DarkOwl57

What would you like to see added to KSP?

131 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

I actually wouldn't recommend this as a stock thing.  It's somewhat advanced, and can cause issues if you misuse it and then ask for help.

But, thanks for thinking of me.

Have it auto enable itself if it detects, say 10 other files/folders in the gamedata folder. It is one of the best mods I have found, that is why I use it and mentioned it. A must have for all mod players!

 

AUTOSTRUCT/RIGID ATTACH ALL BUTTON FOR LAZY PEOPLE!!!

Edited by KerBlitz Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, KerBlitz Kerman said:

AUTOSTRUCT/RIGID ATTACH ALL BUTTON FOR LAZY PEOPLE!!!

*cough Editor extensions redux cough*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2017 at 11:46 AM, KSK said:

What would I like to see added to KSP? In a word - immersion. Which is a bit of a nebulous concept so let me give some examples of things I'd like to add to improve immersion. Usual caveat applies to any of these suggestions that can be implemented through existing mods - I don't care and would like to see them in the stock game anyway.

1. Sound design. Long due for an overhaul. If I'm launching a rocket I want it to sound like a rocket rather than a toddler blowing an extended raspberry. If I'm in space then no sounds please unless I'm flying in IVA mode. Then let's have some decent background noises - coolant pumps, fans, RCS thrusters firing etc. Bonus points if those thrusters sound louder from inside a Mk1 lander can than a Mk1-2 capsule.

2. Launch effects. RealPlumes or something similar please. Stock SRBs aren't too bad but the current stock graphics for liquid fuelled engines are massively underwhelming. The Mainsail allegedly has enough power to rival small nations - it sure doesn't look like it.

3. Contracts. Let me put faces to names here. What does the CEO of Rockomax actually look like? It would be nice to have  Civ style talking heads for the various companies. Also - lets have some background info on these companies, even if that's only cosmetic. Better yet make that info easily moddable (including an option to delete them) for those that get bent out of shape by the mere mention of 'story' in-game.

4. Accepting that KSP is unlikely to ever have an official background story, at least give us the tools to create our own. Give us Final Frontier style service logs for our kerbonauts. Have the Companies actually react to what we do in-game. If I muck up a string of contracts for Rockomax, let's have that talking head CEO I mentioned above, get more and more grumpy. If I fail a contract for one of the smaller companies, maybe they go bust. 

5. If I'm running Kerbin's first space program (which I clearly am because I'm racking up a string of world firsts) then what were all these companies doing before I came along? Why not have companies spawn (for want of a better word) and grow, depending on how I run my space program. Give them some history and update that history depending on what I do.

Maybe Probodobodyne start off as two telecoms engineers working for another company. Inspired by your first Duna probe, they decide they want to found their own satellite company. Probodobodyne then spawns as a contract provider and starts offering satellite related contracts. Bonus points if those contracts happen in any sort of logical progression. Maybe the Comsat market has been largely cornered by another company, so Probodobodyne decide to contract you to set up their spiffy Munar mapping cluster. Then they progress to offering you targeted landing missions to drop their ore detecting landers at strategic spots. Assuming you choose to do that for them, they team up with another company to build mining facilities - and start offering appropriate contracts for those.

TL: DR - make me believe there's more to Kerbin than a field, a handful of buildings and a string of random requests from Gene.

I definitely agree with all of this.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

I definitely agree with all of this.

Same. That is very well thought out. Maybe you trade science to the COMPANIES for some of their products and if, say KerboDyne goes out of business you lose all their products that you haven't allready gotten. Say if I fail some of their contracts their products become more science and initial cost expensive. That would be sooooooo hard. right @KSK?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, KerBlitz Kerman said:

Same. That is very well thought out. Maybe you trade science to the COMPANIES for some of their products and if, say KerboDyne goes out of business you lose all their products that you haven't allready gotten. Say if I fail some of their contracts their products become more science and initial cost expensive. That would be sooooooo hard. right @KSK?

The problem with the company going out of business thing is that then, at the end of the tech tree, you wouldn't have all the parts.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 minutes ago, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

The problem with the company going out of business thing is that then, at the end of the tech tree, you wouldn't have all the parts.

Eggs-axtly, it would be in settings on ultra hard mode. also then if you kontact kompanies individually byebye single techtree. You would prioritize K-dyne C7, Probodyne, and rockomax above all. STRATEGY GALORE!!!

