KSP 2 needs Space Telescopes and Fog of War in the map for Progression/Career mode

[GoldForest]

I had this thought that KSP 2 should have telescopes, and that got me to thinking it should also have a Fog of War outside of the Kerborler System. 

It would make it more realistic if we had to find the new planets and solar systems before being able to go to them. 

Now, I'm not suggesting we scan the whole sky ourselves. This is what I'm thinking.

1) Launch a Radiological Telescope into orbit and it continuously scans the sky in a grid like pattern. 
2) When it detects a planet or solar system, it will inform the player
3) The player will check their map to see that there is a question mark symbol around the area where the planet/solar system is. The question mark will be kind of like how asteroids are now.
4) Player launches space telescope
5) Player looks around area where the question mark is
6) Player spots planet or solar system
7) Planet/solar system becomes available to view in map view
8) Plan interplanetary mission
9) ???
10) Profit

[nwillard]

So kinda like stock ResearchBodies

[tseitsei89]

This would be an awesome idea, but they have already stated that(or am I completely wrong) that the kerbol system will stay the same...

[GoldForest]

22 minutes ago, tseitsei89 said:

This would be an awesome idea, but they have already stated that(or am I completely wrong) that the kerbol system will stay the same...

I never mentioned anything about changing the Kerboler system. 

33 minutes ago, nwillard said:

So kinda like stock ResearchBodies

Basically. 

[Incarnation of Chaos]

Its just as easy to say "kerbal scientists have already found these systems" and save a decent amount of work on a feature that i don't really see contributing much to immersion or gameplay. 

[GoldForest]

41 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Its just as easy to say "kerbal scientists have already found these systems" and save a decent amount of work on a feature that i don't really see contributing much to immersion or gameplay. 

True, but irl you have to find planets and solar systems. So it does add immersion. 

[Guest]

Since the stars systems are the same for every game, this would just mean rote busywork. Fun the first time, tedious after that.

If you have to, just link discovery of the star systems to building upgrades you’d do anyway, like unowned object tracking.

[tseitsei89]

2 hours ago, GoldForest said:

I never mentioned anything about changing the Kerboler system. 

 

So fog of war or not, most players will already know what is coming. That being said, not changing the kerbolar system is not a good choice to begin with... I for one want new challenges at least instead of the same old same old

[GoldForest]

50 minutes ago, Brikoleur said:

Since the stars systems are the same for every game, this would just mean rote busywork. Fun the first time, tedious after that.

If you have to, just link discovery of the star systems to building upgrades you’d do anyway, like unowned object tracking.

I see discovering other planets and solar systems as a major way of earning science/funds like in Research Bodies. And of course, you could always turn it off in the settings menu when you get bored of it. 

Oh! Idea! Someone should make a random planet generator for KSP 2, that way there's a real reason for having FOW. 

20 minutes ago, tseitsei89 said:

So fog of war or not, most players will already know what is coming. That being said, not changing the kerbolar system is not a good choice to begin with... I for one want new challenges at least instead of the same old same old

That's what the new planets and solar systems are for. They want to leave the Kerbolar system alone so that new players can easily get into the game and the old players don't have to relearn the whole system again. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Oh! Idea! Someone should make a random planet generator for KSP 2, that way there's a real reason for having FOW. 

It would pretty much require that to be fun, yes.

[GoldForest]

1 minute ago, Brikoleur said:

It would pretty much require that to be fun, yes.

Or a rival space agency. 

KSP 2 does have multiplayer. 

[Xd the great]

58 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

KSP 2 does have multiplayer. 

Starting a space race, are we?

 

5 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Now, I'm not suggesting we scan the whole sky ourselves. This is what I'm thinking.

1) Launch a Radiological Telescope into orbit and it continuously scans the sky in a grid like pattern. 
2) When it detects a planet or solar system, it will inform the player
3) The player will check their map to see that there is a question mark symbol around the area where the planet/solar system is. The question mark will be kind of like how asteroids are now.
4) Player launches space telescope
5) Player looks around area where the question mark is
6) Player spots planet or solar system
7) Planet/solar system becomes available to view in map view
8) Plan interplanetary mission
9) ???
10) Profit

A way to reduce tedious work is if we can launch both telescopes at once.

[GoldForest]

27 minutes ago, Xd the great said:

Starting a space race, are we?

What? No. Never. *Pushes plans for space domination under the carpet*

[tseitsei89]

2 hours ago, GoldForest said:

I 

Oh! Idea! Someone should make a random planet generator for KSP 2, that way there's a real reason for having FOW. 

This would be so awesome.

And then FOW woukd make total sense

Edited September 21, 2019 by tseitsei89

[DunaManiac]

I support this because I don't like ResearchBodies because you have to literally discover minmus! But I do like the idea of having to discover planets orbiting the star.

