Mako

Fair enough. I was wrong to say everyone from prior to 2017 has left the team, as it was only most of of everyone. I oversimplified the situation and represented it inaccurately. I edited my post and it should be more accurate.

Well, if you mean which one would be better for you to use/interact with, that just depends on if you like using Steam or not. It seems you do, or you wouldn't have bought it a second time on Steam. If you mean which one would be better for "supporting Squad" monetarily, well that breaks down as follows: If you want some of your money to go to Steam and the rest of your money to go to Take-Two Interactive, then you should buy it on Steam. If you want all of your money to go to Take-Two Interactive, then you should buy it on the KSP Website. If you want some/all of your money to go to Squad directly, that's no longer an option since they no longer own the KSP IP and aren't the ones selling the DLC (see above). And if you want any money to go towards continuing to employ the people who made KSP up to 1.2, well almost all of them left the team by the time 1.2 released. With a few exceptions, the people currently at Squad have only made 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.3, 1.3.1, and 1.4 (and of course are about to release 1.4.1 and the DLC). I am personally a big fan of the localization work the current Squad team has done; I think that it's great that the game can be more accessible to more people. I'm not making judgements or saying who you should or should not support. I just want everyone to understand that when they say "I want to support Squad" that they're only able to do so indirectly via Take-Two Interactive if and only if Take-Two continues to employ Squad. Also, I strongly suspect that Squad is being paid to continue to develop KSP and whether DLC sales are good or bad won't change what Take-Two pays Squad for their work. Take-Two will decide if Squad keeps working on KSP, and while that decision might depend on sales, it might also just depend on what Take-Two wants to do with their product regardless of how well the DLC does. I just want everyone to be informed of the situation, if they care to be, so they can make the decisions that work best for them.

A fair point. AndAnd I've said in the past that 1.0 felt rushed and suspect it was due to needing to be out of early access to be able to move to consoles. There certainly seems to be a history of business decisions affecting the quality of releases. A business is going to make business decisions; I'm not faulting anyone for that. I do, however, think it's a shame that making a few extra bucks is more important to some people than delivering a polished, professional product. I know there will always be bugs, but this time to really feels like this update, and subsequently the next update/Making History could have used just a few more weeks to really shine.

I don't think any person who has reasonable expectations gets mad about this. This is how it has always been for KSP, and it's likely this will continue for as long as KSP development does. Any game undergoing continued development may be susceptible to this; this is not a problem unique to KSP. And like other games, once development is done then this issue resolves itself. It can be very hard, and sometimes impossible, to add new features or improve old ones AND not break existing features or mods. Often the game devs will have to repair, modify, replace, overhaul, and/or enhance existing features that may seem entirely unrelated to the new changes they are implementing just to keep everything working. And when that happens it is likely that the mod devs will need to do that too, but the mod devs often won't be aware of what specifically must be changed or updated until after the game devs release the new version. Only then can the mod devs do their awesome work. These things take time. You can't have big new updates to KSP (like changing engine versions) and totally avoid breaking mods at the same time. That's a perfect world scenario, and this isn't a perfect world. That's just how this works. So, I'm not mad. About this: I'm ambivalent. It just is what it is. About mods: I'm grateful. A lot of creative, talented folks share their hard work and passion with us every day in the hopes that we might have an even better experience with a game we all care about. Edit: @MaxxQ Yikes. It's not really much at all, but I hope you make a speedy and full recovery from that injury/surgery. I hope bug fixes and most mods will be ready and waiting for you as soon as you're able to enjoy playing complicated games again.

I can't say I blame you. To be honest, I downloaded but haven't ran 1.4 yet. After reading through through the 1.4 Grand Discussion thread I'm not in any hurry. Furthermore I'm expecting both 1.4.1 and Making History to both need some attention following Tuesday's release. For all the resources that Take-Two is said to be able to provide none of it matters if they rush products out to cater more to shareholders than to customers. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but it certainly feels this way to me. KSP may have started as an indie darling, but it's got major backing behind it now. I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.

And, to clarify, both are coming this Tuesday. My guess is a 1.4.2 will be needed since I've been feeling like all of this has been rushed for a few weeks prior to release. It feels very much like Take-Two really wants to get this out the door before then end of their fiscal year (a not uncommon practice amongst big, publicly-traded publishers). It's easy to miss this info since the it's pretty spread out amongst many posts in many threads. The answer is: no. The mission builder and the missions themselves are a separate mode unrelated and not interacting with career mode in any way. Missions are essentially individual scenarios/challenges complete with a customizable scoring system not unlike the scenario mode you might find in an RTS, strategy, or management game. Stickied at the top of this Daily Kerbal section you can find two threads that explain how missions are built and shared in more detail.

I was pretty confident the community would pick up the slack. Same as it ever was. Well done, software and server folks. You impress, surprise, and delight yet again. This work is much appreciated, thank you.

