tuckjohn

I also hope that the devs see this, but(saddly) I feel that it will require a lot of work on their part:( -art team to re-do the node "covers" -re-codeing of the tech tree "logic" to make it look a lot nicer -Excedera, Excedera

Now that I look at the first page, I really like the way that you used lines to mark where the borders of the tiers are located. Nice job!

I have said It before, and I am going to say it again. What you have done is Incredible!

(Sorry in advance for the length of this post, and the referencing of posts pages back. I was away for awile and still want to get my opinions about different posts out) (and in response Alshain said...) To me I feel like the game is a bunch of management games scrunched together in regards to the central mechanics, e.g. There are many parts that are present but not tied together. There are the (getting) science portion, contract/money portion, research portion, reputation portion, etc. and all of these portions exist separately, but there is not really any way to tie them together. The strategies/administrative building KINDA tied them together with the strategies and allowing one-way conversions of science, reputation, funds, etc. I think that above is the solution to this- You must test a part in a certain place before being able to unlock its followers on the tech tree. e.g. you may have to test the ANT engine in interplanetary space before you can unlock the vernal engine(Also, on a side note, "testing" should not be first activating it, which is just silly talk. Testing should be just getting up to full throttle). These "assignments" could/would be given to you though the contract system, which would tie those two "portions" of the game together. I agree that this may be able to get (very) grindy, so I think a button to allow "additional research" to "skip" the testing phase, which could cost science and funds. I agree with Cpt. Kipard here. KSP is trying to be a very simple game when you first start playing it, but allows much more in-depth playing once you get better. A science system where you have 3 sets of science data would not fit into this scope, sadly, even thought it may be a very fun way to play the game. That is a great idea, and would make the game more then "get science" "get parts" "get science" "get parts" "get science" "get parts". But as Cpt. Kipard said; If you do that it will be more likely that the devs will see it, and thus more likely it will be added into the game into some form. For the sake of game balancing, I think that the RTG should have to wait until late in the game, as it is not something that a player that can barely make it to the mun should have.(Also, dont take this as an insult, but use spell check "Lanunched" ) (and in response) The chance of this happening is very high, actually. Felipe said(something like) "As this game is still in Alpha, I do not want to have to be scroll though hundreds of part files in order to change a singe aspect" awhile ago in response to requests to add more parts in the next update(I would find the devnotes where Felipe said this, but I have other things to do). Now that the game is in beta, I feel like we will be getting more parts as the art team finishes their textures And more parts mean more variety of the parts, and more "upgrades" of early engines SWEET!! I cant wait to share the HECK out of it Also I hope it makes modding Mondays tomorrow, AKA I hope the devs take notice Again I apologize for the length of the thread.

I don't know it this is the right place to report this, but I have a bug. If you lower the anchor while parachuting (tested on kerbin), you shoot off at high speed (I hit 58 million times the speed of light)

I like the idea that the experimental parts have a high chance of failing, as of now you can get the "nuke" long before you unlock it on the tech tree.

That's a great idea! I would recommend that you would still have to spend science after, say, landing on duna. I dont think that you should be able to unlock a node for "free" or at no science cost. Also, here is some rep.

Why do you say that the inline ant engine allows lower craft mass? I say that the inline engine should be first because with the radial one you can do 8x symmetry, giving it greater functionality with the same performance.

Complexity is Relevant!

Great work sir! I want to suggest 3 things though: 1. In future versions have an option to switch from defending to ascending, if possible; 2. Also, if you have not already changed it, I think that the ant engine should come before the radial kind, as the radial kind has less restrictions then the normal one. The mono engine and vernal engine should still come after the radial one though. 3. Lastly, my I recommend that you make the final few nodes in the teur 3 area really expensive? It will make it harder to "beat the game" EDIT: one more thought: somewhere when you click on the nodes, or hover over them or something, I would have the game tell you what teir the node is supposed to be in so that players can play it as it is intended though the honor system. Just as a placeholder until you get the code for it to work properly working.

This is exactly what I consider to be grinding- you go to the mun 5 times, and you fill the tech tree. it is easier and gets you just as much science for less cost then going to say, Duna. Why would you interplanetary? Again this could be easily solved by degradable science.

I have a problem with science being so abundant because it turns the game into a game were you have to grind out missions and I do not enjoy doing a almost exactly the same mission over and over just to get enough science to unlock a few more nodes. This can be fixed with diminishing science, as I explained in a previous post.

