Top 10 Requests

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Turbo Ben said:

I'll add another 10 to that.

AND MY AXE!

[Jacke]

Wow, so many good posts.  Don't have the time to read them all.  But the features that I think might be missed if I don't mention them:

1. Realistic launch clamps like the ones used to hold real rockets at the base, not the silly part in  KSP1.
2. Proper corner RCS quads like what was used on the Lunar Module, with the 2 horizontal RCS jets at 90°.
3. The original MK1 Cockpit from KSP.  It was cool and it hurt to see it dropped from the game.

[Bej Kerman]

4 hours ago, Jacke said:

Realistic launch clamps like the ones used to hold real rockets at the base, not the silly part in  KSP1.

What would this do that normal launch clamps don't?

4 hours ago, Jacke said:

The original MK1 Cockpit from KSP.  It was cool and it hurt to see it dropped from the game.

What function would the Mk1 serve to justify its redundancy?

[Dakitess]

Haha, there we go ! I'll link this post that contains a whole comprehensive survey about it :

Have a read about it, really, especially because it's the "state of the art" before KSP2 actually released, so before the huge mess, only in a positive and speculative way, what the french community statistically was waiting for the most ! A quick overview of the main result :

I'll stick to my opinion back in the day, and which is quite adequate to the above data. Among anything else : graphics. Graphics. GRAPHICS.

Environment, scenery, something to look at, an incentive to actually take off, land, drive, explore, fail, move around, rebuild a rover because of the rocky challenging terrain, getting back to Drone exploration because more convenient, and finally finding the little pearl, the perfect spot that you're proud about, to share screenshot and coordinate : a stiff canyon with sharp and detailed texture, micro-mid-macro topology, collidable little rocks, etc. A river. A mountain, a valley. A waterfall. A cave. Anything but by the 2020+ standards, something worth exploring.

Incentive. I don't have any in KSP1 except using mod but still not perfect and very dated technical foundation.

I don't want anything much more than Graphics. Actually it's the only real thing I was waiting for and when I saw the trailer, dang may I say I was hyped like almost never before. A NEW technically up to date KSP, this is all what we were missing !!! With that, anything would be possible : performance, scenery, the rest would come as bonus content, added features, mods compatibility. But a good technical foundation and true graphics upgrade to set KSP2 in the 2020 decade.

The previous data and the linked methodology show how much it was a common request, a real expectation. And I repeat, it's not a reaction past KSP2 released, it's back in 2019 !

Well... We all know how it turned out ^^ It's getting better, but there is still a looooong way to get proper 2020+ visuals.

Edit : oh ! And Discrete Procedural !

The thing I like the most about KSP is... Being able to build whatever based on a given list of canonic parts. It's an incredible challenge, and the reason why I spent 7000+ hours in VAB / SPH, fine tuning design, trying to innovate, looking for efficiency, overcoming what has been done, etc, everything only with the stock parts, not a single part mods. I LOVE it, I really enjoy this challenge, and this is why I don't like Procedural. Even for wings which can be debatable, I'm not used to it so far, and I'm not sure to like it.

But Discrete Procedural is way to cumulate only the good aspect of procedural while keeping the discrete Lego gameplay. It's probable that most of you get what it is, but I'll write anyway for the others :  

	FL-T100 Fuel Tank	Small	150 (104.1)	0.5625	0.0625	2 000	6	50	45	55
	FL-T200 Fuel Tank	Small	275 (183.2)	1.125	0.125	2 000	6	50	90	110
	FL-T400 Fuel Tank	Small	500 (316.4)	2.25	0.25	2 000	6	50	180	220
	FL-T800 Fuel Tank	Small	800 (432.8)	4.5	0.5	2 000	6	50	360	440

You have this for "Small diameter" tanks, right ? Well... What about a single one, adjustable in lenght, with a minimum increment according the smallest actual tank heigh ? You add it to your craft and you slide it in WYSIWYG fashion or by numerical input if's too hard and there you go : one part, less performance hit, less wobble, but the whole spirit of the original lego gameplay. Nothing removed, like, at all, but only advantages.

