions explodiness is mentioned at the same time in the video, ain't that handy?

12 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:

• no magic stuff, only physics - please, never give up on this crown rule of KSP

No more Kraken?

 

From the top of my head, I'd like to add a couple of suggestions myself as a 2000<=KSPlaytime<=4000 h player:

Cosmetic enhancements:

• footsteps, vehicle trails, kicked up dust. nuff said
• condensation trails, mach effects. Would be nice to have for immersion
• chatter. Kerbals communicate(?) in the trailers and have com arrays... we should be able to hear them.

Gameplay enhancements:

• proper career with time based mechanics. Including meaningful planetary and orbital infrastructure. Don't use anything from the current 'career' mode... seriously.
• make planets interesting and interactive. They are extremely boring in KSP1, which the grinding of science points does not alleviate whatsoever, no matter how much ground is broken.
• science is about discovering how the planets/stars/universe works. Science is not for unlocking tech*, tech should be unlocked over time with whatever currency system career mode provides. Also, scientific infrastructure.
• separate jet engines and nozzles. The off-set CoM of KSP1 jet engines is unrealistic and messes up designs. Include a jet engine and dedicated nozzle(s) that the player can orient however (s)he sees fit.

Technical Enhancements:

• shape-based, vessel-centered, aerodynamics. You know, FAR. The shape of the vessel as a whole, not individual parts, should control lift and drag. Stuff that is obscured from the airflow by other parts of the craft should not be causing any drag.
• native part-welding. People build big, complex craft, and with colonies and multiplayer there will be a lot of craft within physics range. For the vast majority of the time, most parts don't need their physics updated every frame, so allow the player to weld whatever they want together and keep FPS high. Even if you guys successfully implemented multithreading for individual craft, make welding a thing!
• procedural parts. Procedural wings are as much Lego style as the stock big 455 wings we currently have in KSP, and allow for more creativity while reducing part count. We might not need proc fuel tanks, if we have welding.

For the love of his holy Kraken Enhancements:

• call geomes, well, geomes. Biomes are only for lively places... or minecraft

 

* Though scientific discoveries may open up new tech branches, and tech may lead to new scientific instruments.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Yakuzi

[JeeF]

All these suggestions are nice and I couldn't agree more, but you forgot to mention the most important one: A decent sized planet.

First thing I do on any of my KSP careers is to mod the planet into an Earth-sized planet. The standard one is just ridiculously easy, no challenge whatsoever.

People are building SSTO's capable of taking off and landing 3 times before refueling, building a 10-ton spaceship capable of visiting any planet in the system, etc.

MAKE IT EARTH-SIZED! GIVE US A CHALLENGE!

Edited August 22, 2019 by JeeF

[KerikBalm]

Yes, I also want it scaled up (or variable scaling according to players wishes). I play KSP at 3x scale. Doing it at 10x scale is unreasonably hard because of the poor TWR of rocket engines, no engine with H2+O combustion Isps, and poor mass ratio of tanks. With current Ksp part balance, I find 3x to be the sweet spot.

If we're going to get future tech and the ability to build stuff offworld, the small scale of KSP1 will make it ridiculously easy.

Scale up KSP

[lajoswinkler]

On 8/22/2019 at 6:20 AM, JeeF said:

All these suggestions are nice and I couldn't agree more, but you forgot to mention the most important one: A decent sized planet.

First thing I do on any of my KSP careers is to mod the planet into an Earth-sized planet. The standard one is just ridiculously easy, no challenge whatsoever.

People are building SSTO's capable of taking off and landing 3 times before refueling, building a 10-ton spaceship capable of visiting any planet in the system, etc.

MAKE IT EARTH-SIZED! GIVE US A CHALLENGE!

While I agree with scaling up, I don't agree with making it full scale. There is a good reason why KSP is this small - time it takes to perform maneuvers.

 

On 8/22/2019 at 4:15 AM, Yakuzi said:

For the love of his holy Kraken Enhancements:

• call geomes, well, geomes. Biomes are only for lively places... or minecraft

I was always so annoyed with such usage of the word biome. It has nothing to do with KSP. Geome is a good alternative word, I support it.

[Tweeker]

I'll add one more to the pile, 

Engines should generate a shroud above the engine when it overhangs the tank above it, 

usefully for building clusters, and when the engine bell is larger than the tank above it. 

 

[Crabman]

On 8/22/2019 at 1:20 AM, JeeF said:

All these suggestions are nice and I couldn't agree more, but you forgot to mention the most important one: A decent sized planet.

