Ehco Corrallo

In practical terms, No Man's Sky is infinite. Adding more planets in a procedurally generated universe is easy; I'm pretty sure the devs said: "Let's make the universe bigger," then made it bigger. There's a good chance that there'll be two or three planets that look almost identical, but there's a very small chance that you'll encounter both of them. There are eighteen quintillion [18,446,744,073,709,551,616, actually] planets in No Man's Sky. It's a pointless number, but it has a purpose; no matter how much people play, there'll always be something new for you to discover. As I've mentioned before, there are a ton of variables that go into planet generation. While there might be two planets that differ by only one percent, you aren't going to find them both. Also as mentioned before, planets are generated to be more surreal (and more awesome, and more dangerous) the closer you get to the center of the universe, which throws another layer of variation into the mix. If things start looking similar (and I'm not even sure that they will) then it's time to move on towards the center. (Reaching the center of the universe takes, somewhere around 100 hours, and that's if you don't get distracted.) Even if No Man's Sky doesn't end up being totally awesome, it'll still have an interstellar pokédex and a color palette completely different from Call of Duty.

Frankly, that's why everyone's excited about No Man's Sky; Procedural generation isn't a new idea, but its implementation in No Man's Sky is unprecedented on a number of levels. Both the scale of the game, and the detail, have not been matched in another procedurally generated game (to my knowledge). The plants, animals, ships, factions, planets, stars, galaxies, and even the music is generated procedurally. We'll see how it turns out on launch, but I'm reasonably confident that Hello Games has managed, at the very least, to improve significantly on the way procedural generation is used. I recommend taking a look at this video, which explains the majority of the process behind the generation. It's a little long, but worth watching. The planets have only one biome, so that if you land in any one place you've seen, to a certain degree, what the planet has to offer (this was a design decision on the part of Hello Games, not a limitation in the engine; most planets in traditional sci-fi [the main inspiration for No Man's Sky] are only a single biome). If there's one kind of tree on one side of the planet, it's also on the other side of the planet. The terrain is considerably more diverse, though, and geological formations vary fairly considerably across a planet's surface. There isn't a supreme amount of variation on each planet, but there are large variances between planets, (if not in the terrain, then in the flora, fauna, and resources). If you look at screenshots of different planets, you'll see some similarities, but the differences are unsubtle enough to distinguish one desert-and-red-crystal planet from another desert-and-red-crystal planet. It also seems like Hello Games is taking care to make sure that each planet offers a slightly different gameplay experience. Another note on variety: The planets that have been shown so far are from the outer edge of the universe; they get considerably weirder and considerably more varied the closer you get to the center of the universe. Hello Games, despite having announced the game really early, is keeping the awesomer (a word I do not use lightly) stuff under wraps so it's a surprise (and a genuine discovery) when players encounter something really cool that they didn't know was possible. I'd like to point out, after this text-brick hype-rant, that I'm a total skeptic where video games are concerned. I've done my research on No Man's Sky, and while it might not be for everyone (that's another text-brick hype-rant) if you're interested in a procedurally-generated classic-sci-fi exploration (or not) game, then No Man's Sky is about as close to a sure-thing as you can get in a video game. I'd also like to point out that, yes, No Man's Sky has pop-in. It's something that will likely be mitigated at launch, but it's not something that's going to go away; No Man's Sky has way too many LoDs. Just an FYI, if it changes anything for anyone, there you go. And it's gorgeous. I don't know of many games with an aesthetic this nice.

Yep. That'd about be the way to do it.

"Man in the can." A few things to consider: Drama isn't always necessary, suspense is often a more subtle option. (I'm not talking cliffhangers here, either, just careful pacing.) Conflict between characters might not be the root of a story, but it is a major contributor, just make sure to mix things up every once in awhile. Remember that just because two (or more!) characters stand in opposition, doesn't mean they don't agree on some things. If you want your series to progress and establish a narrative, make sure that at least one of your characters has some sort of motivation and some sort of goal. Spreadsheet discussion might not be interesting if your characters are only discussing spreadsheets; a bit of digression and banter can easily make a mundane scene seem significantly more alive. Introspection is another way to combat stagnation in an unavoidably dull scene. Most of this is a little remedial and rather general, but it's worth bearing in mind. Hope it helps, at least somewhat.

I built my first space station. Docking isn't as hard as I remember it being.

