Sign in to follow this  
jpkerman

.22 playtesting being waylaid by mods?

Recommended Posts

It seems that testing the new tech tree is being hijacked by all the mod makers adding their parts to the tech tree and reorganizing the nodes and such. it seems that Squad cannot release their vision for KSP without it being turned into Star Trek/Dr. Who/NASA/ Red Dwarf/Space X and the Soviet Space program by all the modders. Is anybody but Squad testing the released version of the game? I am afraid the game is going to get side tracked more than helped by the mod sub culture.

-Yes, I have my favorite mods and parts, I'm not against the fine features they have inspired or 'blazed the trail' on, but with this last release a mod reordering the tech tree was out before any real feedback was being posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's certainly people who don't use part mods for career mode, I happen to be one of them. Squad also has experimentals to make sure stuff works and is fairly well-balanced.

That being said, the Tech Tree is working great! No complaints here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont know the first thing about programming (and perhaps a method like this already exists ingame as a feature and im just completely oblivious because as of now the core game satisfies me greatly), but would it be possible to have like an algorithm or something that would scan the type and properties of modded parts, and autonomously lob them into the already existing tier groups?

for example

a mod adds a new landing leg. the game recognizes this, and, based on its specifications, decides to put it into the "advanced landing" group

and maybe it could go even further and, with preset tier science costs, decide that if a part was too great even for the most advanced part type (a landing leg that exceeds the capabilities of the best stock leg by enough amount), it could put it into a previously unknown skill group such as "superior landing" or some such

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that the stock tech tree is advertised as an introduction tool for new players I have absolutely no desire to use it. Thankfully SQUAD allowed me to change how much science I could gain per experiment and some modders created a new tree on patch day, so now I have a fulfilling tech tree fit for an experienced player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been trying not to install any mods after updating, even something as simple as flight engineer to view TWR and Delta-V while designing. I have also been trying to not use the revert, attempting to design craft as safely as possible. I have stuck with the first part, but it is really frustrating botching every Mun landing or return attempt. I am running out of Kerbals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play without mods. I will continue playing without mods very likely up until release of version 1.0.

I might do some mods before that though... They talked a while back about Updating the space port and linking it into the game itself so while playing you could browse and download and install mods without needing to close down KSP or figure out where to copy what file... Mods are a part of KSP and when they add features specifically geared toward mod integration then I'll play with those features... until then I go modless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I am gonna stop you right here. Not only did they go through something like 27 versions of the tree during testing (per today's SquadTV stream, which I expect also spawned this thread) but you only need to look through the last few pages of this forum and the suggestion forum for a multitude of posts about the stock tree and the changes people desire.

Let's not invent trouble that is not there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend (and did myself) playing though the stock career mode at least once without using any mods whatsoever.

I had a lot of fun with it, but after playing around with it found the distribution of the parts in the tree very odd.

My abusing all my years of knowledge in KSP, I managed to make 710 science points in a single, TL0 mission. With that, I can easily finish the rest of the tree in another trip.

The way science works right now isn't very balanced, and the tree doesn't fit every play style. A lot of people were questioning the position of the aero parts and probes, and I fully agree with them.

And is for that reason that I jumped right into modding the tree as soon as it was possible, to allow people to try other ways to organize it, and share them.

The tree modding tools aren't "must use" mods, they are there just for if you also find that the stock tech tree could be organized in some other way and would like to try it. If the stock one looks good for you, even better :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are modding it because they don't like Squad's vision. Squad is going down the path Microsoft went with Microsoft Flight, ignoring the 'hardcore' realistic/challenging audience in favor of a a 'silent majority' of easily bored arcade gamers because they apparently can't believe that most of us might actually want a realistic experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squad intentionally made the tech tree easy to mod for a reason. Let people play haw they want.

They actually intended for it not to be modded so they could get playtesting data (Max has said this), and they planned on making an API for it once they feel like making it (unlikely).

I am glad that it is being modded though as the nodes make no logical sense as a career system, like how you get plane parts too late for them to be worth using for science. Squad forgot about the tutorial system they added so they made a tech tree that caters towards brand new players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They actually intended for it not to be modded so they could get playtesting data (Max has said this)

I think the results of playtesting are already in. In the form of many people looking for modded trees. I suspect weeks from now there will be a popular modded tree which may influence the final Squad KSP tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suspect weeks from now there will be a popular modded tree which may influence the final Squad KSP tree.

I agree with this 99%, but I also think Squad will release a current-career-style-tech-tree as a tutorial game mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

plenty of people playing stock.

what you can see and what the developers can see are very different. You need to stop thinking that your over excited imagination is the same as the developers thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my heavy mod build... but my current build of 0.22 is stock except for including Telemachus to drive my remote instruments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having probes first is very realistic. Do you have any idea how hard it is to space proof a computer that can fly a rocket in space with complex maneuvers? All Sputnik had to do was circularize its orbit and then emit a signal at regular intervals so that the Soviets could synchronize their ICBM launches.

Our probes didn't do much either until after we got men on the moon. Circularize, emit radio signal; that was it.

And I think the circularizing part might even have been hardwired into the rocket itself and not controlled by the computers at all.