First thing I do on any of my KSP careers is to mod the planet into an Earth-sized planet. The standard one is just ridiculously easy, no challenge whatsoever.

People are building SSTO's capable of taking off and landing 3 times before refueling, building a 10-ton spaceship capable of visiting any planet in the system, etc.

MAKE IT EARTH-SIZED! GIVE US A CHALLENGE!

 

I disagree it's easy. I spent weeks to land the first vessel on Mün. I didn't used tutorials or watched videos of it, which I think it's what the majority of players do, they go blind. I, however, agree that a bigger Kerbin would be nice, just not as big as RSS

[Bartybum]

I definitely would like to see the Kerbol system's planets be 2-3x as large as they currently are. It's a bit jarring when half the time your payload is almost as long as your lifter, especially for smaller payloads.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Bartybum

[lajoswinkler]

7 hours ago, Bartybum said:

I definitely would like to see the Kerbol system's planets be 2-3x as large as they currently are. It's a bit jarring when half the time your payload is almost as long as your lifter, especially for smaller payloads.

Yes, a bit larger, but not Kerbin=Earth. It's too much. Takes too long. I've played with RSS sized system and even as someone with quite long attention span, it was tedious.

That payload thing... gets me every time.

[Bartybum]

52 minutes ago, lajoswinkler said:

Yes, a bit larger, but not Kerbin=Earth. It's too much. Takes too long. I've played with RSS sized system and even as someone with quite long attention span, it was tedious.

That payload thing... gets me every time.

I haven't played RSS, but I'm not sure I could handle the added difficulty. The 2.5x mod for KSP 1.x seemed like it'd be a nice balance between realism and gameplay.

Edited August 25, 2019 by Bartybum

[Geschosskopf]

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

Here are some things I'm kindly suggesting for KSP 2, most of which are very simple and have great consequences, something lot of people have been asking for years. Most of these have been made possible by mods, but now there is no reason to leave them behind. Let modders deal with fresh ideas.

Good to see you again.  You know I'm expecting some even MOAR epic KRON mission in KSP2  

 

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

Cosmetic enhancements:

I have as feeling most of these will happen.

 

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

Gameplay enhancements:

I'm cool with most of these but there are a few I disagree with, or think should be options.

 

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

• astronomical body tilt - it's time to implement it

I dunno.  I don't see this having a useful gameplay purpose.  All it really does is make you wait for a specific time of day to launch into the inclination you want, then have to do more plane changes along the way.  IOW, it gets in the way of folks just slapping stuff together and going somewhere, which is one of KSP's main purposes (especially for the younger or less-serious part of its audience).  However, if there was some sort of in-game instrumentation, so you could plan all this out properly, and a timer you could set to launch at the proper time, then it wouldn't be that big a burden.

 

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

• radioisotope thermoelectric generator power decay curve - one radioisotope with fixed halflife is enough

I'd prefer this as an option.  It doesn't suit everybody's playstyle.

 

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

• life support, Kerbal reproduction and mortality - it opens vast gameplay opportunities - colonization, difficulties for interstellar travel, etc.

As I've said before, I don't think life support should ever be stock.  It has only 2 outcomes.  The first is simply bogging down your system with a bunch of background calculations that never have any effect on the game because you packed enough supplies to last the trip.  The 2nd is that it becomes micromanagment Hell, utterly preventing you from getting on with other things once you establish your 1st colony or launch a long-term mission.

It is my sincere hope that colonies are self-sufficient so we don't have to micromanage their life support needs.  This could be abstracted by putting the colony in a place with access to the necessary resources, then dropping sufficient modules of various types.  IOW, all the worker bees at the colony themselves are abstracted, not playable Kerbals.  But once the colony has enough population and you've basically built a new KSC there, then you interact with the colony the same as you do with KSC.  Build and launch ships, recruit playable Kerbals, etc.  Just as we don't have to run the whole Kerbal industrial base that must exist to support KSC on Kerbin, nor make sure roach coaches arrive in time for lunch at KSC, we shouldn't have to bother doing that with colonies, either.

 

On 8/21/2019 at 8:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

• sample museum - displaying all the collected and returned items in a special building

TOTALLY COOL IDEA!!!!!  Maybe even allow ships to be put in the museum, too.  Like the capsule from your 1st Mun mission, etc.

