Will there ever be more planets?

[SpaceshipFood]

One with rings like Saturn? That would be awesome.

[Schweehog]

Imagine Saturn in KSP, mmm how amazing.. Imagine the easter eggs in the rings... Mmm... Oh it just would be so awesome!

[tstehler1]

Imagine Saturn in KSP, mmm how amazing.. Imagine the easter eggs in the rings... Mmm... Oh it just would be so awesome!

Imagine the derping of people as they crash into the debris in the rings... Mmmmmmmmm... xD

[Kerbface]

Proper planetary rings would be probably very difficult to make, considering each of the quadrillions of rocks/other particles would need to have physics when you were near them unless they were big enough to be on rails.

[Dr. Muttonstache]

Yes, this is a planned feature:

3 gas planets, moons and an asteroid belt

Proper planetary rings would be probably very difficult to make, considering each of the quadrillions of rocks/other particles would need to have physics when you were near them unless they were big enough to be on rails.

they are planning on making an asteroid belt, so a ring wouldn't be too different.

[A Fat Pokemon]

Squad has another gas giant in the works, and SURPRISE! They are attempting to create rings for it.

[SkyRender]

I think the recent decision to not load the models and textures for planets you can't even see at the moment will help a lot with their plans for any future complex planets and/or asteroid belts.

[Kerbface]

Yes, this is a planned feature:

they are planning on making an asteroid belt, so a ring wouldn't be too different.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think rings around planets are a lot denser than asteroid belts. In an asteroid belt, you'd very rarely see two asteroids at once.

[kacperrutka26]

mmmmmm Imagine how much lag you would get when you come up close to the rings! Wonderful!

[NeoMorph]

Comets and asteroids, yes, but rings should just be visual... I do know there used to BE an asteroid in the game (think it eventually got remade into Ike) but it was buggy as anything. Hopefully they will figure out how to make the roids and comets.

Anyone remember the Star Trek Voyager intro where they go over a planet's ring... Imagine that in KSP. Would take YEARS to render if it was individual particles lol.

[AncientAstronaut]

Hm... I don't know..... according to Star Wars, there's asteroids EVERYWHERE in a belt.

[bsalis]

I don't know why people assume that belts would have thousands of asteroids or moonlets in them, hence kill performance. I would think you would just use polys with texture & visual effects, and no collision mesh. Then throw a dozen or so asteroids/moonlets of varying size, like Magic Builder.

[Kerbface]

I don't know why people assume that belts would have thousands of asteroids or moonlets in them, hence kill performance. I would think you would just use polys with texture & visual effects, and no collision mesh. Then throw a dozen or so asteroids/moonlets of varying size, like Magic Builder.

But if that happened, there wouldn't really be any point in them being there, nobody would ever stumble across one, and if they did stumble across one on the millionth crossing of the belt, they'd be extremely dissapointed that they can't even land on it.

[Crush]

You wouldn't have to calculate each object in the rings individually. That can be faked pretty easily.

It would be sufficient to visualize the rings with a single two-dimensional, translucent plane as long as a vessel is away, and when a vessel is close enough to the ring that collisions are possible, you randomly spawn some asteroids at a radius of a few km and remove them when they leave the attention radius around the vessel.

Just like terrain scatters are handled, but mobile and with collision.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Crush

[bsalis]

Hmm, I said like magic builder as in it has no gravity nor SOI. Moonlets would be marked on map view.

As for the rings, they would just be a visual effect. Eg...

[Erixxxx]

I believe they've said they'll implement more celestial bodies once they have the exploration system in place, ie. that you don't know where they are when you start the game and you have to find them yourself.

[MRab2]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think rings around planets are a lot denser than asteroid belts. In an asteroid belt, you'd very rarely see two asteroids at once.

You are correct. I would suggest the rings be done as a visual effect. You *could* put a collision mesh on the whole thing OR you could treat it like a band of astmosphere so you get re-entry effects as you pass through. When heat damage is brought it passing through the rings would result in a spectacular fiery death which imho is close enough to reality with minimal physics and rendering.

Our asteroid belt has millions of asteroids (they're actually still finding them) but are, in general, quite a surprising distance apart. 11 spacecraft has traversed the belt so far, and all without incident - no dodging, blasting or flying out of the mouths of giant space worms required.

[Dr. Muttonstache]

flying out of the mouths of giant space krakens required.

Fixed that for you.

[electronicfox]

I really wouldn't think a semi-dense ring would be too bad to run, like someone mentioned before, it could be done in a similar fashion to terrain scatter, only with some collission enabled when up close (and a pretty image at a distance). The ring scattered rocks would all be on rails similar to that of moons, so there's no massive need for physics to work with it, and it doesn't need to be rediculously dense.

[Tw1]

Having it work like a band of atmosphere is a good idea. A nice compromise between visual only, and rendering all those little rocks. A few objects wouldn't be too much trouble, especially once they add the only-load-planet-like things-you-actually-see optimization.

Not sure you'll have any reentry heat though. We're dealing with solid particles, rather than gas.

Talking about new planets, I hope planetoids get added in unusual orbits.

That would add some extra variety, once you've mastered the holman transfer.

For example, comets on highly elliptical orbits, things orbiting where L points should be, maybe even -for those who are crazy- something in a retrograde orbit.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Tw1

[Kerbface]

Would going through a ring be death to any craft that attempts it? I mean getting hit by something, even small, in orbit is already dangerous, what about a million things of varying sizes?

[stargazer1235]

In reality, the Saturn rings are actually small particles dust so in ksp it would be acceptable to have it as just a visual with a couple of asteroids thrown in. With the asteroid belt, I heard that they plan to do the asteroids without SOI so it would effect your flight path but you could land on it it you want.

[Tw1]

Would going through a ring be death to any craft that attempts it? I mean getting hit by something, even small, in orbit is already dangerous, what about a million things of varying sizes?

That's a very good point. But our command modules seem pretty durable, hopefully it won't be death in KSP.

In real life, it would depend on the density and size of the particulates in that region of the ring.

Perhaps, if they go with the visual + atmosphere like idea, they could have different regions of density, some which damage (sandblast?) Your ship, and some less dense regions that don't.

This gives me a whole new idea. Ring breaking! Like aerobraking, but scratchier.

[MRab2]

I would think in real life you'd be able to ease a spaceship into a ring (matching orbits etc) and survive. The stuff that makes up the ring is in an orbit.

If, on the other hand you tried to fly through the rings at a heavily inclined orbit then death is assured.

For ease of game mechanics I'd say either make them insubstantial or certain death. I favour the latter.

[CptNuts]

Ringbreaking sounds cool, surf the ring of a Gas giant to slow down your ship, sounds like something Jeb would approve

I really look forward for Asteroid Belt and more planets (now that I am finaly got my mind around manned interstellar travel XD)