KerbolExplorer

Lets talk about the new update.....

Recommended Posts

Another install?

what do you mean with that?

i forgot i could copy the plane lol

 

19 hours ago, JedTech said:

Real time multiplayer is the way to go. It causes people to invest time and effort into a real time community. You can fly what you want to fly, go where you want to go. Can't wait for docking? Don't reap the benefits of docking. Want to go to Mun? It might take a day. We would need a feature in game that can do a scheduled maneuver for you while you're at work or asleep. This could be a real money maker:

Subscription based = $$$

  • Free Membership:   Level 1 KSC features. only 1 command module active at a time.
  • Bargain Rockets Membership:   Level 2 KSC features. 1  automated maneuver
  • Rockomax Membership:   Level 3 KSC features. 2 automated maneuvers.

How to turn a fun game into  pay-to-do-everything-that-makes-the-game-fun.

actually they will get 25% of the money they actually get by the game itself and the DLC, cuz i dont think everybody that would play multiplayers wants to pay for 1 automated maneuvers that only works once and then you need to buy it again...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Kerbart said:

What aspect about it is scamming people? Greedy, I'll buy. But scammy? It's not like your money is being siphoned away to Nigeria while you're playing the game.

It turns scammy when the game changes orbital parameters to ensure that maneuvers happen when you're normally not playing the game, creating an incentive for you to buy automated maneuvers. That would be scammy. But surely you do not suggest that.

I'll add that hosting a multi-player environment is an on-going cost, so I would expect a company to want a subscription based service. My example of subscription solutions provides a free option so that all players can participate to some extent. The limitations of course would only apply to multi-player mode. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those about to rock wondering about the aerodynamic issues, it has been fixed with 1.5.1. We salute the devs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When building an aircraft I would like it to put wheels on properly rather than having to fiddle with the ADSW and caps lock. We do it for the rockets when putting parts on why is it so hard with wheels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2018 at 9:46 AM, JedTech said:

Real time multiplayer is the way to go. It causes people to invest time and effort into a real time community. You can fly what you want to fly, go where you want to go. Can't wait for docking? Don't reap the benefits of docking. Want to go to Mun? It might take a day. We would need a feature in game that can do a scheduled maneuver for you while you're at work or asleep. This could be a real money maker:

Subscription based = $$$

  • Free Membership:   Level 1 KSC features. only 1 command module active at a time.
  • Bargain Rockets Membership:   Level 2 KSC features. 1  automated maneuver
  • Rockomax Membership:   Level 3 KSC features. 2 automated maneuvers.

Um... are you serious? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I buy a game I buy a game. I play as it is. If it gets updates it can be included in the initial buy, a yearly fee or no updates at all.

Multiplayer - hard to do given the time for some missions. Would be better to have a leader board for achieving events fastest, less $$ required.

Obviously mods allowed but will make a difference the standing. Like having a drugged bike rider vs a  normal bike rider.

Both can ride in the event but the drug one get a handicap. The more drugs the more handicap. Have to have a real time connection for the log to be stored so that this can be validated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About planets. No one currently  at squad actually knows how those work (or how it seems).
Part revamp.     Literally everyone who played with Vens part revamp ad many more who did not, wanted stock part reworks.

On 10/17/2018 at 1:08 AM, ZooNamedGames said:

Whelp. There goes my Mercury style Mk1 pod replicas. What the hell is the new cockpit intending to be? A cockpit or a pod? It doesn’t look like anything I’ve ever seen fly.

And for you. The Pre-1.5 black cockpit variant still is usable via mesh-switch (most new parts have multiple appearances)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:

Um... are you serious? 

Yes I'm serious. You get the base game for the price you paid. Then there should be a way for them to earn revenue/pay costs of their multi-player service. It's perfect because there is a free option for everyone who wants to try or participate.

Share this post


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

Yes I'm serious. You get the base game for the price you paid. Then there should be a way for them to earn revenue/pay costs of their multi-player service. It's perfect because there is a free option for everyone who wants to try or participate.

Paid multiplayer really isn't the way to go.
Especially since TakeTwo aquired ksp

Just can you image the Armageddon levels outry and accusations about Evil T2 ruining ksp when Squad attempted paid multiplayer.

Also, the numbers which you proposed are EA level of scumbag online transactions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JedTech said:

Yes I'm serious. You get the base game for the price you paid. Then there should be a way for them to earn revenue/pay costs of their multi-player service. It's perfect because there is a free option for everyone who wants to try or participate.