[lajoswinkler]

On 8/25/2019 at 4:34 PM, Geschosskopf said:

Good to see you again.  You know I'm expecting some even MOAR epic KRON mission in KSP2  

Oh, yeah. That's being planned.

Quote

I dunno.  I don't see this having a useful gameplay purpose.  All it really does is make you wait for a specific time of day to launch into the inclination you want, then have to do more plane changes along the way.  IOW, it gets in the way of folks just slapping stuff together and going somewhere, which is one of KSP's main purposes (especially for the younger or less-serious part of its audience).  However, if there was some sort of in-game instrumentation, so you could plan all this out properly, and a timer you could set to launch at the proper time, then it wouldn't be that big a burden.

Of course, this should go with the timer and all that you imply. It's a valuable tool to learn about the seasons, etc. When a planet has 0° tilt, a lot of neat things simply don't appear, such as analemma. With proper implementation and instrumentation, this would be an excellent thing to have.

 

Quote

 

As I've said before, I don't think life support should ever be stock.  It has only 2 outcomes.  The first is simply bogging down your system with a bunch of background calculations that never have any effect on the game because you packed enough supplies to last the trip.  The 2nd is that it becomes micromanagment Hell, utterly preventing you from getting on with other things once you establish your 1st colony or launch a long-term mission.

It is my sincere hope that colonies are self-sufficient so we don't have to micromanage their life support needs.  This could be abstracted by putting the colony in a place with access to the necessary resources, then dropping sufficient modules of various types.  IOW, all the worker bees at the colony themselves are abstracted, not playable Kerbals.  But once the colony has enough population and you've basically built a new KSC there, then you interact with the colony the same as you do with KSC.  Build and launch ships, recruit playable Kerbals, etc.  Just as we don't have to run the whole Kerbal industrial base that must exist to support KSC on Kerbin, nor make sure roach coaches arrive in time for lunch at KSC, we shouldn't have to bother doing that with colonies, either.

 

Micromanagement woud be hell, indeed. We could really use really simple system of one resource nutrition, like Snacks mod does. For example, even though I love Kerbalism for some of the things it pioneered, its resource system is just too tedious.

This simplified system, together with a neat little instrumentation, would make things very easy.

Edited August 28, 2019 by lajoswinkler

[whitespacekilla]

Even though the ship has sailed on ALL of these suggestions if they're already demoing footage, why not add a few ideas for us looky-loos in the forums to scrap about?

Modders enhancements:

• Don't run the code through a silly obfuscator, doesn't protect any IP (your licensing does that), bloats the DLLs a bit, makes it harder for the community to make use of the public facing APIs, makes it harder for the community to communicate to you about bugs, etc.
• Switch to a standard configuration file format like json/yaml, not a custom format
• Document at least the data models in your config files thoroughly
• Provide examples
• Provide usable, stable UI toolkits and tooling

Technical enhancements:

• Don't allocate so much garbage memory per second
• Use something like a voxel based drag model (a la FAR)
• Build calculation intensive systems with more parallelization in mind (no one has CPUs with less than 4 logical cores these days)
• Load configuration/textures/definitions/other assets and data in a manner that strikes an intelligent, modern balance between memory usage, load times, performance, and stability
• Drop the breaking ground science deployment and inventory system entirely and/or adopt the KIS/KAS system

Automation:

• Once I've proven some type of mission is trivial by accomplishing some milestone, give me ways to skip it, i.e. if I can put a giant station in LKO, don't make me individually launch small satellites anymore, perhaps a system based on the mass, capacity, and equipment of the stations/bases determines what kind of premium I have to pay to have the vessel I want to ship automatically delivered to some corridor near my stations (I've always wanted to make a mod that does this and have made some progress but haven't completed it)
• Auto-navigation of rovers so they're useful
• Automated re-supply at a cost
• Movement of resources around a well colonized celestial body at a cost
• Sharing of resources in short range so I don't have to make giant single vessel bases and stations (even if some time has to elapse or special equipment is necessary)

Quality of life:

• KER's features at a minimum as far as information and readouts
• Better science tracking/checklist functionality
• Overhaul the action group interface, maybe even introduce some templating (i.e. dynamic specifications like I want re-runnable experiments mapped to this, I want multi-mode engines and air intakes mapped to this, etc)
• Alarm clock/scheduling system
• Built in transfer window / porkchop information systems, ejection angle tools visually integrated
• "Intuitive mode" maneuver node editing
• More "smart points" on orbits for starting a maneuver node

Edited August 28, 2019 by whitespacekilla

[Geschosskopf]

15 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:

Oh, yeah. That's being planned.