I'm sure that you will be able to minimize KSP and move files around while the game is open, since as you say they mission files aren't much different than save files (well, text files packed in a zip archive to be precise). However, that is not the same as having an in-game mission browser that doesn't require you leaving KSP. The way it is set to work is still less user friendly than if they had made an in-game menu for uploading, browsing, and downloading missions. I know it's not hard to look online and then download and move files around, but the point is this was yet again another missed opportunity to make KSP seem like a polished product. I'm not other saying it's the end of the world, far from it, but I do think it's a missed opportunity. Furthermore, lacking an in-game browser, I'm not totally sure how they can provide the mission sharing functionality if they ever make Making History available on consoles. That's obviously not important at the moment, but it's something to think about. The real bummer about not having an in-game solution for mission sharing is that until a community repository gets set up there won't be one best place to go to find new missions. If each mission gets its own thread in the challenges section of the forum it might make finding good missions to play a challenge in and of itself. Squad could have implemented a solution that would have looked good, was easy to interact with, and most importantly that wouldn't take you out of KSP. It would have taken some effort and it would have meant setting up a server, but I would think Take-Two has the resources. It seems like they're just not interested...

Ah, okay. I misunderstood. In that case, I completely agree that there is not and probably will never be an in-game solution. I was asking about that months ago, and I never saw a response from Squad. At that time, I conjectured that by not having an in-game system to share and download mods that functionality would likely have a hard time existing on consoles. I also pointed out that as far as user experience is concerned, the in-game solution would be best. Unfortunately it would also be a lot of work for a development team that was never able to make their patcher work reliably. If you check the Daily Kerbal section of the forums, you'll find a post detailing how to share missions pretty much as you describe: via zip files outside of the game in a fashion similar to sharing mods. As for a community repository, I mean Spacedock or whatever it's called, the community developed and maintained repository that CKAN pulls from. I'm not sure if it's going to be made to accommodate missions, but I wouldn't be shocked if it did. I have no idea what the "official" mod repository, Curse/Curseforge, is doing these days in terms of hosting mods, let alone missions. I wonder if they're still "official" now that Take-Two is in charge...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but sharing, downloading, and playing missions created by other players is very much part of the DLC. It's arguably the most exciting feature of the mission builder aspect of the mission builder, since I'm sure we'll see some very creative and interesting missions produced by this community. As for where they'll go, I wouldn't be surprised if the community mod repository and/or community vessel repository adapt to host and index user-made missions. I haven't seen any mention of such just yet, but if the Expansion is popular I'm sure we'll see some sort of community mission repository made available within a few months time.

I, too, have not played with 1.4 yet. I did download it, but I figured I had enough stuff to occupy my time that I could wait a week and see what fixes 1.4.1 brings. I'm not expecting a lot since a week is not much time. It does seem like there's some neat stuff here, but not without some problems. It's a shame to hear that the new textures/parts still seem to have some flaws. It sounds like this update could have used another month or so of polish. It seems like Take-Two really is rushing this out to get the DLC out before the end of their fiscal year. Not an uncommon move by big publishers, but it almost always feels like the title suffers to some degree for it. Oh well. I hope they are able to polish this up with a minor update in a few weeks time. Or maybe KSP will simply remain a diamond in the rough that one must cut and polish with amazing mods...

Nice. Personally, I though it would make more logical sense to be tied to a building upgrade, similar to the EVA ability, than to astronaut level. It seems like they're trying to make astronaut levels more meaningful, and, while I understand that motivation, I don't think this is a good way to do that. Though I guess it hardly matters how parachutes are awarded; the haphazard gamification of career mode to what is largely a toy/sim arguably means all the restrictions are arbitrary and therefore don't need to make any actual sense. KSP remains great for what it is, but still feels like it has untapped potential in terms of a compelling career mode. To be fair, I don't have many suggestions on how to fix it, but I'm also not a game designer. It would likely need a lot of work. It all functions, which certainly counts for something.

It was asked about 6 posts above yours. You can look up to find the answer. As far as I've seen, at this time there isn't any word about chaining missions together into a multi-part campaign, but it seems like it might be possible to make very long missions that essentially feel like a multi-part campaign. Obviously we'll know more in a week.

