Vanamonde Posted December 15, 2022 Share Posted December 15, 2022 Reminder that this is the KSP2 sub and not a place for discussions of real world government budgets and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KerikBalm Posted December 16, 2022 Share Posted December 16, 2022 (edited) [snip] That said, I have no interest in warfare in KSP. There're other games like Children of a Dead Earth, and the Arma series for that. Edited December 16, 2022 by Vanamonde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanamonde Posted December 16, 2022 Share Posted December 16, 2022 Some content removed. Not the place for politics and real world issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElJugador Posted February 22, 2023 Share Posted February 22, 2023 It's fair to dislike the interstellar focus of KSP2 - I am not among that number - but I get a strong feeling that OP is confusing their highly-modified experience of the base game with vanilla. KSP is not and has never been about managing complex resources and radiation. At its core KSP1 is an orbital mechanics toy with some aerodynamics as a treat. That's it. It's the bare minimum. How would Intercept Games "streamline" the experience any more than KSP1 already does? Other than reducing career mode difficulty, which, well... a lot of people barely even touch Career mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombie_Striker Posted February 23, 2023 Share Posted February 23, 2023 17 hours ago, ElJugador said: Other than reducing career mode difficulty, which, well... a lot of people barely even touch Career mode. Career mode could be better, sure (especially contracts), but the financial aspect of it is a good thing. If you have an unlimited budget, you can over engineer the rockets without worry of whether it is reasonable to do. 17 hours ago, ElJugador said: KSP is not and has never been about managing complex resources and radiation. As someone who plays with Kerbalism, resource management and radiation can be fun, and there are those of us out there who like it. It may not be for everyone, and having the ability to have a free-play mode might be beneficial (and what you're looking for), but I certainly would enjoy adding those things to the game. On 12/8/2022 at 5:23 AM, garwel said: Instead of a more nuanced simulation of various aspects of spaceflight (life support, radiation, parts failure, thermal regulation, gravity assists, you name it), we'll see far-future or speculative techs that will quickly make space travel trivial. Back to the main topic, this is only a concern if you are playing in "free-play" mode. If there is some limitation like finance, or complex resource management, this wouldn't be an issue. If it would take several harvesting missions to get enough <sci-fi fuel source> to power an FTL drive, then the idea that every mission would be trivial is juts not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garwel Posted February 23, 2023 Author Share Posted February 23, 2023 3 hours ago, Zombie_Striker said: Back to the main topic, this is only a concern if you are playing in "free-play" mode. If there is some limitation like finance, or complex resource management, this wouldn't be an issue. If it would take several harvesting missions to get enough <sci-fi fuel source> to power an FTL drive, then the idea that every mission would be trivial is juts not true. Yes and no. Of course, one can always find a challenge, but if to have a decent challenge you need to go deep into the far future and speculative technologies, it's not what KSP is to me (i.e. plausible realism + complexity). I think actual space flight already has a lot of interesting challenges, which I wish KSP (1 and 2) would simulate. There are so many interesting - and real - mechanics that might make the game deeper and more enjoyable! But I'm afraid the actual challenge will be like: build a HUGE rocket and make sure it doesn't disintegrate on launch and doesn't fry your PC; land on a planet and mine some Unobtainium, fuel your ship, repeat. And as a reward for all this grind you'll see some (undoubtedly beautiful, if your graphics card can handle it) fantasy planets. I mean, apart from colonies, there are basically no new interesting mechanics promised. Even a Career mode is probably not a thing, so hello overengineering! Ok, I just hope I'm wrong and the game will indeed be as deep as most commenters here claim. Otherwise, my only hope is modders. For now, it looks like I'm going to stick with KSP1 and watch the sequel from a distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obney kerman Posted February 23, 2023 Share Posted February 23, 2023 Radiation is confirmed for later in EA, and resource management will be a part of the 'Adventure Mode' that's going to be our successor to Career mode, so overengineering is only a sandbox problem. Other semi-realistic challenges are also coming to the game: it seems like reaction wheels aren't overpowered anymore, so RCS is a necessity again; splashdowns aren't just a guaranteed safe landing anymore, and some of the planet descriptions seem to be hinting at geothermal activity and Van Allen radiation belts being a thing soon. 4 hours ago, garwel said: But I'm afraid the actual challenge will be like: build a HUGE rocket and make sure it doesn't disintegrate on launch and doesn't fry your PC; land on a planet and mine some Unobtainium, fuel your ship, repeat. And as a reward for all this grind you'll see some (undoubtedly beautiful, if your graphics card can handle it) fantasy planets. That's a pretty simplified mission. What about the design process, or orbital assembly instead of all-in-one? Or exploring the planets you're mining, with rovers and planes? Building bases, doing science, panickedly hashing together a rescue mission because one of your ships wasn't built with enough delta-V, and on and on. Sure, you could just mine your fuel and leave, but you don't HAVE to. Also, curious about what makes KSP2's planets 'fantasy' as opposed to KSP1. Might just be reading that implication wrong though, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts