Eji1700

What i'd like in order of personal importance- 1. OBSERVATION. A huge part of space exploration comes from looking at and mapping things FIRST and then you start blowing stuff up to try and get there. Having a "fog of war" for the solar system that you can uncover with various methods would be great. I'd love the idea that you only start with knowledge of the sun, kerbal, and the mun, but can either send out exploratory probes, use telescopes, and maybe even other methods(from realistic stuff like enough science + knowledge of orbits ='s figuring out a possible location, to more kerbal things like chain launching suicide 900 suicide probes in every possible direction) to figure out where other planets are. Further upon discovering you don't have any idea what they look like in detail until you actually GO there(or high enough tech could be very powerful telescopes). There's so much you could do with this(especially if you could then randomize the solar system each game) that i'd love to see it implemented. Hell even MORE you could do with it + multiplayer Sadly i'm doubting it's even on the list let alone being worked on. 2. Aerodynamics/heat damage. I don't want fully modeled systems(because as is I really think the game isn't well designed to deal with heat damage realistically), but having a purpose to nose cones besides asthetics at the very least would be nice, and at least needing to angle correctly on entry would be decent as well. I wouldn't mind if you could "paint" a portion of each piece in heat shielding for weight/cost issues. Only a small section if you want to be efficient, or just coat the whole damn thing to be safe. The idea of having to add physical heat shield parts or re do fuel ratios/equations so we always bring enough to slow down before aerobreaking strikes me as too tedious and too difficult for the more casual players. 3. Resources. Science is a decent start for those of us who want goals to help guide our play, but resources and an expansion of such a system offers so much promise. I'm also hoping it one day leads to building things off planet, but in the meantime just having a reason to set up base on other systems(besides !SCIENCE) would be nice. 4. Multiplayer- it will be cool and it is a neat idea, but I really really want there to be stuff to do that's supported in game as well as whatever crazy projects my friends and I come up with. I know it's a big deal for everyone, but I personally wish it'd been held off on until we had more main features besides sandbox.

Just throwing it out there, but i'm on auto update, and so far am still on the old version of kerbal(not .21). Not sure how to manually force the update(tried toggling to don't update auto and then back, and was planning on a redownload next if i must). Advice would be appreciate.d

Time. This game is balanced around the idea that you can fast forward time at points, but there's still a lot to work out. You've got SUPER weak engines like the probe ion engines, which might be interesting to use, but as the system currently stands i can't just set it on max burn and come back in 4 days. I've often mentioned i'd LOVE a "fast forward to this node" option and a way for reminders to be set while you fly other missions(flying something else and have a reminder pop up when your other ship hits a certain spot sorta thing). If they did something like this, then it'd make realistic and efficient designs a LOT less tedious. Currently most of my designs are VASTLY overpowered simply because the idea of setting something up and leaving it going is WAAY too tedious, and the fine tuning of fast forwarding gets obnoxious fast. Oh and gravity wells/aerobraking. Predictions are often wrong when shifting gravity wells, and there's obviously no stock way to calculate aerobraking(which is slightly obnoxious when dealing with jool). I don't mind having to do it the hard way sometimes, but i'd be much happier if some more depth was added to computer systems(price/ability/weight tradeoff) rather than just being stuck with the same set of abilities and the "option" to add autopilot.

Post your issues in the bug section so they can actually fix them quickly.

Awesome! Glad to hear. I won't have to park extra kerbals underneath the rockets now.

Is this how it will always be? Seems odd that you can't just have a list pop up and select which crewable compartments will be filled and which will be left blank. Granted it's not exactly high priority either.

And the problem with DLC content is that 1. Many developers prefer to make the game, and then parcel it up, and 2. Many developers seem to like massively overcharging for their DLC. Sure $1 isn't much, but when you're paying for a skin that should likely be $0.10 tops, its a mess. This very much leads to lower quality games if you're not willing to pay for overpriced content which the game was designed to have, but then removed later to make more money. Further it KILLS modding because smart people won't pay $1 for what they could have done themselves in a few seconds with mod tools. How do you solve this? Don't add mod tools. As for Kerbal, my feeling is that they should do an actual release at some point, and if they want to do an expansion afterwords, that's fine. I'd be willing to pay for more content, especially if it's actual content. Honestly i'd prefer they just do a full out expansion pack rather than this piecemeal bs. They've clearly done tons of work to bring this game to where it is. That said, if i suddenly see rocket booster downloads at a $1 each and the removal of mod tools, i'll throw it in the trash pile with all the other games that want to treat me like i'm an idiot.

