PLS add boat parts

[awsumguy76801]

i always felt like boats were something KSP really needed. they literally made a moon like laythe that is almost entirely covered in ocean and never added boat parts so we could sail on them, i know its still possible to make boats with the stock parts but its a lot harder and to test them on kerbin you have to get them moved all the way to the water which is a pain in the ass. so maybe add a port as the 3rd launch pad where u can test them and some water physics. idk much about how boats work but ik if something is less dense that water it will float so maybe make it so that if ur boat is denser than the liquid it is floating on it will sink and this could be done to make submarines too and finally make its so you can place flags on water. its just a normal flag with a little buoy to keep it afloat on the ocean

[t_v]

2 minutes ago, awsumguy76801 said:

i always felt like boats were something KSP really needed. they literally made a moon like laythe that is almost entirely covered in ocean and never added boat parts so we could sail on them, i know its still possible to make boats with the stock parts but its a lot harder and to test them on kerbin you have to get them moved all the way to the water which is a pain in the ass. so maybe add a port as the 3rd launch pad where u can test them and some water physics. idk much about how boats work but ik if something is less dense that water it will float so maybe make it so that if ur boat is denser than the liquid it is floating on it will sink and this could be done to make submarines too and finally make its so you can place flags on water. its just a normal flag with a little buoy to keep it afloat on the ocean

I like the flag idea, although I think that restricting it to land incentivizes people to build boats instead of plopping the flag wherever they splash down. When you say "boat parts" do you mean parts that have a boat-like cross-section? I think in general, a more flexible cross-section system could help but the use for specifically curved triangular cross-sections might be too niche and you have to build with combinations of other parts.

That aside, I don't know which video it was in, but the KSC has water docks. As for physics, they already allow for submersibles and allowing ships to take on water might be a bit difficult to program (unless cargo bays are programmed like fuel tanks and can visually fill as fluids enter)

[Bej Kerman]

32 minutes ago, awsumguy76801 said:

i always felt like boats were something KSP really needed. they literally made a moon like laythe that is almost entirely covered in ocean and never added boat parts so we could sail on them, i know its still possible to make boats with the stock parts but its a lot harder and to test them on kerbin you have to get them moved all the way to the water which is a pain in the ass. so maybe add a port as the 3rd launch pad where u can test them and some water physics. idk much about how boats work but ik if something is less dense that water it will float so maybe make it so that if ur boat is denser than the liquid it is floating on it will sink and this could be done to make submarines too and finally make its so you can place flags on water. its just a normal flag with a little buoy to keep it afloat on the ocean

Reasonable demands seeing as submarines and boats will be as important as rovers and aircrafts on planets with water - which I assume KSP 2 will have plenty of.

[Vl3d]

Yes to water / under water crafts.

No to flags ON water, but yes to flags on the sea bed (first to plant flag in the Kariana trench for example).

[awsumguy76801]

18 hours ago, t_v said:

I like the flag idea, although I think that restricting it to land incentivizes people to build boats instead of plopping the flag wherever they splash down. When you say "boat parts" do you mean parts that have a boat-like cross-section? I think in general, a more flexible cross-section system could help but the use for specifically curved triangular cross-sections might be too niche and you have to build with combinations of other parts.

That aside, I don't know which video it was in, but the KSC has water docks. As for physics, they already allow for submersibles and allowing ships to take on water might be a bit difficult to program (unless cargo bays are programmed like fuel tanks and can visually fill as fluids enter)

by boat parts i mean kind of like the space plane hulls. different types like there could be some if you want to build a massive ship or a tiny speedboat

[t_v]

6 hours ago, awsumguy76801 said:

by boat parts i mean kind of like the space plane hulls. different types like there could be some if you want to build a massive ship or a tiny speedboat

That makes sense, though I’m not entirely convinced that the parts will be generic enough to fit in. For example, the round parts are circles, which can fit into a lot of designs, and the mk. 2 parts are sort of eye shaped, which can also fit into a lot of designs, but I don’t really see how boat parts can be shaped to fit in. Maybe I just need an example of a boat part being used creatively, which will happen if they are included. 