I don't believe Take-Two or Squad have said anything, but some proponents of KSP's ongoing development use the reasoning of purchasing DLC to support Squad/Take-Two so development will continue. I have a neutral stance on the issue, much like you're advocating here, but I do recognize the business sense that if sales don't meet expectations further expenses/development of any kind might be reduced. In this time of crowd-funding and Early Access, things are not so simple as a product that's for sale. These new software development models work directly on support, and in the case of crowd-funding often no product will exist without it. While KSP isn't in this boat anymore, it's very easy to see how some folks would translate the recent trend in indie development to a game that was until relatively recently an indie title. Regardless of the reasoning, it's still reasonable to assume that if Take-Two believes KSP's sales are underperforming, they will be less likely to take risks (such as further development) with the property. If someone is hoping that existing KSP will eventually add some feature or content they want, they might decide to buy products they dont necessary want in hopes of voting with their wallets enough to encourage more development of things they do want. Of course there's no actual official statement saying that spending $15 now will bring more stuff in the future. So while no one official is saying the DLC must be bought to support KSP's development, it's easy to see why some would feel that way. For what it's worth, I agree that you should pay what you feel something is worth to you for what exists right now. That's why as cool as some game may seem and as much as developers will say they want to accomplish, I can't really justify purchasing it for anything my thing other than what it is at that moment.

SSTO planes can be a bit tough, but if I remember correctly they're easier to get into orbit on Laythe. Also, now that water is significantly less destructive, landing and taking off again should be easier. The biggest tip i can offer is to makke sure that Center of Lift is behind Center of Mass on your SSTO. I can't offer any advice on Mechjeb since I've never really used it. But, it sounds like you're looking for a small orbital tug vessel to aid with docking. That's not a bad idea, and Mechjeb might be helpful with utilizing that for launch and for redocking after landing. I feel like I did something similar, but it's been a while. Don't be afraid to test everything individually on Kerbin or in LKO. It'll give you a pretty good idea of how well everything will work. If your Laythe lander can land and take off to orbit there it should work on Laythe no problem. Be sure to test it's water landing and take off capability. Your Tylo lander will need to be capable of making a safe propulsive landing on Kerbin, but it needs to also be able of slowing itself down during desent without relying on atmospheric drag. If your Tylo lander can get into orbit on Kerbin, it should be able to do the same on Tylo. Tylo is harder to land on but easier to take off from compared to Kerbin. It's a very fun mission to plan and execute. I'm sure other folks can be of even more help than me, but I'm happy to offer as much assistance as I am able.

Once upon a time I attempted the Jool-5 mission. I took an interplanetary vessel with two landers -- one lander designed specifically for Laythe and one Tylo-land-and-return staged multipurpose lander for the rest of the planets. The intended order of operations was to land first at Laythe and return to the ship. Then, the Laythe lander could be jettisoned to reduce dry mass. Next, we would go to Tylo and during landing and ascent from we'd stage away even more dry mass from the multipurpose lander. After rendezvous with the main ship we'd go to Vall where we'd refuel and reuse the multipurpose lander. Bop and Pol would be like Vall. Then we'd return home to Kerbin and be big darn heroes We never made it home. We never even made it past Vall. My excitement of the success of the tested-only-on-Kerbin multipurpose lander after pulling off the landing and return at Tylo and then Vall got the better of me and I time accelerated too fast enroute to Bop. We got shot out of Jool's sphere of influence by an unexpected moon slingshot before I had any idea what was going on, and by the time I could stop it we were too far with the last quicksave being before the Tylo landing. One day I will return to Jool and each of its moons in one mission, and I will use this same profile. I think the engineering was proven on that first attempt. I recommend launching your mothership with as little fuel in the tanks as possible to get into orbit. This will make it easier to get a very high delta-v capable mothership into orbit. Once in orbit, launch your lander(s) and dock with the mothership. Lastly, launch as many refueling vessels as needed to top up your mothership/landers. I can't speak to the necessary delta-v requirements for any part of the mission as things have changed a lot since my attempt. It's likely none of my designs would work today. As for lander engines, for Laythe you can pretty much use whatever you'd use for Kerbin. For everything else you want engines with good vacuum ISP, and for Tylo you want to make sure you have plenty of thrust. Tylo is like landing on Kerbin without anything but engines to get you down safely, but harder. I don't remember exactly what my main vessel looked like, but I'm pretty sure I used a puller style ship with engines in front to pull the fuel and landers as opposed to a more usual pusher design. It seemed to increase the stability of the vessel, especially when changing heading. Good luck and welcome to the forums. It's a fun challenge and I'm really looking forward to attempting it again myself.

