Altering how KSP Treats Stacks

[SyberSmoke]

Just today I had to bang my head against the limitations put in place on how ships are designed. My goal was to use a rocket to boost a small space plane into orbit. Eventually...it did it, but the resulting creation was...ungainly in many different ways. As you can see below, I built the plane first as I knew the shape I wanted.

The problem I ran into was how KSP treats objects. Objects must be built linearly going from A to B to C to D. But this was the issue as I wanted a less...unstable launch platform for this specific craft.

The issue was that I could not designate distinct entities with in the editor. So my plane could not be one entity, my rocket could not be another entity, and I could not create assemblies to connect the two as an inline structure. Essentially clamping one onto the other much like the Launch Stability Enhancer clamps onto the ship and then lets go.

So what I would like to suggest is three fold.

1. The ability to create, on a limited basis, distinct entities or craft as a single project. This could be expressed in many ways but both would be valid and allow the user to build on then separately. Allowing the user to work on A->D, and G->K in parallel.

2. The addition of a user created pallet for entities. This is so commonly used objects can be pulled out of the pallet or transfered in with out having to edit anything. So in this building a space plane, then placing it into the pallet and going to the rocket center where the plane can be grabbed, oriented, and placed onto a rocket. Why reinvent the wheel each time??

3. Allow the creation of, or add an object into the game, clamping objects. The simplest method is an I-Beam connecting two decouplers. On decoupler on each element your attaching. A small set of varying length objects could also be added to achieve this, but allowing the player to build unique and interesting solutions is more of what KSP is about.

I hope you enjoy the thought, please be constructive. And if your wondering, the plane got to orbit, flew great, and got Jeb home safe and sound.

Edited August 16, 2013 by SyberSmoke

[LeadMagnet]

1. and part of 2 sound alot like the "sub-assembly loader" mod. This allows you to build entities (one at a time), save them, then load then in when needed. I think this is a planned feature as it's extremely useful during building and removes the repetitiveness of building your lifting stage (for example).

The other part of 2 sounds like a "find and replace" function? Or, select a part, right click, "replace with" and select the new part from the parts list. Now I like this idea, very much.

3 doesn't make much sense to me, but I've only had 2 cups of coffee this morning! You also have to realise how parts are stored in a craft file. In the editor, to build 2 completely separate entities would require 2 separate storage files. When the editor "greys out" a stack of parts, this is the games way of telling you "...if you save, this will be deleted...".

Hope this helps.

[SyberSmoke]

1. and part of 2 sound alot like the "sub-assembly loader" mod. This allows you to build entities (one at a time), save them, then load then in when needed. I think this is a planned feature as it's extremely useful during building and removes the repetitiveness of building your lifting stage (for example).

The other part of 2 sounds like a "find and replace" function? Or, select a part, right click, "replace with" and select the new part from the parts list. Now I like this idea, very much.

3 doesn't make much sense to me, but I've only had 2 cups of coffee this morning! You also have to realise how parts are stored in a craft file. In the editor, to build 2 completely separate entities would require 2 separate storage files. When the editor "greys out" a stack of parts, this is the games way of telling you "...if you save, this will be deleted...".

Hope this helps.

To help you with 3, the thing I was trying to make was a decoupler, but instead of using a stack decouple (you can see that would not work because of the jet engine) I wanted a pair of decouplers connected via I-beams. The I-Beams would be the connection between the rocket and the plain portions with the decouplers releasing the two when the decouplers blew them away. This is what I was calling a clamp.

The second thought stemmed from the first, an object with arms that attach to the ship like the LSE's. These could be used for payloads or for objects that do not fit well with the use of a Stack Decoupler or a decoupler. You could also place it more or less free form on an object to tune the balance due to the asymmetric nature of some parts. Once placed, it would act as a mounting point for a stack. Or mounted to a stack and ready to hold a payload, depending on how you build your craft.

That was the thought at least.

Concept Object: Payload Clamp

Description: The payload clamp acts like the Launch Stability Enhancer for payloads on the ship. The base comes in two sizes, Medium and Large. From the base the Payload Clamp has arms that rise from the base and attach to the payload. The arms must be symmetrical. It may be possible to allow the arms to be placed using Symmetry mode selecting the numer of arms with the remainder of the base filled in.

On the arms are adjusting pads that will attach to an object holding it in place. The pads will adjust to fit the objects shape to get a good connection or hold with the arms adjusting their angles to facilitate a good grip.

When activated, the pads will release and the arms will rotate from a pivot point in the bass to be inline with he plane of the base (think Starfish). The payload will be released and allowed to escape under it's own thrust.

Alternately, the clamp could be used as a grabbing mechanism. The arms could be powered using electric motors, when activated the arms will close and the pads will seek to attach to an object they strike. This would facilitate the capture and movement of orbital debris with out the risk of it jostling or bouncing.

Better explanation.

Edited August 16, 2013 by SyberSmoke

[allmappedout]

Off topic...but I read this as Altering how KSP treats snacks. I was hoping for a novel approach to Kerbal food production

[SyberSmoke]

Well Jeb does need his snacks. But yeah, a little off topic there. :-)