[mcwaffles2003]

New KSC already has docks added to it. Boat parts are likely already in the game or at least are planned to be implemented

[Vl3d]

3 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

New KSC already has docks added to it. Boat parts are likely already in the game or at least are planned to be implemented

Yeah, but will kerbals be able to row (j/k but really what kind of hulls and propeller / jet propulsion)? Will we have wind powered vessels? Will we need anchors to cope with the waves? Will there be storms and giant waves?

[Ember12]

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

but will kerbals be able to row (j/k but really what kind of hulls and propeller / jet propulsion)? Will we have wind powered vessels? Will we need anchors to cope with the waves? Will there be storms and giant waves?

It was recently established that people think an advanced weather system isn't going to happen, so storms and waves don't seem likely. 

On a more general note, I think that boats could be incredibly useful.  They could be used to transfer resources over short distances, for instance, or to putter around the seas of Laythe or Eve for getting Science.  They could also be used to recover spent rocket stages from the sea, as in this animation, which would offer a much easier way to build reusable rocket systems.

Given all these possible uses, I think that dedicated boat hulls and engines would be well worth the effort of coding them in.

[Vl3d]

14 minutes ago, Ember12 said:

It was recently established that people think

Are you sure? Do you have proof?

Has anything official been said on the subject? I've seen wind powered generators in the game. Why not sails?

[Ember12]

Sails might very well be implemented.  I was mainly saying that there probably won't be storms.  I believe that people don't want a complex weather system because of this recent discussion, where people seemed mostly negative about the idea.

[Vl3d]

8 minutes ago, Ember12 said:

I believe that people don't want a complex weather system because of this recent discussion, where people seemed mostly negative about the idea.

Nooo, that was a discussion just about weather visuals, like clouds, rain, snow etc.  Nothing complex, just graphics.
The discussion about wind as a gameplay feature is here. Most people want wind.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Vl3d

[Ember12]

8 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Most people want wind.

Sure, but a storm is a LOT more complicated to simulate than a bit of wind.  Many in that discussion thought that modeling weather systems, even for purely cosmetic purposes, would be incredibly difficult.  

I think the sail idea is quite workable.  I was only saying that waves, and especially storms, require a huge amount of processing power to simulate well.

[Vl3d]

7 minutes ago, Ember12 said:

modeling weather systems, even for purely cosmetic purposes, would be incredibly difficult

You mean like in this 4 year old game?

 

[BowlerHatGuy3]

Not gonna lie, being on a giant cargo ship during a storm on an alien planet orbiting a green gas giant is kind of badass. Weather effects shouldn’t be too hard, I don’t know about waves though.

Just now, Vl3d said:

You mean like in this 4 year old game?

 

The problem with citing a game like Sea of Thieves is that that game is focused solely on sailing and finding treasure, so the dev team are more willing to put effort into simulating what it would be like to be on a ship during a storm. Whether we like it or not, Kerbal is a space exploration game. They likely wouldn’t want to spend so many resources into making a planet wide wave system that reacts with storms and wind. 
 

I could be wrong though, as there’s this game called Trailmakers that simulates wind, waves, and aerodynamics all in one game. 

[t_v]

8 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

You mean like in this 4 year old game?

 

Exactly. That simulation system took soooooooo much work to get in place, that if KSP 2 tried developing it, they would run out of budget on the first planet. Asking for that kind of storm simulation is like asking for space exploration to be neglected. As someone said, development is a zero-sum game. Resources don't come out of nowhere and any time spent developing one feature comes at the expense of other features. As I have said, some of the features you ask for are ridiculously out of scope for the game, and will never be able to be developed. 

1 minute ago, BowlerHatGuy2 said:

Not gonna lie, being on a giant cargo ship during a storm on an alien planet orbiting a green gas giant is kind of badass. Weather effects shouldn’t be too hard, I don’t know about waves though.

The problem with citing a game like Sea of Thieves is that that game is focused solely on sailing and finding treasure, so the dev team are more willing to put effort into simulating what it would be like to be on a ship during a storm. Whether we like it or not, Kerbal is a space exploration game. They likely wouldn’t want to spend so many resources into making a planet wide wave system that reacts with storms and wind. 

