Should all planet locations be known from the start?

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, Superfluous J said:

To be fair, 1840 was over a century before the space age

I think the entire home system should be known, though I'd love to have to discover the surfaces of the planets. I mean, there were still people who thought there were canals on Mars before probes reached it, and it's our closest neighbor whose surface we can see. Similarly, Mercury was thought to have 1:1 resonance between its orbit and rotation until about the same time, though that was proven without needing to send probes.

I think it's totally reasonable that we get ridiculously bad maps of local system bodies to start (with an option to turn that off because I don't know if my 84th career will really require that mystery) and star-only data for other systems, perhaps even with some stars "hidden" in that we either can't see them or don't know they're significant compared to all the other stars that are assumed to be around but we can't visit.

Agree home system should be known, not exoplanets, you will need an large space based telescope to find them. Perhaps with grading so something like James Web style telescope you can find something like Kerbin around the closest star, but not Duna or the Mun. An larger one could get smaller objects and more details like atmosphere composition and if its water there, probably also distinct an water world like Laythe from Kerbin. Minor moons you will not detect and they can be very important for colonizing if they have the resources. One real life problem with the outer planets moons is that you get an thick ice cap, then an deep ocean for the larger so you get water nothing else outside of asteroid impacts. 
Titan has the benefit of hydrocarbons but is else an ice world. The outer captured asteroids might be more useful. 
Back to KSP 2, its an reason why the starship was launched from Jool or an orbit around one of Jool's moons. This is might well be for some gameplay mechanic like needing say helium 3 for the huge fusion engine. 

Yes it could just be because it looked jaw dropping awesome. 

And how many other KSP players fridge moment was yes this but in 1+8 asparagus.

[sturmhauke]

On 9/9/2021 at 6:29 PM, Pthigrivi said:

Question about this: I know n-nody is ruled out but could lagrange points be simulated with small, orbitable, blank soi’s? 

That would only be a very rough approximation, to the point of being completely unrealistic. Objects don't really orbit Lagrange points so much as they are pulled by dueling, approximately equal gravitational forces while near those points. L1, L2, and L3 are unstable, while L4 and L5 (the trojan points) are stable, but only if the primary body (e.g. the Sun) is significantly more massive than the secondary (e.g. Jupiter). For a binary system like Pluto and Charon, there are no stable points.