SkyRex94

As much as i like the creative ideas from everyone, but i don't want to see this as stock, really! I like KSP being the (almost) only semi-realistic-plausible space game and would like it if it stays that way, so no Sci-Fi-unrealism with X-Rings or Planets in the Sun. I think Mods are good for that for all the people who want to play it that way but not for stock. I, for my part, plan on creating a Planet pack as soon as Kopernicus Mod has reached final release, where i plan to 'complete' the Kerbol-System in a realistic-stock-ish way, as we probably won't see new stock planets anytime soon. Keeping it realistic (in scale) but also diverse. SO no X-Rings, no Retrograde PLANETS (Moons could be) no new Stars orbiting Kerbol and no Heavy Objects on highly inclined orbits(like Sentar) as this doesn't resemble the real nature and as said i like KSP being plausible and not another Sci-Fi-Game. I shared my idea of a system a little earlier in this thread already. ( Some addition on that: I said i planned GP3 'maybe' to be a Super-Earth. Screw that, i did a little Research and any heavy objects as far out as Gas Giants are possible will form a Gas Giant as the solar wind isn't blowing the gas away. So GP3 will be a Gas Giant. IF i'll add a Super Eart it has to be closer to Kerbol than Kerbin and the system is pretty dense there already so i don't know yet) But please leave the unrealism for mods in KSP. Don't turn Stock into another typical Sci-Fi-Game. Stock needs more varieaty as i said in various threads, but realistic nature still offers thousands of diverse possibilities that aren't implemented, before there is any need to go unrealistic. NO criticism of your ideas, i think it could be a good mod, and also the X-Rings would offer a great view and the sun-planet an awesome challenge but it would definetly push the stock game totally in Sci-Fiction territority and destroying the FEELING I ( and probably others) like particulary about KSP. (As for really far objects, when i'll make the planet pack i'm planning on implementing a Pluto-Charon object really far out. And i'm planning to implement Comets on highly eccentric orbits (Ap higher than Pluto-equvalent, Pe lower than Moho) that will offer a real challenge while being realistic too)

These are some of the reasons why i thougth about the Endgame Content and the Science system Overhaul. And if complexity arrives in later game instead of systems that affect the start it'll be good for both sides. Easy start for new Players but challenging for the advanced. please leave your opinions about the additions i made to the first post.

NO lets not give Tylo any atmosphere! if you'd read the post before you know thats totally plausbile that there are moons without an atmosphere that are heavy and light ones that have one. Look at Titan and than look at Ganymede or Mercury , Titan is much lighter than these non-atmo-bodies but has a very very thick atmosphere. Tylo is the aquivalent of Ganymede and i think its great to have a heavy moon without an atmosphere. Make the surface more interesting yes, but not add an atmosphere to Tylo.

Atmosphere's not only depend on mass. Only because a body is heavy enough to have one doesn't mean it has one becaue there are other factors too. Look at our Solar System : Ganymede has no atmosphere (or maybe just a very thin one like the moon) BUT Titan has a denser atmosphere than our Earth although it is smaller and lighter than ganymede!!! It also depends on varoius other things. Which elements are available on that body to form an atmosphere, at which tempereature they are in gas form, how high is the actual temperature on that body and so on In short: there are bodies which are to small to have an atmosphere yes, and there are ones that are so heavy they certsainly have one. BUT there is a range between these sizes were a body can but don't need to have an atmosphere. (The scale-downsize in mind) KSP's atmospheres and the bodies that haven't one are totally realistic (or plausible).

I'm really glad to see all these positive responses and ideas and disscusion on this Thread and my Post. That confirms that more people here would like to see some changes to some important parts of the game (e.g.Science System !) Let's hope the devs stumble upon this and maybe leave a comment about the significant suggestions and ideas. Additionally i had some more ideas and updated the First post. Don't worry you don't have to read everything again if you have already , i marked all the lines where i added something.

I know that Gravity is not equally spread in Real Life. Biggest Example is that the 'dark' side of the moon is significantly lighter than the side facing Earth. But that's for bigger areas if you go high up and it seems not realistic that measuring the Coast or Slopes from really far away makes any difference to the neighboring biome. It makes sense for big things like Water or Poles, but for KSP i think its pretty dumb gameplay wise as you have to (without mods) trial and error to get readings of small biomes like Coasts to get a reading from high up. And if you measure the values from space near you'd scale them up to get the bigger picture, so i think gameplay wise its no fun trying to hit biomes from high up.

