KN_Namida

Shouldn't we, as a community of a game still in alpha stage, be partially involved in the development process of said game?

Don't know if this is a good example but... Let's say you got an illness of some sort. You don't notice it, there are no symptoms, and you go to the doctor as you do once or twice a year, as usual. He finds out about the illness. So, what would a good doctor do? Tell the patient nothing, or explain them about the illness, even if it is nothing serious? I love Squad. I love the game they're making. Just like a father would love its child. But when that child comes home from school with an F, what do you do? You don't stop loving your child, that'd be ridiculous. But you'd be disappointed. I just want to know if some features that I thought were going to be implemented when I bought the game over one year ago are still planned to. See, before buying KSP I documented myself. I came to know youtubers as HOCgaming, Scott Manley, EnterElysium and more. I found out about KSP Wiki, and browsed it all, all the planets and moons, all the parts and easter eggs. I loved it, so I bought the game as soon as it came onto Steam, a few weeks later. On the wiki, I also saw the page regarding planned features: that's mostly what drove me to buy this game. More planets, following Novasilisko's ideas, more parts, weather effects, better aerodynamics, scenary on Kerbin such as small cities and small villages to fly over, life support for manned missions, more EVA activities such as ground sampling, etc. Alright then... are they all going to be implemented before the final release of the game? I want to know it. I want to know if I'll eventually get what I paid for. I won't stop playing KSP if some of that stuff doesn't make it into KSP, I'll keep playing it. I'll just be a bit disappointed. That's why I demand an official list of general things that Squad is willing to work on. I need answers. And I haven't received anything definitive yet.

On the contrary, if Squad states once and for all what they intend to work on, this debate will settle. People who don't like where the game's going will stop playing it, or just play it sporadically, while the rest of the community will keep playing KSP happy that the features they'd like to see will, sooner or later, see the light of day. People can't live in the shade, we need certainties.

Heh, I wish Squad gave us a list of features they, as of now, intend to implement before the final release, so speculation and hatred would, for the most part, stop. Even a yes/no list would be fine, darn it! More celestial bodies? Revamped science mechanics? Re-organized tech tree? Addition of more structures on Kerbin? Life support for manned missions? You decide which to work on and which to scrap and throw in the paper bin, but at least, give us a definitive YES/NO on some frequently asked features.

Ah don't worry, I didn't mean Squad had to make it solid, but the way things spawn, it needs to be fixed. It just doesn't work properly, like, once upon a time I landed on a mountain range, with no grass or trees or whatever on it, just plain rock. My ship broke in 2, the capsule and the science compartment, so I retrieved them separately. By doing so, the camera moved to KSC, obviously, during the first recovery, and when I got back on the mountain range to get the science compartment back, the whole thing was fulla trees!!! The game probably thought I was in the vicinity of KSC since the camera focused on that previously. And so when I loaded the next scene trees appeared.

Since nobody mentioned it, I'll do it: GROUND SCATTER

Yeah, that would work too. But as you said, Squad has to put the code in first... We all know how many times they've taken and implemented into the game something suggested here by the community...

I am for the addition of more music tracks into the game. Having some space tunes that play averywhere except inside Kerbin's atmosphere is sort of pathetic and sad I mean, you get your VAB/SPH music, your title screen music, and the birds tweeting in the space center screen (which is a bit weird since you don't see any...) But after you leave Kerbin's atmosphere at 70 kilometres above sea level... that's it. The same tracks repeat and cycle to the point where you just mute the darn thing. I'm fine if, while in space, you get that music and nothing more. But it bugs me that there's no music for the Mun's SOI, or Minmus's, or Duna's, or... you got the idea. I just hope that, before the final release, more music gets added, preferably specific tracks for each planet/moon's SOI. That'd be amazing

Mhm, nice to hear that Hugo. I guess you're also re-shaping some of the Mk series' models, right? Like, the Mk3 cockpit for example, that thing really needed an art pass Also, new IVAs for the cockpits which still lack it, the community will appreciate it!

Roger, hope you get better soon Thanks for the update Squad, looks like it's going to be worth the wait!

Yesh, I just hope that some kind of atmospheric effects will be included in the final version of the game For the time being, this mod will come in handy. Thanks devs!

