Lets talk about the new update.....

[Noname117]

For multiplayer, why don't they just include several options for the server owner to pick from when configuring the server? A "one-size-fits-all" for Kerbal multiplayer seems like a bad idea given how different people play it different ways.

 

EDIT: In my opinion, Kerbal needs to revamp their campaign in some way to make it not feel like just an expanded sandbox. There is still a disconnect between how science is gathered (exploring planets) and how it is spent (on new parts), which makes little sense. Being able to instantly launch rockets after construction makes the Kerbal space program develop unbelievably quickly. Starting with manned launches, like you're basically required to do, is a huge disconnect between how real life space programs developed and KSP. There's no competing space agencies to fight over contracts with, or to compare your progress against. And the endgame is basically just unlocking all the parts, which is done through exploration. The point of exploration in the campaign doesn't have anything to do with learning more about the system, but entirely has to do with progressing further. Which I feel just removes the depth from exploration.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that the campaign feels like it lacks management depth or a proper goal, both of which a good management game needs. The challenge of campaign mode comes from engineering and flying a space program, with very little coming from managing said space program. Sandbox mode is basically the same, except with that little bit of management gone. Kerbal has the potential to be that nice mix of a management game, construction game, and flying sim, but really only gets 2 out of the 3. And in today's market it seems like most similar games do the exact same. And honestly, I think that bit of management depth (and maybe exploration depth) is what KSP needs the most to truely live up to its full potential.

 

That being said, the current solar system does feel like 2/3 of a solar system. Those outer planets we've been expecting for years kind of need to be added for the KSP solar system to truely feel complete.

 

So although what Squad has done in the past couple years has been nice, it's all been little improvements to the game which fail to address the core issues surrounding the game and the major areas where the game feels incomplete.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Noname117
Wanted to add more to this post about the topic as a whole.

[KerikBalm]

16 hours ago, Tyko said:

The scenario that concerns me is this...

I'm setting up a rendezvous in LKO. I have to wait a half dozen orbits before the optimal transfer point, so I'm looking at a 4 hour 1x time wait. I set TW to 50x, but my buddy is docking a station part and has his at 1x. I walk away for a few minutes to grab a coffee and for whatever reason my buddy raises his TW. I come back and TW is at 50x and I've missed my transfer window.

The only way to guarantee I don't miss my transfer window is to set my TW to 1x while I'm AFK and then bump it up when I'm back at the computer...then I'm sitting there watching my 1x orbit.

This can be mitigated with clear communication between two people. I think the complexity goes up exponentially with more people.

There is a warp to here command, so maybe using that you could have it automatically stop the warp?

[Tyko]

2 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

There is a warp to here command, so maybe using that you could have it automatically stop the warp?

There's still the problem of having to sit at your computer the whole time. Even Warp to Here doesn't pause the game when you get to the designated point.

If you have a 4 hour wait before your next maneuver - which is pretty common for orbital activities -  you could very well have to wait up to 4 hours, and with up to a half dozen other people playing you really have no reliable way of knowing if it's going to be a 4 hour wait or a couple minutes at higher warp. Since the game doesn't pause once you get to your point you have to be at the controls ready to act.

 

[KerikBalm]

yea, but if multiplayer is limited to 2-3 people, its a different story

[GrandProtectorDark]

Small scale co-op friends only might work if you give the time warp privileges to the group leader. 

Big scale servers with +10 members aren't so much doable without horrible desync options. 

[KerikBalm]

yea, large scale multiplayer doesn't seem like it would work.

2 person multiplayer could work, collaborating on building a station for example. There would probably need to be 1 "master". If my vessel docks with another players vessel, it then counts as 1 vessel, who controls it then? If it undocks at a different place, there are now 2 vessels, who controls what then?

I could see having some fun with air launch to orbit designs (without using mods that essentially split your save, allow you to fly both, then re-merge them)/flyback boosters, even mid-air refueling.

I once saw a reusable Eve design where a craft launches from Eve, ends up on a suborbital intercept with an orbiting Eve craft, which then goes suborbital and "catches" (docks with) the ascent vehicle (while still suborbital), and then burns again to take everything to a stable orbit... I imagine switching between craft on that one and the timing was pretty hard... such a feat seems like it would be a fun multiplayer exercise with one player controlling the ascent vehicle,  the other the orbital "catcher".

Likewise, exploration "flotillas" with multiple craft arriving at similar times sometimes result in two craft needing to make burns at the same time.

2 player coop could work

[nsgallup]

I love the updates they are currently doing, but if I could choose what they next worked on it would be making Outer Planets Mod stock, making kerbal engineer stock, and spending some time making landing gear work better.

 

I think multiplayer is a waste of time.

Edited October 31, 2018 by nsgallup