These days i rarely care. I usually set up my point(say an intercept with jool). Then i rotate my rocket so i'm lined up on the point and bring up the map and controls. I don't actually watch the Delta V guage, and instead watch my actual plotted course as it changes in real time on the map. Once it's at the desired point, i stop burning. I've done t minus a minute or so with such setups(sometimes days for massive adjustments)

As someone who can dock and who can get within meters of a planets surface from across the solar system I still feel that kerbal needs- 1. A better flight planning interface. The tools are nice and intuitive, but there's some MAJOR issues that make things harder. It's very difficult to line things up so you can see what the hell you are doing(or see what you want to see), and one mistake can mean a good 15+ seconds of tedious work. It doesn't help that certain things aren't calculated accurately(aerobraking isn't accounted for at all, and when you switch into a different gravity well it often has to redo calculations and thus requires adjustments), but from what i've seen from mechjeb, the game CAN calculate these things. I'm personally hoping that later we get different levels of computers that combined with actual instrument data(thus giving probes a point) will give us more accurate calculations. 2. Tutorials for these things. In game and already set up to go. I managed to get to other planets decently quickly(its like the moon, but much much farther) but i had to watch a tutorial to figure out how to equalize my speed with an in orbit object without missing it. 3. Let me choose how many stupid conics i want to see in game please. So that said, my advice if you don't want to mechjeb everything- 1. Practice using the moon. Get something in orbit and then learn to use the flight planning controls to get caught by it's gravity. Once you figure out what each marker does(and understand that you can move the entire point) it becomes much easier to plan things. 2. Then shoot for minmus. Again just practice getting the hang of manipulating the stupid thing. It's especially obnoxious trying to manipulate zooming in an out to see where your predicted path is in relation to the moon/planet. 3. Then go for duna. I suggest duna becuase it's basically the easiest by far. Jool isn't actually that bad either, and helps you learn aerobraking. 4. Optionally, QUICKSAVE. Personally i didn't even find out about such a feature until long after i'd gotten everything down(and now just don't use it out of habit) but when you're trying to learn i see no reason not to abuse the hell out of this. Relaunching rockets is just dead time between practice sessions, so set up a rocket in orbit with plenty of fuel, quick save it, and start practicing.

1. I personally believe that they can very easily(well...sorta.), through a variety of methods/means, add other solar systems and interstellar travel to the game in a balanced fashion. WILL they do it is another question, and totally up to them, but they most certainly can. 2. I really dislike how people seem to feel that such things will ruin the game. It would be more than possible to balance and include in a reasonable manner given the framework they already have/plan on creating. My ONLY concern is time. I want KSP to have as much depth as possible, and that means as much gamespace as possible. If they add another solar system, that's more to do, but I don't want that at the cost of some other feature that should go in first(mining and reentry heat being an easy example...or possibly actual weather). That said, if added, no one is saying you have to use it, but if not added then no one can use it. At the very least i hope they put in the infrastructure required in the code so that modders who want to experiment with it can do so. 3. The "realism" argument bugs me a lot. At the end of the day how real this is comes down to the devs, but one of the things that I love about KSP is being able to test out things that we will likely never see in real life. We don't have hyper massive space stations, moon bases, or even manned missions to mars(lot easier when your astronauts don't eat) in real life, but they are something we could do "in theory" and no one seems to have a problem with them being in the game(and expanded upon). If they really bug you, you probably don't build them, and still enjoy whatever part of the game you have. It's easy to limit yourself if you choose not to do something, but it sucks for others who wanted to do it but now cannot. There's a LOT of theorized ways to do interstellar travel, and I personally hope that it is not only added, but that many different methods are. As for balance, that's almost trivially easy. Not only are some of these methods inherently balanced(the aforementioned ramjets would be easy to make costly), but unless something massive happens, they're planning on adding a resource system(which will finally help balance the currently overpowered nuke rockets...which no one seems to mind in this topic). Possibly in the very next major version. Every ship you make won't be sporting antimatter engines if it requires mining bases on 6 different planets, a complicated ferry system, and a year of in game time to build one. So in short, first and foremost I want them to ensure the game keeps it's quality with whatever they have planned. If they feel they don't have development time to add interstellar travel(or to do it justice) so be it, but if kerbal suddenly starts making AAA money out of the blue and they think, we should expand our goals, I very much hope they put the quality and effort they have into making the current game, and apply it to interstellar travel.