More or less, yes. It's not meant to be a terribly difficult challenge. Mostly it's just an excuse to send ridiculous things to Kerbin's drab satellite. There are a few regulations, but it's pretty wide open.

Wow. That's quite a house you've got there. Someone put a church on the Mun, but it was comparatively petite. Those look like lifting stages only. What are you doing for your transfer burn? The man doesn't look terribly happy. What did you use for his head?

I have to agree. Writing is a practically limitless medium, and it's just as much about omission as it is about inclusion. It's your choice whether you want to work on graphic novels, or to stay with prose, or to include illustrations alongside your blocks of text. I'm fine writing for anything, but I'm definitely most comfortable writing novels and serial stories. I've tried writing comic scripts, TV scripts, and short films, but I honestly prefer the level of control that's afforded by having only a single layer of composition. It's very much up to personal preference.

I used cliffhangers almost religiously once. Now I don't. Instead I start my chapters with something big, and then work through the following few chapters in an attempt to resolve whatever new chaos I've thrown into the mix. Example: Me: "What's that Ehco? The war you started is going according to plan?" [Ehco Corrallo is both my username, and the protagonist of a novel I'm writing] Ehco: "Yeah, everything's sort of fine, actually." Me: "Oops." Ehco: "What oops?" Me: "An elite army of Hujan troopers may or may not have made landfall around where you were trying to gain a foothold." Ehco: "What? Why would you-" Me: "Have fun trying to resolve it." This is a rather protracted example, and slightly exaggerated also, but it basically explains what I'm talking about: Chapter starts, new obstacle, exhausted protagonist works to mitigate disaster. Essentially, I just move the cliffhanger from the end of the last chapter to the start of the latest one.

Yep. Badge is done. It's smaller and says the right thing now. I updated the OP, also. And here's the link if you want to embed it: http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/548681523271941364/AC5C94E1DDCBA7904C8A9B5995E1BB38130BC8C2/

You can use MechJeb if you want. I'm not so meticulous that I'll ignore a good argument. (Definition of good argument: Uses the phrase: "annoyingly meticulous.") Besides, you're right, this challenge isn't so much about piloting and engineering skill as it is about having a creative and extravagant entry. MechJeb is now officially acceptable and I appologize if it wasn't before. I'll edit the OP. Great! Looks nice and symmetrical superstrijder15's Score: One photo finish. I'll get on it. The text is bothering me as well, it should say "Munar Crusader" instead of just "Munar Crusade." I'm not exactly sure how to embed the badge, so I don't know how much I can streamline things. Another career entry, huh? Best of luck.

There's a badge now! If you're on the Board of Crusaders, you are officially entitled to slap this badge on your signature. Speaking of which @SuicidalInsanity, your entry is fantastic, magnificently styled, too, and fully entitles you to be thrown straight to the Board of Crusaders, with the following score: SuicidalInsanity's Score: One Four Step Step Pyramid (I know it's a ziggurat...) Lookin' good. Just let me know when the entry is officially 'completed.'

Business as usual then.

And I'm reasonably sure you succeed with your goal. On another note: I find it hilarious that the giant rover wheels are, without doubt, the best landing gear in the game. If you repaired them, would you be able to rotate your giant payload? Anyway, you're going straight to the board of Crusaders. purpleivan's Score: The Largest Orange Lump. The varied designs are awesome, I'm glad things are working out well. Have you had any trouble so far? As I really ought to have mentioned in the OP but didn't, MechJeb kind of defeats the feeling of accomplishment. This isn't a hard challenge, but it's still supposed to be a little bit difficult. Trajectories (the mod that scullyl mentioned) would be perfectly acceptable. Looks great! The rover design is awesome, and running the challenge in career further increases the legitimacy of your entry. What happened with the save? It looks like all of your projects are coming along nicely.

I did some tests with wheelbase width. This layout didn't roll on flat ground, but the Rovemax M1's have trouble lugging its bulk up hills. This layout also didn't roll on flat ground, and it can climb hills, but the TR-2L's tend to cause pinwheeling if you even start to roll. This needs further consideration.

