The Yellow Dart

Good post.

I honestly don't know what the plan is for multiplayer, as far as frame rate and physics calculations. Right now there is still a big pause whenever a decent sized ship enters physics range, and frame rate goes way down. Imagine with 3 or 4 or more people trying to play in the same space, it is just going to be unplayable.

What? Did you read the first post? Because it is the exact opposite of that. I said nothing about Mun science, the idea is actually to make players leave the Kerbin system sooner. Remove contract science (or just add the option to do so in the difficulty menu) because 1) it makes science too easy on hard mode (hard mode makes you grind out funds from contracts and you are getting science the whole time without even trying while doing contracts you have to do anyway to progress), and 2) it makes science unlimited while the tech tree takes a finite amount off science to complete, which throws off the balance of the game somewhat.

Oooh! I just thought of another possibility. Since the tech tree is limited, we want science to be limited as well, right? Otherwise you can finish it without leaving the Kerbin. So what if the slider in the difficulty menu, rather than adjusting a global percentage of science received, adjusted the total amount of science available in game, with the minimum value being the total value of the whole tech tree (an incredibly hard game where you have to clean every bit of science from the entire solar system). This could include a certain predetermined percentage of the science that would come from contracts, so that you can still get science from contracts, but it is exhaustible and spread out over different planets, i.e. a certain amount of contract science for the Mun, a different amount for Dune etc. This way you could easily and dependably adjust the science difficulty, determining how far you have to go/how many planets you must visit to complete the tree. - - - Updated - - - But when you put the game in hard mode, you have to do lots of contracts just to stay above water, and keep advancing, all the while earning small amounts of science for something you had to do anyway. So what I'm saying is that increasing difficulty actually makes this aspect of the game easier, and that is a problem to me.

Yeah, it is definitely better, the main problem is that science gets easier as money gets harder, since you are already going to do loads of contracts anyway if you are in hard mode. I nickel and dime'd my way through a couple different nodes trying to earn enough to upgrade the VAB. It should shouldn't work that way. I am talking strictly from a gameplay perspective, in that it kind of breaks the whole science/tech tree aspect when science is essentially unlimited. You can unlock the whole tree just putting satellites around Kerbin and the Mun if you just keep accepting them. Agreed that plenty of science would be gained from many different contracts. But if we are going to talk about realism and science, you don't really learn a whole lot about airplane wings by launching satellites, yet I just unlocked a butt load of them with satellite science. So yeah, we probably shouldn't talk about realism and the science system.

Yeah, I've noticed that it is less now, which is good, but it is still technically unlimited while the tech tree is not. In 0.90 I used a little mod someone made to remove it, but it seems like it should be a stock option, since we have so many other difficulty options now anyway.

I've been wondering if others feel like I do on this subject. This is a problem I've hade with the contract system since its inception. The fact that contracts inevitably have science attached to them means that science stops having any value, especially as you increase the difficulty settings. The main purpose of the contract system was to create an economy so we can earn money to pay for a space program, and a secondary purpose was added with the reputation system. The problem with adding science to contracts as well is that, when funds are in short supply you are force to grind a bit and do a lot of small contracts to make enough to move foreword, but since you are earning science the whole time you are rarely limited by science. You generally have plenty of science for where you are in the game and so science stops mattering. And what's worse is that when you increase the difficulty, science matters less and less because you are forced to do more and more. I would prefer a fixed amount of science with none coming from contracts, or at least a more limited system where there is only small bits of science coming from the one time contracts, like achieve orbit Or return from the Mun, with none ever coming from the endlessly regenerating contracts. But a bare minimum would be to add it as an option in the Difficulty Menu. As it is, you can only decrease overall percent science received, but with unlimited contract science, this isn't very helpful. Any thoughts on this?

I think we need a stock launch simulator. I'd like to be able to turn off reverts in the difficulty menu but I need to be able to test craft out without spend a full launch worth of funds.

Also, if you delete your root part, and reselect it from the parts menu, it will reappear in the exact center.

After starting a fresh install, I kept thinking "something is missing... what is it?" Your mod is so perfectly Kerbal, I always forget it isn't stock. Thanks for it!

We (humanity) are no where near having the ability to manufacture elements from other elements, much less on an industrial scale with portable machines (and no, there is no such thing as xenon ore). Even if you don't consider the real world scientific problems with "making xenon", it makes sense as a gameplay element. Ion engines are crazy efficient, way more efficient than anything else in the game, so it makes sense that, as a drawback/trade off for the efficiency, you can only get it from Kerbin.

