|
Mister Bates posted:So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. You could go for a Duna or Jool system launch. Those take months though. In the interim you can work on an asteroid orbital
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
Mister Bates posted:So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. Aaaah, "NASA Syndrome". Thats usually the point where I start doing interplanetary probes of increasing complexity.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. Visit every biome on Mun and Minmus, which will require: 1) A Mun (or Minmus) polar scansat probe to map biomes prior to sending missions down 2) Lifting an orbital space station to equatorial orbit around Mun (or Minmus) 3) Lander(s) to go from the space station to the surface and back, where the space station refuels them and processes their science. I recommend 2 landers, a manned that does surface samples and an unmanned that has a materials lab instead of a can. 4) A return module to carry the science and crew to/from the lab 5) A refueling tanker to replenish the space station So that's a heavy space station plus 4 craft to dock with it in Munar orbit plus a recon sat plus about 20 dockings at a minimum. That's without adding rovers. And then you have to do it all again at Minmus. It'll keep you busy for a while... My question: Is it worth landing on another planet more than once since they don't have biomes? Do I need to send a heavy refueling station to refuel a lander for multiple trips to the surface? Or is a quick down-and-back going to get me all the science there is to get? Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 04:42 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:I see rocket design as one of the aspects of player skill level. So a mission can fail (by no means exclusively) due to: You're forgetting that people have mods giving them detailed figures on a per-stage basis, and still have mission failures or redirects of mission objectives because that one reason can be a big wrench in the works. Sure, with very detailed figures you can overdesign a lot, and most people do to account for odd errors, SAS flipping out or interplanetary transfer windows being imprecise. Having a dV readout in the VAB, even if it's an unlockable tech somewhere in the tech tree makes you a better designer. All you have to do is make sure your number goes up, and with a bit of trial and error, you find that adding more fuel gives more dV to a point, making your lander smaller REALLY makes your dV go up, but adding engines seems to make it go down. KSP is about experimenting to find the fun, with sometimes  catastrophic results on the way.If Squad never puts it in, there will always be people who will mod it in. But I think it would add to the game far, far more than any perceived "complexity" up front would cause in confusion. Mistle posted:Guys, clearly the solution is to make them all machine people, with one gender: electronic Don't forget a radar altimeter toggle for the main altimeter view, a la the surface/orbit/target velocity display on the nav ball.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 04:42
|
|
"
|
DelphiAegis posted:Don't forget a radar altimeter toggle for the main altimeter view, a la the surface/orbit/target velocity display on the nav ball. There's been a lot of good suggestions, but really this one is in a tier by itself. It would, by a wide margin, be the most useful thing for a beginner playing stock KSP.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 04:54
|
|
|
Captain Postal posted:My question: Laythe and Eve have seas/oceans that technically counts as a different surface, requiring multiple landings to get all the science from the planet possible.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. Can your manned flight program, rent seats from the Krussians at inflated prices, and then dump all of your annual budget in to interplanetary probes/rovers and planetary science, and hope you don't end up at war with the Krussians in the gap years while you wait for commercial spaceflight to close the gap.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
To make it obvious which altimeter view you're in, you could have the radar version only work under a certain threshold (say, 5 or 10 km) and the display at top would be digital with green LED lights a la the real Apollo spacecraft, and as seen in lunar flight.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Wow, all that discussion about the legitimacy of having Female Kerbals in addition to Males and such. Was I the only one that was perfectly content with launching a bunch of mass-produced, genetically copied, asexual green things with eyes into space? I mean drat, I didn't think it was this big of an issue in a game about finding creative ways to launch green things into space  Not saying it wouldn't work or anything. It's just....am I the only one who hasn't thought about the gender specifics of Kerbal society?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 08:38
|
|
|
Kerbals look like dudes, so they're going to make Kerbals that look like chicks.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
BMS posted:Wow, all that discussion about the legitimacy of having Female Kerbals in addition to Males and such. Are you a woman?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
BMS posted:Wow, all that discussion about the legitimacy of having Female Kerbals in addition to Males and such. I don't believe for a second anyone looked at the Kerbals and didn't see a little green Tom Hanks. Also, "I didn't notice that women were completely unrepresented" doesn't mean they aren't, especially when you're not a woman.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 09:57
|
|
|
