Hannu

Finnish hobby astronomer's magazine made an article about KSP during last autumn. I downloaded a demo and made first rockets. After 2 or 3 flights I bought a full version (it was 18.0). After that the game has delayed all of my other hobby projects and caused some conflicts with wife. It is the most addictive game I have ever played.

OK. I do not exactly know what is that Unity and why it has some limitations compared to common programming languages, for example C. I know. I have sometimes tried to program some kind of algorithms to produce game worlds, but it is quite impossible to get fine results as a hobby. It needs huge amounts of time. Yes, it is clear restriction that dynamic physical models are impossible. But I think that by using some kinds on noise algorithms it would be possible to generate nice "pseudophysical" details automatially. For example small scale topography, weather etc. It is possible to compute values of variables at certain place and time without computing previous values by using suitable noise functions. But I do not know is that possible in Squad's game system. Maybe not, if it has some limitations. But it would be possible by using any universal programming language. However, maybe it is not possible under gamemaker's economic resources. Of course KSP is just a game (in my opinion one of best ones) and some hopes are unrealistic.

Of course you can generate low detailed planets, like current KSP planets, with a simple algorithm and get whole galaxy with billions planets with different sizes, colors, surface roughnesses, and gas pressures. But I think that it would not be very interesting if planets lacks of fine details. Producing fine details, like weather, small scale topography, all kind of stuff on surface etc. is very hard. You must precalculate whole planet, which needs insane amounts of RAM and storage memory, or create details in real time, which means huge computing costs. I prefer that Squad should develop current planets instead of create a lot of new ones which are practically similar except size, color etc. On every real planet there are different regions but KSP's planets have maybe couple of anomalies and couple of interesting topographic places. I have driven hundred kilometers on Eve's surface and there was not any interesting details. I would like to see rivers, lakes, stones, small scale hills, rains, sunny times etc. and take into account their effects to kerbals, vehicles (for example cooling, wet soil ..) instead of ten new detailless planets of moons. KSP have already small, medium, large and impossible celestial bodies. Easy, hard, and impossible places to visit etc. Plain planets and mountainous moons. Places with different atmospheres. In my opinion there should be more variables before increasing number of celestial bodies would be reasonable. It is true that FTL can be limited to interstellar transitions. But game's current simplified physics model can not handle really different solar systems, for example multiple stars, twin planets etc. which would be interesting challenges to orbit planning. Other solar systems would be very much like Kerbol's system.

I suggest that you should use gravity slingshots. Othervise you need so large ship that I fear that game's physics engine can not handle it. Problem with slingshots is that delta-v is quite limited and typically you need several flybys and about 2-10 orbits between every flyby. Travel time will be extremely long, but fortunately kerbals live forever without food and breathing. Search for example Messenger or Cassini planet probes paths and try them. You have to calculate things by hand, because KSP's or Mechjeb's orbit planning systems can not handle multiple orbits before flyby.

I think that purple liquid evaporates and rains down and leaves purple color to soil. I suggest that Squad should add thick clouds, heavy rains, rivers, and smaller lakes. Purple color should be lighter on areas where rainfall is low.

In my opinion that should be a different game. Such a technology would make researching Kerbol's system very easy and therefore very boring. At least I like to plan and make transitions, landings and ascents by using limited delta-v instead of flying freely to any planets in system. I think that it would be impossible to create thousands of really different and well detailed planets by using some kind of computer algorithm. At least it would need supercomputer's memory and computing speed.

I have visited all bodies except Kerbol and Jool. Not very surprisingly, Eve was clearly the most difficult in all ways. It took heaviest boosters, nearly 2000 tons, and the largest number of ground and LKO tests and the longest play time. And it took also two kerbal's lives. I made it once with version 18.2. I tried exactly same construction again with version 19 or 20 and send also a rover (with separate launch). Astronaut drove nearly 100 km to ocean shore and back without significant problems, but something has changed in aerodynamics or controls and that ship could not ascend. Steering system was just pod's reaction wheels and it was inefficient for 60 ton's ship. After many tries (with purely hand control, SAS and Mechjeb) I build a new rescue ship with one LV-T45. It succeeded and the brave astronaut survived back to Kerbin. I think that it is my toughest achievement in game. I used only Mechjeb and ISA Mapsat mods.

Sorry, I forgot the URL.

Here you can see many steps in development process of manned Eve mission. It took several tries to get huge booster stable enough to survive its first kilometer. Texts are in finnish, but I think that video tells more than words.

It depends on rocket. If I use one mainsail and 6 or 8 solid boosters in small booster, I can use about 20 % of Mainsail's thrust just to steer ship. Other example is a rocket with little small TWR, which can use full throttle from pad to orbit. Typically I use 2 stages to orbit and second stage is nearly always at full throttle from ignition to MECO. The most huge rockets (1500-2000 t) are so unstable that I must be very careful with Mainsails. Automatic steering is very aggressive and Mainsails have so large gimbal angle that they can shake rocket to break.