Search the Community

Hi, here is my KSP Mission builder tutorial series for KSP Making History expansion. Here I will be covering how to create missions, how to edit mission parameters, test etc Episode 01 - Simple Rescue Mission (Basics) Episode 02 - Pre-made Craft & Part Failures Episode 03 - Adding Flavor with Catch All Nodes Reserved for future use

Hey Commanders, I really love KSP but... am I missing something or could it be, that the DLC only supports english? I mean, the dlc-shoppage says the following languages are supported: Languages: English French Italian German Spanish Japanese Portuguese-Brazil Russian Simplified Chinese But ingame I can't find any option to change the DLC-Language and now I have a mix of german/english... and it looks like that everything that comes from the expansion is in english only. I've reapplied the steam language settings - nothing. I've reinstalled the whole game and set it to german - nothing. Just english. Is this a bug or a misinformation at the shoppage? If it's not a bug, please give me and the others correct informations instead of disappointing me, thank you Here a screenshot from what I'm talking about: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1330154126 Excuse my adventurous english, please Greetings, Paem

When testing a run through a mission in the mission editor, it would be really helpful to be able to see which state of the state machine it is currently sitting in. I think that would help me debug a lot of problems. But I'm not sure how to do this. Is there a feature that will show me this? It would be the state-machine equivalent of when a debugger highlights the current line of code as you step through a program. I suspect a lot of my problems are that the state machine isn't in the state I thought it would be at this point in the mission, but I don't know which state it's actually in instead of the one I expected.

( EDIT: I reported this as a Bug before, but it turns out it's just a very unintuitively weird choice for the defaults in the Spawn Vessel details. I just found a checkbox in the Spawn Vessel details for "Focus on Vessel". It turns out that turning this checkbox on gets rid of this "bug", but why on earth isn't it the default to make building and spawning a vessel from the VAB behave just like it does in the game? Why go out of the way to find the option and change it in order to achieve the default behavior that matches how the rest of the game works? Shouldn't switching to the vessel after building it be the normal way? The default way? Note, it was so weird, I thought it was a bug, which is why I posted the text below originally.) --------- Original Post Message follows Below this line ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Bug: A spawn Vessel node has the player click on the VAB and build their own vessel, but then when they launch it, the game doesn't switch focus to the vessel they just spawned like the game is supposed to. Instead it leaves their spawned vessel sitting on the launchpad while it focuses on some other vessel in orbit that has nothing to do with what they just did. To Cause it: Your mission has to populate the solar system with at least one pre-made vessel before the player builds their vessel in the VAB. Then the game will always focus on that pre-made vessel instead of what the player launches. To help the developers diagnose the problem I reduced it down to the minimum example that demonstrates it. I can reproduce this bug with a very small mission, that only has these 4 nodes with no branching, like this: Start Node (does nothing, no details or docked nodes) ---. | .----------------------------------------------------' | `--> Spawn Vessel Node, a mission-built premade vessel in orbit of Kerbin. ---. | .-----------------------------------------------------------------------' | `--> Spawn Vessel Node, A player-built vessel they make in the VAB. --. | .---------------------------------------------------------------' | `--> Always True Node, just a dummy placeholder for where the rest of the mission will be later. Note, I get the exact same bug if I "dock" those two Spawn Vessel Nodes into the Start Node. The problem seems to be that when you leave the VAB and launch the vessel, it focuses on the first vessel defined in the mission, even when that's not the one the player just launched. When the mission first starts and the player has not built their vessel yet, it makes sense to focus on the pre-made vessel in orbit. That doesn't feel like a bug at all. It makes sense because it has to put the player *somewhere*. The bug is that it keeps doing this every time you launch from the VAB, even if it's no longer the start of the mission anymore.

I figured out how to make things that happen automatically at the start in parallel to the Start Node. You find one of the nodes that allows you to checkbox "Catch All Node" (why don't they all? dunno) and then chain the other things you want to have happen off of that. Doing this I am able to set the player's starting funds for the mission. Except, that's not how to set the player's *actual* starting funds, because none of that runs until after the player designs the first vessel and launches it from the VAB. Only after the player uses the launch button does the mission truly "start" and the Catch All Node fires off. Since my goal is to make their initial vessel dip into those starting funds, I want to set the player starting funds *before* they click "launch" from the VAB. How do I do that? I can limit the vessel's allowed cost, but I cannot seem to change the fact that you always start with exactly 100,000 funds in every mission.

