Wjolcz

Not in the scope of the game. I'd rather have a few more launch sites on Kerbin and a Carrier somewhere on the sea. Not sure who would do that though as bac9 is not in the dev team anymore #bringbac9back

"The Atlantis didn's sink. It lifted off." Been reading about the Black Knight satellite recently, ey? Anyway, we would know. We are not that blind. We have radars that can track satellites, we would see the change in the atmospheric composition and there would be buildings. A lot of them. A civilization as large as ours would leave TONS of things (including fossilised bones).

Not even that. It's more of a "Kerbal Space Grind With a Limiting Tech Tree and Random Contracts".

I know :C would send NASA my 8MPix phone if I knew they were putting a camera on it.

It wouldn't be a problem with annual funding though. If programs could raise the annual funding, there would be no need for contracts that reward you with money. It doesn't matter if we call them 'missions' or 'contracts'. It's just semantics anyway. There could be simply commercial programs that would focus on missions based around space tourism or mining, or something like that.

I think ProkJet shoule handle it. There used to be a few artists in the past reworking the parts and that's what made them so inconsistent. These switchable tank butts are pretty dope tho

Wow. I hope the game doesn't lag too much because of all that? Also, would you consider putting the mod on CKAN?

I remeber the 8-shaped orbits people were posting by the time the orbit view became a thing. Or maybe when more planets were added?

The problem with this is all you need is one Mun mission. After that you have to pray to get another sensible Mun contract. I just hate that. All you need to do is land a probe somewhere and then the game offers you to go somewhere else. It's not the problem of not having enough dV. If I'm doing something around the Mun then I want to squeeze as much as possible out of it and have all the missions somehow related to each other. That's why I think that programs should be included. People who want to focus on building an actual infrastructure around some body could easily do it and be rewarded for doing so. Sure, you could just say "Screw the contracts, I'm focusing on a Minmus station now, because I want to have one and I'm not spending my whole life in the Mission Control!". But by playing career that way you are going to run out of money eventually. Not like it punishes you in any major way for doing so, but that's not the point here.

Well, yeah. Non-linear tree might indeed be a little bit wonky to deal with. People would simply go for the best parts straight away if they could afford it. I like idea of staff hiring. I'm actually sick of paying ridiculous amounts of cash for my 20th astrounaut. It would be better to pay them salaries every X amount of days, fire them and send on vacations. The SCI you were talking about actually makes sense now that you've explained it, though I think it might also be solved with a system where a part needs a certain amount of scientists before it can be researched. So the player would have to upgrade the R&D and hire, let's say 150 of scientists, because that would be the amount to unlock the most valuable part. That way we could get rid of the one time payment mechanic and have theR&D scientists upkeep cost instead.

I recently ceased to go interplanetary simply because I've been to most of the places before the career mode became a thing. I wish I could visit them again, but the career is the main thing stopping me from doing that. I spend too much time declining my way through a bunch of contracts I don't want to do and I simply don't see any point in visiting other planets because of the lack of sensible progression and achievement in career mode.

None

What the hell Kerbal EDU has all that and the "basic" version of the game doesn't. I'm seriously questioning why I spent 15$ on this game. Seriously.

Well, I was going to say that balancing something that doesn't exist yet is really hard. Even harder when the player gets to move the difficulty sliders himself. I would really prefer not having the sci points at all. The parts would simply require time and money. If parts are queued, the time to research simply adds up. I think it's a really nice way to balance the tree. If someone wanted to queue the whole tree (assuming he/she has enough money) it could take a few years to research the last part. And before I get bombarded by Pthigrivi again: No, all the parts wouldn't be available after the last one is researched. After each part is researched it becomes available and then the next one in the queue is being researched. I kind of like the idea of the staff number and their salaries, but I think it should be avoided. At least for now. IMO we should focus on the more basic systems first. I'm also not sure if I fully understand the whole interval mechanic. So let's say there's a Mun program and the reward for it drops at 1% of the initial reward every 2 days? And if we suspend it 2 REP is taken from us, right? I feel like the system where each activated program doesn't let your REP drop below a certain level is easier to balance and understand though.

Can I be the third side here? I think we all agree that the career game is too messy. We get the somewhat linear tree (which is imperfect) and on the other hand the randomness of the contract system (which also is imperfect). The problem here is that we have to reseaech the tree by sending probes to other bodies (which makes zero sense) and pray for contracts that are connected to what we want to do next (which also makes no sense). Wouldn't it be better to have a broad selection of objectives we could pick ourselves and being rewarded for doing so? You can't make a sanbox game and then decide "Yeah, let's now add this linear tech tree and random side quests just to maintain the sanbox feel of the game". It simply doesn't work like that.

If it ain't got no control then it's a debris!

Check out @parameciumkid's Jump Drive mod: Cool thing about it is that you have to place a gate somewhere in the system first and then you can warp to it. EDIT: Nevermind, it seems like it doesn't work anymore. But you should leave him some rep anyway.

Yes, I agree. The completed missions shouldn't give anything but rep. I'll edit the OP and include your post as an alternative way to deal with the reputation drop. EDIT: I will also include other posts into OP when I find some free time to re-read the thread.

I'm really afraid it will be just another "tweak" to the contract system though. But I might be wrong (and I hope I am).

Yes, I agree with OP. The contracts are too random. It would be better if we were able to pick Programs that influence the types of missions generated, similarly to how Strategia does it except with more options (station per body, base per body, etc.). The deadlines are too ridiculous. I accepted contracts that last for 60 years to get money many times, because I knew I would have already finished the tech tree by the time the contract deadline is over.

I liked how it worked some versions ago. The engines would simply use the fuel/ox that was left without giving any thrust. I don't know how realistic or dangerous it would be irl, but I liked it. I think they should bring it back.

Yep. The system based on contracts that grant you money is really hard to lose. You would have to goof very early in the game to lose it. However, what I would like to see (once we get a proper career overhaul) is space mining. Simply having missions that would say things like "Get ore from that asteroid/moon and bring it back to Kerbin, because there's tons of cool and precious stuff we can get from it!" would be nice. Right now we get money for objectives that are randomly generated and because of that we have to haul ridiculous amounts of ore to ridiculous destinations. Or maybe we could finally get xenon as a mineable resource since it costs a lot.

Oh dear lord! Please forgive me! I didn't know! ;_; That's actually pretty cool to know though. I always thought they were made balanced just so one type of gun doesn't own everything else.

Well... The AI doesn't seem to know how to conserve energy (afaik). The engines were purposely made OP just so the AI doesn't struggle all the time. The guns are also not realistic, because if they were everyone would simply take the best gun. They were made the way they are to keep the balance of the tournament.

Huh?