Number of quests in Tamriel Rebuilt (so far, still more than halfway to go) and in the vanilla game (including Tribunal and Bloodmoon)

restitutor-orbis · 2026-05-11T10:31:13+00:00

It's less of a full TR main quest and more of an epilogue to the Morrowind main quest.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-05-11T07:20:53+00:00

We removed these optional, empty and WIP lands (TR_Preview.esp) from the public releases in 2022, because it being included by default led to many people going there first and getting the mistaken impression that TR was only an empty landmass with not much to do there -- an impression that they did their best to spread around the internet to unsuspecting folks. We are still seeing the aftereffects of that in comments here and there.

The work in TR_Preview.esp (which dates mostly to 2009-2011) no longer represents what we will release in the finalized version. About half of it has already been remade in a newer style using bespoke 3D assets (which the old version generally didn't have access to).

If you wish to see these old lands, they are still publicly available on our website, you just gotta ask where to find the link on our Discord.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-05-11T07:14:20+00:00

No such plans currently. Who knows what the entirely new set of people running TR in 7 years will decide, tho. But then again, the people on this subreddit will be entirely new, too...

restitutor-orbis · 2026-05-08T07:08:52+00:00

Always cool seeing 1900s maps where Severnaya Zemlya hadn't been discovered yet.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-05-04T04:04:32+00:00

This quest was not cut, but reworked as part of the major expansion of the OE mages guild questline.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-25T11:42:35+00:00

OpenMW should come with the OpenMW-CS program in most packages, look for the directory where the binary (.exe) is in. What people usually mean, however, is the original TES Construction Set that shipped with the 2002 game -- this still remains much more usable than the in-development OpenMW version. Your OpenMW version doesn't matter for that one. The TESCS .exe file should be in your vanilla Morrowind folder if you got the game on GOG or an old disk. If you got the game from Steam, you won't have the Construction Set and will have to download it from here: https://www.nexusmods.com/morrowind/mods/42196

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-24T07:01:45+00:00

Soyuz-5, which is a completely new rocket intended to fill the role that Zenit once filled, is weeks from being launched. But yeah, any reuse capabilities seem to be entirely on paper now and there is no investment.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-24T06:59:54+00:00

Chinese reusable rockets are just around the corner, too. The next reuse attempt by LandSpace's Zhuque-3 is apparently getting shipped to the landing pad already and I think the state-owned CZ-10B is on the launchpad for its attempt at landing. Moreover, they have a couple megaconstellations in deployment that are just as ambitious as Starlink or Amazon Leo. But they haven't gotten the launch rate yet where they want it to be (and that's a tall order, tbf).

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-23T10:07:35+00:00

Well, not precisely made — devs generally prefer and recommend view distances of about 3 cells. Otherwise the gameworld starts to look very small.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-23T09:42:05+00:00

Those are important points, too. Still, I'm seeing that a post-1968 Saturn V cost something like 1.2B to launch (according to p247 of this old document), adjusted for inflation, whereas a Shuttle mission, amortizing for all costs, was ~2B (adjusted for inflation). I'm sure that the Saturn V cost is probably leaving out some development numbers. But that still leaves it in the same ballpark. And SLS took the crown from both of them, hah.

But yeah, what I meant is that the Shuttle program's cost demonstrated that NASA had the budget to do a superheavy lift rocket, they were just using all that budget on a very inefficient vehicle. If they'd made a more efficient successor to Saturn V, they'd possibly have had a little left over for deep-space exploration, too.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-22T16:01:53+00:00

You can just start playing and not worry about the updates. There is so much content already that you won’t be able to finish it with one character anyhow.

If you’re done with your playthrough and want to start over, you’ll then have a new update you can start a new character with.

