A list of features I would personally like to see available in the stock game that have not already been confirmed:

[mcwaffles2003]

Disclaimer: This list does not necessarily mean available at launch and I don't intend all of these to be non-optional.

• VR support (at least for the VAB if not IVA)[around 70% support(only 33% say they would immediately use it)]
• Multi-monitor support (so we can look at our craft without a million gauges covering it) [over 80% support]
• Actual science (experiments that give us tangible and useful data to use for better decision making in the future) [around 80% support]
• Space telescopes (these have always been our first step to exploring space, it would be nice to see them play a real part) [over 95% support]
• Life support (even if it is minimal and rudimentary, I think it would help standardize mods around the subject)
• Improved part selection (ex: all cylindrical 1.25m tanks under the same icon and when clicked a dropdown of available lengths presents itself)
• Improved tech tree advancement (more reasonably sorted tree with multiple types of "points" to acquire to make tech progression more sensible)

 

Sources for my proclaimed polling support:

Spoiler

 

 

EDIT: Everyone, please feel free to post your own list, but please try to keep it in a short format. If this thread gains attention I'll put up a poll with the posted ideas to see where support in general lies for everyone's ideas.

Edited July 1, 2021 by mcwaffles2003

[Dientus]

Although I may prioritize differently, I mostly agree with your list overall. And while I believe life support could add to the game, it has been confirmed that it will not be implemented.

 

Quote

Simpson noted that, while you can colonise other planets, you won't have to worry about feeding your Kerbals and keeping them alive once you get there. Life support isn't going to be a concern.

https://mashable.com/article/kerbal-space-program-2-interview?amp&utm_campaign=mash-com-tw-main-link&utm_contnet=entertainment&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=social&__twitter_impression=true

 

 

[SOXBLOX]

That quote seems kinda squishy to me... It seems to leave room for any kind of LS that isn't necessary (with an arbitrary definition of necessary) but which might be useful. Maybe colonies will survive, but not grow, without LS?

Edited June 30, 2021 by SOXBLOX

[MKI]

22 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

That quote seems kinda squishy to me... It seems to leave room for any kind of LS that isn't necessary (with an arbitrary definition of necessary) but which might be useful. Maybe colonies will survive, but not grow, without LS?

The thing with LifeSupport, or even something like "grow with LifeSupport" is as far as I know, KSP 2 wont force you to "grind" similar missions over time. So something like resupplying a colony with more snacks multiple times to keep them growing would fall into that "grind" bucket and probably not be part of the game.

 

14 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

• VR support (at least for the VAB if not IVA)[around 70% support(only 33% say they would immediately use it)]
• Multi-monitor support (so we can look at our craft without a million gauges covering it) [over 80% support]

I personally would want multi-monitor support over VR. But if this game is going to consoles I can see VR support being more sensible.

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, MKI said:

The thing with LifeSupport, or even something like "grow with LifeSupport" is as far as I know, KSP 2 wont force you to "grind" similar missions over time. So something like resupplying a colony with more snacks multiple times to keep them growing would fall into that "grind" bucket and probably not be part of the game.

Having used USI-LS for years (which is probably more robust than any potential KSP2 LS system) I find I worry much less about life support than I do about fuel. Fertilizer deliveries are much less frequent than shipping fuel around, and with 8 or so fuel types this will be even more important. So they’re going to need an automated milk-run system either way. 
 

The only real issue with LS would be permanent death or harm on timewarp, which is understandable. But there are lots of ways to alleviate this problem. If they’re going to get hard-boiled about power generation and real-world fuels they should at least think about the chemistry of life support, even if its abstracted  and simplified so as to keep management fun and non-punishing. 

Edited June 30, 2021 by Pthigrivi

[Mr. Peabody]

This members of this gaming community must surely be the most insane, in that they earnestly put forward such ambitious suggestions with the hope of seeing them come to fruition. Do the developers even read this forum subsection?

[SOXBLOX]

@Pthigrivi It would be kinda strange for the devs to focus on futuristic tech and fleshing out fuel types, and yet ignore life support. Without LS, kerballed missions really aren't any more complex or difficult than sample return missions.

[shdwlrd]

8 minutes ago, SOXBLOX said:

@Pthigrivi It would be kinda strange for the devs to focus on futuristic tech and fleshing out fuel types, and yet ignore life support. Without LS, kerballed missions really aren't any more complex or difficult than sample return missions.

Nate just confirmed that there will be no need for LS if you don't want to use it. It's in the article that Dientus linked above.

Edited July 1, 2021 by shdwlrd
Clarification

[Pthigrivi]

1 hour ago, shdwlrd said:

Nate just confirmed that there will be no need for LS if you don't want to use it. It's in the article that Dientus linked above.

