Musil

@Casei. OK, sorry if I misconstrued your comment.

I am not sure that's a good thing But yeah, a lot of what I was saying has to do with people complaining about the game suddenly requiring new skills and different (good or bad) game mechanics. That annoys me, to be honest. Acknowledging there are problems with the game is part of the process. But I believe there is a right way to say it. If I may say so, now you sound very reasonable, but your first post was so... idk, obnoxious, it killed my enjoyment of the community. And, as I said on another post, the community is an important part of this game, for me.

I play on hard, but I do slide the rewards a bit higher, up to 80%, to get a bit less grind. Also, quicksaving is a maybe every time I start a new career. Science rewards might get even lower if I feel like punishing myself.

You were complaining about not liking it! It's like complaining that you don't like chocolate an saying «so I wont eat it». Yes, that's the answer, don't eat it. Don't complain either.

That seems to fit with the idea of having an aerodynamic model that is somewhat "realistic" but still allows for silly #lolsokerbal contraptions, as the devs wanted it to be. For really unforgiving aero, I think FAR will still be needed. I read some of the things that Ferram was saying about the development of the new FAR and it sounds quite amazing. Still, I can't believe you put that thing in orbit. I would never dare, not even with the soup aerodynamics.

Not at all, your comment was quite all right. Critical, yes, but that's a good thing

On the contrary, I fully agree that the problems you point out are indeed problems and need to be addressed ASAP. And there are proper ways to tell the devs what they are and urge them to fix them. My problem is not with criticism; quite the oposite. My problem is with the negative attitude that we are getting from people when they find some aspect of the game is not exactly as they expected it and they start on a rampage, calling everyone an idiot and the game a piece of crap, just because x-feature is not perfect. I find that the strong community is an important aspect of the game. When I first started playing, there was a lot of thing I did not understand, and people helped me out; the moders do an incredible job and, in general, it's just fun talking about kerbal stuff. Unlike most places on the internet, people here are quite civilized and nice. But no one likes a kid with a tantrum, and since 1.0 I have seen to many tantrums on here to be happy about it. - - - Updated - - - Yeah, I joined when 0.90 came out, but had the game since 0.24 was out. I remember some bickering about 0.25 and 0.90, but nothing like this. Anyhow, yes, blown out of proportion and doomed to go away on it's own, but will you not think of the children, why does no one think of the children? - - - Updated - - - So, you don't like career? Easy solution: don't play it. There, fixed. No need to be bitter about it.

No. You can't buy the right to be critical: it is inalienable and you always had it. You don't need to read Ulysses to criticize Joyce's writing, actually, and a lot of people make the mistake of thinking you have to know, own or have done what you are criticizing. You don't. But having the right to do something doesn't mean you can do it without looking like an ass. I have been critical too, you know...? I think not having a way to dissipate heat is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. Sure. But calling a bunch of people idiots â€â€or presumably something worst, if you had your way because you disagree with them about the completely subjective mater of aesthetic preferences about mouse pointers, well... that makes you look like an ass, in mi eyes. And I am sorry to say so, but, as you point out, I have te right to criticize. And later you say, paraphrasing, "this is the internet so you have to be rude to be heard". Dude! That's like justifying assholery because "it's the only way to get things done around here". It is not. You don't need to be a pushover, you don't have to say you like what you don't, and you should certainly have your say, but there is really no need to be rude to the team that has produced this wonderful game and to the QA testers that worked to make your game better for free! Did they make mistakes? Probably, who wouldn't? Do they deserve to be called idiots by some random internet guy just because he paid 15$ and thinks he's entitled to go around spreading insults? Probably not. Make no mistake: you are entitled to be as rude as you like. It's just... why would you? As a consumer, if the product you bought is sub par, you should be angry, you should protest. But, first of all, KSP is not sub par â€â€it has some things that could be better, it is not mediocre productâ€â€, and secondly... I am guessing you didn't buy it on release at 1.0; so you bought an early access game, you bought a beta, with the explicit warning that the game would change and not necessarily in a way you would like. So you bought unfinished software, still in the works, and later you are insulting the developers because they made the â€â€in your mid wrong choice about mouse pointers. Well, you look like an ass doing so, in mi opinion. And I am sorry to say so, because we share an interest in KSP that should make us colleagues and friends. In that spirit, I really do not wish to offend you, and I am very sorry if you feel attacked. It is not my intention, and I wish you don't take it personally... The problem is, since I am being rude, you probably will feel ofended despite my best intentions, and you will probably want to insult me back. Then again... It's the internet, what did I expect. - - - Updated - - - Jolly... I was just thinking the XP system should have something like that, and it's a shame it doesn't. ¡Yey! Can't wait for 1.1 But yeah, KER is awesome.

That seems sensible. I don't use planes much, so I haven't noticed, but yeah.