I didn't mean to erase the Detector. I meant that it's stupid to get different results in HIGH SPACE for different biomes. I don't think the Graviolis are any different 1 million km over Desert than over Grasslands. That's what i meant.

Eve is an Extremly hostile planet. Its based on Venus after all. Venus is not a place you want to go and there is most probably no life on Venus. Sure in KSP it's not literally Deadly because there isn't any heat or air-pressure damage, otherwise it would be very hard to even land there. The Oceans are probably no water but maybe Mercury or maybe some mixture of materials, which are liquid under this pressure. And even Water does not mean Life. Life probably needs Water but Water doesn't produce life. As known today elementary Oxygen is a much better indicator for life, since nature seems to bind it in molecules and just life-forms produe new O2 and O3. So Laythe has probably some Plant-micro-life. But i dont think Eve has. Google for Venus and compare.

Things left to do This Thread shall be a mix of disscussion and suggestion about what critical features are left to reach a good so called scope completion and after that whats left to finish the Game. I'll try to draw a logical guess based on what the devs said already, the assumption that scope completion is not soo far away and logical theories what is left to do gameplay-wise. Starting Point is the current Version 0.24.2 *Lines starting with '*' were added after an edit. Atmospheres: - Plausible Aerodynamics (maybe something like NEAR) and maybe simple reentry heat - More/redone plane parts (already confirmed) Activities: Most important point! so i'll write a little more: Problem is as we all know, there is literally nothing to do after landing on another planet (or even on Kerbin) unless clicking on parts. And simply adding biomes to everywhere isn't the answer, because there is nothing to do on mun and minmus too. A ressource system won't happen, they said, okay so which options are there? If you're not Roleplaying we have three possible motivators Funds,Rep and Science. Funds and Rep could get attention in this case if they implement more complex Contracts e.g. Launching Sattelites, Setup Bases, Timed stays like 50 days on surface, and so on. But the real Motivator has to be Science! Why we're doing mission in Real Life? Money for bringing things for a customer from A to B OR Exploration and Research of the unknown. And i think the contracts are mainly providing the funding of your Exploration Missions. It's an Exploration Game after all,so the Exploration has to be fun (not just the way to get to destination). That leads to: Science System Overhaul: I think we agree simply clicking on several parts to finish the experiments is not realy Exploring-Fun. So i think there should be certain ways of actually performing the Experiments (Maybe Squad can use parts of the Contract-conditions-system Code for that) First, you can't do everything everywhere. And you can't do biome specific things in 'high' Orbit, like the gravioli, please remove that that makes absolutly no sense.Suggestions for specific Experiments: - only one remaining clicking Experiment which provides Data Readouts like Temp. and Pressure - a Terrain Analysis, which requires you to move a certain distance over the Surface ( for Rovers) - a long time Lab Experiment (Maybe use the current Lab for it) Requires to be manned and requires a certain time in the enviroment (Surface,Space) before yielding the Science ( Base and Station Use) e.g. 100 days - a drill-core Experimet, analysises the deeper regions of the ground, but needs like 2 hours to finish - a dive exploration Experiment , like above but only in 'splashed down' - an impactor experiment, working as in interstellar, with a experiment active while an impactor has to hit the ground - a meassurement experiment, requires a minimum of three experiments further apart than e.g. 10 km to measure out the planet (giving multiple landing sites a better purpose) - maybe a solar particle collector and analysis, works only in Orbit, has a readout for magnetosphere and only yields the science if in high enough particle density aka magnetic field density (or solar orbit) so you have to find the place first. - a weather research experiment, requires to be in atmosphere and under 10 m/s relative to surface. maybe requires a ballon part - an orbital observing experiment, requires to be in orbit for a long time around a body e.g. 1 year. *Maybe modelled like a Telescope - and maybe seasonal Experiments, which yield only 25% of its value per season of the planet, so a permanently base makes sense *-a life behavior experiment, maybe like the Science Jr. Bay for researching Plants and microorganisms exposed to the enviroment, requires some random(!) time to finish in each situation, so you may have to check back after some time to check if something actually happend. *- a Assemble-First-Experiment: consists of a part, which can be docked to itself and form a bigger structure. Maybe something like a Particle-Accelerator. So you'd have a slight curved Part, but if you' dock like 20 of them together it'd form a Ring with 1km Radius. Then you can ran the Experiment in