[mcwaffles2003]

On 9/21/2019 at 4:17 AM, tseitsei89 said:

This would be so awesome.

And then FOW woukd make total sense

I've been hoping for a designed stellar neighborhood and a procedurally generated rest of galaxy

This way we can all share common game starts that diverge after essentially "beating the game" and find our own little bugs in randomly generated planets. i assume setting this up couldnt be that hard, especially if you can pull from a library of designed planetary features to still add touches of custom made work to these procedurally generated systems

[GoldForest]

33 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

I've been hoping for a designed stellar neighborhood and a procedurally generated rest of galaxy

This way we can all share common game starts that diverge after essentially "beating the game" and find our own little bugs in randomly generated planets. i assume setting this up couldnt be that hard, especially if you can pull from a library of designed planetary features to still add touches of custom made work to these procedurally generated systems

Procedurally made planets are hard because you have to code in pretty much everything that could happen, and then you have to turn around and code everything that can't happen. 

I would say a semi-procedural generator would be in order, as you mention in your last sentence. It pulls from a library of features. Size, shape, atmospheric properties, etc. 

For example: It could copy Kerbin, change the color of grass to purple, change the atmosphere height from 70km to 10km, then make the water green instead of blue, oh, and increase its size to super-earth(Kerbin) size. So Kerbin is twice the size, has a super compressed atmosphere which makes the mountains around Kerbin higher than the Karman line, and It would have double to triple the gravity. 

[Superfluous J]

6 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

For example: It could copy Kerbin, change the color of grass to purple, change the atmosphere height from 70km to 10km, then make the water green instead of blue, oh, and increase its size to super-earth(Kerbin) size. So Kerbin is twice the size, has a super compressed atmosphere which makes the mountains around Kerbin higher than the Karman line, and It would have double to triple the gravity.

Hey it worked to make No Man's Sky's planets infinitely unique.

 

 

 

 

...that was a joke.

[StarStreak2109]

On 9/21/2019 at 4:06 AM, GoldForest said:

I had this thought that KSP 2 should have telescopes, and that got me to thinking it should also have a Fog of War outside of the Kerborler System. 

It would make it more realistic if we had to find the new planets and solar systems before being able to go to them. 

Now, I'm not suggesting we scan the whole sky ourselves. This is what I'm thinking.

1) Launch a Radiological Telescope into orbit and it continuously scans the sky in a grid like pattern. 
2) When it detects a planet or solar system, it will inform the player
3) The player will check their map to see that there is a question mark symbol around the area where the planet/solar system is. The question mark will be kind of like how asteroids are now.
4) Player launches space telescope
5) Player looks around area where the question mark is
6) Player spots planet or solar system
7) Planet/solar system becomes available to view in map view
8) Plan interplanetary mission
9) ???
10) Profit

Well, there's one thing I do not like about ResearchBodies. On Earth, we knew a lot about other bodies in our solar system ages before we even launched the first rocket. Having a fully fledged and functional space program and virtually no place to go beyond say the Mun just rubs me the wrong way. I'd be okay with this if it encompasses extra-solar bodies like other stars, exoplanets and of course small bodies like planetesimals, comets and asteroids.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

12 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Procedurally made planets are hard because you have to code in pretty much everything that could happen, and then you have to turn around and code everything that can't happen. 

I would say a semi-procedural generator would be in order, as you mention in your last sentence. It pulls from a library of features. Size, shape, atmospheric properties, etc. 

For example: It could copy Kerbin, change the color of grass to purple, change the atmosphere height from 70km to 10km, then make the water green instead of blue, oh, and increase its size to super-earth(Kerbin) size. So Kerbin is twice the size, has a super compressed atmosphere which makes the mountains around Kerbin higher than the Karman line, and It would have double to triple the gravity. 

Procedural planet generation has been a thing since Spore; well before then in fact. The coding is tedious but workable; you design "model" systems like you described and then feed them in. You would need more than just Kerbin; Jool, EVE and Eeloo would cover most of the possibilities. I'm also pretty sure there's a mod team attempting this for ksp1 and it seems performance and ksp jank getting in the way of scatterer is the limitation rather than the code.  KSP2 hopefully handles this much better due to systems being present in stock.

[Klapaucius]

On 9/21/2019 at 2:06 PM, GoldForest said:

I had this thought that KSP 2 should have telescopes, and that got me to thinking it should also have a Fog of War outside of the Kerborler System. 

It would make it more realistic if we had to find the new planets and solar systems before being able to go to them. 

Now, I'm not suggesting we scan the whole sky ourselves. This is what I'm thinking.

