Jump to content

Travisfv

Members
  • Posts

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Travisfv

  1. I'm having this issue too with the smaller wheels. I landed a rover to aid recovery of an... Aggressive landing where the Karbala survived but still has a mission to do.

    My rover, while sitting with the brakes on, went full throttle passed the recovery lander. It missed, but I just had to check and it was definitely not braking and to be honest I felt like its motors were running by themselves without my input.

  2. Firstly, a lack of time-based mechanics very much hurts this style of game. That's as much as I'll say about that.

    Disclaimer: What comes is my opinion that career mode should start as a guided tutorial and open into a free-form, player-guided experience.

    Career mode being the default, this is the first thing most new players will see. I seriously doubt most will even touch the tutorials. They're over-rot and separate from the main game experience. This brings me to my first point. Contracts are a perfect method of slowly introducing the mechanics to new players. Contracts could teach players fundamentals over time, rather than the current info dump that is the tutorials as they are now. This being the case, beginning contracts need to guide the player; teaching them good habits based around part testing and world records. Part testing, as it is now, only teaches bad habits and not what the part should actually be used for. Players should not have to deny contracts because their current situation makes them illogical or impossible. The excuse that you can just deny poor contracts is not good design.

    The tech tree should also accommodate this. As new nodes are unlocked, new, appropriate contracts will be introduced. Technology needs to accommodate the players needs. Basic solar panels should be unlocked before Mun missions. Ladders need to be accessible once the player can build a functional jet / lander / rover / rudimentary architecture. No part should be available before certain counter parts. 2.5m decouplers, engines, or pods should never be available before 2.5m tanks.

    In an attempt to slowly teach the player. Not every building needs to be accessible from the start. Strategies can wait tell players are comfortable with contracts.

    Speaking of buildings. Let's talk upgrades. The game should not be harder at the start. By locking conics and maneuvers behind upgrades, you are insuring that early career is several times harder for new players and only truly passable by experienced players. The difficulty of career should come from trying to get to the next planet, not artificial barriers.

    So, that's some of my thinking. There's more, but, honestly, I've seen so many good ideas on this forum with little improvement to the actual career mode. It's hard to feel it's worth typing it all out.

    You make some really good points. Some I agree with, some I do not. My main point of contention being the structure of career mode. I do not believe starting as a tutorial is the best solution, and that is because experienced players like myself who enjoy career for the challenge of not only managing funding but also giving a sort of sense of progression over the more freeform sandbox mode.

    I simply suggest that the difference be that a career tutorial be an option that you tick at the beginning on the save. That gives experienced players a way to skip the "getting to know you" phase and get right into running their space programs.

    As for technology and unlocks, I do agree that there are some really silly layouts for the whole tree. I actually just found myself looking for a 2.5 meter tank because I saw the skipper engine as an option. Ended up trying to slap an adapter to the bottom of a 1.25 meter tank to still get the power I was looking for.

    I also agree about the conics. I am practically able to make maneuvers accurately for rendezvous without needing the node whatsoever. It's sure helpful for getting to Duna, but even then I'll have that building upgraded well before I attempt such a mission.

    I'd really like the "Program" part of Kerbal Space Program to be added to the game. Right now, all I have to do is check to see if funds are there to launch a rocket or upgrade a building. I really enjoy Kerbal Construction Time and Kerbonomics, both add a sense of the program being much larger than its current representation. I recently purchased Buzz Aldrin Space Program Manager, and that is exactly what I'd like to see in Kerbal Space Program. Maybe not so in-depth as to worry about flight controllers and SET personnel, but like you said but did not elaborate on, time needs to be a factor. In the craziness of finals, I've left Kerbals on Minmus for 3 years and 407 days. I need to penalized for that. Perhaps a mod has done that.

    Anyway, thank you for your input. Although I feel out levels of dissatisfaction are vastly different, at least we can remain civil and discuss them.

  3. I can see it. I think maybe some people, who have lower standards then others, take criticism of Squad personally. They might feel it as an attack on their own values with which they judge the game. It's sad, but what can you do?

    The artificial environment, which the forum rules create, make it nearly impossible to address this logical deficit without the trolls regressing to a child-like state. What logical argument can you present to someone who doesn't value logic?

    How objective can one remain when one has already reduced his opponents to "trolls" that have a "logical deficit"? This is bordering on name calling. That is not a very open minded attitude.