I must say that I don't understand why it's still not the case for KSP2. This is really part of the thing that should have been identified as good innovation to the way we build, while lowering computing demand and fixing most of the wobble issue. I know that the original KSP1 team and the new one never got attracted by procedural yet they did for wings, but here there no procedural cons, only pros.

Edited November 14, 2023 by Dakitess

[dansiegel30]

On 11/10/2023 at 9:46 PM, Dakota said:

Think it would be good to spin off discussions about potential features into their own threads.

Well, that would be nice only if IG committed to them.  Perhaps it might be best for features that Nate and Co. are SERIOUSLY considering putting into the game (I'm assuming the roadmap is fairly locked until 1.0) in versions 1.1 and beyond.  Then we can be involved in the specifications for those features, rather than hearing the title/concept of the feature with a few sentences in a blog, waiting for them, and being disappointed when they appear - modification of them at this point becomes an order of magnitude more expensive and usually doesn't happen.

[Idealistic]

I would like to add to all the people here,

1: Change the light of the V.A.B remove the shadows and put a more diffuse or global light because when I look under my constructions it's hard to distinguish the details. A light a bit like in ksp1 to see the details clearly.

2: Robotics of course, but with a few more specific features. For example, I'd like to have an altimeter so that as soon as you exceed a certain altitude, it triggers a kal controller or an action. Also a speedometer to automatically trigger actions at a certain speed. An anglometer that detects the inclination of craft, which can be handy for making your own SAS. Logic doors. I think this would develop almost infinite automation.

3: The rovers, and wheels in general. Make sure that when you brake a rover or a plane doesn't turn over as soon as you brake a little.

4: That you can see the remaining fuel in a single tank when you right-click on it.

5: Weather for colonies and crafts. For example, make it possible to have storms that delay the launch of certain ships, thus adding to the difficulty of controlling certain planes. 

6: Radiation, to create radioactive zones later in science that would require protection for our little Kerbal.

7: More types of ore and different types of refinery to refuel our ships.

I've got more to say but I'll stop here. The most important to me are 1 and 2. 
Thanks for this game, it's going to be incredible. See you soon ♥.  
 

[AtomicTech]

4 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

What would this do that normal launch clamps don't?

What function would the Mk1 serve to justify its redundancy?

It's cool.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, AtomicTech said:

It's cool.

This. Honestly KSP's launch clamps are just terrible after playing with FASA.

[Bej Kerman]

1 minute ago, regex said:

This. Honestly KSP's launch clamps are just terrible after playing with FASA.

What's wrong with them?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Bej Kerman said:

What's wrong with them?

They're ugly and they don't operate like anything in the real world. Watch some actual launches, tons of different solutions and they all look far better than what we have in the game.

[ConsoleCoder]

1. Mobile compatibility

2. VR compatibility

3. Three-dimensional terrain like caves or cliffs

4. Fix the ring particles (In a circular orbit in the rings, the ring particles should appear nearly stationary, as the ring particles should have orbital velocities like any other body in orbit.)

5. Bring back Gene Kerman in some form, even if just for an easter egg.

6. Visualised transfer window & delta-v guides (Like a display of a planet's current orbits and the optimal trajectory at what time and place on a celestial map)

7. Weather effects, mainly rain, snow, wind, storms, and vortexes.

7.5. If adding weather such as wind or vortexes, I recommend adding some weather visualization, like a forecast map for the present and future (Maybe the future could have a slight error in predicted weather), and a toggle for weather.

8. Jool intense atmospheric effects (Lightning, intense wind vortexes, giant storms, clouds that look more swirly, etc.)

9. More realistic clouds for Kerbin, Eve, Laythe, Jool, and possibly Duna, featuring multiple different types of clouds in different layers of the atmosphere, along with different shapes, affected by weather if it gets added.

10. More scatter on all planets, along with a toggle for scatter collectibility.

[Bej Kerman]

4 hours ago, regex said:

They're ugly and they don't operate like anything in the real world

Their looks are irrelevant (they fit the artstyle of the game as with all the other parts, that's the most that matters) and they keep your engines off the surface of the pad. That's literally all they need to do.

