|
Just starting to get back into this after a, like, 3 month hiatus, and daaaamn. I love the addition of the asteroid and the grabber and all. I just managed to snag a class A from a collision course with Kerbin and drop it into a Munar orbit. Fuckin' cool, man.   Now I gotta rescue my dudes from Munar orbit.
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 08:24 |
|
|
Maxmaps posted:the only actual departure from the original design doc that has happened so far has been deciding that Kerbals aren't genderless. Wait what? Does this mean we'll get female Kerbals at some point?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Our next approach was to thin the system down to something that A)Required Less Parts, B)Was Less Complex and C)Was More fun. There are mods I like the theory of, for example TAC Life Support, but don't use because it goes overboard on 6 different consumable resources plus dozens of containers to hold them, when 1 generic life support resource would be 100% as fun in practice. I'd love for base KSP to add some of these systems, but in the KSP style where they are distilled to the basic concept. As for resources, I think as long as you're just generating the fuel types to refuel a ship you might as well do it the way Interstellar has done. Just make the fuel types directly without a "kethane" step, and tie what you can make to what planet / biome you are in. But generating fuel just seems so quaint these days. Kethane & the big resource flowchart was cool way back when because it was a thing to do once you had mastered building & launching rockets. Science, asteroids, and hopefully contracts are filling that need for objectives in a more satisfying way. I never extracted Kethane because I needed it, I extracted it because it was there.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
uXs posted:Wait what? Does this mean we'll get female Kerbals at some point? Squad saw this and this and decided that they needed to implement it into the game.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
Using different resources and combining them to build parts sounds pretty fun though. It reminds me of an old space strategy game called Reunion where you had to set up mining colonies and fly around to deliver ore to your main planet to build new buildings and warships. I'd love to see something like that combined with an economy based on space tourism, satellites and ore trade.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 09:18
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:KAL = Kerbalistic programed ALgorithmic computer. Ah, got it  The successor of JBM (Joyfull Borderline Mongomachines).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 10:12
|
|
|
The problem with TACLS isn't that there's 6 different resources, it's that each resource has its own container. It would be nice if you could have a container with x amount of space, and you could freely distribute that space between different resources. Would be great for spaceplanes as well, if you could reduce the amount of oxidizer in a fuel tank and use the space you free up for more fuel instead.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:Would be great for spaceplanes as well, if you could reduce the amount of oxidizer in a fuel tank and use the space you free up for more fuel instead. The Mk 1 Fuselage has such a bad mass fraction that the FL‒T400 with all the oxidizer drained holds more fuel and is still lighter. The Mk 2 is less bad, but still loses to a tweaked FL‒T400. Being able to fill the oxidiser space with more kerosene seems like cheating at that point. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 11:23 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
My first mission to another planet has been a success. Now begins the mission to rescue them. They crashed because I thought I was being clever with part clipping and it exploded during a 2 m/s landing after one of the decouplers had to be worked around when it would result in catastrophic failure. At first they were pretty calm, only Bilgan realizing the gravity of their situation, but on second thought they're all pretty stoked about getting some time off. The crew has gone mad, prospects for survival look grim.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 11:55
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:The problem with TACLS isn't that there's 6 different resources, it's that each resource has its own container. I just don't see any gain in gameplay from having all those resources split out into individual types. Logically the TAC resources plus the parts which reclaim waste are exactly equivalent to a single resource plus modules that reduce consumption. Assume the kerbals can do the basic math to pack a correct ratio of consumables for the mission. That's a tedious task that everyone solves by just throwing more cans of stuff on. Platystemon posted:The Mk 1 Fuselage has such a bad mass fraction that the FL‒T400 with all the oxidizer drained holds more fuel and is still lighter. The Mk 2 is less bad, but still loses to a tweaked FL‒T400.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 12:06
|
|
|
I like plausbility (rather than ~realism~) in my games as it means you can copy real life solutions to in-game problems, which is satisfying and educational. That's why I love FAR and (the idea behind) RT2 (if not the clumsy and tedious execution). However, I've never had any interest in life support mods. It doesn't actually add a problem to solve, it just means you need heavier interplanetary vehicles and you probably can't do rescue missions.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 12:53