  4. Oh yes.. For the simple reason that KSP is so unstable now that it will spontaneously corrupt saves..

    I have had two corrupted since v1.0.

    many, many ;.;s

    I too have had 3 career games crash on me. What I've learned is to not fire any kerbals I rescue that I don't want. I simply send them into orbit to... Do... Science? Yeah, that's it, science.

  5. What I want to know is everyone's opinions on whether squad can break saves post 1.0 release. Especially with career mode requiring more time and effort, will squad be hurting its player base if they were to break saves on a new release.

    Unlike in alpha and beta where a broken save is expected (by reasonable people), a full release is supposed to come with an almost guarantee that breaking saves is no longer going to be an issue.

    Therefore, will we ever seen such sweeping reforms as aero and changing entire part catalogues, or are those days gone?

  6. Are people seriously so upset that KSP is a success that they're bashing the reviewers for not giving a horrible score?

    KSP: 4/10

    I couldn't stop playing, my wife left me, I got fired from my job, I'm now unemployed and rent is overdue... and I still can't stop playing.

    In my opinion, some may be bitter than the score they feared it would get by being a 1.0 full release, was not what happened, flying in the face of their accusations that SQUAD was making a terrible mistake. I feel like this release was buggier than others, but I've only been around since .18. Have not been vocal about it because it has reignited my love of KSP.

    Also finally graduating from college is freeing up some time, although soon it's back to the books for the LSAT in October.

  7. I think KSP is probably hard sandbox to review.

    If you have played it before, you are biased and shouldn't make the review.

    If you just start playing, you won't get far in the time that a reviewers usually play games. (especially in career mode, it seems that most reviewers mostly played sandbox.)

    Playing the game before should not preempt someone from objectively reviewing the game, but any review should be taken with a grain of salt. I have close to 800 hours in the game and I have noticed numerous issues, especially now after the 1.0 release where I've noticed even bigger bugs and flaws.

    Do I still enjoy the game? Absolutely.

    Do I recommend it to a friend who plays games almost exclusively for the story? Absolutely not.

    Reviews should not be taken at face value. Everyone needs to do their own research beyond a "professional" review.

  8. No, a game is about goals and progression and such. Accomplishing defined goals, etc. As with all English words (and I imagine this probably happens in other languages), the meaning of 'game' is eroding over time, and it's starting to encompassing things like sandboxes (nothing wrong with sandboxes, just they aren't games), or pretty much any sort of pass-time on the computer. Again, having a variety of different things to do that arent' traditional games isn't bad, just the erosion of the word's meaning is ('game' will eventually mean the same as 'smurf' at this rate).

    Star Control II is a game. Final Fantasy X is a movie. Minecraft is a sandbox (even in 'survival'.. lulz survival). GTA5 is a bit of all three.

    KSP falls short in the goals and progression stuff - probably because it evolved AS a sandbox (like Minecraft or Space Engineers, which also fall flat on their faces as 'games' while being good sandboxy things).

    Exactly. It's trying to be, but still needs a lot of work.

    Congratulations, you have defined game. I will now define "video game".

    Video Game- noun-

    a game played by electronically manipulating images produced by a computer program on a television screen or other display screen.

    The definition of game is not limited to competitive sport or challenges. The definition may say "especially", but it does not say "only". The word "especially" acknowledges the chance that something else can occur and be called a game. Only is definitive and what you have presumed "especially" to mean.

    The definition of words change and are not static. Do not expect game to always mean competitive sport or challenges. It evolved to encompass new entertainment, a la video games.

  9. Kerbal Space Program

    Yes, I do like minimalism, why do you ask? 1.0 is a very special release, it's the game as envisioned, nothing more, nothing less. It's the very idea which those three words have referred to since the beginning. In my opinion adding a sub label to that specific release would play down the importance of reaching that milestone. Give names to any other releases, but 1.0 is special.

    I can see the video for release now (inspired part by the Build, Fly, Dream trailer). A beautiful trailer with a glorious score.

    Slow start, single simple rocket launch, the same we have all seen. Ramping up in speed to a montage of some of the best, most creative mission moments from the community over the years. with replicas of real missions, crazy out there whackjobian rockets, to futuristic looking crafts.

    At the most excited part of the score, the loudest and most varied part of the music, it cuts to dead silence, showing a NASA based SLS on the launch pad, but we can only see the black outline of it's figure with the Mun hanging just over the LES on the top of the rocket.