Quite a few solar panels you have there. It's good to see things coming along, especially when it can't entirely be confirmed whether or not cheating actually did take place instead of nothing but legitimate rocketry Nah, it's all good. Changing your design once something is already in orbit is a huge and wholly understandable pain. Rover rolling is an issue I've encounter time and time again. It's very hard to counter because if you make the rover wide enough that it doesn't roll sideways, it's liable to tip forwards. If you do the opposite, the reverse is true. Plus you have the lower gravity against you; rover building is the only thing that's adversely affected by lower gravity. If you make the rover too light, it'll flip even easier, but if you make it too heavy, it's much harder to get it where you want. Cynical Answer: Wait for 1.1 and better wheel physics. My Answer: Mitigate the effect of rolling. If you can't stop your rover from rolling, then roll with it (hehe, pun). Installing reaction wheels will allow you to steady your rover if necessary. I recommend mapping them to the SAS control group. If you start to roll, hit SAS, and try to maneuver to a less killy angle. You might have to repair the wheels, in fact, you should expect to; putting the cockpit within reach of the wheels is very helpful and saves a lot of time. You can get around the dangerous bounciness upon wheel repair by installing landing gear to lift your rover off the surface. I'd also recommend installing a decent roll cage. Aesthetics are important, but not as important as survivability. Locking the steering on your rear wheels will help somewhat. In general, you want a wide wheelbase and low center of gravity. I'd recommend looking around the forums, there's bound to be someone who knows how to get rovers working properly.

Nice. I like your style. Happy flying!

A new chapter is done! It contains the following passage: "Microgravity Onionbitz are not as effective at modifying skin color as Samuel Gordon’s “Signature” Vostok Sauce. Then again, there are very few things that are quite as effective for turning oneself orange as Samuel Gordon’s “Signature” Vostok Sauce." If you think it could make sense in context, it doesn't. And the context is slightly stranger besides. Here's the link: Phone

I know where you're coming from. After 1.0.5 I spent a bunch of time working on planes, and barely ever flew rockets. It's tricky to get back into the hang of engineering. Also: It doesn't have to be big if it's ridiculous enough. There's a number of more recent Crusaders who are sending lots of medium size things (like you). Another thing to remember is that one-way missions are not only allowed, but strongly encouraged. It's always nice to have large amounts of stuff piling up in your tracking station.

That's an awesome Apollo-esque mission you have there. Unfortunately, it's not terribly unnecessary, and doesn't quite fit the challenge. I'm incredibly impressed, don't get me wrong, it's an excellent mission; very well designed and flown, but I'm not sure if it qualifies. It came up earlier in the thread that this isn't just about landing on the Mun, it's about conquering it, it's about ludicrous mission-plans, and one-way trips. It's also about personal accomplishment, though, so don't count yourself out yet: If this sort of mission is a cake walk, and not much more different or difficult from anything you've attempted previously, then I can't really consider this a qualified entry. However, if it pushed your abilities, and was at least something of a challenge in and of itself, then I'll relent and award you a non-existant badge of honor. I appologize if the OP was in anyway unclear, and for any confusion the highly ambiguous scoring/qualification system may have caused. Sounds good.

Wow! Nice. It looks very precise. I'd like to see at least one crewed landing, though, just for the heck of it. (And because it was partially specified in the OP.) I think you ought to put the probes on your X's anyway. You might as well, seeing as you got them this far. Sounds great. I'm really interested to see how you manage to make a mission simultaneously extravagant and efficient... And yes, my scoring algorithm is precise, unwavering, and on average means absolutly nothing. (Or everything; it's hard to tell sometimes.)

It is very much intended to be completed in sandbox, mostly because it's intended to be very, very expensive. Career entires are perfectly welcome, but it's hard to keep up with the necessary scale if you're strapped for cash. Also: Does your username happen to have anything to do with this?

Looks like it's coming along. I ran a similar mission a short while back, and the best part was when I had all the probes ready and waiting to drop along an equatorial orbit. On the map, it looked as though the Mun had a ring. I like that you run all the transfer and maneuver burns simultaneously. It's much cooler (and harder) than sending everything one by one.

Looks like it's coming along. Nice lander variety. Sounds pretty cool! You can't increase the view distance in settings, though; you may need to land your rockets pretty close. My laptop runs KSP pretty well, but framerate or no framerate, big rockets can be a pain. Have you thought about docking things together in Munar orbit (or even LKO)? It'd decrease the launcher size for each payload...

That's what this challenge is about after all: Fun, and cool designs as well. Well, and also revenge on the Mun, and vindictiveness, but maybe that's just me