that Enviroment (not biome specific), but you'd have to launch several missions first and assemble it somewhere to do so and it makes a nice objective for a big base or station. (It could actually be some kind of a substitude for Ressources, if actually no ressources will be implemented, and it'd be only one new part and some Coding to add a deeper space-building purpose) Biomes shouldn't yield the same Science, the first you land in should give you 100%, the second 50% , 3rd 40% , 4th 30%... That would encourage to explore new planets but not punish to stay. And the most new Knowledge is gained on the First Landing in Real Life too. Recreated Tech Tree, more logical and more Nodes. Either make it more expensive in total or decrease the science payout of experiments and contracts. * Adding new non-Part Nodes for Endgame--- more about that further down. And a basic Antenna Range, so the big Dishes have actually a use. (But after all that won't lead to big bases , but it doesn't in real life either. After Apollo Missions no one got there again, because right know there is no reason to do so. Infrastructure comes with ressorces (for the RL moon that could be Helium-3 sometime), so if there won't be one Ressource in KSP you have to get a Mod for senseful Base building, but thats also realistic.) So this and more Contracts are the possibilities squad has to make more things to do without implementing all new systems. Activities-continued: we need more things to do on EVA. In real they do Experiments, Repair things and construct things. We can do Science and repair some things. To construct things we need a simple System for building. Maybe don't even new Parts, just that every EVA-Suit has two new things, a Ground structure and a Pipe. Infinite, like the infinite Flags in the suit. And apply them in the way KAS does it. Maybe also a strut. so you can build structures and maybe even repair crashed ships. Image the situation you crashed on landing and something important (engine) got off but didn't explode? you could strut and pipe it back onto the ship and try to fly this weirdly shaped ship somehow back instead of reload or send rescue. (But this is not as important as the Science Overhaul) * make one or two of the suggested Experiments in Science system overhaul require to be set up and activated by a Kerbal on EVA, maybe the Life behavior Exp. , would be another addition for Station and Base To-Do-Things. (Checking the Data also requires interaction with a Kerbal) Dangers: -on geological active planets there could be actual dangers like Geysiers or Vulanos that would make it more difficult and interesting than regions like Mun or Ike.(but thats probably not important for Scope Completion) *- Actual gameplay-affecting storms on atmosphere planets, like Dust storms on Duna reducing view and solar energy and adding force(Wind) to your ship so be carefull with light rovers on slopes End-Game-Things: I think Squad seems to focus mainly on new players, but they shouldn't forget about the experienced ones that can complete the tech tree really fast. But there is much more Science so i have a really simple suggestion: Add Endgame Nodes in the TechTree after you've got all the Parts: Really expensive and they don't unlock new Parts, but maybe some small new objects (planets as soon as new ones are implemented) like maybe Comets (really small and weird orbit and hard to reach) that got discovered with the invested science. E.g. if KSP gets 3 Comets, there could be 3 EndGame Nodes to unlock them and give the Science a purpose. And after that One FINAL Node which requires so much Science, that you have to get 90 % of all the Science to get there and unlock it. It would unlock Nothing. Just maybe a long Kerbal-ish-written Text about new Discoveries in the rest of the space. But nothing gameplay-wise, since you Explored everything at that point. Would give the Tech Tree an actual final End where the hole Kerbol system was fully understood by the Kerbals. *Another thing to unlock through tech tree could be the ability to track asteroids. Like advanced telescopes and maths allow Kerbals to identify these unknown dots in the Telescope-Pictures. After all Newbies won't capture an asteroid first so implementing the ability in the techtree is more purpose for science with all parts already unlocked. So when all the above or similar things are implemented i would call it feature complete. After that there comes the Content: - Visual Enhancements - Immersive Enhancements (Clouds, Solar Flares, Dust Storms...) - More Planets to get more diversity (don't basically repeat/copy the current ones, there are things that aren't even in the game yet. Look at our Solar System) - Sound Enhancements - Some more Parts - Performance Enhancements - more Contract Types - more IVAs If i forgot something what you think will be in Scope Completion let me know. If someone from Squad Reads this and if you can talk about it, please leave a post, espeacially regarding the Science System Overhaul. Besides please leave your opinions about the suggesting parts and disscuss what you think will/should be implemented to make the Exploring more Fun and if you believe that squad actually implements them?