Yeah, I think a lot of the anger and vitriol in the 1.0 response is coming from feelings of "I TOLD YOU THIS WOULD HAPPEN!! But did you listen? NooOOOooo" in regards to releasing 1.0 so fast/not doing more Beta releases. A pretty large part of the community voiced concern over the matter and the devs went ahead with it anyway. Too a degree, I think the community was right; 1.0 would have been a lot cleaner and smoother if the new features had gotten a 0.95 release (flipping capsules and überchutes would certainly have gotten noticed then). On the other hand Squad did a pretty good job of it, considering the circumstances, and I think as long as they keep fixing major issues quickly, it will be water under the bridge before too long.

I killed her... I shouldn't have tried to play 1.0 for the first time with a 6 month baby in my lap. We came down over the mountains, I didn't hit the 'chutes soon enough. BAM.

Thanks for all the answers. I think one person in a 1.0 video said that staying close to terminal velocity, whatever it would be for the craft & altitude, would make it easier to control/ harder to lose control of. Any idea if that is acurate or not?

Has anyone figured out the new terminal velocities for various altitudes yet? Not sure how you'd go about finding them but I had the old one memorized and the sooner I can get started on the new one, the better.

Yeah, I think the devs said that if your computer took 40 secs to load something in past versions, it will take around 12 seconds in 1.0

Awesome! That slider sounds great, just what I was hoping for. Side question: anyone heard about removing science from contracts in 1.0? I've been using a mod to do it because there is just way too science if you leave it in. I've been hoping it would be added to the difficulty menu.

I Agree that it looks too easy. The Mun at least is mostly covered by ore. I would prefer the surface be mostly barren, with small islands of ore (learn precise landing technique). I would also like it to be kind of odds based, like you see a spot of high concentration from above and it means that there is 75% chance there will be ore under you when you land. i.e. a square kilometer of high concentration will be divided into 100 blocks 75 of which have ore, the rest don't. There is only so much you can tell from orbit, without landing and actually seeing if it's there. This would also encourage adding wheels to your rig. (This just a tangent, not important to the cheating question).

The desert on the west coast should be the Homecoming Desert. The large island to the northeast of KSC should be Daytrip Island. The peninsula due east of KSC could be the Negative Return Peninsula.

But didn't those certain rulesets go out the window when the difficulty menu came? Anyone can change the game to make it very easy now and it is a stock part of the game. Just like the isru will be a stock game mechanic, so everyone will have access to it. Not a cheat. Not a Godmode or a code. This is just a case of not coping with inevitable change. I'm sure people said the same thing when the nuke was introduced, or maneuver nodes. Both made getting around the solar system a lot easier.

How can it be cheating? If you use sandbox mode, you use whatever parts you want anyways without limitations. If you think it is too easy with isru, don't use them, just like the nuke or ions. In career they are towards the end of the tech tree and you have to earn access to those parts. If the tech tree is too easy, that is a separate issue fixable by the difficulty settings. There is no cheating KSP, unless you are cheating your own personal rules. On a side note, I do hope the isru family of parts are HEAVY. I want it to be very hard to get them out there and setup to mine.

I think the important question to answer is who do we want to be interested in space? The general public, or commercial interests? The moon is, imo, a better way to reinvigorate public interest in human space exploration. This will do a better job of improving NASA's budget through public support but the downside here, to me, is that NASA is slow moving due to budget concerns and bureaucracy (through no fault of their own), and human space travel is even slower (for good reason). ARM has a good chance of jumpstarting commercial space travel in a big way. Getting an asteroid back here to be fully analyzed will show entrepreneurs and investors how well they can do in deep space. A good sized asteroid could have more precious metals in it that can be mined in a dozen strip mines on earth. In the long run, I think this is more important and do more for humanity by normalizing both robotic and human space travel faster than a moon mission would. And I would fully support the idea of just getting a boulder from the surface of a larger asteroid, because it greatly simplifies the mission, meaning it could leave sooner, meaning I could get a condo on Mars sooner. The major downside of ARM is a severe lack of moonbases.

Wow, very pretty. Know if it works with EVE clouds? If it doesn't, that will be a tough choice cause that looks amazing.

Which mods? And how do they impact regular gameplay performance?

Yup! That's the one! That thing is incredible. Probably won't be possible, or at least it will be a lot more difficult, once aerodynamics gets fixed.