    A countdown is heard, in Kerbalese of course. Five, four three, main engines ignite, two, one, the solid rockets. Just as the clamps release and the ship begins to rise, it fades to white, and "Kerbal Space Program" logo appears.

  10. For me, 75% of the fun of this game is in design. I could never settle though on designs. I don't have launcher families, I don't reuse unless its to fulfill the simplest of contracts. Designing new ships is so much fun. I just created a new VTOL with variable rockets. I spent hours designing it for one purpose. If that broke, no big deal, I'll do it all again with a new ship and design.

    Trying to save peoples designs is admirable, but if those people stop playing the game (although who can quit such a drug as KSP), shouldn't the game be the best of the developer can do, and not what is best for the present community's ship designs? And lets not forget that such feeble things as ship designs can be lost when a computer crashes entirely. Are we willing to sacrifice a better aerodynamics model for things that can be lost so easily?

    Kerbal Space Program is an established, successful, albeit early access title. Past, present, future, it will be here for this community that loves it so much. Does Squad really plan to cater solely to the past and present, or do they wish to create the game of the future that HarvesteR had originally dreamed of years ago when he was strapping tinfoil "Kerbals" to homemade rockets?

  11. After messing around for god knows how many hours trying to build a space plane, I finally design one that can make orbit, and it could reach my station at 200km orbit. Literally, first plane that could do it. 650 hours into the game, I built my first space plane. Great feeling.

    Next though is the Golden Moment. In my never ending tedium of just trying to make orbit, I always forgot something. This time it was any source of electricity generation or storage. I arrived 5km out from the station on just RCS and a good pilot. Next mistake, only the monopropellant from the cockpit was on board. I managed to make two maneuvers with my rockets, KW rockets that were the type that take time to throttle up and down, and place myself within 200 meters.

    By this time I'm running on 5.35 units of monopropellant. In painstakingly slow approach, with a twitchy craft with poorly placed RCS blocks (Still my first successful attempt at a space plane), I get within 5 meters of my target. 2 units of Monopropellant left.

    The space plane is about 20 degrees off of the proper rotation to line up. I do a quick burst in translation mode to reverse the craft (which rotates it downward and for some unexplainable reason lifts it up), and then quickly burst the last unit of monopropellant upwards and shut down the pilots control, which honestly did not matter because he had nothing left to work with.

    I attach and now they sit and wait on the station until the next successful plane arrives with an engineer and some KAS parts to power the space plane enough to return home. Docking is something I can do in my sleep when it comes to regular pods and service modules of any size. But this was extra special for me.

  12. My "elite" three are not really my elite astronauts. I use them being test pilots now. Jeb is usually the main test pilot for atmospheric aircraft, Bill and Bob are usually the first to test out a craft in Kerbin orbit and testing their docking ability. Sometimes when I have KSOS installed I use them for the shuttle missions, with Jeb as pilot, Bill as commander, and Bob as EVA specialist (KAS installed).

    For my elite, their attributes must max out, and then they are designated as crew commanders, and never all thrown into the same ship if I can help it.

    I'm tired of their orange suits mostly. Jeb is usually dead in a few missions. I build quite awful planes. Bill and Bob end up on a station somewhere soon after that gets established. I like not using them, as they are always rubbing it my face that they were first.

  13. Cargo bays and TNT-filled buildings are great, but... the design of the admin building doesn't fit at all. And they just plopped it right in the back of the KSC!

    I think its design and location make sense. It is small, across from the astronaut complex, aesthetically pleasing (for visiting dignitaries), and is out of the way of the day to day operations for R&D, VAB, and SPH. It has quick access to the astronaut complex and R&D center, and is a short walk to any of the major operational buildings.

  14. Poor Brazil...

    :P

    There's being beathen, being destroyed, being decimated, and being annihilated. Then there's being "Germany Vs. Brazil'ed".

    Edge of my seat that whole streak Germany had. It was kind of heart wrenching to see the Brazilians so upset, but their team was outclassed by the German's. I never thought the U.S. had a chance, but after seeing that match we did a heck of job considering the punishment the German's could dish out.

  15. I like my astronauts. I want to keep them alive. I've mentioned this numerous times, but I don't really leave Kerbin's SOI. But my probes do. They've landed on Duna, Laythe, Eve, Ike, and "landed" on Jool. Also, watching a tiny rocket propel it's tiny payload into the solar system is just epic in a sense to me. When I don't need a 500 ton lifter, and the whole package weights less than 10kg, and can go so far… it's just awesome.

×
×
  • Create New...