I share this sentiment. I would love to have these experiences, but the level of depth that is being requested for these features is far too much

[mcwaffles2003]

Guys... Wrong thread

[t_v]

One thing I’d like to see if boat parts are implemented is propeller RCS. Lots of underwater drones use propellers along axes to maneuver around, and using a rocket underwater to change orientation seems unnecessary. With a little tweak ability, this could also be useful with drones in atmospheres.  However, these parts are not even as important to have as a lavatory part, so I wouldn’t expect them even if boats and submarines are added. 

[Vl3d]

1 hour ago, t_v said:

As someone said, development is a zero-sum game.

No it's not, you stand on the shoulders of the giants that did it before. You think every game is coded from scratch? It took the same amount of work to make Wolfenstein.

26 minutes ago, t_v said:

propeller RCS

100% the game needs easier axis control mapping than KSP1.

[t_v]

19 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

No it's not, you stand on the shoulders of the giants that did it before. You think every game is coded from scratch? It took the same amount of work to make Wolfenstein.

Do you think that the developers at Microsoft will just send over a copy of their wave and weather simulator? No, KSP 2 devs will have to implement their own solution.

Besides, that is not what the zero sum game is even about, even if you start with a baseline like having Unity and libraries and different software that reduces workload, there is a limited amount of time and resources to be allocated to development and developing one thing means you cannot develop another. It doesn't matter if you get other people to send over code or not, it is still a zero-sum game. 

Anyways...

22 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

100% the game needs easier axis control mapping than KSP1.

This would be a good general solution to the demand for more RCS parts, to just allow any part to be bound to the RCS mappings, but if that is out of scope, then a part with rotors that acts like an RCS block is a good substitute. Hopefully it has a high torque, low speed mode for underwater use, and a high speed lower torque mode for less dense atmospheres

[Vl3d]

39 minutes ago, t_v said:

limited amount of time and resources to be allocated to development and developing one thing means you cannot develop another

Don't think of it like that.. think of it as "pre-release" and "post-release", as Nate previously stated.

[t_v]

Just now, Vl3d said:

Don't think of it like that.. think of it as "pre-release" and "post-release", as Nate previously stated.

And we are only talking about pre-release development in these discussions - new resources are not flowing in from the consumers, and the developers need a viable product to ship so that they can even consider working on other stuff. On top of that, resource scarcity always exists for development, even after release. Live service games have to carefully plan what they want to focus on for updates, and working on one update feature means delaying or cancelling another.

In my personal opinion, it is not fair to expect the developers to put in such a complicated and expensive feature because the cost of putting in that feature is many other   relevant features being delayed or never included. For boat parts, I think that feature has enough value and is easy enough to make that it is worth adding, and I think the same way for wind and a weather system. But if it comes to the level of Sea of Thieves, then that is too much. Same for boat parts, I'd love to see them, but if suddenly a whole system of water flooding parts was added and there were other good features that could be made instead, it would not be worth it for me.

This is not to say I would be unhappy with these changes; I would love to see realistically simulated waves and wind, and my computer can run it, so no complaints here. I would just not expect the developers to make that feature because I know that the cost is probably too large. There is a difference between wanting something and expecting it. 

[Guest]

On 7/5/2022 at 7:01 PM, Vl3d said:

You mean like in this 4 year old game?

 

You really must have liked what happened with cyberpunk seeing how much effort you're putting in replicating it with KSP2.

[Vl3d]

3 hours ago, Master39 said:

You really must have liked what happened with cyberpunk seeing how much effort you're putting in replicating it with KSP2.

Oh yes, I have ruined Cyberpunk and I will ruin KSP2 with my posts on the forum talking to the same 20 people about multiplayer, gameplay and graphics suggestions. You have totally uncovered my evil plan!

PS: Also planning to get Keanu Keeves in the game.

[Vanamonde]

Back off the tempers, please. We don't need to treat each other like enemies over differing aspirations for a game.