I use a little trick mounting some temporary hold ontop off the plane, assemble the Payload there and then put it in the bay as a hole. Since subassemblies don't surfaceattach you can get it to the attachment node of the cargo bay. Delete temporare payload hold point--> finished.

You really should do a Aerodynamic Overhaul Mod. I used FAR, now i'm using NEAR , realistic Aerodynamics but not as complicated as FAR and no High dynamic pressure, you should try it. And that : "Realistic rocket profiles (no square stacks, asparagus staging, Skyscraper rockets or mid rocket boosters)" becomes neccesary than, because you can't get anything else into Orbit without spinning your Rocket out of control.

You can only make Jool Templates in PF, thats why i'm waiting for Kopernicus. and it seems quite buggy sometimes. It was just for the looks, not for actual gameplay yet. And i'm not a graphics guy, so here's how i made the texture : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/89041-Question-Making-Texture-only-having-round-Pics

Planet Factory CE on my Mod-Testing-KSP-Install

I have tested Space Engine, but all the gas giants doesn't look like i want it. They all have quite continuous stripes around them and not so scattered clouds. (like the ones on Neptune but preferable more) Space Engine seems good for solid Planets but not so good for Gas Giants IMO.

So long term (Around the start of September) i plan to start working on my own Planet Pack, with the Kopernicus Mod (which will hopefully have a public WIP Version till then) Just found a nice Site : http://planetmaker.wthr.us And by trying a little i got IMO a really nice Gas Giant : Problem is: The Site is just for Looks, you can't export a Texture So to get a First feeling in KSP i took some straight on Screenshots and glued my own Texture together with Pic-Parts and a lot oft struts. Thats how it looks: http://imgur.com/a/e3j4a#0 Not particualr bad but way from the generated Original (And the Polar Regions really look bad) So question for Graphic-talents (I'm not so good with graphics) Is there a good way making a flat texture out of round planet front pics (assuming you have 4 or 8 different, from all Sides, but not straightly lined up so the lines could be slightly off)?

I just slapped together the first lousy Syterion Texture Prototype. Just to get the feeling what i want to do when Kopernicus is finished. Syterion Prototype : http://imgur.com/a/e3j4a/

Sure, here, it is in active developement sice several days and looks very very promising IMO : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88168-Early-development-0-24-Kopernicus-Planetary-System-Modifier

Yes i didn't mentioned that too. I'm also planning for rather flat inclinations ( unless for relative light objects), because i want it to be realistic and believable. Many of the PF mods have either the planets or th moons on totally unrealistic inclinations. You wont have a huge Gas Giant on a weird Inclination in Real Life ( unless it got captured, what's also unlikley for heavy gas giants, the same thing with heavy moons.) The lighter, the bigger can be the inclination without getting absurde. You see that in Real life and also in Stock KSP ( Moho and Eeloo are small and have bigger inclination, the heavier the more plane they become, or looking at the moons of Jool, the three main moons are plane , Bop is light and can have a inclination) I testet Sentar and Urania and have seen pictures of others and everytime i thought: " How in Hell should such a Formation form and be stable?!?!? that doesn't make any sense at all!"

I recently had an Idea for a GP2 Name : Syterion Your ideas are very similar to mine, like GP3 as a SuperEarth. I've made a post in the Planet Ideas Thread recently. And i'm thinking about making my own pack too, as soon as the replacement Mod for Planet Factory (called Kopernicus) is finished. (So pleace don't steal Syterion as a name , as i think about it , although i would wish it as the stock name) Here's my post from the other Trhead :

when you need less than 800 m/s to return from Vall polar low Orbit to Kerbin. Just done that. Setting up the node for this really feels like Serious Player

Do you plan on making it possible to create custom Gas Giants? With custom i mean variable size (not only 6000km) and various Atmosphere and so on. I've tried PF CE and that was the thing that annoyed me the most. Besides: I like the look of the things your doing so far. Keep it on.