Going to other planets takes months, and that's just for the closest ones. A round trip to Eeloo takes over a decade. Even a round trip to Duna takes a couple of years. There is no possible way you can run a multiplayer server in real time without adding what amounts to FTL travel. People aren't going to pay for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@KerbolExplorer people being upset because the visual revamps are not a big enough step forward I can understand. What I can't understand is people who reverse course and step back into the mess we had before.

There are things I'm not satisfied with about the revamp (they could have at least enabled the normal map shader for the fuel tanks even if they weren't gonna use it it would have been a nice hook for a modder, or better yet don't make excuses and give all tanks normal maps damgit!) But at the very least with the standardization it started it'll be a study enough foundation to build off of unlike the layered mess it's steadily replacing.

As for the present mismatch of old and new you're just gonna have to bear with it for a while this stuff should have been done pre 1.0 as active people have actually been asking for all this time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet they’re going to redo the engines next. Add variants, mesh switching, etc., to bring them on the same level with MH engines. Not sure if PJ work is going to be used, but I *really* hope it will be. What’s there left to redo? Reaction wheels, utility stuff like parachutes and batteries (they’re fine though), landing legs (bigger ones PLEASE).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would be nice is if they can have it that planes can be showing if they are left or right drifting. I think that planes being built from the 1940's had the alignment thing sorted out.

Maybe it could be a science update. Show Alignment???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2018 at 7:27 AM, BadLeo said:

Hence I said that HyperEdit would complement the KSP multiplayer. Want to go to Minmus? Cheat your craft into its orbit. Done. No waiting, no desync, no problem at all. Then again, if one player is tooling with an aircraft and the other is going to Minmus, they aren't playing the game together as much as they are spending time together doing different things. Multiplayer can be done and issues over desyncing can be worked around with compromises. That CAN be done. If the devs are willing or not, and why, that is a different thing.

Honestly, the best thing I can think of is to just do what DEFCON does- time moves as fast as the slowest player-selected timewarp setting, e.g. player 1 has 10x and player 2 has 1x? Moves at 1x speed. Player 2 bumps it up to 100x? It stops at 10x. Because nobody ever was as horrifically jarred by time moving slower than they wanted it to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LorenLuke said:

Honestly, the best thing I can think of is to just do what DEFCON does- time moves as fast as the slowest player-selected timewarp setting, e.g. player 1 has 10x and player 2 has 1x? Moves at 1x speed. Player 2 bumps it up to 100x? It stops at 10x. Because nobody ever was as horrifically jarred by time moving slower than they wanted it to.

As you add more players, that will just peg the timewarp setting closer to 1x more often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No MP system that hypothetically gets implemented will be perfect. It'll please some and displease some others. People will always argue that it could have been implemented differently [coincidentally or not to better suit their particular taste]. We are egotistical monkeys, even the best among us are.

Choices have to be made. Hopefully devs can devise a way to please the biggest number of players possible by the biggest margin possible while displeasing the smallest number of players by the smallest margin possible. Utilitarianism is as far as perfection goes. What it substantially will consist in when it comes to KSP MP, thought, only the devs can tell.

Edited by BadLeo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, the current update lacks consistency. I know they are working on revamping more parts to the current standard set by these and making history parts, however, it is a slow process. Until then we have a game that isn't consistent across teh board in style and visuals. I know they are working on revamping more as I asked this specific question in the grand 1.5 thread and was replied to by a member of the art team saying they are revamping more!

I have faith we'll get there eventually, with all of the parts revamped to fit their new style and visuals, and hopefully the planets and solar system too. But we will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2018 at 9:27 AM, BadLeo said:

(I)f one player is tooling with an aircraft and the other is going to Minmus, they aren't playing the game together as much as they are spending time together doing different things.

 

4 hours ago, sturmhauke said:

As you add more players, that will just peg the timewarp setting closer to 1x more often.

My view has always been that any multiplayer system would need to be tailored for no more than 4-6 players, and they will need to be doing a coordinated project.

Otherwise, multiplayer is just a bunch of people playing KSP alone with a chat option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, razark said:

 

My view has always been that any multiplayer system would need to be tailored for no more than 4-6 players, and they will need to be doing a coordinated project.

As had I.