What can you do in base kerbal(simplified)- 1. Build something that goes up. 2. Build something that goes to orbit 3. Build something that goes to a moon. 4. Build something that goes to another planet. 5. Build something that goes to another planets moon. 6. Build something that goes to something you built. 7. Any of the above, plus comes back/goes somewhere else after the first part. Annnd right now that's about it. Now thanks to how kerbal works that is a whole HELL of a lot. Also you can "gather" data, but the data gathering devices, much like the communications ones, are as aesthetic as the nose cones. So, adding weapons actually adds gameplay space. We all know mining is planned in the future as something else that can go on that list(extensively), but even without adding weapons i'd say "shoot something you made down" is a very fun and practical challenge. Accommodating and efficiently using stock jury rigged weaponry is actually very fun and quite difficult to do and gives yet another goal for people who've maybe only done parts of the above list, and don't want to build a space base on laythe, or a moon satellite network, or giant dres space station, or whatever. Further actually efficiently piloting and using such things requires a skill(and design) that the normal game currently(and may never) actually ask of you. Both long range accuracy on a target(you never have any reason to shoot something at something else from any distance or speed), and if you want to get technical, be maneuverable in space. Most spaceships are large, hulking, and VERY slow, so building something that's supposed to be agile and zip around once it's up there is actually a heck of a challenge(heck a PLANE that's agile is tricky enough right now) and you have to develop completely different skill to pilot such a craft. So yeah, there's a ton of people who just want to watch stuff go boom as is evidence by the endless supply of weak to deadly overpowered weaponry mods, but there's also a lot who just want to have a way to test, learn, and use new skills in the game. Heck i'll probably put a Space slalom into orbit just to test craft maneuverability at some point, and give me a reason to make these stupidly difficult to pilot agile death machines(mostly for the pilot).

Agree with the above, and have several more to add- I'd like if somehow the game could calculate atmosphereic data as well(since aerobraking without mechjeb is a guess and check method right now). Granted from what i've heard they plan on redoing the air physics or something, so that might be why. Reminders/timers/alarms. There's a LOT of stuff that's basically "ok, now float for 4 weeks". The game actually tracks persistant time, so it'd be nice to just set up a flight out to jool, and suddenly have it remind me when i'm a week/day/hour away from needing to do the next burn/arriving a certain point. Toggling the number of conics in game. NOTHING is more obnoxious than getting an encounter, but having it send you on an almost perfect orbit for the second loop. Now you have all the other obnoxious manipulation issues + trying to click on the correct path for altering orbits. Moving the controls. Sometimes i want to look at duna while i mess with the flight path. This requires focusing on duna, but making sure i can see the controls in the background. Let me hold a button and just pull the manuver node off the line and put it where I want it so its easier to really plan ahead. And god so much more(calculations always seem inaccurate when you go from solar gravity to a planets) Anyways I realize the game isn't complete and that a lot of this is probably on the "to do" list(especially since mech jeb can do most of it and more), but it can be so frustrating when doing longer interstellar flights to have to micromanage a bunch of hidden rules, and it makes it VERY obnoxious to teach.

I actually find this kinda bothersome. Even with physics warp it can take FOREVER to pull off some maneuvers. I really wish you could set a rocket to low burn and leave it and still have the game calculate correctly. Or at least a faster timewarp under burn for deepspace.

I'm very interested in the knowledge base. The idea that you can collect and gather data on planets is not only interesting just as a objective, but leaves you guys with some interesting design space to screw with. My immediate thought is something like sending probes to get info on planets so you know not only where to mine, but also get access to better flight planning(would kill for atmosphere calculations to be stock)

Ok...something i\'m confused on and I\'d love to see a video explanation(a written one would be fine though)- Engines seem to work basically with just the following- Fuel tank Thruster. In the vid you have- Fuel tank Thuster Intake. They are configured like so intake/fuel/thruster. Now then, Question one What do the actual 'engine' parts do then and where/how/why would I use them? There seem to be 2 different ones and I have no clue how they differ or what effect they actually have. Question two How much does part order matter? For example if I set up a plane that front to back is- Intake/cockpit/Engine/Fuel/Thruster It works, but I don\'t know whats doing what or whats actually helping. Does that intake do anything, or does the cockpit prevent it from helping? Is that engine doing squat, or am I just getting normal fuel + thruster output? I\'d love to screw with spaceplane stuff more, but I\'m having a hard time figuring out what in the hell is going on.