I did some more experiments with the roadtrain. You're right, Kerbin may "disappear" while connecting the segments, even though it only happened to me once. I just reverted the flight and then everything worked fine. Also, the weird pendulum/whip curving problem was due to the fact that, even if I locked the steering of all the wheels except the front-end ones, I didn't disabled their motors, so all the wheels were thrusting forwards, instead of being pulled by the main segment. I deactivated all the wheel motors (except for the ones of the front pair of wheels, of course) and everything worked fine Of course, the roadtrain had a much lower acceleration this way, but it was a lot more drivable. And even more realistic, you might say. I successfully assembled and drove a 9-segment roadtrain around the KSC, and each segment consisted of a lab module + more crap (so they weighted tons, hehe).

As Scott Manley already said, this needs to be in stock KSP. Not necessarely now, but it needs to happen (maybe with an option to turn the clouds off, if your PC has issues with the simulation)

Also, guys, all this bendyness gave me an idea, but the first attempts at it proved to be not really succesful. Feel free to try your designs and ideas, see if we can improve this I'm talking about a ROADTRAIN with free-pivot grabbers between each section My first design had some pendulum-effect issues, probably because the sections were not perfectly aligned, so moving forwards (when I locked the steering of all the back wheels) caused some of the sections to curve, and after a whil the whole thing started moving like a snake, hehe... Needs some redesign, but it's promising! This grabbing device really added a whole new level of gameplay here... Now I'm imagining a battle between 2 mechanical space krakens, with space arms for tentacles, in a future multiplayer KSP server... I love this game :>

I'm thinking... If you added fuel lines between each segment, maybe with the help of some little cubic girders if you lack the space to connect them... And putting a docking port instead of a claw on the end of the last segment... Could you use it in space stations as a refueling arm? it would be super easy to move it andconnect it to a nearby ship, instead of moving the whole ship into the station What do you think?

wow. WOW. GONNA BE PLAYING RIGHT NOW

Oh don't worry too much about it, I don't think we need that much funcionality from something that is supposed to only grab asteroids. I mean, if someone wants to build a base on a planet's surface, we can lay it down or use landng legs if needed. The base doesn't fall over unless it's on a slope (player's fault for not choosing a more appropriate place) or if you bump it with a rover or something (again, player's fault). The only reason I'd use a claw to attach something to the ground would be... probably building something on the side of a mountain. And that already sounds pointless, though a bit cool, too. To keep it short, it's something we don't really need, don't worry about it grabbing asteroids is really more than enough, can't wait to see the update released

Hehehe, I remember now the post NovaSilisko wrote quite a few months ago, regarding his ideas for the Kerbol System, and they were just great. I'll just name a few: - Turning Laythe into an Io analogue, keeping the oceans but adding active volcanoes with deadly pools of lava. - Re-modelling Tylo and Vall, they look a bit too uniform and boring right now. - Adding the second gas giant, with 4 moons. Eeloo would be one of those moons, then there would've also been bigger moon, a Titan analogue, with an atmosphere that ended before the peaks of the tallest mountains, so the peaks were in space wilst the valleys below in a dense atmosphere Oh, and he wanted to add flares to the Sun, IIRC. Lots of variety, you can tell. And I'm still excited about it, even though, since Nova is a former developer (as far as I know), the probabilities that we'll see any of that are... low But that doesn't mean we won't see GP2 someday. It's just that Squad has some other priorities at the moment, I can wait. P.S. I want it sooo bad

Agreed. It looks like, doesn't matter if the claws behave exactly as docking ports or act a bit differently, we can find valid solutions if any problem pops up.

I didn't thought of this, you might be right. Or, to be more correct, I didn't know that 2 parts of the same ship could not connect together via docking ports... I'll have to think of a solution. And I might have just found one: instead of ejecting a claw + docking port towards the asteroid and then dock to it, we could have a claw + tiny probe + docking port module, practically a separate vessel, attach to the asteroid and then your main ship connects to it. Anyway, we're still speculating on features not even implemented officially yet. Once the update comes, I'll test all I can to find out the capabilities and limits of the claws. We should have a thread about that too, once the time comes...