|
|
|
Ugh, I hate docking port bugs. I still have to investigate whether it's not properly connected but everything is pointed the right way and to Senior docking ports won't connect. Frustrating.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:A small amount of veteran players are pretty upset that a resource chart drafted and shown around (without approval) by former dev NovaSilisko was abandoned after we found a system based on 8 resources with individual methods of extraction, combination and refinement was (upon playtesting) super comboluted and an unfun mess. Is this why the 4chan post are so venomous? (and racist!) They seem to love calling you a lair. It is a wonder you can give them the time of day. Times sure have changed. Used to be we had to wait for a final release before we could bitch. Now we can actively bitch about developers as they make the game we like and suck any joy from the creative process. Thanks for the great game and active development.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
uXs posted:Wait what? Does this mean we'll get female Kerbals at some point? Yep. Designing them has so far been a challenge. Don't want people to feel any worse for turning them to a fine green mist. Edit:∆ Yup.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:since why make Kethane when it already exists. Uh, for the sake of making it stock? Exactly like you did with docking?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:A small amount of veteran players are pretty upset that a resource chart drafted and shown around (without approval) by former dev NovaSilisko was abandoned after we found a system based on 8 resources with individual methods of extraction, combination and refinement was (upon playtesting) super comboluted and an unfun mess. Ahh, good call. I'm only interested in resources in a very general sweeping way, and even that can be pretty much mod based. Even if there was mining or whatnot introduced in to the game it could feasibly be reduced to a super abstracted system (Ore miner, water driller, gas compressor) and that combining those elements could generate a good to be consumed or sold (gas compression + Water = oxydizer, or even a general "Life support" resource for say a base. Send ore to a crusher, get the opportunity to convert it to money or a general "building material", that kind of thing, very loose), the more detailed the system gets the more brain damage you have to go through to balance it, support methods of transportation, etc. KSP has always been about getting the feel and approximate response rather than a super technical slog. Honestly if the contract system is good that really kills 90% of the need for resources anyway. If I make a colony now I'm basically playing with DStecks posted:Uh, for the sake of making it stock? Exactly like you did with docking? That's silly. There's no way in a game about space exploration that there wasnt going to be a docking implementation no matter what. We dock in space all the time. We dont mine in space. One of these things is a borderline base thing for space exploration, the other is a nerd wet dream. Not the same ballpark. Spaceman Future! fucked around with this message at 14:32 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
DStecks posted:Uh, for the sake of making it stock? Exactly like you did with docking? Non-stock docking was incredibly buggy, laggy, and had almost nothing that made it fun or easy. Kethane isn't docking because docking required actual code changes to work successfully - namely having the ability to turn two ships into one. Presumably OfficalKethane would be a copy of Kethane but without massive code changes needed, making it redundant.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
T-man posted:Non-stock docking was incredibly buggy, laggy, and had almost nothing that made it fun or easy. Kethane isn't docking because docking required actual code changes to work successfully - namely having the ability to turn two ships into one. Presumably OfficalKethane would be a copy of Kethane but without massive code changes needed, making it redundant. I don't really care that much about mining one way or the other, but if it's a good idea and fits in with the core game then it should be part of the core game. It doesn't make sense to leave something like that to modders just because you can.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:That's silly. There's no way in a game about space exploration that there wasnt going to be a docking implementation no matter what. We dock in space all the time. We dont mine in space. One of these things is a borderline base thing for space exploration, the other is a nerd wet dream. Not the same ballpark. We also don't send manned missions to loving Pluto, or put space stations in Lunar orbit, or have nuclear powered engines. In situ resource extraction is one of the most commonly suggested methods to make a manned mission to Mars actually work, and it's a hell of a lot more plausible than anybody actually building a NERVA at this point. Paradoxish posted:It doesn't make sense to leave something like that to modders just because you can.