DelphiAegis posted:Don't forget a radar altimeter toggle for the main altimeter view, a la the surface/orbit/target velocity display on the nav ball. Absolutely forgot about that. I'll go and edit that in.Mister Bates posted:So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. I think the new big thing to do in preparation of the next update is to wrangle your asteroids into on mega-base, anchored to each other using claws, and megadocks, and careful, careful steering. Until you nudge it in the critically worst place and chain-deconstruct your science platforms 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
I'm sorry for starting a massive derail, especially when so many people completely missed my point; but that's my fault. I really, honestly, thought that more people saw the sexism and gender-normative stereotyping being introduced by gendering Kerbals. The reason I didn't elaborate on it before, and also the reason I specifically requested to not hear from straight-white-males, is that they are not part of the group that is trying to be "included" by adding gender to Kerbals, nor are they a member of the many groups which will be explicitly excluded by the addition of a simple binary gendered Kerbal, and -- all good intentions notwithstanding -- are not in a position to choose their opinions for them. Speaking of good intentions, people are quick to point out that you're carefully not sexualizing Kerbals with gratuitous T&A while you go about "feminizing" them, but your choices of feminizing features paints a picture of what you think a proper, feminine physique is: slender, slight, soft. The sketch of the proposed male and female Kerbals shows the "female" at roughly half the volume (therefore mass) of the "male". This is a nerd-culture male's view of how females should look, cute, demure, with no overly sexual characteristics which could be threatening . How many people that you're looking to make feel included will identify with that particular ideal of femininity? Before I posted anything, I asked my friend and colleague (a scientist from Iran who is familiar with both KSP and my love of turning Kerbals into fine green mist) what she thought of adding gender to Kerbals. Her response was "Why? They are Kerbals ... and disposable. Who wants disposable Kerbal women?" She too had thought of them as genderless rocket fodder ... but that could just be because she'd seen the way I played. The discussion meandered to Lemmings, and the point was made that genderless Lemmings can be slaughtered with glee, but march female Lemmings by the score through smashers and flails and the game looses its whimsical nature -- as it should; there's far too much real, horrific violence perpetrated on women. We were thinking of KSP as Lemmings with rockets. Pretending for a moment that some players won't be so gleefully murderous to their Kerbals, I asked her if she thought of the idea that girls might feel more included if they could identify more closely with the Kerbals. "Is there an way to let the girl Kerbals wear hijab, or even a simple headscarf?" A young Muslim girl might not appreciate your efforts at including women if comes with the implicit statement that they need not apply. So, where are the Muslim Kerbals? Where are Indian Kerbals? The African Kerbals? The Asian Kerbals? Where are the fat Kerbals? Maybe I want a respawing Porkins Kerbal to be my go-to red-shirt for missions with a high chance of lithobraking. Someone posted asking how being more inclusive is bad. It isn't. More inclusive is better. People say that currently Kerbals appear too masculine with their Western human male features, and whole-heartedly agree this is a problem, but I question if the right solution is to take a rib from Jeb to mould for him a Westernized, feminized Kerbal companion.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 12:02
|
|
|
Obviously the solution is to go the hyena route, and make the female Kerbals larger, stronger, and more dominant than the male Kerbals.  In all seriousness, though, you make some good points- but I would still like to see female Kerbals, because there's only so far you can go with the genderless argument. Whether you like it or not, there is still a fairly large contingent of female players- and not all of them play with "disposable" Kerbals like you do. If nothing else, it gives players an incentive to bring Kerbals home alive. Honestly, I'm not that qualified to talk about this- the best course of action is probably to consult female players, not straight white male nerds.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
DelphiAegis posted:To make it obvious which altimeter view you're in, you could have the radar version only work under a certain threshold (say, 5 or 10 km) and the display at top would be digital with green LED lights a la the real Apollo spacecraft, and as seen in lunar flight. I think the best approach would be to show ASL altitude above a threshold, say on Kerbin, 60km ASL, then gradually do a weighted average of that and radar altitude from 60km to 20km ASL (gradually transition from 100% ASL-0% Radar to 0% ASL-100% Radar), then do radar altitude from 20km ASL down. This way, players don't need to pay attention to whether they are in ASL or radar; it just works, with no confusing sudden jumps.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
eth0.n posted:I think the best approach would be to show ASL altitude above a threshold, say on Kerbin, 60km ASL, then gradually do a weighted average of that and radar altitude from 60km to 20km ASL (gradually transition from 100% ASL-0% Radar to 0% ASL-100% Radar), then do radar altitude from 20km ASL down. This way, players don't need to pay attention to whether they are in ASL or radar; it just works, with no confusing sudden jumps.  that's even more confusing, requires more computations on the already strained CPU as it is, and as a final strike, is invisible to the player and would be difficult to explain with any tutorial. The instrumentation is there to show one thing: data. It is up to you (and the kerbals) to interpret that data and make it meaningful, not wonder if the instrument is making calculations for you.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
