Squadcast Summary 2015/07/03

[Superfluous J]

I just don't understand what is so magical about dV that the game does NOT include it. Why even tell us the masses of the parts and their other stats, when we could just put everything in a spreadsheet instead?

[Robotengineer]

I just don't understand what is so magical about dV that the game does NOT include it. Why even tell us the masses of the parts and their other stats, when we could just put everything in a spreadsheet instead?

For that matter, why not have people do their own physics math? And draw their own graphics?

[FlowerChild]

How is it useful information if you have NO IDEA what DV even means, or how much you have? A better car analogy would be this:

Driver: I want to go to the city, which is 200 miles away.

Car: You have 300 megajoules.

How is the relative measure provided by a fuel gauge any more informative? All it indicates is how much you have left relative to how much is there when it's full. It often times doesn't even display any kind of units to give you an indication of what volume is actually remaining (which is information that KSP currently provides beyond that). Still quite useful, as is knowing your distance to destination.

I use the car analogy, but there are many similar precedents in various games over the years that have made this kind of limited information approach rather common. I think Lunar Lander may have even given you your velocity relative to the ground but your remaining fuel was just an abstract gauge, and whether it be space games, ground based games, flight games, or even character-based survival games (You're displaying how many calories this can of beans contains but my hunger bar is an abstract gauge! AAAAHHHH! ), a separation between the level of information you have about what you're trying to achieve vs what your vehicle is capable of is quite common.

KSP isn't at all an exception in that regard other than it's about *somewhat* realistic space flight, and people consider space to be hard or something.

How is it useful information if you have NO IDEA what DV even means, or how much you have?

DeltaV (for a maneuver) is simply the change in velocity required between your current velocity and your desired (much like the distance you need to travel in a car is just the difference between your current position and desired). There's nothing particularly complicated about it, and it's entirely useful information in comparing the relative cost of various maneuvers and getting a feel for how well different vessels perform in completing particular maneuvers without needing to know your deltaV remaining for it to have meaning. It essentially amounts to "I want to go that much faster in that direction", which I consider to be a separate level of information from knowing how much capacity your vessel has for performing such changes overall.

I use it all the time and I'm glad it's there in the format it is, despite not using a deltaV remaining indicator.

I just don't understand what is so magical about dV that the game does NOT include it. Why even tell us the masses of the parts and their other stats, when we could just put everything in a spreadsheet instead?

I think the "magic" comes down entirely to what level of information players find to be more fun, and what Squad considers to be the most fun for players overall (and probably what they consider to be most approachable for new players as well). That's all highly subjective of course, but speaking in a general sense I think partial information like this, especially about desired outcome vs. vehicle capability, has been used in many games before to help create tension and increase the possibility of failure to create interesting scenarios that the player might not run into otherwise.

Edited July 5, 2015 by FlowerChild

[Linear]

Is it really hard to add a little gui similar to ker with total dV and dV per stage...seriously..

[Robotengineer]

Which is easier, installing a mod or not clicking on a button? That is basically what it comes down to.

[selfish_meme]

I think a dV readout in construction is necessary once you get out of Kerbin SOI, you can 'wing' Kerbin and mun just like someone else said, for evidence see the speed run in my signature. It is also necessary when you want to start to build efficient craft. It seems crazy to restrict that information for grindy 'gameplay' purposes. The novice won't recognise the significance immediately and to the experienced player it will be an unnecessary encumbrance.

[Temeter]

I think the "magic" comes down entirely to what level of information players find to be more fun, and what Squad considers to be the most fun for players overall (and probably what they consider to be most approachable for new players as well). That's all highly subjective of course, but speaking in a general sense I think partial information like this, especially about desired outcome vs. vehicle capability, has been used in many games before to help create tension and increase the possibility of failure to create interesting scenarios that the player might not run into otherwise.

Probably even made sense when KSP was smaller and had Kerbin and a single moon. Now you'd need, even without Delta-V, remember/write down lots of numbers, thrust to weight ratios, and make lots of estimations. It's gotten kind of tiring to do so much complicated guess work considering it was originally for the sake of simplicity.

The whole 'no dv' thing is something for a very dedicated and special kind of hardcore-player not too interested in realism.

I don't think there are many arguments not to include Delta-V, at least after the career's early game.

[Wallygator]

Probably even made sense when KSP was smaller and had Kerbin and a single moon. Now you'd need, even without Delta-V, remember/write down lots of numbers, thrust to weight ratios, and make lots of estimations. It's gotten kind of tiring to do so much complicated guess work considering it was originally for the sake of simplicity.

The whole 'no dv' thing is something for a very dedicated and special kind of hardcore-player not too interested in realism.

I don't think there are many arguments not to include Delta-V, at least after the career's early game.

This. The number of players who do not want dv info is dwindling. Yes, there are a few who remain. I suggest a mod be designed for future versions of ksp whereby any dv info is wiped from vision. Let these players use that mod.

I guess a simpler approach would be a small piece of black electrical tape strategically stuck to the screen. Those of us who use KER choose to remove said electrical tape.

Seriously though, it seems to me that this never ending dv debate has finally arrived at its moment of lunacy.

[FlowerChild]

The whole 'no dv' thing is something for a very dedicated and special kind of hardcore-player not too interested in realism.