 

Edited by KerBlitz Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Edited by KerBlitz Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

30 minutes ago, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

The problem with the company going out of business thing is that then, at the end of the tech tree, you wouldn't have all the parts.

Opinions may reasonably differ on this point but I would regard that as a 'feature not a bug'. As in - if I don't use a particular part, there's an in-game way of pruning it from my VAB list. Also, as  @KerBlitz Kerman mentioned, it introduces an element of strategy into contracting. One company might ask you to do all manner of crazy stuff - but you suck it up because they supply that key part (such as fuel lines). On the other hand, another company might want you to field test launch clamps on Duna or something equally silly, but you don't much care if they go bust, so you tell 'em to shove their contract in their engine bell and ignite it.

You could also balance this by having new companies spawn to provide you with parts once you research the requisite tech. For example, say I've allowed most of the aircraft parts companies to go under/stop trading with me because I don't care about planes and haven't made them a focus of this playthrough. I research the final 'flight' node in the tech tree, unlock RAPIERs - and a startup company spawns with the aim of capitalising on this cutting edge technology I've just developed. The prototype RAPIERs are expensive as heck, only available in small numbers and, if part failures are switched on in your game, more than usually prone to failure, reflecting their cutting edge status.

if you persevere with them though, the company grows, the supply of RAPIERs increases and they become more reliable. Conceivably - again assuming this feature is available - you also get access to the relevant part upgrades as a loyal customer.

Edited by KSK
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the added logic that new companies could spawn to replace old ones at a different time, it makes such more sense to have KerBlitz's logic.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the ideas! See other people see that the ingame contract system is crazy Squad! I love KSP, but there are times that it needs help. Also @KSK I must remember

38 minutes ago, KSK said:

so you tell 'em to shove their contract in their engine bell and ignite it.

ABSOLUTELY GENIUS WORDING!!! Also prices are ridiculous right now and hacks don't require technical knowledge...

Yep, that's what I mean. Manipulation of KSPrices.gov...

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would die to see another species...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Casualnaut said:

I would die to see another species...

What? You don't want better contracts or mods that auto install or...

a forum access inside of KSP?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KerBlitz Kerman said:

What? You don't want better contracts or mods that auto install or...

a forum access inside of KSP?

 

A simple buffet is a great buffet... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@KSK I'm going to play the role of somebody who disagrees right now, but I wholeheartedly agree with your proposals.

1.) Memory. Those new company's names and flags will take up a lot of memory for every save as well as save files individually increasing load time and increasing lag. A problem for those who play on toasters.

2.) Sheer difficulty. Some players won't like the difficulty.

3.) Programming difficulty. I suggest we contact avid modders like @Nertea and @linuxgurugamer to see if such a patch is reasonable, possible, won't make KSP too lag intensive, as well as being non-memory intensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KerBlitz Kerman said:

@KSK I'm going to play the role of somebody who disagrees right now, but I wholeheartedly agree with your proposals.

1.) Memory. Those new company's names and flags will take up a lot of memory for every save as well as save files individually increasing load time and increasing lag. A problem for those who play on toasters.

2.) Sheer difficulty. Some players won't like the difficulty.

3.) Programming difficulty. I suggest we contact avid modders like @Nertea and @linuxgurugamer to see if such a patch is reasonable, possible, won't make KSP too lag intensive, as well as being non-memory intensive.

I have no idea about 3 but if 1 is a problem, even for toasters, then something isn't quite right. It shouldn't matter anyway - the game already handles a slew of company names and flags and all that we're proposing is that that number changes throughout the game. The way I envisage this working is that we would actually be starting off with a great many fewer companies and if the player decided to cultivate all the new ones that spawn throughout the game, growing the roster to its current size (or maybe slightly higher) as the game progresses.

Regarding 2, if those players can handle the rocket equation, building a spacecraft with adequate power, guidance, propellants etc., basic orbital mechanics, powered landings, rendezvous and docking - then I'm pretty sure they can handle a bit of strategy too. If they don't - well there's always Science mode and Sandbox mode. Career mode is already stripped back to the point where it's barely a game - any improvements to it are necessarily going to increase the difficulty. Seriously - aside from the normal rocket building and flying challenges which are present in any KSP game mode, what extra tasks does Career mode currently require the player to do? 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean and agree with what you are saying @KSK but the idea is that limitation of facilities presents difficulty in it's own right. However the coding most likely would be hard and may not easily be accomplished.