Just had some ideas for better experiments, posted it in another thread, but i think it would fit here too: As suggested from somebody in another thread it could change, that you have to fullfill a certain task for a certain expirement to do it. As an example i could think of the impact-probe-experiment from interstellar. So maybe condense the Data-Readout-Experiments (Temp. Pressure, Gravioli, Seismic) into one single experiment calles Physical-Data or something, which you can do everywhere by the click of a button, but change the others and add new ones where you have to do something. Some Ideas: - The described Physics-Data-Readout-Experiment - an Impactor Experiment (like the changed accelometer in interstellar) requiring an impactor on the surface - a long term observing experiment (needs to run a certain time on the surface maybe 100 days before yielding the science) - a ground behavior Experiment (needs to drive for a certain distance on the Surface of that biome before yielding science) - a dive explorer Experiment (can only be done in 'splashed down' and needs maybe one day to finish) - a drill core Experiment (as above, only in case 'landed') - a big scale observing Experiment (can only be done in space low and high and requires time, like the long term observing)(so a proper use for sattelites) - a Kerbal life endurance Experiment(certain time in a Lab on the Surface of the planet) (- maybe a weather baloon experiment, but we would need a helium baloon part, which can only be done while flying or while in high atmosphere. And would yield more science if brought back so getting the data out of the baloon again is the next challenge)

As good as the idea may be there are some problems: Timewarp, everything that is related to time can simply be timewarped away (If you're not RP ). And for the more experiments i would say 'yes, but' they have to readdress the click-and-done mechanic of the experiments, otherwise it will be just end up as more clicking and tacking more stuff with you. As suggested from somebody in another thread it could change, that you have to fullfill a certain task for a certain expirement to do it. As an example i could think of the impact-probe-experiment from interstellar. So maybe condense the Data-Readout-Experiments (Temp. Pressure, Gravioli, Seismic) into one single experiment calles Physical-Data or something, which you can do everywhere by the click of a button, but change the others and add new ones where you have to do something. Some Ideas: - The described Physics-Data-Readout-Experiment - an Impactor Experiment (like the changed accelometer in interstellar) requiring an impactor on the surface - a long term observing experiment (needs to run a certain time on the surface maybe 100 days before yielding the science) - a ground behavior Experiment (needs to drive for a certain distance on the Surface of that biome before yielding science) - a dive explorer Experiment (can only be done in 'splashed down' and needs maybe one day to finish) - a drill core Experiment (as above, only in case 'landed') - a big scale observing Experiment (can only be done in space low and high and requires time, like the long term observing)(so a proper use for sattelites) - a Kerbal life endurance Experiment(certain time in a Lab on the Surface of the planet) (- maybe a weather baloon experiment, but we would need a helium baloon part, which can only be done while flying or while in high atmosphere. And would yield more science if brought back so getting the data out of the baloon again is the next challenge) That way we would have more to do, and actually required to perform some of the expirements. Also i would suggest a decrease of science with more biomes on the body, so first you visit yields most science, 2nd only 50 % , 3rd only 40% , 4th 30% and so on, which would encourage to explore new worlds but not punish if you want to stay. That could also be the beginning of 'more to do' on the surface as rovers and Bases get a value and you'd need different experiments for different locations. And with such a change there would actually be more gameplay instead of just waiting longer for science. What do ya think?

I'm a great TopGear Fan so i like the idea ! Here some more Name Ideas: TopThrust , TopStage , TopBooster

I thought it would be a good thing to start a thread to share, what neat but maybe obvious things you didn't know about before. So sharing them here will 'maybe' help others that didn't know about it either. You know what i mean. Let me start: Literally two Days ago i just found out that there is actually a Stock Airbrake System ! You know clicking on 'Use as spo...' for Control Surfaces in the VAB and adjusting the degree and if you turn out all the other functions of this Control surface it will just react to the clicking on 'B'. So i tested this out, put a pair of Flaps directly Flat onto the wing at the CoL position, turned functionality off, turned Airbrake functionality on and tested it in flight. AND IT WORKED JUST LIKE A AIRBRAKE ! awesome! i could slow down in the air if approaching to fast ! Sure most of you probably know that already but i never stumbled upon it and was amazed that this is actually possible in Stock. Now You .