metl

I did actually try it briefly shortly before .90 released. It was well built (within the limitations of what can be done as a mod) but I suddenly felt like I was playing a completely different game and doing nothing but hitting the "warp to completion" button. If I had played it long enough where I had multiple missions all over the place going at once, I might have a different outlook, but as it was it didn't add any immersion. It just became a tedious time-sink where I sat and stared at the screen waiting for the time to tick away. Good mod, just not for everyone.

And once again I find myself having to try to talk sense and reason into someone that is only concerned with their own narrow view of how the game should be played. So anyone not comfortable with build times should just learn to multitask several ships at once? Yeah, okay... And I do agree LS for higher difficulty levels would be a good way to include it. I would even extend that to include construction time, so everyone is pleased. Reentry heat could also be mixed in there. And yes, the current difficulty levels are not so great. My preference is to actually use normal settings but turn off all of the extra options. I don't have to grind funds or science, but there is still significant risk in failure. Tutorials are all well and good to an extent. I can't tel you how many games I have abandoned though because after 30 minutes or more of never-ending tutorials there were still mounds of unexplained layers of information needed just to figure out how to get started in the right direction. Information overload does not automatically make it a better game. Do what extremes should they go? Food and water? Hygiene? Mood? Loneliness? Bathroom? Maybe we need an exercise regiment (I've actually seen that suggestion and there is even a mod for it) and instead of just "unlocking" EVA, there should be a training program that takes time for every Kerbal to complete (I actually like that idea, but it is really superfluous for the games intentions.) As far as for the veteran players, just how many hours do you think the game should be required to entertain you for? 10? 20? 100? Or are you like most of us veterans here and have put hundreds of hours in? We've been playing this game for a LONG TIME. Far longer than even the most epic of RPGs. That speaks volumes to just how solid the core game is on the "fun" scale. Very few games manage to capture large audiences for that long, especially single-player ones, even with mods. (I think my next highest single player game for hours played is Fallout New Vegas, weighing in at 222 hours and that took some serious modding to do. I don't blame Bethesda for that. I thank them for providing such a good base to work with, especially in this day and age when game developers think thathaving 10 hours of gameplay is something to be proud of.) I go back to my original point of let's remember what made the game fun for us to begin with and why we all still hang around. There is plenty of room within the upcoming changes, future updates, and mod selection to keep almost everyone happy without anyone having to be forced to play a certain way.

And I hope that is what they do if they add LS. It doesn't bother me either way to play with or without (it's not a major hurdle to work around.) I just don't want to see the game get relegated to being "too hardcore" for all of the casual players out there.

Here's my take on some of the issues squad is trying to avoid by having build-times. First, part of the original appeal to this game was being able to build rockets lego-style and toss them around trying to learn how to pilot them. Now imagine you didn't take the time to read any of the forums, watch any videos or really even take a good look around the screen. Suddenly you are told immediately after trying to launch your first rocket that you now have to wait several days. It is a bit of a turn-off, especially for the younger crowd. (And we all know there are plenty of players out there that would feel this is an inconvenience to have to even click on the warp button and just wait.) Second, transfer windows. Barely missing a transfer window because you realize you forgot a part after launch sucks enough already. Imagine the amount of frustrated players there would be when they try to plan for a certain window only to find out they don't have enough dV, or forgot a part and now have to wait no telling how long for the next opportunity, all because of an artificial time difficulty included for the sake of "realism." granted, the new engineer app would hopefully help with this, but we have all been there where me do something silly and have to re-launch with a modified design. Adding hours/days onto that error just punishes the player for not being perfect every time. This could be compared to maneuver nodes and such, but they really are two separate issues. Third, life support. IF they add life support (which I am actually against due to just wanting to keep the game accessible to as many as possible) then build times significantly complicate things except for all but easy mode (assuming it disables build-times, LS, etc.) Plus, in case of stations and other permanent fixtures, supply runs get really tiresome. Most of the people commenting on this clearly fall into the LS and time-restriction "realist" camp. Keep in mind Squad is aiming this game at the masses which includes children as well as complete laypersons that would have zero knowledge of space. The simpler they can keep it (while still covering the basics of space exploration), the better received the game will be en-masse. This game has become rather popular in recent months by many players that really aren't into space exploration, because the game is just fun. I suspect many of you tried the game because it looked fun, stayed because it was fun, then added mods when the initial fun wore off and now have lost sight of the initial charm of why you tried it and kept playing to begin with, long before many of the mods were available. To those of you that will simply say they will stop playing "if Squad doesn't add X" or if "My favorite mod no longer works", that is fine. It is a perfectly natural cycle. If the game is no longer fun for you without added features that aren't in stock, that is fine. There is a season for everything. There are many, many people out there though that have yet to discover this gem. Let's not get so focused on what "we" want that we disregard what brought "us" here to begin with.

Thanks for the update!. I just read the update and moving the radial decoupler sooner should be a good help. Like I said, overall I love layout. Hopefully when the stock tree gets revamped, it will be easier to implement mods into the tree or make a custom tree without it making stock so difficult and bare.