1) Launch a Radiological Telescope into orbit and it continuously scans the sky in a grid like pattern. 
2) When it detects a planet or solar system, it will inform the player
3) The player will check their map to see that there is a question mark symbol around the area where the planet/solar system is. The question mark will be kind of like how asteroids are now.
4) Player launches space telescope
5) Player looks around area where the question mark is
6) Player spots planet or solar system
7) Planet/solar system becomes available to view in map view
8) Plan interplanetary mission
9) ???
10) Profit

I quite like this idea.  Right now in career mode, I can start out, go to the tracking station and immediately call up all sorts of information on the planets. Considering that it was only a few years ago we had any more than a few hypotheses about the composition of Pluto, having even those meager facts at our fingertips  right away does not make a lot of sense.  Prior to Voyager, we only knew of 2 of Neptune's 14 known moons and prior to Voyager we had no idea that Jupiter, Neptune and Uranus all have ring systems.

I like the idea of having to do flyby's and do some science to ascertain and/or confirm facts about the planet: atmosphere, atmospheric density, etc.  It would actually make the science aspect seem more relevant than just temperature and goo containers.

I'm doing my first career game right now. Some of the contracts include launching relay satellites into various orbits. So, why not add a few telescope parts? It does not have to be super-complex.  There could even be a contract to launch an array of cubesats like the BRITE mission. The picture below is from the mission website:

 

 

I actually think the science is the weakest part of KSP because it is all a bit silly. I mean, the Goo canister is iconic, but it would be nice to do stuff that seems more relevant to the missions. So at least making other solar systems obscured would be good. We can know they exist, but the details need to be teased out.

[StarStreak2109]

Well, for discovering the astronomical features I highlighted earlier, space telescopes make very much sense. You can even use a Hubble analog to perform science on other worlds in the Kerbol system.

With regards to planetary science (including science done on minor bodies and/or asteroids), I wish much more love is given to the science system. I for one could imagine a system where much care has to invested into discovering planetary resources and conditions required for off-world base building. Much like we are investigating say Mars or Europa for useful resources. Where are hydrocarbons? Is there liquid or frozen water? Are there atmospheric resources.

Furthermore, I would not also be solely looking at resources, but also planetary conditions! Like weather phenomena. A planet could be as "calm" as Mars or as violent as Venus. How is the atmosphere structured? Are there environmental hazards, like e.g. acidous lakes you wouldn't want to land in?

Talking of landing. If I were to build a base on another world, I would want to know about the geography of that world, so I need maps.

Some of these functions are contained within the ScanSat mod. This could be incorporated into KSP2 and built upon.

To sum this up:

• Use space telescopes for discovering extrasolar bodies and minor planets, asteroids, comets and the likes;
• Use space telescopes for planetary recon of Kerbolar objects; and
• Use of dedicated science instruments for detailed analysis of any solar or extrasolar body.

[GoldForest]

1 hour ago, StarStreak2109 said:

To sum this up:

• Use space telescopes for discovering extrasolar bodies and minor planets, asteroids, comets and the likes;
• Use space telescopes for planetary recon of Kerbolar objects; and
• Use of dedicated science instruments for detailed analysis of any solar or extrasolar body.

This is basically the consensus, and the basic point of my first post. KSP 2 is set after KSP 1 (Obviously), so it's not hard to think that the Kerborler system has been explored several times over canonically, but beyond the solar system, that's another monster they haven't tackled. Telescopes would make discovering the new systems enjoyable, at least for the first few runs. 

[Incarnation of Chaos]

8 hours ago, Klapaucius said:

I quite like this idea.  Right now in career mode, I can start out, go to the tracking station and immediately call up all sorts of information on the planets. Considering that it was only a few years ago we had any more than a few hypotheses about the composition of Pluto, having even those meager facts at our fingertips  right away does not make a lot of sense.  Prior to Voyager, we only knew of 2 of Neptune's 14 known moons and prior to Voyager we had no idea that Jupiter, Neptune and Uranus all have ring systems.

I like the idea of having to do flyby's and do some science to ascertain and/or confirm facts about the planet: atmosphere, atmospheric density, etc.  It would actually make the science aspect seem more relevant than just temperature and goo containers.

I'm doing my first career game right now. Some of the contracts include launching relay satellites into various orbits. So, why not add a few telescope parts? It does not have to be super-complex.  There could even be a contract to launch an array of cubesats like the BRITE mission. The picture below is from the mission website:

 

 

I actually think the science is the weakest part of KSP because it is all a bit silly. I mean, the Goo canister is iconic, but it would be nice to do stuff that seems more relevant to the missions. So at least making other solar systems obscured would be good. We can know they exist, but the details need to be teased out.

KSP needs more love for small sats in general; along with probe bodies and reasons to send them out. I really like the idea of using these to get finer details of important deposits; even making the tracking station images blurry until probe passes provide better detail. Yes we could see everything in the solar system with telescopes well before spaceflight; but even objects as close to the moon were still not known in extreme detail.

 

[Nuke]

i like this idea.