Reading through this thread some hours ago made me think... If Kasuha is correct, attaching more claws of a single ship to an asteroid will be trickier than I firstly thought. My initial idea, regarding the construction of a space station on the side of the space boulder, was to attach an "anchor" of triangular shape, using 3 Probobodyne HECS units connected by girders, and each HECS having a claw beneath it, all of the claws with their pivot in free mode. One claw would attach first, then the second one and then the third one, if you were able to attach more claws from the same ship at roughly the same time. It works with docking ports, but this could be different. There's always the possibility that, once a claw attaches, the vessel can't attach more claws to the asteroid, in which case... Some solutions come to mind, like using claws attached to the ship only by docking ports, and let them attach to the asteroid by themselvesbefore re-attaching your ship to them. That's a possibility. On a side note, while thinking about this the vision of connecting more tiny vessels with claws, thus creating a proper chain (if you free the pivots) came to mind. I'll have to try that as soon as we get this update

SO YEAH Asteroids are coming soonâ„¢ and, if you saw any of the videos on youtube that show what they're going to look like, I bet you're pretty excited So, IF the devs plan to add, in an unspecified future, an asteroid belt into the stock game, probably near Dres's orbit, now they're one step closer! How do you think it should be pulled off? How would you like it to be? Personally, since we'e talking about a proper belt, not just some lone rocks drifting in space near Kerbin, I think the density of asteroids in the belt should be quite higher than the one in Kerbin's proximity. Enough asteroids so that, if you want to go and check one out, you can do so without tons of efforts, but still not so many as to pose problems while traversing the belt. I think you understood me, maybe around 100 bodies or a bit more on Dres's orbit, of different sizes (maybe not limiting them to the sizes of the ones near Kerbin). Maybe they could be, partially or entirely, randomly generated, as I guess the ones coming soonâ„¢ will be. And like, if you want to track one of them, you can't do it from the tracking station, since they're so far out, you'd need a space telescope. Or, you'd have to go near one (relatively near) and then select it from map view to check its trajectory... I mean, this are just some ideas. If you guys have your opinion about the topic, or other/better ideas regarding a possible asteroid belt in the game, feel free to post below

Well, obviously the single player components of the game will remain untouched, don't worry about it: we'll still have single player sandbox and career. I'm not against multiplayer, we all played just that until now. I just think that multiplayer could somehow enhance the experience (in some ways), giving you more to do. And it all comes down, as I said, to what you can come up with. When you start KSP and decide to unwind a bit in sandbox mode, you ask yourself "What could I do today?". Maybe you'll build a space station. Maybe a voyage to Dres. or Maybe you just want to burn something up into the Sun, you decide. And the same thing could be applied to the multiplyer, the only difference being "Guys, what are WE going to do today?". I'm aware some people just prefer to have a singleplayer experience, and I understand that. Multiplayer will not be for everyone, but if you can come up with the right ideas, then it definitely is for you.

Think of the possibilities, not at what can be done as of now: you could have a co-op experience and try colonizing the system with a friend(s) of yours (if you put a password on the server that you give only to some of your friends, so no griefer comes and ruins your day), or you could organize a space race to the Mun, or try something like the Gemini missions, this time not docking to yours but to someone else's ship like it should be... and so on, I could keep going, it reall comes to your imagination.

As the good old list of The Rules of the Internet states: proofs or it didn't happen. I know multiplayer is going into KSP at some point in the future, that's been said by the developers, and I really like the idea. But other planetary systems? Please link where did you find that information, I didn't know of such a thing being officialy considered for the stock game. Also, I'd vote against it, totally. KSP is a sandbox-driven simulator, and the simulation part plays a major role here. I already posted in another thread that, if we had another planetary system added to the game, placed at a realistic distance from the Sun (scaled down by a factor of 10, as everything in the KSP universe is) it would still take you many real weeks of letting the game run non-stop day and night moving at escape velocity away from Kerbol to reach the nearby star. Besides, if even the kerbal system isn't completely finished yet (asteroids -don't know how many- are going to be implemented soon, some celestial bodies need an art-pass, and maybe some more planets or moons are going to be added in the future), then why would we need another system? Give me more stock parts and things to do any day, but another system is definitely something I don't need. And have you people realized how inneficient, compared to its real-world counterpart, the fuel is in KSP? the amount of delta-V necessary to move such great distances (and maybe come back) would be prohibitive, you'd need to assemble the ship in orbit and probably need 3 or more launches...