(This is about playing the missions the DLC comes with) First mission: "Launch your first rocket, get it to 5000 meters, splash it down near the abandoned runway". "Surprise, we actually meant on the runway, oh you didn't design your rocket for a land landing? Well too bad redesign and try again." Second mission: "Get to 48,000 meters, take a temperature reading and return home safely". "Surprise, we actually meant splash down in the water next to this waypoint we never told you about beforehand. Oh, what's that? You didn't design the rocket for steering because you thought we were telling the truth about the objectives? Well, too bad redesign and try again." Is there a way to learn those surprise objectives beforehand so you don't have to waste a launch just to learn the real objectives? Are they displayed somewhere?

I'm having a hard time with the mission editor because anything that is vessel-dependant (i.e. check if vessel is landed, but only this one specific vessel, not just any vessel) has that pull-down list of vessels to pick from but the list is wrong and acting like it's off by one. Example, the list contains these items in this order: Any Ole Sciency [a little probe with some science instruments that I spawn for the mission] Trash Collector [the player-made ship that they will be expected to build as one of the first nodes of the mission graph] Voss Talk 2 [an abandoned ship with broken engine] ComSat1 [a geosyncronous satellite] SpyLab [an abandoned science lab station] Trash Collector [YES, this one appears twice in the list like this, at the top and at the bottom] When I try to pick "Any", and save the mission, when I return to the mission it has changed the selection to "Ole Sciency". When I try to pick "Trash Collector", and save the mission, when I return to the mission it has changed the selection to "ComSat1" instead. Also, I can use the little 3D viewer tool to pick the vessel and that looks right at first, until I save and come back, and then it's switched the vessel to another one again.

Having spent days now trying to get golds on the newly added missions, I am frustrated. I understand the mission logic, but obviously not the actual calculations. I dissect the mission initially in the builder, going through the nodes and taking note of the score additions and modifications and what I need to get those, and also what to avoid. I some cases I feel I have a 'perfect' run, however, when the finally tally comes it seems to make no sense compared to what it should. The final scoring needs to be MUCH CLEARER, especially with missed objectives that you thought you achieved. Can someone please tell me how to get the official answer? Because emailing support goes does no good. I wanted to start creating my own missions to finally recreate some of the classic challenges of the forums, but I am extremely discouraged.

There are 3 ways I can think of that a vessel becomes gone: 1 - Destroyed. 2 - Splashed or Landed and then recovered. 3 - Merged into another craft via docking. I can't figure out, after several hours of trying, how to form test that can detect if a vessel is gone and *not care* which reason there is that it's gone. Alternatively, if I could test a simple dumb count of how many vessels exist, period, that would give me what I need too. What I'm trying to do is make a mission that does "space junk clearing". It will spawn a few vessels in orbit for the player to try to recover, then later end the mission only after there's no vessels left in orbit. I don't care about the order they get taken care of. The mission score is based on whether you've made profit on the recovery costs that exceeds the money you spent building rockets. I figured out how to score based on recovery cost/profit - I just can't figure out how on earth to trigger the end of the mission by detecting that all vessels aren't in orbit anymore, since there's so many different ways for a vessel to stop existing and I can't quite work out how to cover all of them. The ugly problem is that if the player docks with the satellite and then brings it down to a soft landing, it's no longer *that* vessel anymore - it has become part of the recovery vessel, so any triggers based on *that* vessel being landed aren't going to be true.

The Acapello 15 mission is neither completed nor failed if you splashdown on Kerbin instead of land on ground. If you finish the mission in water, the "splashed down" node does not lead to a "mission complete" or mission fail node. Instead it leads (for some reason) to a 5 minute timer node. At this point the player has no idea what's going on. There's no message, and if you recover vessel, the KSC is all disabled and nothing works. Either splashing down should be a fail or a success but it shouldn't leave the mission stuck in limbo.