So, I'm a trans girl. Pretty much exactly the sort of person you think would be excluded by this. And... I think adding feminine kerbals is a good idea anyway. Previously, I'd advocated adding feminine names, feminine features, and randomizing everything independently, but the base kerbal model has ended up looking too male and it's stuck around too long for that to fly with most people now, I think. Though I will say think a one in thirty or so chance of a kerbal generating with a name from the other list would be funny. Which reminds me, hey Maxmaps, is Kerbalizer ever going to get an update? I'm pretty sure it's still the same version it's been since launch, with the same bugs and all. Besides, you guys need to add Sailor Mun hair, clearly  Nevets posted:With apologies to the original artist: Now he just looks like an idiot. Perfect.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
It's always been hard to think of "little green men from space" as anything but gendered, and that's always what I've seen kerbals as. The embodiment of the little green men from space trope. You can get away with kerbals being genderless when it was only Bill Jeb and Bob, but once you started naming each kerbal, they lose their lemming like quality. Lemmings never had individual names. I'd certainly like more variety in kerbals in general. They look all almost identical. Gender is a nice way of instantly doubling character variety, and then you can add in hair and skin color variety. It's not only relatable to humans, it's cheap way, codewise, to add variety.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
emf posted:sexism and gender-normative stereotyping  RAPE!!!!! RAPE!!!! RRRRAAAAAAAAPPPPEEE!!!!!!!In other news all I'm really worried about with female Kerbals is:  Wearing long-rear end hair on military or space missions is a douche move, so I agree with that one sketch everyone reposts that keeps the same hair texture for females. So long as that's set I'm cool. KSP has never been about !!!TRIGGER WARNING!!! men in space, it's just that one a purely practical level it started as a Mercury/Apollo simulator and thus used iconography of that time. That's why there's buzz cuts, that's why there's flags, that's why there's a You're only talking about this one issue because it's so en vogue. Stop it.  =  = OH MY GOD I JUST POSTED THREE PICTURES OF !!!TRIGGER WARNING!!! MEN! I MUST BE A MISANDRIST RAPE APOLOGIST RAPE SUPPORTING RAPIST RAPER CIS-WHITE... actually I'm poly/pan and I've suffered a lot of discrimination throughout my life for various reasons kthxbai.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 15:53
|
|
ME
|
OH MY GOD I'M GONNA HAVE A GREAT BIG FREAKOUT BECAUSE MY STATUS AS PANSEXUAL MEANS THAT I CAN UTTERLY INVALIDATE EVERY POST POINTING OUT THAT KERGALS WOULD BE A FUN AND HARMLESS ADDITION TO THE GAME
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:00
|
|
|
You are all loving ridiculous. Add some loving girl kerbals in, choose a model that has feminine features, but that doesn't exaggerate them, pick some girly sounding names to go in the random name generator, and then lets all loving move on. Christ.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
What. The everloving. gently caress. "Lets maybe make some of these kerbonauts female/add female names to the random list." Internet Explodes. I think there would be less of an outcry if they forced you to add rocket parts with a rivet minigame, or do transfer window calculations manually. Edit: ^^ That.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
emf posted:I'm sorry for starting a massive derail, especially when so many people completely missed my point; but that's my fault. I really, honestly, thought that more people saw the sexism and gender-normative stereotyping being introduced by gendering Kerbals. The reason I didn't elaborate on it before, and also the reason I specifically requested to not hear from straight-white-males, is that they are not part of the group that is trying to be "included" by adding gender to Kerbals, nor are they a member of the many groups which will be explicitly excluded by the addition of a simple binary gendered Kerbal, and -- all good intentions notwithstanding -- are not in a position to choose their opinions for them. What
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
All the more reason to create Katherine Kerman, frankly.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. Captain Postal posted:Visit every biome on Mun and Minmus, which will require: I've done this before a couple of times with Minmus; each time, it was pretty much enough to unlock the rest of the science tree. One time I did it without quite so many mods, using an orbital science station and refueling a lander for each trip, following the above flight profile pretty closely, though I only used a single lander. Recently I did it again with a whole bunch more mods, including some science parts from 'Panda Jaeger' that are at the very end of the tree as far as science goes (the 1000s level) with smaller and repeatable materials and goo canisters. The second go around used small nuclear engines and a big tank of gas that meant I never had to go back to orbit until I was done. Bottom line, forget about a surface base, unless you've got Kethane and you're extracting resources, or you want a surface outpost for the sake of a surface outpost. Orbital science stations are the way to go. Also, here's the mapping probe I'm using these days.     That uses TurboNisu's stockalike aesthetics pack for the trusses (which are incredibly useful, btw) and DMagic's Orbital Science plus SCANSat parts for the instrumentation. The solar and comm arrays are AIES. After the local Kerbin system, it's time to head to Duna and whatever else you've got transfer windows for, as well as managing your asteroid shooting gallery. Asteroid Cities v.03 will give you refineries and probes that create Kethane and Water loads for asteroids, and Orbital Construction Redux provides orbital shipyards that use Kethane to build things, effectively giving you an orbital asteroid shipyard. Building a ship there and sending it to Duna or Jool is probably my next step. I know this is basically a laundry list of mods that you need to install, but they provide so much additional functionality that they've created a fair bit of gameplay for me just from having them. Also,  and shut the gently caress up about female Kerbals, Jesus Christ. They'll either add them or not; we've ceased to be a useful source of discussion on the issue.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