How would that work? I imagine a lot of people make a spacecraft useing 100's of the same part then recover it, then use that part for a one-way mission

Guys those are AWESOME ideas!! "DEVS! Come here, Quick!" I don't think the science system really fit the game for some reason, and have been trying to figure out why/how to fix it. That^ is the answer, along with degradable biome science, because there is just way too much science in the kerbal system. (you get science from the mun in one biome, then you next mission (going to another biome) will only get about 80% of the science, then 65%, 50%, etc.)

What are you trying to unlock? Rocket parts. To do what? To go higher into space, and as a result, the tech tree! For it to look good though it would have to have some kind of gradient in the background. It would not look good to have just a flat-looking background with this idea, as the stock tech tree does now.

I think that a bottom-to- top tech tree would be fitting, as you are researching to go higher and further! Also, I don't know if this has been suggested yet as I have not read though this entire thread, but I have an idea for a "starting" node: you start with say; 100 science; and choose what "genres" of the research tree you want to invest in; eg. Science, rovers, and planes; and have a very wide and not long (almost the opposite of the stock tree now) tech tree. If this or something like it has already been said, sorry for taking space

From the various 5 minute release videos around YouTube, I noticed that upgrading the runway does not really change it, although it gives it a new texture and [probably] a higher resistance to exploding. (I don't know about you guys but I see no point in 'wasting' money to get a new runway texture in a career save). I recommend that the earlier-tiered runways are MUCH shorter, so in order to launcher that 2000 part mega plane that you spent all night disigning you have to spend some money upgrading from the dirt runway.

This would be great in the education world. KSP already has a very large potential for teaching and inspiring younger folks in spaceflight, and this could extend that into programming; and any good game that teaches 2 things is a amazing game. Devs take the hint ^

Awesome! I will be looking forward for that

With this, My goal would be to center the part being placed on your cursor. for example, when placing a structural panel sideways, your cursor (the place where it attaches to the ship) is on the edge of the panel. If this suggestion was implemented, then you would attach the panel by the center of the panel(sorry if this makes no sense, It is slightly hard to describe my ideas with words). It should be toggle-able, because there are times where you would want to current part placement method.

I knew that the devs were overhauling the inner code and the UI, but I did not think that they were going to change how it was to work

This idea is simple and I am not going to write very much on it. It is best to envision this with a structural panel on a fuel tank. The idea is when a part is flipped, the editor un-clips it from the part being placed upon and (upon click) attaches it to the side. For example, pressing [W] twice with the square panel makes it so that it is (almost) 100% clipped inside the part you are placing it upon. This idea, if ever implemented, would 'move' the part so that it would not be clipping, and (in the case, because the panel is symmetrical) you would end up with the same thing that you would get it you just placed the panel on the part without flipping it. Sorry If this makes no sense; it is kinda hard to explain with words. Feel free to post here with questions!

(I don't know if someone has already suggested something like this because I do not have time to read all 60+ posts. If so, sorry for the redundancy) If any devs are reading this, I have a very simple idea it reduce the amount of science available (make it so that you HAVE TO go to other planets to finish the tech tree. The more science you get from different biomes on a planet, the less that is available in other biomes (KSC would have to be separate from Kerbin, because it would be silly to be able to max out kerbin's science with only a single rover around KSC). For example, I go to the Mun and get science from the highlands. Then I send another lander to the lowlands, but only get 75%. Then 60%, then 35%, 15%, 8% (these ratios are just made up on the fly.....the idea being that they would "decay" over time, slowly approaching 0%, but never actually getting there. For math geeks, y=0 would be an asymptote) Just an idea, feel free to expand!

This is a MOD idea, Not really thought to be used on its own or even in a serious modded play-though I have an idea that may inspire a mod-maker that reads this, or someone wanting to get into modding. This idea can be used by anyone, although a shout out to me would be nice. My Idea is simple, and kinda crazy. The kerbals have had a population boom! Help them by launching rockets that hold subjects...er...kerbals!! Basicly, Parts that hold kerbals cost money, but when launched with kerbals they cost negative money (AKA they give you money). Recovering a kerbals costs money(AKA you lose money) because (supposively) you have to build them/find them a house (or something like that:confused:). Launch a ship consisting of full hitchhiker cans, it costs negative money, and you get money. This mod would be intended to be used with TAC (or Snacks, or another life support mod) so that this would only be useful to get just a little bit more money for that Jool Mission. Thanks for reading this, and I hope you get inspired! P.S. Moderators, I would recommend adding some kind of "idea" prefix for this category. If this post is in completely the wrong place and the sugestion does not make sense, and this post should be somewhere else, please inform me.

I thank everyone for their help, but just solved this problem by, disappointingly, removing EVE. I am going to try to re-install it with lower textures, but KSP launching so I am happy