Are the new parts from the Making History DLC available in career mode? I am having a difficult time finding a straight answer on this, and I would like to know before I purchase it. Thanks.

I have installed 1.4.1 and the DLC as instructed in the ReadMe file. I can access Missions and Mission Builder in game but I cannot see any of the new parts and when I try to start a mission that uses the new KV-series pods I get an error message saying the files cannot be found. I looked for the files and found them but Squad has changed the folder organization in the DLC and it no longer resembles the vanilla install folders. Unfortunately I cannot make any changes to the DLC folders as they are write protected. This is frustrating because I have the files on my computer but cannot figure out how to get the game to see them...

While I found the stock missions in the Making History DLC fun at first, I am getting more and more frustrated with the poor way in which the objectives are communicated to the player, so you end up having to do several play-throughs just to learn what they really wanted you to do. I'm always having to read through the info panels on the right with a sharp eye to catch the places where the descriptions don't match the real objectives. Rather than go over all of them, here's one simple case where I got really confused for a while: The game doesn't explain why you failed a mission. It took me a long time to realize (and this is still just a guess on my part since the game doesn't say for sure) that failure isn't a matter of one specific bullet point you miss, but rather of not getting a high enough score. If you failed the mission because the general final score wasn't high enough, then failure dialog box needs to tell you this (and how far you fell short of the needed score) instead of making you hunt around guessing which specific bullet point you missed. It's only through trial and error that I'm starting to guess that there's probably this rule about a minimum score, since it never said anything about it. An example of a better way to communicate it to the player would be if the failure dialog box said this: In another instance, I kept failing the Agena launch for the rendezvous mission, because I "missed the launch window". At no point did the mission tell me that what this *really* means is that I need to complete everything within 20 minutes of game clock time. I had to pull the mission into the editor to figure this out because, again, the player isn't being told the real reason for the failure. You can't meet objectives that you don't even know what they are. I feel sad about this DLC because I know it needs to financially succeed for Kerbal to continue and for SQUAD to keep working on it, but things like this are a real hurdle to that happening, I think. Players shouldn't have to struggle to wrench information from the game about what the objectives even are.

Hey guys! I wonder, if there is any collection thread concerning missions made in the mission builder? Or even better: could we get a sub-forum for user-created missions? Best Regards, Mario

So, i was think that the Making History expansion, more specifically the Mission Builder can change the KSP challenges. Users (and Squad) can make challenges in the form of misions that you can play. What do you guys think about it?

I thought it's time to dig up this unconscious horse and start beating it again. Actually, this is what made me do it: http://store.steampowered.com/sale/2017_best_sellers/ I'm not sure KSP was in it last year, but I assume they were at one point. But by now KSP has positively dropped out of Steam's top 100 list. If you're complaining on how Squad dare to charge money for content, here's your answer: without money there likely won't be any content. It surely isn't coming in large amounts from the sales of the game anymore, and developers don't like to work for free. Most of us know this, but for those who expect Squad to develop new things without you paying for it: wake up.

Just a quick query to @SQUAD With the Making History expansion coming out sometime "soon", I figured it might be an idea to ask if the developers had a preference where people would purchase the DLC when it does eventually come out? I ask as if there is any choice in the matter, I'd like to choose that my money to the developers directly and not have that money divvied up between various intermediate parties that doesn't directly benefit the developers other than distribution of KSP. Is buying the DLC directly from the KSPStore actually a more beneficial option that via something like Steam or GOG? Also, pre-empting a question that might arrive from my thread - if someone purchases via the KSPStore, can they then register that DLC purchase via steam to get the best of both worlds? i.e. I assume that with this option, all money would go to the developers AND people could have the DLC on their desired platform (for those that use Steam) (for the record, I'll be purchasing the DLC via the store as I don't use Steam for KSP and prefer the manual install)