I appreciate the work you put into this, and you are certainly on the right track, but this needs major re-balancing. I have done every science possible vertically up to high space, plus several on the ground around KSC, and I simply do not have enough science to unlock a second rocket engine, decouplers, an antenna, or anything else to get me farther. Had I started with planes, I might have been able to take some survey missions, but just doing the normal height progression to orbit, and even unlocking goo, I simply cannot get enough science to go farther (I did not try to spam science around Kerbin or part tests, this is just a general, normal difficulty run-through.) I unlocked unmanned, science down to goo, and the tree over to antenna 2 (neither the first, second or third even has an antenna in it, but electricity did have some wing parts...) If I am missing something, please tell me as I really like the idea behind your tree. I don't use many parts mods and I use AntennaRange instead of Remote Tech. I noticed there are two versions in the tech manager. One says notechcost? What's the difference?

Well that explains a lot of things... I just thought I was getting really bad draws!

Why did I not think of this already? Mind=blown.

Extract this mod to your KSP/GameData folder. Problem solved. The marker will be on he overhead map and makes navigating MUCH simpler. In-Flight Waypoints

For some reason, it isn't showing up on CKAN, but that's okay. It might be on my end.

I recently added Karbonite just to get a feel for how it will be set up. I actually don't care for it. Mine it, convert it is really as complicated as it needs to be. I don't care for all of the Karbonite powered engines or the crazy amounts of various collectors. I really hope Squad makes it much more simple than that. With that being said, I used Kethane for several updates and finally stopped installing it as I realized I never actually used it. So unless Squad really hits this out of the park, I don't see it making a big difference in my gameplay.

It was said a long time ago that the engines (especially the jet engines) were overpowered simply because of the thick soup atmosphere. They had to do it that way, but it was never intended to stay as they knew they would be overhauling the aero eventually. I imagine that the 48-7S is really supposed to only be a small maneuvering engine for probes and was never intended to take on the duty it has.

They completely reworked the way parts and plugins were handled, just so they were easier to mod. How does that compute with the supposed "pattern of behavior?"

I tend to agree sort of, which is why I stopped using DE. Adding shield became more tedious than actually adding any difficulty. I could land anything with a big enough heat shield slapped on the bottom. I would like to see heat, but the only real way to make it something to worry about is by limiting what parts can have shields.

Your criticism was based on assumptions that the aero model is going to suck, because they did not hire Ferram (paraphrase from your blog), therefore you weren't even going to waste your time with it, and that ksp is not moddable because you couldn't alter a few things. I was just attempting to help support your argument. While I agree completely that the aero will be not be FAR, not everyone shares your pessimistic view of Squad's terrible ability to make a fun game. I once held an elected office in high school and am friends with a few local politicians, so if I say I know how to balance the federal deficit, you should just trust me, right? One thing about it, you certainly earn your forum title. - - - Updated - - - I do want to point out that if you like FAR, and would rather play with FAR, that is great. Do what you need to do to enjoy KSP. But just because you find it fun does not mean others do. Squad is rebalancing the entire game around the new aero. Max has basically said it will NOT be the same game. Seems a little early to me to say it will outright suck. But that's just me.

Because they have failed so miserably at making it moddable now. Hell, it's so bad I can't even find ONE person that has been able to make a mod for this game. And yeah, that aero is just going to totally blow like everything else they have tried to do in this completely un-moddable, entirely boring edutainment title for toddlers. Hell, you can't even go to space in this thing.

I'm with you there. I know I will never get that chance, but oh man wouldn't it be so wonderful?

While we may not see widespread space colonization by the end of the century, to say it will never happen is almost as much of a folly as those that say space exploration in general is a pointless waste of time. Necessity breeds invention, and this rock won't last forever.

Would they be better off starting over? (Not this KSP, that would be folly) but finish this one then move to a bigger, better engine and crank out a completely new 2.0 version?

I would enjoy seeing them either expanding the Kerbal universe (earlier/later tech, more planets, other solar system, etc.) or doing a KSP 2 in a newer engine. Take everything that makes this one good, put it in a newer, more stable and efficient engine, add better models, better effects, and just more overall exploration (maybe random galaxies with random anomalies/points of interest to find?)

Thankfully those are extremes and don't make up the majority of America (I hope we aren't perceived that way by other countries...) I think KSP has opened up space exploration for a new generation, but us older ones aren't generally prone to suddenly decide we are interested in something new. And even for those of us that already had a love of space, I know it certainly opened my eyes up to just how difficult it really is. A huge drawback is I now find myself unable to enjoy other space sims and movies that I once enjoyed (some of them, anyway) because all I now see is how terribly unrealistic they are.

It was a tough choice between Modding Mondays and Devnote Tuesdays, but the Devnotes won out. It finally came down to which one do I actually get anxious waiting on, and definitely the Devnotes, every Tuesday.

Here's a nice collection of fueled nose cones as well. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/102041-0-25-TurboNisuReloaded-Stock-a-Like-Parts-Pack-5-12-14 But back to the OP, i am stoked for this release and can't wait to read tonight's DevLog. Hopefully it will be packed full of good information.

Do you really think that many members would be on untrusted computers? When I posted this, there were around 270 members and a little over 1800 guests. That's a lot of registers members visiting as guests. While it is possible, i would rather be optimistic and encourage any non-registers visitors to jump on board

Word is spreading already. PC Gamer