Lists of things that SHOULD NOT BE ADDED IN KSP2

[Lo.M]

This topic is to list all the things that should definitely not be added to ksp

-space elevator  (complicated for the game)

-Orbital ring  (complicated for the game)

-Launch loops  (complicated for The game)

-Tachyon drive (Technology not of that century.)

- unrealistic drives (Technology not of that century.)

- planetary deconstruction (complicated for the game)

-warp drives (Technology not of that century.)

- wormholes  (Technology not of that century.)

-war (Not rocket related.)

-political KSSR / (political/money)

- intelligent aliens (not necessary) (complicated for the game)

- FTL drives (Technology not of that century.)

-fake dlc (political/money)

- magic technology, unobtanium (magic)

- Loot boxes or in game purchases. (Political/money)

-mega-structures at Dyson sphere level (complicated for the game)

-Excessive DLCS (political/money)

-(Metallic hydrogen removed) to be discussed

-(Terraforming removed) to be discussed

.... list outhers ......

Edited January 28, 2021 by Lo.M

[SpaceNerd4]

-warp drives

Actually, as long as they're somewhat balanced, they would be fine for a late-game tech.

[Guest]

I'm not at all opposed to space elevators, orbital rings, megastructures, or terraforming in principle. In practice they're probably way too much work, I'd certainly prioritise any number of things over them – aerostats, better aerodynamics, solar sails and/or laser propulsion, richer/deeper/more interesting science, hacking in Lagrangian points somehow, etc etc. 

With you on the other stuff.

Things that have occasionally been proposed but that I would not like to see:

• Intelligent aliens (other than kerbals ofc); alien relics are OK if they're kept relatively low-key and don't provide magic technology or such
• Pop-culture references or other fanservice (easter eggs that are so rare they might as well not be there are OK)
• Kerbal politics (no KSSR/KSA space race plz)
• War and instruments thereof
• Grindy mechanics, such as:
  • Overly punitive LS (I used to be more concerned about this but going by what they've been saying I think they're going to get it more or less right)
  • Random part failures and part degradation requiring busywork for constant upkeep

[KerikBalm]

23 minutes ago, Lo.M said:

This topic serves to list all the things that definitely should not be added in ksp 2                           

-Tachyon drives                                                                              

-warp drives

-space elevators

- orbital rings

-mega-structures

-terraforming

-FTL drives 
.... list others ......

I mean... why not orbital rings, or mega structures like launch loops and such.

Also, they need not be so mega on places like Gilly

 

Other things:

- Weapons

- metalic hydrogen engines

- dangerous xenomorphs

- functional alien spacecraft/living alien civilizations

[SpaceFace545]

I don't want to see:

• Technobabble, I'm fine with metallic hydrogen but no unobtanium drives or other stuff like that.
• The game being "dumbed" down for kids 
• The game being tailored or marketed primarily to kids
• Being dropped after a few bug fixes and never to be updated or maintained again like many big box games are. 
• Dumbed down fusion or no realism, I think we all deserve a challenge with more variety and fuel types than xenon and whatever the heck liquid fuel is.
  • Fusion in real life is the holy grail but also back breakingly hard to achieve so I want to feel that way.
• Orion engines not turning whatever you touch into a nuclear blast zone
• Micro transactions and fake dlcs which only have a few parts or skins
• No skins of any sorts that need to be earned or can be bought instead.
• I know they are flushing out kerbals some more but so help me god if the kerbals dab or do any tik tok or fortnite trash. 
• No career mode, maybe they'll make it "funner" but I like money.

8 minutes ago, KerikBalm said:

I mean... why not orbital rings, or mega structures like launch loops and such.

I think launch loops would be fine only on planets without an atmosphere so they wouldn't be so massive. But how would an orbital ring even work? 

[kspnerd122]

Orbital ring - Wikipedia

Orbital rings are fine, actually makes sense for colonization, can be built anywhere(insane cost of course) Why no terraforming, if u want to set up a colony and eventually terraform the entire game, do it. dyson spheres, laser propuslsion, all of em, we should not limit ourselves, seriously, maybe the ground color would change and the atmo hight and thickness would change, oceans would fill lowland areas(they would always be in the same spot), so terraforming a planet, sure, if you want to spend IRL days terraforming eve/duna, fine, do it.

[Lo.M]

1 hour ago, KerikBalm said:

metalic hydrogen engines

Delete this immediately without any discussions about it.