Uh, I hadn't noticed they come in a pod now. I still have to do one... I was saving it for later. But I am getting a bit of spam rescue missions... It used to be just one free kerbal if you rescued him; now it seems half of all kerbalkind somehow was left in orbit with no way to return...

The devs don't want it. They think it takes away from the "I hope this works" feeling the game should have. But I don't want it stock any more: they will never ad something like KER (they don't like the idea), and KER fulfills all my needs... so I am happy.

Then you have to make better choices. Of those 3 nodes, the only one I unlocked just to make 2.5 rockets was the engines one: I got the tanks node for the fuel line and the one with the adapter for some other part, i can't remember what. Once I had those two, I said «hey, if I get engines I can make bigger rockets!». It all worked out very well and very intuitively. Anyways, they made it so that the tech tree is easy to change now. I think the current form really gives the game an interesting mechanic, it makes you work for what you want... But if you don't like it, there seems to be a simple solution.

That's the point.

Since 1.0 launched, I have found this forum to be almost intolerable. And this used to be such a fun community! Yesterday there was a flamewar going on about the pointer... the bloody pointer! I found it quite nice when I noticed it was there. And a transparent navball... yeah, good job, SQUAD. But every time I come in here, there is endless whining going on about this and that... To make things worst, now I have to whine about the whining. Now, let's be clear: there are problems with 1.0. Two big ones, in my opinion: pods turning the wrong way on reentry* and not having a way to dissipate heat (radiators are really needed). There are other things too: some bugs still exist, fairing confeti is silly and contracts need more improvement. Yes, this are concerns. But I don't know what people expected. For KSP to remain in beta sine die? What would that accomplish? I would bet a finger that if a 0.91 had been released just to test the waters, people would have complained about a 1.0 release that added no new features. Besides, I imagine SQUAD wanted to launch with a proper bang, not just with a «oh, this is the same game we had at last update, only some bugs have been fixed». Maybe some people would like a lot more features in the game, like life support, but the team wanted to launch, and can't you understand why? They are a small indie team and you wanted them to slave away for years without being able to say voilá. I don't like getting personal on the internet, but maybe this calls for it: recently I finished writing a very large book. Took me years to write, and a lot of hard work. Of course, once the last page was finished, I had to look back and find all the "bugs"; but I can testify to the need of saying something like «this still needs work, but after 4 long years damn me if I am not proud of saying it is done». Now, as for the trivial whining... and by trivial I don't mean complaints about the pointer; that's beneath disputing. People see something they are not used to and, no mater how good it is, they want to complain. Well, damn them. I have seen a lot of complaining about previous rocket designs not working any more. Of course, before that it was complaining about the soup atmo, but now let's complain because it's hard to get into space. People: it is SPACE! Ok, simulated space in a game, but how could you possibly complain about not being able to get into it by only using jet engines... The point of a game is for it to be difficult to master, for there to be obstacles to conquer. So if your cheesy SSTO doesn't work any more, make a better one. People complain about career. «Too grindy at hard settings!» (easy solution comes to mind). «The tech tree is hard to complete!». «I want fairings, but I don't have them yet!». «I don't want to build a rocket using ridiculously small tanks and lousy engines!». Again: a game, supposed to present a challenge. What I like about career is that I can't just build anything; I have to mind the fact that with the limitations of the early stages I can do only very few things effectively. I can't get more experiments and bigger rockets, I have to make a hard choice. Today I had to get some tourists into orbit... Failed miserably four times, because the rocket was hard to control. Of course, I cursed myself for not allowing reverts; but that is not SQUAD's fault! It's my own, because I set myself a challenge and failed. But when the tourist finally completed the itinerary, I was satisfied and had a lot of fun (of course, the &%$/"! contract set me back 40k, but that's not the point). I saw one guy complaining that he couldn't finish the tech tree with just a couple biomes at KSC. What? Well, he wanted to play sandbox, only with science and kerbals gaining XP. I think you can't blame the devs for not having that game in mind when they made KSP, can you... Maybe you have fun with that, but I must say it's rather unique, and can't be expected to be what the game should be. And you can always just work around that ading the science and the money in the save file. Same thing can be said about a lot of the complaints people seem to have about the current game. To sum it up, because this is getting long: should we be critical? Yes, of course: that probably helps SQUAD to make the game better. But, please, good kerbonauts, stop with the whining. Maybe this is not the game you imagined when you where six years old and dreamed up the perfect game, but it's the game SQUAD dreamed up. You can play it if you have fun with it, and count your blessings, but if you don't have fun, find an alternative: mod it, be cheesy or just play something else. Don't be a killjoy. Have fun, people. Really. It's not that hard. *: A mod has fixed this already, for those of you still having problems. I solved it by putting nothing on the pods except the heat shield and then just manually keeping it stable.

