Sign in to follow this  
Nicholander

Should The KSP Kerbol System Be Like An Analog To Our IRL Solar System, Or Should It Be More Unique?

Should The Kerbol System Be An Analog To Our Own Or Should It Be Unique?  

167 members have voted

  1. 1. Should The Kerbol System Be An Analog To Our Own Or Should It Be Unique?

    • Unique, I Mean It's Already 10x Smaller!
      35
    • Somewhat Unique
      18
    • A Mix Between Analog And Uniqueness
      96
    • Somewhat Like An Analog
      13
    • Analog, Just Look At The Similarities!
      6


Recommended Posts

I'll grant you our picture of these other systems - approx. 1,180 as of this month - is not complete. But, thanks largely to the Kepler mission, we're finding more Earth-sized planets than in previous searches, and we're finding more planets further from their suns. I think we have enough of a sample size to state that our solar system's mix of planets - terrestrials close in, Jovians/subjovians further out - is not the norm.

Well, we know that there needs to be at least two gas planets in a solar system to allow for rocky planets. We learned this from other star systems, ones with gas planets so close to their star that they're tidally locked.

And the Kepler mission is looking at a tiny portion of the sky. I would say that accounts for some bias...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somewhat like an Analog.

Because our own solar system already bears so many fantastic and interresting landscapes and things. Take the most interresting and amazing features and exeggerate them in a kerbal way, change a few things or add moons here and there to spice things up where necessary, but leave things mostly in way that it still somewhat represents our solar system.

For more exotic things like carbon planets and hot jupiters, add more stars. (squad, pls? :3 kthx)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like it to be a mix of both. Analog so I can explain what each planet is like to those not invested in the game, and unique because I want a planet ridiculously close to Kerbol, and a rapidly rotating planet, like in the original PlanetFactory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, we know that there needs to be at least two gas planets in a solar system to allow for rocky planets. We learned this from other star systems, ones with gas planets so close to their star that they're tidally locked.

And the Kepler mission is looking at a tiny portion of the sky. I would say that accounts for some bias...

Hm. Perhaps. I suppose we would have to wait until we've performed a survey of EVERY star in the Milky Way before we can conclude that the Kepler results have led us astray. I'm inclined to think that the sample size is big enough for us to make an educated guess, and from where I stand that guess that our solar system is atypical is a good one, but I could be wrong.

(Perhaps I should have made this clearer in earlier posts, but I would note that my statement that our Solar System is atypical is not a statement that life or intelligence is rare in the universe, or that habitable planets are rare. My point is more of the line of "our ideas of what is normal need to be re-examined." My apologies if I did not make this clear.)

Nevertheless, there is enough oddity in the systems we're finding that I think making the Kerbol system a near-perfect analog of our own system is a little limiting. Some analogy - especially with respect to Kerbin - is needed as the game can be used to teach basic rocketry, but some flavor of the exotic is also desirable, to help convey the concept of "who knows what is out there? Let's explore and find out."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is analogous to the solar system. All the planets and most of the moons have clear real-world counterparts.

And I think it should be. There's room for innovation certainly, but I think the general layout should be analogous to our own solar system. For example I wouldn't add a new planet between Kerbin and Duna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the mix that we currently have. On the one hand, I do like some of the analogs; Mun, Duna, and Jool being the obvious ones. I also like the places where it diverges. Eve and Minmus are both wonderful early-game targets that give you a sense of accomplishment without being too complicated.

I would still like to see at least one ringed gas planet before we're through though, for the screenshots if nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The middle of the road option is what I feel KSP is already, and I like it (I'd just like to see more in the system, that's all).

For example:

- Duna is clearly a Mars analog (position, size, color), but the atmosphere is fairly thick compared to Mars, and it's got one big moon instead of two little captured asteroids.

- Eve is clearly a Venus analog (position, heavy atmosphere), but it's atmosphere is only 5 bar (vs 92 for Venus), and it's actually bigger than Kerbin with stronger surface gravity, whereas Venus is smaller with lower gravity than the Earth. Eve also has a tiny moon, whereas Venus does not. Also Eve is violently purple with liquid seas~

It's a kinda taste of home but with the spice of different.

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