So I've not had the chance to be on the forums all that much, with this new game called real life being quite demanding , but there is one rumor I have consistently been hearing that deeply concerns me. Paid DLC. This is never a good move by any game developer, I don't care who you are. I have recently been hearing that KSP will now have paid DLC. Are these rumors true? See if you talk to the average guy on the street who hasn't played KSP, they usually are of the opinion that the game is overpriced. Now you and I know that the 40 bucks you pay will give you thousands of hours of enjoyment, but they dont, so they see it as overpriced. Many people I convinced to play KSP balked when they heard the price. And its not like 40 bucks is all that much, but they still balked, even though I mentioned the thousands of hours most get out of it. Why. Just why. Now if I was a potential customer under the misguided impression KSP was slightly over-priced, and then I heard that paid DLC was a thing, that would be an instant turn off for me, because every single game with piad DLC added went down the same road: The devs had a good game maybe with some free DLC from the community, that did well, then it got sold to another company. They wanted to make more money, so they added some paid DLC, originally as just plain add ons, but nobody really bought them because the free DLC plus the stock game worked just fine. Or even just plain stock. Then the devs realized that to get people to buy this, they had to put something in that made the paid DLC better than the free stuff. There are two ways to do this. One more drastic way is to take from stock and put in paid DLC, and the other was to put some new element or bug fix in paid DLC that players simply could not do without. So in essence, they had to force the players to buy paid DLC because the community free stuff was better. Paid DLC does not have its own market, so it must take from somewhere to make one. There must be demand for something to sell. Basic economics. Paid DLC isn't something that is naturally desirable, so they must make players want or need it. Both roads are a very bad turn, and it always marks the beginning of the end for the game. There's a good reason for this too. If you start doing that, entirely aside from whether it is a money grab move or not (even though I cant see how it wouldn't be, but I'm giving KSP a lot of slack) the community sees it that way and resists. Once your devs are fighting the community, that is death to the game. And eventually it ends up where stock is basically so awful that the game is unplayable without paid DLC. If it's worth paying for, it's worth adding to the stock game. There can be official DLC, and I see that is the case, but it must be free of charge. If not, you are falling down a very slippery slope that will be the end of the game. So I suppose I'm looking for reassurance that my favorite game is not going down the drain by putting out paid DLC. If it is, I will be forced to grab the versions I can, and hunker down and stop getting new updates. The DLC may have great content. I'm not arguing that. What I am saying is it cannot cost a single penny because then we risk falling off this edge. That is not a risk we can take. This community is amazing but every time the dev team changes or a major change is made, then there's always the people who cry: "This is the death of KSP!" Take the devs leaving. Hooooooo boy that caused a ruckus. And that wasnt the worst one. Just a recent one. But if we go down the road of paid DLC, that will really be the beginning of the end for KSP. We may be a while in dying cause KSP has a fiercely loyal community which is amazing, but the end is inevitable if you go down that road. Because for a game to make a steady profit, new people must buy it. Paid DLC is a fast way (one of the fastest ways) to turn off any potential customers, no matter how awesome the game. And the community already there doesnt exactly want to pay for the new DLC either. So as well as asking for reassurance, I am also pleading with our devs to either never go down that road or if they have already started, then to pull out while they still can. Because once you commit to that road, it is very hard to go back, because then your reputation is ruined. Then paid DLC becomes just about the only way you can make a profit any more. Then that stops. KSP has a lot of life in it. Please please do not ruin it by putting paid DLC in the works. That is death. Game devs in general shouldn't make DLC really, they are kinda supposed to, you know, develop the game. But we can make slack for it like if some stuff wasnt quite polished enough to make the actual game then having it as DLC is cool. But paid DLC is just a bad idea all around. Please tell me my favorite game isn't going down this route. Sincerely, Mycroft, CEO of CMAU Incorporated

I'm sure it's been suggested before! But I'll talk again! Need a coop! That more than one player can control the same base and the same ship doing different things! That a player can be taking care of the first stage while the second is taking care of the second and carrying in orbit or both doing things on the same ship! And in a space mission on some planet each one controls a character and does different things, but always free to do anything! The game is good today! But with coop of form officially without lags and problems would be perfect! Imagine people traveling through space with up to 4 friends can do everything! I realize that the problem is in the matter of game time! But you have to have a solution to have a good experience with friends! It could be a DLC paid! But it has to be perfect in the coop! Would be ideal!