Yup, that would be me

Seriously though, it seems to me that this never ending dv debate has finally arrived at its moment of lunacy.

Relax man. I haven't been telling anyone how they should play with regards to this. I haven't been trying to convince Squad not to include the remaining deltaV meter.

All I've been doing is explaining my own preferred way to play the game and arguing counterpoints against what I view to be some of the weaker arguments on the other side that aren't doing anyone any good.

Edited July 6, 2015 by FlowerChild

[NecroBones]

I just don't understand what is so magical about dV that the game does NOT include it.

That's the thing... it's the single most important measure of what a spacecraft can do, and where it can go. It's a better measure of its remaining capability than a fuel gauge, and is the primary "currency" of space travel, so to speak.

To be a space game and not have some measure of it, is just truly baffling. To have maneuver nodes tell how much of it is needed, and have no corresponding indication of what you have, is equally baffling.

And I'd even be satisfied with just a "current stage/configuration" display, as per the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation, without even the stage-by-stage breakdown of KER.

[Wjolcz]

Driver gets into car, and says "I need to drive 200 miles!"

Car says: I have half a tank of gas.

Driver gets out, slams door, and vows to never drive again.

The above is exactly what I hear when I see the above argument made. Personally, I find it amusing, but entirely unconvincing.

OOOOH! I'm just gonna quote this because of the level of anger I just achieved that doesn't let me read through your other posts.

The player falls back into the atmosphere and wastes his imaginary money and time or gets stuck in space and wastes his imaginary money and time.

The driver hitches a ride, takes a walk to the nearest station or takes a bike.

The real astronaut gets stranded in space and dies from the lack of food/oxygen.

I'll just take a slingshot and keep throwing them rocks until they escape the atmosphere and achieve a stable orbit, I guess.

And I know you've said "If this was real rocket blah, blah, blah but it isn't so dV readout isn't needed", but seriously... it is needed. Once we get life support (and I really hope we do someday) there won't be a way to get around without knowing all those useful information. If you want to not use them, fine. Don't. But I will.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Veeltch

[Columbia]

In my honest opinion, I feel that a DV readout should instead come with a VAB tier, like the Engineer's Report..

Well, if all else fails, we'll have to use spreadsheets. Again.

- - - Updated - - -

OOOOH! I'm just gonna quote this because of the level of anger I just achieved that doesn't let me read through your other posts.

The player falls back into the atmosphere and wastes his imaginary money and time or gets stuck in space and wastes his imaginary money and time.

The driver hitches a ride, takes a walk to the nearest station or takes a bike.

The real astronaut gets stranded in space and dies from the lack of food/oxygen.

I'll just take a slingshot and keep throwing them rocks until they escape the atmosphere and achieve a stable orbit, I guess.

And I know you've said "If this was real rocket blah, blah, blah but it isn't so dV readout isn't needed", but seriously... it is needed. Once we get life support (and I really hope we do someday) there won't be a way to get around without knowing all those useful information. If you want to not use them, fine. Don't. But I will.

Calm down, it's just another man's opinion.

We'll see once 1.1 comes.

[Commander Zoom]

To those who've replied "well, you should just work that out yourself": I'm guessing you also think it was a mistake for Squad to add a map mode back in .11, and that we should all go back to how it was when I started - consulting charts of height vs. altitude, or doing the math ourselves, to see whether we were in orbit? Plot all our courses and burns on paper with protractors and compasses and slide rules?

Edited July 7, 2015 by Commander Zoom

[klgraham1013]

In a game?

I wouldn't launch a real rocket without knowing its deltaV either. Launching a few green cartoon characters into space in a game where pretty much everything is made simpler than the consensus reality and just winging it is an entirely viable option? Why not?

I take my game a bit more seriously. I hate it when I lose a Kerbal. I also have spreadsheet to keep track of my missions, though. I don't expect everyone to role-play as hard as me.

[Wallygator]

KSP rides an extremely fine line between game and simulation. It's actually on the knife's edge IMHO. and wow! i am so glad. There are no other platforms out there that even attempt this.

Now... IMO Removing dV does not add to the game, rather it detracts from the simulation.

Squad would be well advised to more effectively align their vision regarding their melding of a proper simulation (which they are very very close) with a game "wrapper" (which they are very far way) - AND communicate it clearly to the community, the critics and the industry. Hell, even if it ultimately is implemented in 2.x who cares... as long as the vision is clear, we can support it and Squad along the way.

From what I can observe, the KSP core community seems more aligned to the simulation aspect (since the game and the community has evolved from sand box) yet are supportive of having a fun and engaging game wrapper. Sadly, the wrapper is and must be everything about "Career" and the tycoon aspects of managing a space program. Squad had not placed much focus on 'fleshing the career bit out' - rather (and quite rightly) they are focused on stabilising the simulation core first of all.

This is of course my own opinion - I do not force anyone to believe it.

[Superfluous J]

KSP rides an extremely fine line between game and simulation. It's actually on the knife's edge IMHO. and wow! i am so glad. There are no other platforms out there that even attempt this.

Now... IMO Removing dV does not add to the game, rather it detracts from the simulation.

That is a very interesting way to word it. Once again someone in a scant few words has expressed something I've felt for a long time but couldn't elucidate. Thank you.