I had to vote other, because I get the Expansion for free, but if it wasnt free I might not buy it. But it's even more complicated if you want my full answer. The mission builder sounds neat and I'm sure we'll see some clever, creative missions come from the community, but I'm not sure if that's worth $15 dollars to me. As for the history parts and missions, they're also neat, but I don't have an emotional attachment to any historical rockets or missions. The engineering challenges rocket scientists overcame in the space race are endlessly fascinating to me, but this Expansion, and KSP in general, only deals with a fraction of those challenges. I've already flown a difficult, as-realistically-inspired-as-possible Apollo 11 style mission back when @Mulbin made one of their last Munbug vessels, and while it was thrilling I feel like I've already flown my most compelling historical mission. So the history side of things only has pretty limited appeal to me, and mods can provide more parts than I know what to do with if some need arises. And here's where it gets complicated. I bought KSP on sale for a friend a few years ago. My friend didn't have a lot of disposable income at the time, and still doesn't now. It's been a rough few years, and I know KSP has been a great outlet for creativity and stress relief during that time. So, if my friend is interested in the Expansion I'd get it for him without hesitation. Personally, supporting Take-Two has zero importance to me, and, while I'm sure Squad is comprised of decent, well-meaning people trying their best to do good work, the people who made KSP so great have all moved on. At this point I have no idea what the plans are for KSP; Take-Two has offered no information of what it wants to do, so it's hard for me to be excited about the future of KSP and feel like it's anything I'm interested in supporting. As directionless development continues, I continue to lose interest. I remain hopeful that something will be made that takes its inspiration from KSP and makes it even better by having a directed vision from the start and by utilizing the best software possible to go beyond any limitations KSP has. If that comes from Take-Two, great! If it comes from someone else at the expense of the Kerbals, great! Heck, if it comes from someone else that might even be ideal. I think I could like a space-software race. TL;DR - I get the Expansion for free. If it wasn't free for me, I don't really feel compelled to buy it for myself -- at least not at full price -- but I will probably buy it for a friend.

The Missions and Mission builder are a completely separate mode from Career mode. Missions are basically a Challenge or Scenario mode like you might find in an RTS or management sim and do not interact with Career mode in any way.

Fair enough, but you really only take away from the people who would like your mod. You certainly don't make a bit of difference as far as Take-Two is concerned. Take-Two only cares about mods when they cause problems. In a single-player, offline game where mods must be manually installed, the amount of problems mods can cause is very limited. Take-Two won't notice what you do, and, on the off chance they do notice, I highly doubt they'll care either way. And fair enough for being concerned about that section of the EULA. While I'm sure it's there to cover the missions players make with the Expansion, it is way too vague and all-encompassing to make anyone feel good about Take-Two in any way. I think the lack of specificity speaks to just how much interest they have in KSP, and makes me wonder again to what end they hope to take KSP.

That is completely your choice. The only real risk of making a mod is being asked to stop, so if you make it for yourself anyway there's not really any harm in releasing it publicly. You can always discontinue public distribution at that time. I think the risk of being asked to stop has always been there and neither increases or decreases with the new EULA, but again it's your choice. Just remember if somehow you do get some word from a Take-Two representative, any permission they might give is always fully revocable at any time without warning.

Maybe. They haven't said anything that I've seen, but it seems like it'd be easy to add. It hardly seems necessary, though. The only person you'd be cheating is yourself. It's not like Missions will mean any more than forum challenges, and those have survived on the honor system just fine. Also, even if they added it someone could make a mod to bypass it, so again were back to the honor system.

@Farm Buyer I appreciate that you're still hopeful for an answer. Welcome to how Squad publishes information. This is just pretty much how it's always been. Except now Take-Two are the ones who decide what Squad announces and makes. Since Take-Two doesn't really have a presence here, all you can do is hope Squad passes along the message and hope someone at Take-Two cares. To be fair, if Squad were still calling the shots the only answer you'd get about future plans is the same answer they've been giving:

Well, since Squad probably has no authority to answer since it's Take-Two's EULA, and since I doubt that Take-Two would respond with anything other than a canned answer, I'm going to say: no one. You're probably better off begging forgiveness than asking permission. And even if they gave you permission it seems doubtful that they'd be obligated to honor it.

None of Squad's messaging ever really implied that it would have anything to do with Career Mode, but you and many others made that same assumption and Squad's communication is so spread out between many threads and many replies that it's really easy to miss the details that would provide clarification. As you've discovered, the Missions are essentially individual Scenarios or Challenges that offer new features not found in the base game, like scripted part failures and scoring. For what it's worth, besides the potential for community-made missions (the appeal of which is of course subjective), the Expansion will feature a decent amount of new parts (arguably already available through mods) and missions inspired by historical Earth missions. Personally, it seems neat but underwhelming. I think new parts will almost always be welcome, but mods can offer many more parts for free. Mods don't offer scripted missions/challenges, but that has subjective appeal. We may see some really great, creative community-made missions, but is that potential plus what Squad packs in enough to make a compelling purchase? I am very curious to see how this does, and I understand where you're coming from. Maybe it'll surprise us, but what they've shown/talked about so far leaves me curious at best.

From the Terms of Service on kerbalspaceprogram.com (where this forum resides) So, it seems you own whatever you post or have posted here, but also give Deported (aka Squad) full rights to do whatever they want with/to whatever you post here. The main thing that will change with the new EULA/ToS in regards to what you post on the forums is that now instead of Squad saying this it'll be Take-Two saying this.