Uh, that's a really nice idea. What I don't like about the tree is that it's basically what drives the game, giving you a reason to do missions, but it's pretty much done once you finish exploring the Mun and Minmus. Only being able to get some parts with experiments done at certain biomes would be very cool. I don't see the problem in what everyone else is saying. So what if decouplers, tanks and engines are on different nodes? Unlock all of them, duh... And I have yet to find a node with no useful parts whatsoever: I still needed the 2.5 tacks node to get fuel lines, and then got the engines to make bigger rockets. I got the adapter with the spare science. As for the fairings, it makes perfect sense for them to be under the avionics part of the tree, because they are research into aerodynamics, not engines or science. I only ever send probes to planets, not Kerbin's moons. So it doesn't bother me that they are a bit further up on the tree... The Stayuptnick can be useful for tourists and such, but you really don't want to use it for anything serious. Why is it so hard to get bigger tanks? Because gameplay, that's why: if you have to use more tanks in your rocket, you can't make it so big without getting over the part limit, so you really can't go to the Mun on tier 2. I really think it's a good game mechanic. Anyways, it doesn't make sense to get too many parts before you upgrade the VAB. I just decided not to get thermometers and batteries, for example, because my rocket's already have 30 parts, so I would not be able to use them. The new tree is really working for me. Don't see a real problem in the early stages.

I don't know why, but I quite like the Mun. I go frequently in career, maybe because I have a lot of fun designing Apollo style missions. Also, I like to roleplay finding the anomalies, which motivates my kerbals to go to Jool and beyond.

Awesome. Thank's, RoverDude, I have been wondering how the lab would work. The dev notes were never very precise about it. Cheers and thanks for all your good work!

I haven't gotten to the Mun yet because every time I get into orbit I get greedy, try to bring back a capsule with 2 material bays at the bottom, the thing flips and kills Val. I think I have to just give those experiments up and do the reentry with just the pod. Getting to the Mun without patched conics is not hard. You need to start burning when the Mun comes up on the horizon and get your apoapsis up to munar orbit. You will almost certainly get a decent encounter. The contract grinding on the first stage of the game is a problem for career, I think. I have hard settings, but I did give myself a bit more starting money and turned the money rewards up to 80%, because I prefer to grind science, not money. Career needs more contracts that can be done on early tech, on Kerbin, that are not "do this boring testing". The turists contracts are a nice start. I want the contracts to make me do things in orbit. Why is there no simple "do an EVA on Kerbin orbit" contract, and that sort of thing... hopefully better, but it just seems like it's "get into orbit" and then "land on the Mun" with nothing to ease the blow. As the game progresses, I expect more of that kind of thing to apear. I am having a lot of fun, and expect the problems that I am having to be easily fixed by some mods that don't change gameplay too much.

Yey!!!!! Congrats, Squad.

Yeah, I always forget to take monoprop out, so that is a problem... But, as for the extra mass, consider that such a tank would have to be cryogenically cooled and, therefore, heavier anyways. @Gregox: I actually think starting with the small tanks plays well with the launchpad/VAB limitations. As you unlock new parts you can build bigger rockets because you don't need so many parts for each unit of fuel. The lack of female employees at the KSC is, indeed, worrying.

Just take the oxidizer out?

I am having a lot of fun. Career really seems more enjoyable to me now. Yes, more balance is going to be needed, but the improvements are fantastic. Weirdly enough, I fin the new aero really adds to career: I had a lot of trouble sending Bob without SAS in a very overpowered rocket, and immediately lost Valentina on my first try (restarted since then). The new tech tree progression seems much more sensible. The amount of money you get from contracts is tweakable, so I have no problem with that... I prefer to get a bit more money (about 80%) and less science, and that balance is fun to play with. And, oh god, reentering is so much more fun. I used to play with FAR and DRE, and I still find this better. I would like parachutes to break at high speeds and high g's to kill kerbals, but that is an easy fix with a mod. I really feel I will be playing for some time with just stock parts. KAC and KE might still bee needed, and of course I would like to tweak this and that, but the game feels very nice. As for bugs, I am not sure, but I think I went through a mountain at high warp... Not sure because it was night, and very dark, but something weird happened. But that would be hard to fix, and I am not sure if I would even call it a bug.

So... first thing I do: career... ¡Yey!... Let's make it hardcore: 120% reentry damage. First couple of launches feature Jeb. But let's make the first kerbal to go into space Valentina... ¡Yey! Val died on reentry. Crap...

It's almost 1 a.m in Mexico City and I think I am about to go to bed. But who else is doing a vigil and refreshing the KSP site or steam every five minutes even at this late hour? I am! And I guess Squad is too... maybe drinking champagne. I hope they are, because tomorrow we all get an awesome KSP day.

I have never seen software without bugs, much less a game. I don't think a couple of bugs that trigger under very bizarre circumstances are going to spoil the game for people that get into it now.