You paid what $20, 5 freaking years ago for a game with hundreds of hours of game-play and now EXPECT EVERYTHING AFTER THAT TO BE FREE??? Your like the old lady at the fast food restaurant that pays a $1 for a cheese burger and expects Gordon Ramsey to cook if specifically for them. This game has given Way, Way,Way,Way,Way,Way,Way,Way,Way, more back to its fans than any game I can think of in recent history. Yet you still find it absurd that after 5 years of free stuff they want you to finally pay for extra content! As a professional developer it hurts my soul to here some of these comments about Squad. Your more than happy to spend 40$ in add-on for some click-bait cell phone game, but when actually quality comes along you huff your chest and tilt your nose up at it like some self imposed uber game critic. This, this is why only crud games make money anymore. Why every game has to be free with paid add-ons, because its the only way you will give up $0.99 for 327 hours of gameplay. By the way, you would still complain about spending the $0.99 for 327 hours of gameplay cause anything less would be robbery. Even though you spent twice that much for a soda last week you didn't even finish.... It takes hundreds of man hours to create just one hour of gameplay. Game devs have to eat and pay our bills just like you. Don't like the game, then don't buy the expansion. But if you do like it you better sure as heck cough up that $15 for the DLC and not say a freaking word about how your not getting your moneys worth. Would you want someone at your job to suggest that you should come to there house and bake another pizza for them for free cause they ate the first one too fast?

The game becomes practically unplayable when a vessel exceeds just 1000 parts, simply because there is too much to calculate in terms of collisions and such and even with improved colliders there is always going to be a limit to what the hardware can handle. Breaking this down it becomes painfully obvious that the number of "needed" parts for a vessel can be decreased vastly by injecting some actually BIG ones to choose from, I usually need 100+ nuclear rods for a large vessel on an extensive mission and this is on the edge of just being plain ridiculous. Same goes for structural wings, those tiny little sheets need to be used by the dozens to start covering any respectable area. The biggest motorized wheels in the game? I can barely see them underneath my largest creations, not to mention even 20 of them can't as much as budge a truly gigantic lander. To rotate a regular 1500 ton ship before it's on the other side of its orbit you'll need dozens of the biggest reaction wheels. Numerous things like these could possibly/hopefully be vastly improved without expending excessive manpower since many models could be largely reused by scaling and just touching up textures a bit. Another thing sorely needed would be just a bucket of glue. Using struts is typically ugly and using the invisible auto struts often comes at a staggering performance cost, instead if something is overlapping it should be possible to splash some space glue there, only visible in VAB but providing all the structural enhancement you'd need. Without a doubt I'd happily pay half of what I paid for the whole game just for an official DLC packed with loads of specialized (and actually big) parts since the hundreds of hours of fun you get out of KSP would easily be worth that much. I don't hate mods but I never mod a game unless it's a hopeless mess and I give up on the devs, simply because I want the "feeling" of accomplishing great things within the challenging frame of what the devs think is reasonable instead of cherry picking things that make the game easier. On this note I believe many truly enormous parts should cost more than a meager 1000 science points to unlock, for example the nuclear rod should have one more step for some 1500-2000 points where you get a giant upgraded core with 50 times the power for 75 times the cash. Fusion reactor would be even better, but that would need another new level for even more points and ridiculous amounts of cash, in return it had better look awesome! Oh as a final note it would be nice to be able to build a much bigger VAB and launch pad, some (actually many) of my creations poke out through the walls of the VAB...

Assuming KSP gets the necessary patches for it to run long enough to play it, and save files for more than a day, are there any plans for DLC? The PC mods are amazing, and while I'm sure the consoles could in no way handle that same mass, could we still a few specialty items like fancy antennas, solar panels, command pods, science experiments, and craft containers?

So I started playing KSP after the barn was dropped. Honestly, I like the barn. So could it be brought back as an official mod or DLC please? Just a thought. #BringBackTheBarnAgain