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:I don't really care that much about mining one way or the other, but if it's a good idea and fits in with the core game then it should be part of the core game. It doesn't make sense to leave something like that to modders just because you can. I love the idea of it but I'm not sure it fits with the game at all. Beyond it being a technology that we don't have, or are even close to, and really aren't even planning (which as silly as some pf the parts in KSP are each has a rough real world analogue, there's no hyperdrive for a reason) so that's a pretty big step outside the current design. Kethane is something to do, but is it fun enough to take a ton of Dev time on? Especially if it already exists and is fine for what it is? Id rather Squad work on frameworks that can be expanded by mods rather than spend all their time converting fan favorite mod of the week into an official feature.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:I love the idea of it but I'm not sure it fits with the game at all. Beyond it being a technology that we.. really aren't even planning Yes we loving are.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
DStecks posted:We also don't send manned missions to loving Pluto, or put space stations in Lunar orbit, or have nuclear powered engines. In situ resource extraction is one of the most commonly suggested methods to make a manned mission to Mars actually work, and it's a hell of a lot more plausible than anybody actually building a NERVA at this point. Yeah, extracting water. You know, the thing that if it exists requires a drill and a mouth. That's a pretty far cry from strip mining the surface of mars for gold and iron or setting up interplanetary refinerys. "Mining" as NASA see it and "Mining" as kethane or the community see it are 2 completely different beasts.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:Yeah, extracting water. You know, the thing that if it exists requires a drill and a mouth. That's a pretty far cry from strip mining the surface of mars for gold and iron or setting up interplanetary refinerys. "Mining" as NASA see it and "Mining" as kethane or the community see it are 2 completely different beasts. Isn't this actually an argument for including mining in the game and not relying on modders? I'm pretty sure DStecks is talking about options for ISRU, which is both realistic and interesting from a gameplay perspective since it opens up more variety in mission types and planning. Right now there's nothing in the stock game that would let you plan a mission like, say, Mars Direct. Paradoxish fucked around with this message at 15:02 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Maxmaps, will you rework the vab menus at some point? Right now it's bearable with just stock parts, but it quickly becomes annoying if one has B9 or other part mods installed, with lots of scrolling between pages and parts barely if at all sorted in an understandable fashion. I really think that the vab parts section needs either give the user the ability to change the order of parts by clicking & dragging, or submenus, for instance propulsion -> 0.625 engines -> list of all tiny engines. propulsion -> 1.25 fuel tanks -> list of all fuel tanks of that size. This might also improve performance a bit, since the game would only need to load all objects from that subcategory rather than everything in the science menu? My programming experience is limited to "hello world" level of complexity, so I have no idea how difficult this would be, but IMO it would make the VAB more transparant to use. Regardless it's not a pressing matter but I do think it would make the vab more easy to use. double nine fucked around with this message at 15:00 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
Yeah. We also weren't sold on the gameplay benefits of the added complexity. Figured anyone who wanted that would have Kethane already. We are currently trying ideas like a drill+processor part that you add to your ship, plunge it into asteroids and it starts making fuel for you.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
double nine posted:Maxmaps, We will. Whole craft building UI is up for a big upgrade.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
I find the whole idea of resource gathering in a game like this horribly dull sounding. What would be fun (to me) is a mission where some faceless corporation wants you to bring back 8 tons of dirt from Duna so they can make tchotchkes out of it. That way you don't give a crap what's on the planet but you still have to figure out the problem of getting a ship there and back.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:We will. Whole craft building UI is up for a big upgrade. I assume not this update? Speaking of, is there a post detailing the goals for .24 (usual disclaimer of changing priorities/unexpected difficulties/opportunities goes here)?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Isn't this actually an argument for including mining in the game and not relying on modders? I'm pretty DStecks is talking about options for ISRU, which is both realistic and interesting from a gameplay perspective since it opens up more variety in mission types and planning. Right now there's nothing in the stock game that would let you plan a mission like, say, Mars Direct. To a degree sure, but not the degree the community wants it. Simple extraction is no biggie (water, oxygen, simple fuels), I'm referring more to the exoplanetary refinement of resources and construction of parts off planet. Something the community is wild about but is just not happening in this lifetime. xzzy posted:I find the whole idea of resource gathering in a game like this horribly dull sounding. Yeah this, much simpler way of what I was trying to say with contracts.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