1 hour ago, Brikoleur said:

I'm not at all opposed to space elevators, orbital rings, megastructures, or terraforming in principle. In practice they're probably way too much work, I'd certainly prioritise any number of things over them – aerostats, better aerodynamics, solar sails and/or laser propulsion, richer/deeper/more interesting science, hacking in Lagrangian points somehow, etc etc. 

Removed orbital rings 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Lo.M

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, KerikBalm said:

- metalic hydrogen engines

Typical

I'd say the only engine related things to be left out are warp drives. They go way beyond the tech capabilities shown in the trailers and they're also way beyond the game's technology, being set only a few centuries ahead of ours.

[Lo.M]

10 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I'd say the only engine related things to be left out are warp drives. They go way beyond the tech capabilities shown in the trailers and they're also way beyond the game's technology, being set only a few centuries ahead of ours.

And Tachyon drive and unobtanium drives

[SpaceFace545]

10 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Typical

I'd say the only engine related things to be left out are warp drives. They go way beyond the tech capabilities shown in the trailers and they're also way beyond the game's technology, being set only a few centuries ahead of ours.

Yeah KSP2 is about a 100 years from now but FTL is about 400 years from now.

[kerbiloid]

Let's hope that they will add at least something and release before telling them what to not add in a game whose future looks rather suspended.

9 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

Yeah KSP2 is about a 100 years from now

They say, 2 years, but maybe you're right.

[Lo.M]

4 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

100 years

35 years 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Lo.M

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Lo.M said:

-Tachyon drive            

- irrealistic drives                                   

-wormholes

-  FTL drives

These have already been confirmed to not be in the game. In a very early interview a ksp 2 developer said no warp drives or ftl drives. I think they also said no wormholes. Irrealistic drives is also probably not going to be in game

3 hours ago, Lo.M said:

- space elevator

-mega-structures 

IDK why these two are bad ideas, space elevator sounds like something possible for a very late game colony. after all, the only thing that's' preventing us from doing it is because of material supply. I'm sure kerbals can make a tall tower.

Mega structures is kinda what the game's 3rd phase of a colony is gonna be like. Now, depends what you mean by mega structure I guess.

[SpaceFace545]

8 minutes ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

IDK why these two are bad ideas, space elevator sounds like something possible for a very late game colony. after all, the only thing that's' preventing us from doing it is because of material supply. I'm sure kerbals can make a tall tower.

Mega structures is kinda what the game's 3rd phase of a colony is gonna be like. Now, depends what you mean by mega structure I guess.

I think megastructures are just too big, KSP2 takes place as a budding civilization that has decided to start colony efforts but just colonies and outposts not large cities that would need infrastructure like that.

[Spaceman.Spiff]

3 hours ago, Lo.M said:

terraforming

I would actually quite like terraforming. It would be cool if Laythe, for example, started with frozen over oceans and a thin atmosphere, but eventually it can become a more hospitable world. Obviously that would be tier 3 (4?) of colonization, but it would be cool nonetheless.

[MechBFP]

The complement of everything that should be in KSP 2.

[Lo.M]

24 minutes ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

I would actually quite like terraforming. It would be cool if Laythe, for example, started with frozen over oceans and a thin atmosphere, but eventually it can become a more hospitable world. Obviously that would be tier 3 (4?) of colonization, but it would be cool nonetheless.

terraforming is too complex for ksp

[Spaceman.Spiff]

1 minute ago, Lo.M said:

terraforming is too complex for ksp

I suppose, but at the same time, the new game is about more than just scooting around the solar system; it's about developing interplanetary infrastructure and colonies. If there are interstellar fusion engines, but no terraforming, I think that would be a bit of an oversight. IMO it would make more sense to terraform laythe than to make an interstellar journey to find a new homeworld.

TL;DR KSP2 seems to be about colonization, and terraforming makes a lot of sense in the grand scheme of things.

[Dr. Kerbal]

No Loot boxes or in game purchases.

[Dr. Kerbal]

We would not want a legendary mainsail.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Dr. Kerbal

[KerikBalm]

19 hours ago, Lo.M said:

Delete this immediately without any discussions about it.

No

It is pertinent to the thread topic, and not against forum rules.  I  listed things that I think do not belong in KSP 2, one of which has previously been discussed in other threads, and I need not reiterate arguments here, but will respond to any such arguments.