Where do baby Kerbals come from?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Spelling Mitsake posted:Where do baby Kerbals come from? A series of large vats deep beneath the nameless KSC building.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Spelling Mitsake posted:Where do baby Kerbals come from? The weird building next to the VAB, they spontaneously pop into existence. malloc() is the uterus for these people.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Goons loving ruin everything, jesus loving christ. I can't even have a loving rocket game where there are none else to be had (except maybe Orbiter) without you shitlords ruining it. Most of you should loving kill yourselves.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Ugh, come on guys. More stories of fun rockets/projects like the space bike or experimenting with cool mods.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Here's a dumb video I made to show some friends what I did when I disappeared into KSP for a few days, months ago. Yes I cheated by putting antimatter in the plane on the ground with hyper-edit, but I wanted to see how such a vehicle would work. Kinda long, ending is kinda slow and I wasn't sure how to use the warp drive well enough at the time, but at least it's better than whatever poo poo was going on before. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILTkys14brE
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Ran into an odd bug/behavior. I had intercepted a Class B rock and brought that sucker down from a 93 degree inclination to zero (took about 5-6 burns from the nukes. Next ship will probably double their count!). I have my fueling depot/general space station floating about, so I fly up a few long arms with claws at the end to stick asteroids on, because why not? Intercept the station, arm the station claw, target the docking port behind the claw to take advantage of the docking port indicator mod for alignment, and then move it in at 0.5 m/s. It hits, the claw engages, and... Normally when you dock the camera view "slides" a bit to center on the new unified ship/station. In this case the camera started moving...and moving...and moving offscreen...and then KSP stopped responding. Restarted, did a quickload from right before I docked the rock, and the same behavior happened--only this time I could still exit to the space center. Did that and came back and things were vibrating but usable. Released the claw on the intercept ship and docked it to the station. Subsequent checks showed things working fine. Anyone else see something like this happen when moving an asteroid into a claw?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
haveblue posted:A series of large vats deep beneath the nameless KSC building. Thats Evangelions. Kerbals evolved from grass. They are plants. Once a year the females produce seeds, and the males produce pollen. Both are scattered to the wind, to intermingle, driven by eddies of rocket exhaust to grow into a new generation of kerbals. edit: Kerbals are, of course, oblivious to the entire process. New recruits just walk into KSC and nobody questions it, because thats how it's always been. 
SocketSeven fucked around with this message at 17:12 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Rayjenkins posted:Here's a dumb video I made to show some friends what I did when I disappeared into KSP for a few days, months ago. Yes I cheated by putting antimatter in the plane on the ground with hyper-edit, but I wanted to see how such a vehicle would work. Kinda long, ending is kinda slow and I wasn't sure how to use the warp drive well enough at the time, but at least it's better than whatever poo poo was going on before. I really liked that music. Reminded me of an Amiga demo or something.. video-gamey and uplifting  Hybrid.. that's what YouTube said it was. I'm going to look up some of that stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Yep, if you like orchestral music as well as beep boop music, then Hybrid is pretty much the best. I think my favorite part of the video though is the opening because I timed all of the transitions perfectly on accident, like the change from white to red on the plane, and the moon's rise on the horizon without even trying.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
The real reason to include female kerbals is to piss off the people who think there shouldn't be women in their spacegame clubhouse.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
I designed a lander that used the landing engine for orbital transfers and such. I had some drop tanks and was headed for the Mun when it went all to hell. Made an emergency landing back at the KSC to find this:
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
I still like the crash survivors theory, explains why there is no evidence of civilization outside a few small encampments despite Kerbals having a highly advanced (if unrefined) level of technology. If Kerbals are trying to populate this strange, empty planet they find themselves on it makes sense that no women would be present in the VAB or available as Kerbonauts; both of which are very high risk occupations. After all, it is the number of women who limit the speed of population growth, not the number of men.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
Sneaky Kettle posted:
That looks gorgeous! Might be adding that pack tonight!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 17:51
|
|