 

I can't for the life of me determine how disproportionately little it comes up, so I try to advocate it in any such discussion, but it always seems to be 'Multiple crafts for multiple people', and never 'One craft, multiple Kerbals' or 'One Kerbal plus vanilla ground crew with telemetry', the latter of the two being far more interesting to me than the specific application of multiplayer that everyone seems to harp on. Given that everyone is, more or less, focused on the same craft, the DEFCON style timewarp ceases to be an issue. Coupling this with what provide mods makes it even more engaging for the single vessel group, having actual IVAs (something akin to Raster Prop Monitor, not just a draggable throttle), more EVA actions and personal inventories (KIS/KAS), software engineering to view functions of certain craft (kOS), and couple this with the ability to control the craft only from certain seats and to switch to and from those seats, you have a much more engaging team play experience with necessary division of attention and responsibilities for better play without even having to leave your own singular space program.

 

EDIT: Also, a failure mod (Oh, Scrap!, or possibly just one's own mistakes in the realm of KSP) and/or life support (TAC-LS) makes trying to mitigate things from the crew and mission control point of view for those 'Houston, we've had a problem' moments provide potential for some of the more gripping cooperative multiplayer moments, which are just as, if not more, engaging than any multi-vessel multiplayer KSP could be, IMO.

Edited by LorenLuke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, LorenLuke said:

it always seems to be 'Multiple crafts for multiple people', and never 'One craft, multiple Kerbals' or 'One Kerbal plus vanilla ground crew with telemetry', the latter of the two being far more interesting to me

#1 is adding multiplayer on top of the stock gameplay, which is how most people conceive of it I think. #2 and #3 would require adding a significant amount of new gameplay also. I'm aware that a few mods have been folded into stock, but multiplayer makes it exponentially harder.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sturmhauke said:

#1 is adding multiplayer on top of the stock gameplay, which is how most people conceive of it I think. #2 and #3 would require adding a significant amount of new gameplay also. I'm aware that a few mods have been folded into stock, but multiplayer makes it exponentially harder.

All 3 are multiplayer, strictly speaking, as the multiple Kerbals makes each Kerbal a player, and the ground crew would each be players where having certain readouts or even a ground track would make it more fascinating to do (I mean, imagine if your dude was just the equivalent of an EVA Kerbal in this scene-

Spoiler

fa84b21d4472a3402e7c6f7880f2a2e2.jpg

I still think one could achieve goodly amounts of gameplay from that). Iit'sjust that there exist no current mechanics to support a player in those latter roles. 

 

As for multiplayer mods, the suggestion was to roll in rudimentary functionality for such things (or even just make a generic MP for multiple Kerbals/ground crew players and have the mods do their own infrastructure around it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, LorenLuke said:

I still think one could achieve goodly amounts of gameplay from that). Iit'sjust that there exist no current mechanics to support a player in those latter roles. 

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. The majority of existing gameplay centers around designing craft and then piloting them. Science, contracts, and especially EVA/IVA are kind of tacked on. Adding interesting things for individual Kerbals to do (whether it's all coded in-house or adapted from existing mods) is basically adding an entirely new game system. At that point it's more likely that they'd make KSP 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this for those that want multiplayer. That they compete against the clock for things to be accomplished? And if they want more challenges the "real world" events can impact the programs.

Obviously the mods, level of play etc must be consistent.

Personally I am looking for better airplane building, such as wheels aligning first time, more science and deeper science, like say discover new material or method and get $$ for the Intellectual Property (IP), hitting space junk, unplanned re-entry that cost funds and reputation to clean up, stop Armageddon happening and finally being able to build things like coil gun launches from the Mun (including orbits and Kerbal)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2018 at 6:40 PM, LorenLuke said:

Honestly, the best thing I can think of is to just do what DEFCON does- time moves as fast as the slowest player-selected timewarp setting, e.g. player 1 has 10x and player 2 has 1x? Moves at 1x speed. Player 2 bumps it up to 100x? It stops at 10x. Because nobody ever was as horrifically jarred by time moving slower than they wanted it to.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tyko said:

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

 

As I've heard someone else mention somewhere on the forums, and I side solidly with them, MP should be no more than something like 4-6 people a server. Note that in my stance, I interpret this as 'vessels', ultimately leading to the statement that, I don't believe there should really be more than three, maybe four active vessels on a server at any given point, and just have many of the players be support staff or multi-crewing said vessels. Personally, some may find that a bit limiting, but it's the best solution I can conceive of to still preserve time-warp without worrying about having 1) desync, or 2) having absolutely no time warp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.