20 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

• Micro transactions and fake dlcs which only have a few parts or skins
• No skins of any sorts that need to be earned or can be bought instead.
• I know they are flushing out kerbals some more but so help me god if the kerbals dab or do any tik tok or fortnite trash. 
• No career mode, maybe they'll make it "funner" but I like money.

I think launch loops would be fine only on planets without an atmosphere so they wouldn't be so massive. But how would an orbital ring even work? 

Definitely no to micro transactions. DLC is ...okaaaayyyy... if it is done well and doesn't just add stuff that really should have been in the game upon release. If the game feels incomplete without the DLC, the DLC is an abusive way to get more money.

Earned re-skins (retextures) are fine. FWIW, I don't care about re-textures, and I wouldn't neccessarily mind purely cosmetic microtransactions, because I'd never be tempted to buy them, but it is a slippery slop.

Dunno about fortnite trash (I know what fortnite is, generally speaking, but no specifics), and dabbing is dumb as heck, but I really don't care as long as they don't annoy me by spontaneously dabbing.

Career mode is fine with me, I'm not sure what you mean by "i like money", the progression mode, as they've described it, does not have limited funds, but rather limited resources to construct stuff off world, related to what the colony can produce.

Orbital rings would need multiple groundstations to stabilize a ring in which each segment of the ring is travelling at orbital velocity. Its essentially a space elevator that goes to low orbit instead of stationary orbit. The top of the "elevator" needs to end in a "tram" that rides on top of the ring,  most often proposed to be a maglev tram, because friction from direct contact with the ring moving at orbital speeds would be... prohibitive.

I'm not sure how you'd go about constructing one, I have some ideas, but I think we need a whole thread for that.

[Guest]

21 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

• No career mode, maybe they'll make it "funner" but I like money.

This doesn't mean much, I would say that with the info we have at hand, the game mode that's at risk is sandbox, not career. 

Unless for "career mode" you intend you want the same exact system that's in KSP1.

Edited January 22, 2021 by Master39

[mcwaffles2003]

19 hours ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

I would actually quite like terraforming. It would be cool if Laythe, for example, started with frozen over oceans and a thin atmosphere, but eventually it can become a more hospitable world. Obviously that would be tier 3 (4?) of colonization, but it would be cool nonetheless.

I'd like terraforming as well, though, based on previous talks of what it would require it just doesn't seem to be in the cards due to computational limits

20 hours ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

IDK why these two are bad ideas, space elevator sounds like something possible for a very late game colony. after all, the only thing that's' preventing us from doing it is because of material supply. I'm sure kerbals can make a tall tower.

Mega structures is kinda what the game's 3rd phase of a colony is gonna be like. Now, depends what you mean by mega structure I guess.

I'm seeing a lot of talk over megastructures in this thread (has there even been a mega structure thread here?) and if they are possible to implement in a reasonable manner it would be cool to see them in the game as a more final phase. I doubt it will happen, there's a lot on the devs plate already but if this game is going to evolve over then next 10 years beyond release I think it would be cool if it could head in that direction.

I think they would have to be built in a wat different than ships/ stations and probably even colonies though as their scale of size is on a different level.

[Gargamel]

I don't see why anything should not be included in the game, as long as the gameplay leading up to them is not compromised. 

[Incarnation of Chaos]

18 hours ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

I suppose, but at the same time, the new game is about more than just scooting around the solar system; it's about developing interplanetary infrastructure and colonies. If there are interstellar fusion engines, but no terraforming, I think that would be a bit of an oversight. IMO it would make more sense to terraform laythe than to make an interstellar journey to find a new homeworld.

TL;DR KSP2 seems to be about colonization, and terraforming makes a lot of sense in the grand scheme of things.

The reasons we won't see Terraforming, are technical not plausibility.

We have no idea how KSP2 handles planets, except that it supports multiple planets by design. But how that system is implemented will make or break any possibilities of "Terraforming", and essentially we just don't know enough about KSP2 to make a guess either way tbh.

I'd bet more that it's not going to be there, at least at launch. It might very well have been a feature that was planned at some point, but hit the chopping block floor as the realization of what KSP2 had grown into and how behind they were dawned. Or it might never been considered, KSP has limited options for changing planets once loaded. Especially their atmospheres, so knowing that KSP2 is using the same terrain system it would make me question if they made anything else more modular/configurable during program execution.