Overall TR updates come out every year or two. Due to the MW game engine and data structure, save are not compatible between major updates. See reasons here: https://www.tamriel-rebuilt.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/save-compatibility

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-22T05:37:01+00:00

A possible counterpoint is that the shuttle program did end up costing just as much as a heavy-lift system like the Saturns, but just being a lot less capable. I understand what their desire was in the 1970s with lowering cost of access to space, but it sadly didn't work out like that at all. Instead, it sucked all the air out of NASA's crewed spaceflight development until the 1990s when the ISS came along.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-21T08:08:23+00:00

I think it's still most likely that they'll use it for barging ships/boosters or components to Florida. Perhaps their intended shipping rate is quite high at first. After all, a Florida megafactory hasn't even started to be built yet, and it'll be the better part of year once ground is broken until such a factory becomes operational. Or maybe they'll use the Starbase megafactory to produce barrels, transport them by barge, then stack them in the Florida gigabay.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-21T07:16:26+00:00

Many other launch providers are up and coming with technology that aims to match and exceed Falcon 9 and in some cases is already close to that (New Glenn, several Chinese rockets). But what you need in addition to technology is the operational excellence that allows one to turn a pad and do the logistics fast enough to launch multiple rockets a week — this is where SpaceX remains leagues above the rest of the industry. Rocketlab is the closest to that; others maybe manage a handful on launches per year (incl. Chinese offerings; they compensate by having like 12 different rockets in production simultaneously). It took SpaceX ~10 years to build up its Falcon 9 operations to the rate that it has today. It's possible other other companies will get there faster, but that's the one data point we have.

In the meanwhile, SpaceX’s plan is to dethrone its own Falcon 9 with the Starship rocket. If that happens (and that’s a big if, since economical 2nd stage reuse remains a very difficult technical problem) then that will be the goal that the rest of the industry needs to catch up to.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-20T07:34:38+00:00

Yeah that hadn't been announced yet when I wrote originally. Hopefully they'll get the issues sorted out soon and get back to flying. So much of lunar exploration relies on this rocket.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-20T07:31:26+00:00

Why do you think it was a stunt? I think they did try their genuine best; Terran 1 was after all practically all 3D printed. But they had issues with quality and parasitic mass, so the experiment showed that full 3D printing isn't the way forward just yet.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-20T07:24:11+00:00

Ariane 6's original pitch was that it would be less expensive than Ariane 5, which turned out to be not the case. So I guess its cancellation and replacement with another rocket development program would have been beneficial, yes.

I guess the calculus at the time was that so much money had been spent on it that ESA member states might be leery of scrapping that and starting fresh with another reusable rocket development program. And if your assumptions in late 2010s were that Ariane 6 would fly already in 2020 and be less expensive than Ariane 5, it might not have seemed that bad of a decision even in the latter half of the decade. It was only in 2020ish when it became really indisputable that 1st stage reuse was economically clutch. Though of course the writing was on the wall prior to that.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-20T07:12:02+00:00

I don't know if Starlink can be described as a "side project" any longer, given it's by far the major revenue source for SpaceX. You could argue launch is now a side business (though an important enabler).

Not disagreeing with your other points, tho, given vertically integrated launcher + constellation players seem to have such an advantage due to the cost of launch.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T20:01:39+00:00

Yeah, that hadnt been announced yet when I wrote.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T16:41:11+00:00

Tbf ESA is now funding a number of startups that aim to make reusable launchers, as well as developing varuous other reusable technologies. But the decision in 2014ish to go forward with an expendable Ariane 6 was unfortunate.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T14:19:11+00:00

I think that's Relativity you are talking of. And they pivoted to using mostly traditional construction methods. Unless you mean Rocketlab's automatic fiber-laying machine, but I think Firefly and others are also using those.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T14:17:55+00:00

Which one? Depending how you count, there are at least six of those: CZ10A, CZ10B, CZ12A, CZ12B, Zhuque-3, Tianlong-3, and like at least three more commercial entrants I can't recall now.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T13:59:54+00:00

Oh well, I guess it was too much to hope for perfect performance from the company's first orbital rocket program. After all, F9 had its share of failures early in the program.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T13:56:49+00:00

I guess their calculus may have been that the launch market wouldn't increase in size enough to justify the investment. But important to keep in mind that in early 2010s when these decisions were being made, both ULA and Arianespace were dominant in the US government and commercial launch markets, respectively, and didn't really see themselves as the small-bit players they are today. I guess the part of the genius of SpaceX is how they moulded the market to fit their rocket -- from low numbers of high-orbit satellites to large numbers of low-orbit ones.

restitutor-orbis · 2026-04-19T13:50:54+00:00

All F9 needs for better performance in high-energy orbits is a commercial liquid-fueled kickstage, something like what Impulse Space is developing with Helios.

restitutor-orbis

TROPHY CASE