I agree with @SOXBLOX thats not exactly clear from the wording. And I stand by the opinion that if LS does not exist in any form and greenhouses and hab modules serve no function within the game that would be a real shame. 

[shdwlrd]

59 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

I agree with @SOXBLOX thats not exactly clear from the wording. And I stand by the opinion that if LS does not exist in any form and greenhouses and hab modules serve no function within the game that would be a real shame. 

I think the misunderstanding is that everyone is thinking that LS would be required for everything that leaves Kerbin's atmosphere. That makes sense. I'm not disagreeing with that point.

What if LS is actually intercrated in a craft. The built in recyclers are efficient enough for a handful of Kerbals for it not to matter. When it comes to colonies, you still can have your Kerbals survive with the basic LS. If you want the colony to grow and be happy, you will need increase the LS supply to help support the increased population and exceed the needs for the colonists.

So LS is there, but you don't need to add a bunch of unsightly parts to your craft. At the colony level, you have the option to add more variety to the colony by adding LS if desired.

Edited July 1, 2021 by shdwlrd

[Pthigrivi]

14 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

I think the misunderstanding is that everyone is thinking that LS would be required for everything that leaves Kerbin's atmosphere. That makes sense. I'm not disagreeing with that point.

What if LS is actually intercrated in a craft. The built in recyclers are efficient enough for a handful of Kerbals for it not to matter. When it comes to colonies, you still can have your Kerbals survive with the basic LS. If you want the colony to grow and be happy, you will need increase the LS supply to help support the increased population and exceed the needs for the colonists.

So LS is there, but you don't need to add a bunch of unsightly parts to your craft. At the colony level, you have the option to add more variety to the colony by adding LS if desired.

Yeah there's definitely a healthy compromise somewhere. I think there have been some great mods but none of them probably hit exactly the right balance. I personally enjoy having the internal mechanic of recyclers, greenhouses, supplies, waste, and fertilizer in USI. It's pretty easy to outfit a interplanetary vessel with a few years of LS, and on the ground you're 100% self sufficient with ISRU. But I get why that might be too much for vanilla with everything else KSP2 is adding. Certainly permadeath shouldn't be the default. LS could be streamlined a great deal, even removing depletion over time the way you describe above, but I think having a real reason to build habitation space and domes and greenhouses and making kerbals happy as part of the mechanics of the the game is really important. Otherwise Kerbals are basically incidental and colonies are just sculptures. I'd also prefer if there was at least SOME clever device there, where you need to feed energy and ISRU resources into greenhouses to produce LS, and you need LS to build more habitation space, and some modules just increase your population cap but others effect your colony's mood which effects resource collection rates, science outputs, etc. Or maybe hab modules consume LS at a certain rate and stop functioning if you don't have enough greenhouses to support them, reducing your population cap and colony happiness, and there are recyclers that reduce consumption rates, etc. You could of course add some of that to transport and exploration vessels to keep them happy, but it wouldn't be absolutely necessary.

There are some images below of some things I made in an old USI save. My personal feeling is that including some of these types of parts really enhances both the look and functionality of spacecraft. Some of Nertea's more recent parts are much better looking even than this. They just look and work more like real spacefaring vessels than a few kerbals crammed into a landercan for a 6 year jool mission.

Spoiler

Munbase with skycrane and rover:


Jool mothership; the stern section is a floating Laythe outpost and hooked to the back between the engines is a VTOL mining rig. 


Tylo lander and Val mining rig:


Eve mothership with a pair of surface exploration rovers in fairings. 


Here they are on the surface fueling up the Eve ascent vehicle:

 

Edited July 1, 2021 by Pthigrivi

[SOXBLOX]

I read the article @Dientus linked, and oh boy, are there some pretty pictures there. There was only that little bit on LS, though, saying that KSP2 will not be a resource management game. So I think there will be a life-support mechanic, it just won't kill your Kerbals to not have it, or not have more than the baseline.

[Dientus]

1 hour ago, SOXBLOX said:

I read the article @Dientus linked, and oh boy, are there some pretty pictures there. There was only that little bit on LS, though, saying that KSP2 will not be a resource management game. So I think there will be a life-support mechanic, it just won't kill your Kerbals to not have it, or not have more than the baseline.

If this is how it comes to pass I myself wouldn't mind it so much. In my mind it's just detailed management on more than a few colonies would be such a tedious grind and they made it clear that's not what they're shooting for.

 

The one good thing about KSP2 is it being built to be easily modded means everybody can have it their own way eventually with a mod.

[Dr. Kerbal]

14 hours ago, Mr. Peabody said:

This members of this gaming community must surely be the most insane, in that they earnestly put forward such ambitious suggestions with the hope of seeing them come to fruition. Do the developers even read this forum subsection?

I would assume so. I have seen some of the KSP2 memebrs going to some threads here and there. 