Let's Create a new thread! That way we don't bog up this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6.7.2017 at 9:42 PM, KerBlitz Kerman said:

Thanks for the ideas! See other people see that the ingame contract system is crazy Squad! I love KSP, but there are times that it needs help. Also @KSK I must remember

ABSOLUTELY GENIUS WORDING!!! Also prices are ridiculous right now and hacks don't require technical knowledge...

Yep, that's what I mean. Manipulation of KSPrices.gov...

 

So much this! I mean - kill the wobbliness between part masses by integrating Kerbal Joint Reinforcements.

The phantom forces exist in 1.3 and they have already cost me ~300k in career, when my rocket decides to disintegrate itself through sudden twitching.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait,  

On 7/14/2017 at 5:34 AM, Kerbal101 said:

So much this! I mean - kill the wobbliness between part masses by integrating Kerbal Joint Reinforcements.

The phantom forces exist in 1.3 and they have already cost me ~300k in career, when my rocket decides to disintegrate itself through sudden twitching.

Do you mean to say we have K-Drive in 1.3?:o

That's what I want, a way to disable KrakensBane. :cool:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@KerBlitz Kerman Not sure about full K-Drive, but vibro-kraken still exits. The smaller joints (typically on smaller parts) still have less power than bigger joints (typically on larger parts), which causes bigger mass part sometimes to squash inside boundaries of smaller mass part, even if small parts were attached without clipping, and cause sudden unpredictable vibration.

In an unfortunate -but very probable- situation that these smaller parts were auto-strutted to heavy part, the autostrut will oppose against small parts and vibration will start to resonate stronger and stronger, either shaking the whole vehicle into pieces or turn it into octopus. Enabling "hard connection" does not solve problem as it results in pieces simply detaching. Not using autostrut will remove "resonation", but will cause wobbliness - which will make rocket unreliable.

You can see it like this:   the default connection type is like gelatin, the autostrut does not remove gelatin property  - but adds a "spring", that causes gelatin to start shake itself if initial "punch" happens, and this "punch" happens if part clips even for short time for any reason.

I had around total eight cases with this, all using similar design - as I unlocked the larger 2m tanks, but not the 2m engines. So I used the multi-attach plate from the B9 Procedural Fairing to attach 4x 1m engines below the 2m tank. But this always causes rocket to start shaking on the launchpad, due to slight clipping between engines. So, I got rid of it and connected smallest 1m-size fuel tank using 4x radial mirror with surface attach below the 2m medium fuel tank, rotated and attached 1-m LV30 below it. It worked as that had zero clipping, but still kraken will attack sometimes when parts clip inside dynamically due to thrust of engines. This always happened in space when time accelerating with phys-warp, causing half of rocket to blow off, often with propelling payload in the proximity from orbit.

KJR mechanic is different - in makes joints "stiffer". And if there is a smaller mass part connecting to heavier mass part, then KJR boosts the small part joint stiffness even further. I had zero such cases after installing it and I don't build monstrosities and don't clip part inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I would love some more planets! :cool: Like a moon of eeloo! Or a moon of a moon

Spoiler

(of a moon of a moon of a moon of a moon of a moon of a moon of a moon of a moon)

Second: More parts like a 3.75 meter seperator? Or more multiple nozzle engines. Or 5 m engines, fuel tanks, fairings etc. Lastly Change the textures of the Mark.3 parts. AND make the cockpits have higher heat tolerance. That would make space planes a whole lot easier! Finally, change those awful fairing textures to something cooler like KW rocketery! :D Duna Maniac Out! *Bang*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

98 more planets/moons/landable gas giants/joustable jool.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need multiplayer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need the heart of any true space program:

More paperwork!

 

Purchase request forms.  Authorization forms.  Authorization forms to request purchases. Authorizations for purchase request forms.  Purchase requests for authorizations.  Forms about forms!  Forms to get more forms!  Forms to make changes to the forms about the forms! 

 

And meetings!  Lots of meetings!  Meetings to talk about what we're going to talk about at the next meeting!  Meetings to set up meetings to talk about the last meeting!  Meetings about the paperwork!  Meetings to talk about the paperwork we need to set up the meetings!

 

 

<sigh...>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now