double nine posted:I assume not this update? Speaking of, is there a post detailing the goals for .24 (usual disclaimer of changing priorities/unexpected difficulties/opportunities goes here)? http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Planned_features But it's fan maintained. Reworked tutorials probably should have come in before the game went on offer on Steam, surely?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:Yeah, extracting water. You know, the thing that if it exists requires a drill and a mouth. That's a pretty far cry from strip mining the surface of mars for gold and iron or setting up interplanetary refinerys. "Mining" as NASA see it and "Mining" as kethane or the community see it are 2 completely different beasts. Please stop putting words in my mouth. NASA has seriously proposed extracting water from the Martian soil to use as rocket fuel for the return trip to orbit. It's less sci-fi than NERVA, for all practical purposes. Maxmaps posted:Yeah. We also weren't sold on the gameplay benefits of the added complexity. Figured anyone who wanted that would have Kethane already. We are currently trying ideas like a drill+processor part that you add to your ship, plunge it into asteroids and it starts making fuel for you. I would be OK with this, but I still prefer the Kethane model of refining a resource, since it allows for an interesting gameplay decision of whether to refine it on the planet's surface or in orbit. Also there's the issue of "why not put a drill on every single craft, then?" which Kethane doesn't have because of the weight and size involved in extracting the resource.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Thwomp posted:Ugh, I hate docking port bugs. Had this same problem before. This fixed it. Soopafly posted:And I can't get my docking ports to connect. Perfect alignment, tried mechjeb, dozens of attempts and they just won't stick.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
DStecks posted:Please stop putting words in my mouth. NASA has seriously proposed extracting water from the Martian soil to use as rocket fuel for the return trip to orbit. It's less sci-fi than NERVA, for all practical purposes. I'm not man, we're not even arguing we're talking about 2 completely different concepts of "mining", there's no need for the bad vibes in the KSP thread.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I find the whole idea of resource gathering in a game like this horribly dull sounding. Minmus Lime Pie.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:24
|
|
|
The game has consistently chosen fun over realism when they conflict (for the most part) and I have no problem with them applying this philosophy to space mining. I for one love the idea of a self-sustaining colony somewhere that doesn't rely on supply runs from Kerbin. If that requires resource extraction that is unrealistically easy or efficient, so be it.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
There's a certain type of gamer who equates more complexity with more fun. Look at Minecraft Tekkit for how out of hand this can get.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:We will. Whole craft building UI is up for a big upgrade. I found it pretty surprising that there is still no filter for parts or even a search function in the assembly menu. There was a mod for it, but i don't think it got updated for the last versions.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:36
|
|
|
Germstore posted:There's a certain type of gamer who equates more complexity with more fun. Look at Minecraft Tekkit for how out of hand this can get. But that doesn't make the game harder, it only makes more options available. Same with KSP. Just because I can build a complex orbital factory doesn't mean I have to, but I like that the option is there.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:We will. Whole craft building UI is up for a big upgrade. Please make the initial stage placement smarter.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 08:24 |
|
|
I'm hoping the mission system can make things that are realistic but tedious (such as setting up a GPS network or running supplies to a space station) into non-tedious challenges. For example, you have a mission to resupply your space station, and rather than doing it yourself every couple of weeks/months, you just have to do it once. If you have a flight that achieves all the mission goals (launch with >= X food/water/supplies/personnel, dock with target, target sustains no damage, land on Kerbin, no casualties) then the game calculates the total cost of the mission and just deducts that from your budget every time a supply mission needs to be run. As a reward, you get an 'operational space station' bonus which gives you periodic science/funding/whatever. And you can always manually re-do the mission with a different rocket design that costs less, and if successful will replace the existing cost of your supply missions in the budget. That way as you unlock lighter or cheaper or re-usable parts you have a reason to go back and re-run existing missions. This makes setting up extrakerrestrial colonies much more fun, since you just need to fly 2 missions. It also means you could setup easy fuel depots, if you had a mission to re-fuel an orbiting space station from the surface of mun/minums, you could have resource extraction and delivery to your orbiting fuel depot all automated. Just focus on the fun parts, building and flying the first rocket to Duna, Eve, or wherever.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:30
|
|