[mcwaffles2003]

14 hours ago, Mr. Peabody said:

This members of this gaming community must surely be the most insane, in that they earnestly put forward such ambitious suggestions with the hope of seeing them come to fruition. Do the developers even read this forum subsection?

What's the point of this sub-forum then? Also, the devs were the ones who made this sub-forum. Not to mention, some of the things I posted require very minimal effort. For example, VR compatibility is built into Unity and would not only offer greater control to the player in the VAB but should even be easier to code in than mouse/keyboard.

Finally, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

18 hours ago, MKI said:

The thing with LifeSupport, or even something like "grow with LifeSupport" is as far as I know, KSP 2 wont force you to "grind" similar missions over time. So something like resupplying a colony with more snacks multiple times to keep them growing would fall into that "grind" bucket and probably not be part of the game.

We're already going to have automated supply routes to supply colonies with materials and to ship materials from them.

18 hours ago, MKI said:

I personally would want multi-monitor support over VR. But if this game is going to consoles I can see VR support being more sensible.

On 6/30/2021 at 7:26 AM, Dientus said:

Although I may prioritize differently, I mostly agree with your list overall. And while I believe life support could add to the game, it has been confirmed that it will not be implemented.

These weren't listed in priority of how much I desire them to be added, it's just a list of suggestions.

 

If anything, sapce telescopes and actual science would be top of my list of desires

[Dientus]

52 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

What's the point of this sub-forum then? Also, the devs were the ones who made this sub-forum. Not to mention, some of the things I posted require very minimal effort. For example, VR compatibility is built into Unity and would not only offer greater control to the player in the VAB but should even be easier to code in than mouse/keyboard.

Finally, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

True.

To add, as  @Dr. Kerbal mentioned, I have dug through the forums extensively learning things in the game over the years, and that was one of the things that made me decide to finally get an account here. The devs (or maybe the team leaders?) Have definitely used this forum as a suggestion platform. There are quite a few things that have been added to the game that was first requested on these very forums.

 

Of course I know that it depends on the developers end vision, production company willingness to expend resources, and the amount of people requesting a particular addition (and various unknowables) for change before it would even make it into the game. But to me it seems obvious it has occurred multiple times in KSP, so why wouldn't the same be true of KSP2? 

 

After all if you make it, they will come. And so will the money they bring.

[Beerasaurus]

The only level of Life Support functionality I want is to install a LS component to my stuff and call it a day. I don't want to hear that life support has been breached, or he's running out of air, or that Warrior needs food badly.

That kind of micromanaging in a game this complex would be a huge turn-off for me. I've got more than enough to do already.

[Pthigrivi]

@Beerasaurus That kind of thing has already been ruled out fortunately. Although to be honest even the most robust LS mods I've used have been way easier to manage than trying to figure out how big a dish and how many batteries you need to transmit data from Jool without it halting and most people seem to love the communication system anyway. Leveling up kerbals individually is much more onerous than throwing a couple of LS tanks and a recycler on your vessel.  I think its all about preventing frustrating outcomes and having simple, easy to understand mechanics that are fun to optimize but don't get in the way of core gameplay.

Edited July 1, 2021 by Pthigrivi

[OHara]

I would like to see

Stage Recovery through some means of letting a player complete a launch to orbit, then go back in Kerbal time to recover boosters, and merge those two timelines into her on-going save.  The KSP1 mod FMRS is a nice example, and its capabilities are useful in other cases, such as bringing a group of craft to a destination planet.

Notes attached to each craft, so players can remind themselves their plans for a craft. There was a 'notes' mod long ago; or players can abuse 'rename craft'.

For Multi-Monitor Support I wonder if letting the player un-dock sub-windows would fill the need.  Several modern programs let us take panes from the main program window into separate windows, that we can arrange using the operating system (strictly speaking, the window manager).  One less window management system to learn.

For Tangible Science I think @mcwaffles2003 intended to link this thread.  

Tech-tree advancement in KSP1 seemed to have as one goal to restrict the complexity of the game for new players. If KSP2 manages better ways to let new players learn the game, the only reason for the tech tree would be to delay access to truly advanced parts, as a way to give an interesting challenge to the game.  If Science becomes useful in-game from its intrinsic informational value, KSP2 might not need 'science points', so we might simply need to earn enough funds using limited tech, to pay for the research for advanced tech. 

[TLTay]

Realistic shadow/lighting option would be cool. Too much illumination on the dark side of a planet in many cases.

[Dr. Kerbal]

9 hours ago, Dientus said:

To add, as  @Dr. Kerbal mentioned, I have dug through the forums extensively learning things in the game over the years, and that was one of the things that made me decide to finally get an account here.

what made me get an account here was the old, fun (and now closed) THE MEGATHREAD .