5 hours ago, regex said:

Watch some actual launches, tons of different solutions and they all look far better than what we have in the game.

And? The clamps don't need umbilicals or bridges to the crew capsule from the launch tower.

[Kerbart]

9 hours ago, Idealistic said:

2: Robotics of course, but with a few more specific features. For example, I'd like to have an altimeter so that as soon as you exceed a certain altitude, it triggers a kal controller or an action. Also a speedometer to automatically trigger actions at a certain speed. An anglometer that detects the inclination of craft, which can be handy for making your own SAS. Logic doors. I think this would develop almost infinite automation.

I suspet that Advanced Robotics will be a DLC feature just as in KSP1. But the more advanced it is, the better the chances to get the essentials—hinges and rotors—in the base game and Robot Sensors (pressure, altimeter, velocity, proximity, etc) would be an amazing addition. Together with triggering of a specific stage, not just “any”

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Their looks are irrelevant (they fit the artstyle of the game as with all the other parts, that's the most that matters)

I beg to differ, I think they go against the new technical style we have in KSP2. For KSP1? Sure, everything's trash cans and garbage. In KSP2 we have new tech.

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

And? The clamps don't need umbilicals or bridges to the crew capsule from the launch tower.

No, like literally watch launches. See how the clamps operate, how they keep a rocket off the pad, how they swing away when the launch happens. KSP's clamps are totally wrong.

[Datau03]

6 hours ago, ConsoleCoder said:

1. Mobile compatibility

You want to play KSP2 on a phone?

[Dakitess]

11 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

Their looks are irrelevant (they fit the artstyle of the game as with all the other parts, that's the most that matters) and they keep your engines off the surface of the pad. That's literally all they need to do.

And? The clamps don't need umbilicals or bridges to the crew capsule from the launch tower.

Do you really act like this on a daily basis ?

Any message I see from you is very defiant, your opinion is the only one valuable and if someone express his own which is not exactly the same as you, you'll clearly say so with definitive affirmation, most of the time non legit because there is no nuance, no place to discuss about it.

If that guy say that he wants better clamps, let it be ? You can question it, otherwise there is not discussion but all your questions are formulated to imply that this is repurposed bovine waste.

Edit : "repurposed bovine waste." I dont EVEN know what I was remotely writing here oO What the heck xD i'll even let it this way haha.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Dakitess

[AtomicTech]

On 11/9/2023 at 6:08 PM, Dakota said:

Asked this over in Discord and it spurred a good discussion so I'll ask it here as well:

If you could pick 10 features/changes/parts to be prioritized for KSP2, what would your list be?

excluding already announced features / milestones (incl For Science!)

As big as robotics or life support
As small as QoL changes or a statue of Dakota out front of Mission Control

Choose wisely! 

1.) Building vehicles during missions (Orbital & Surfacec VABs).

2.) The return of the Part Action Window.

3.) Caves.

4.) Bringing back the OG Kerbals from Admin in KSP 2; who wouldn't wanna see Werner & P.A.I.G.E. teaching you how to fly a long with Gene Kerman working with Dr. Keri Kerman?

5.)  Radiation Dangers + other LS considerations that don't require consumables; hazards like heat, cold, radiation, 

6.) Kerbals requiring medical attention after disasters (Kerbals with prosthetics and other stuff along the lines of Karnold Kerman's hit movie, The Kermanator and it's sequel The Kermanator II: Lithobraking Day. It could also be that you couldn't use the Kerbal for a set period of time after certain violent conditions of landing. Further, you could increase a Kerbal's crash tolerance but make it so that if they exceed it, they'll require increasing medical attention a.k.a. delays to them rejoining the crew roster [you could even have a hospital at the KSC]. If you exceed the new limit, the Kerbals are dead.)

7.) Kerbals with Parachutes.

8.) EVA Construction like from KSP 1.11.

9.) Camera parts with science opportunities and for taking pretty pictures.

10.) Better/more realistic resource scanning like the stuff from the mode ScanSat.