Edited by Nobody_1707

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They actually intended for it not to be modded so they could get playtesting data (Max has said this)

Yeah I'm gonna need that citation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I'm gonna need that citation.

What he means (and what Maxmaps actually said) is that the tech tree nodes cannot be moved around and new nodes cannot be created. And that part is intended. It is however intended to let the mods into the tech tree, there are even dedicated hidden tech nodes for some mods (such as B9 Aerospace, MechJeb, KAS, etc.)

Actual quote of Max here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not having probes first is very realistic. Do you have any idea how hard it is to space proof a computer that can fly a rocket in space with complex maneuvers? All Sputnik had to do was circularize its orbit and then emit a signal at regular intervals so that the Soviets could synchronize their ICBM launches.

Our probes didn't do much either until after we got men on the moon. Circularize, emit radio signal; that was it.

And I think the circularizing part might even have been hardwired into the rocket itself and not controlled by the computers at all.

Those early rockets relied on gyros, vary primitive hard wired computers, timers, and tons of slide rule calculations to time the burns and launch profile to achieve orbit. As an example of that difficulty was the first US satellite launched from a Redstone rocket in which a payload stack of three stages of non steerable spin stabilized SRB sounding rockets were used to achieve orbit. Certainly, a similar first step could be achieved with the Stayputnik, a battery pack, and a single stage sub orbital, later two stage orbiting with recovery needed for full credit of the mission. Then, the tree could be unlocked for manned missions.

BTY, One small probe design from 0.21 using Novapunch mods for flight, now flies stable using the gyros from the Stayputnik alone. The SAS ring in the photo is no longer needed. As the mod itself was not change, this new stability could be from improvements made to the Stayputnik itself.

TD8RZk9.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think it's a good thing that modders jump on the techtree right away.

Devs only need to monitor which techtree reorganisation is most popular, see why it's most popular, and boom, extra info to make vanilla better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, having only probes to start with makes it impossible to do science. The current first science points are from crew reports, EVA reports or surface samples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the current tech tree. It actually encouraged me to go back to the Mun and look for new areas to do science, and got me to do my first stock Duna mission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not having probes first is very realistic. Do you have any idea how hard it is to space proof a computer that can fly a rocket in space with complex maneuvers? All Sputnik had to do was circularize its orbit and then emit a signal at regular intervals so that the Soviets could synchronize their ICBM launches.

Our probes didn't do much either until after we got men on the moon. Circularize, emit radio signal; that was it.

Umm... you might want to look into the Surveyor probes, which *landed* on the moon before Apollo did. Or the Mariner probes, which went deep into the Solar system long before Apollo even flew.. Etc... Etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Umm... you might want to look into the Surveyor probes, which *landed* on the moon before Apollo did. Or the Mariner probes, which went deep into the Solar system long before Apollo even flew.. Etc... Etc...
Don't forget the explorer series...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that testing the new tech tree is being hijacked by all the mod makers adding their parts to the tech tree and reorganizing the nodes and such. it seems that Squad cannot release their vision for KSP without it being turned into Star Trek/Dr. Who/NASA/ Red Dwarf/Space X and the Soviet Space program by all the modders. Is anybody but Squad testing the released version of the game? I am afraid the game is going to get side tracked more than helped by the mod sub culture.

-Yes, I have my favorite mods and parts, I'm not against the fine features they have inspired or 'blazed the trail' on, but with this last release a mod reordering the tech tree was out before any real feedback was being posted.

Yeah... no.

First of all, Squad isn't - despite what some more enamored fanboys think - an infallible developer who's 'vision' for the game is some messianic prophecy delivered from Christ himself.

Regarding Squad's 'vision' be coopted by mods in general: This is Squad's fault, ultimately. People are 'side-tracking' the game with Kethane, because Squad has dragged their feet for over six months now on the resources system. People are 'side-tracking' the game with mechjeb / Engineer because Squad has consistently failed to provide us tools that allow us to monitor aspects of rocket design and flight. People are 'side-tracking' the game with giant part mods because Squad has more or less completely stopped giving us new parts to play with aside from a couple niche things here and there.

If it weren't for mods, very few people would be playing the game right now because the game would get incredibly dull. The reason people are upset with science is because science ended up being incredibly dull. There's no depth to it, it's easily exploitable, and the tech tree is ridiculously easy to unlock and unintuitive.

If people are 'side-tracking' the tech tree, it's because they're UNHAPPY with the current version. They can either learn from this or just stick with the version people don't like. I personally couldn't care less what 'Squad's Vision' is, I will load up with gigs of mods, because the game is coming along far too slowly and too meekly for me to care to play it stock.

I agree with this 99%, but I also think Squad will release a current-career-style-tech-tree as a tutorial game mode.

Which makes zero sense.

The confusing parts of this game have almost nothing at all to do with 'I have too many parts' and 'these engines are too good'. How does the tech tree teach you about orbital mechanics, docking, RCS, SAS, and how aerodynamics in the game work?

Also, having only probes to start with makes it impossible to do science. The current first science points are from crew reports, EVA reports or surface samples.

Sounds like a problem with lack of scientific instruments like, I don't know, a camera?

Edited by Frostiken

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.

Sign in to follow this