Outstanding!  I'm already looking forward to your mission reports a year or more hence.

 

Quote

Of course, this should go with the timer and all that you imply. It's a valuable tool to learn about the seasons, etc. When a planet has 0° tilt, a lot of neat things simply don't appear, such as analemma. With proper implementation and instrumentation, this would be an excellent thing to have.

Implementation without instrumentation has long been the bane of KSP.  In KSP1, there have been some admirable recent attempts to redress the karmic balance but there's still quite a long way to go.  I hope KSP2 completely expurgates the sins of the past in this regard.

 

Quote

Micromanagement would be hell, indeed. We could really use really simple system of one resource nutrition, like Snacks mod does. For example, even though I love Kerbalism for some of the things it pioneered, its resource system is just too tedious.

I well remember your KRON mission to Plock with Kerbalism.  Not a row I want to hoe.  Even when not having other missions going on closer to home, it was still WAY more trouble than it was worth regarding LS.

Even when you can make everything out of Ore, from fuel to all life support needs to every part of interplanetary/interstellar ships,  it's ALWAYS micromanagement Hell.  There is no middle ground as long as consumption, conversion, and whatnot are measured on any timescale shorter than decades.  And given KSP2's interstellar possibilities, centuries might even be too short to avoid micromanagement Hell.

This is why I say it's best to do without any stock life support system.  There's no way to make it work on the short timescale of just colonizing Mun that doesn't make it impossible to deal with at the longer timespans involved in colonizing Duna.  And that temporal unsuitability only gets worse the farther from home you go.  What might be tolerable at Jool is WAY too micro at Sarnus (twice as far from the sun so things move way slower in comparison).   And things only get worse by at least an order of magnitude (likely more) when you got interstellar.

Stock life support bearing any resemblance AT ALL to ANY currently existing KSP1 LS mod is a BAD IDEA which KSP2 would do well to avoid completely, due to the micromanagement they all require in the short term.  So that leaves only 2 options.  #1 is to not worry about it at all.  This is the best option, totally supported by Occam's Razor.  Allowing large-scale, self-sufficient, economically and reproductively viable colonies which can materially contribute to, and be an active political part of, a burgeoning interplanetary/interstellar civilization, is already deep into the realm of fairy castles and rainbow-farting unicorns.  If you have such magic at your disposal, there's no need at all to sweat such trivial details as day-to-day, or even century-to-century, life support.  So just don't do it.  #2 is is coming up with some bastid-ized system that makes nobody happy.  If you can't pack enough supplies for even a sub-light interstellar trip plus however long it takes the colonists to get up and running, then you defeat the purpose of being able to go interstellar.  But OTOH, if you CAN do that, then there's no sense AT ALL in worrying about life support AT ALL on shorter timespans than centuries.  Which basically gets  back to #1.

Edited August 29, 2019 by Geschosskopf

[mattinoz]

On 8/25/2019 at 10:05 PM, lajoswinkler said:

Yes, a bit larger, but not Kerbin=Earth. It's too much. Takes too long. I've played with RSS sized system and even as someone with quite long attention span, it was tedious.

That payload thing... gets me every time.

Could they scale up the timeframe with the planets?

If base time was 4x so one physics frame dealt with 4sec native and wrap controls could make it faster or slower from that as a base then the Planet scale could increase 3x and game time to orbit would be slightly less.

Main reason physics wrap doesn't work very well in KSP1 is SAS is overzealous. Fix SAS, demagic it a bit so it relies more on aerodynamics less on reaction wheel. Give it some ease-in ease-out smarts. We might also need auto shutdown for node burns as well but that's kinda needed for long duration burns while warping which is a confirmed feature.

Still if that was workable the craft engineering would look more sensible and the challenge increase without the time hit.

[DunaManiac]

On 8/21/2019 at 9:41 AM, lajoswinkler said:

Kerbal breathing on EVA with sounds they would hear in spacesuits in vacuum

Nope. I have watched 2001 a space odyssey, and it was just 10 minutes of breathing sounds. I have also done chatterer, and I really don't like it.

[lajoswinkler]

14 hours ago, DunaManiac said:

Nope. I have watched 2001 a space odyssey, and it was just 10 minutes of breathing sounds. I have also done chatterer, and I really don't like it.

There's something called volume settings in KSP. For spacecraft, environmental sounds, Kerbals, etc.