Edited November 15, 2023 by AtomicTech

[Scarecrow71]

On 11/14/2023 at 12:14 AM, Jacke said:

Realistic launch clamps like the ones used to hold real rockets at the base, not the silly part in  KSP1.

I'll tack onto this that perhaps launch clamps shouldn't be parts in the VAB, but rather static objects that are part of the launchpad itself.  Like, you don't need to add them to your rocket, but they are there when you launch.  This would allow part/weight counts to come down, while at the same time insuring they function and act like real ones.  I don't know; just spitballing!

23 hours ago, Idealistic said:

That you can see the remaining fuel in a single tank when you right-click on it.

Yeah, this would be nice.

14 hours ago, ConsoleCoder said:

Visualised transfer window & delta-v guides (Like a display of a planet's current orbits and the optimal trajectory at what time and place on a celestial map)

A combination of KER and MJ's Transfer function.  That'd be keen!

[Bej Kerman]

13 hours ago, regex said:

I beg to differ, I think they go against the new technical style we have in KSP2. For KSP1? Sure, everything's trash cans and garbage. In KSP2 we have new tech.

Not seeing it. You're talking to me from anywhere between next door to the opposite side of the world and you probably still drink your hot beverage of choice from a simple porcelain mug as people have been doing for centuries. This is like saying mugs are bad because they don't have WiFi and bluetooth capabilities and an accompanying app now.

13 hours ago, regex said:

No, like literally watch launches. See how the clamps operate, how they keep a rocket off the pad, how they swing away when the launch happens. KSP's clamps are totally wrong.

Or they're just fine and wanting a feature X doesn't make simpler feature Y bad. The clamps aren't "totally wrong" just because they don't make tea for your astronauts in the morning. Which do you prefer, being able to stick clamps on the bottom of your rocket and call it a day, or having to spend way longer than necessary making an ungodly tower around your rocket just to realism? The former is probably best kept in the game.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Bej Kerman

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

having to spend way longer than necessary making an ungodly tower around your rocket just to realism?

I'm talking about launch clamps, not a damn tower. All I'm saying is that the clamps should look and act like actual, real world clamps, which they don't. At all. Even at the basest, abstract level. You literally have no idea what you're arguing against here.

Edited November 15, 2023 by regex

[Bej Kerman]

22 minutes ago, regex said:

You literally have no idea what you're arguing against here.

Then elaborate because your request is ambiguous and expresses more distaste for the clamps being simple and having a simple job to do than it does explain what "actual, real world clamps" would add to the game besides being pointlessly elaborate. The launch clamps do their job. "actual, real world clamps" probably adds nothing. Feel free to prove me wrong.

[Guest]

Just now, Bej Kerman said:

The launch clamps do their job. "actual, real world clamps" probably adds nothing.

Rockets go up so why do KSP's launch clamps go down?
 

Spoiler

 

Those are more properly "hold-down arms" rather than launch clamps but because we don't have specific launch pads for specific vehicles (and the actual clamps aren't nearly as exciting as hold-down arms) in KSP they do double-duty. Small detail really. But also, the models in KSP are really low-fidelity and look bad.

Just now, Bej Kerman said:

Feel free to prove me wrong.

hahaha why are you so mad?

[Bej Kerman]

5 minutes ago, regex said:

Rockets go up so why do KSP's launch clamps go down?

Is there some impact on gameplay this has?

7 minutes ago, regex said:

hahaha why are you so mad?

There must be some confusion, when did I ask IG to replace the launch clamps over them going down?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Bej Kerman said:

Is there some impact on gameplay this has?

Yes, it improves how launches look. Right now the clamps look stupid and low-fidelity.

[Bej Kerman]

5 minutes ago, regex said:

Yes, it improves how launches look. Right now the clamps look stupid and low-fidelity.

They're not low-fidelity, they have just as much fidelity as any other part, but ignoring that, "looks stupid" is a non-issue because their point in being in the game has nothing to do with aesthetics and has everything to do with keeping large rockets upright and making sure probe cores last as long as the vessel is on the pad. They have 0 reason to be any more elaborate.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Bej Kerman