T1 Runway is a joke?

[Rocket Farmer]

Actually my planes typically start pre wheels so I usually have the upgraded runway by the time I get wheels.

2 really high lifted gantries with the plane on a 45 degree angle works fine. Fire up the engine, wait for it to spoil up and release the gantries and off you go.

Landing is gliding in at a slow speed till I'm 200-300 above and cruising at 50-60m/s then I hit the attached parachutes and drop on the runway smooth as silk.

I didn't know anybody actually used the T1 runway.

[Dawnstar]

I also mostly agree with the OP, despite the success reported by others.

A lot of this game works according to the sound rule that difficulty ought to start out approachable, and ramp up as players unlock more of the game and try more ambitious things.

I am also presented with a line of gravel that calls itself a runway, something you need real skill or good luck - or rockets - to get something off of.

At game start, if you build something that looks like a rocket and keep it simple, it will probably fly. Mostly straight up too, fulfilling simple contracts on the way. Fun!

At the same time, if you build something that looks like a simple plane, it probably won't even get off the ground if you haven't upgraded the runway. It'll veer off to one side and blow up starting with a wing. It will deconstruct if you try and go fast enough to launch many perfectly good designs. It is likely, in fact, to blow up over and over again, despite the overpowered landing gear and soupy lower atmosphere KSP provides to you, in ways that have turned a number of players, including me, off that portion of the game.

So, what changes do I suggest?

1. Make the runway asphalt-smooth from the start, and have the primary effect of level be to lengthen the track. A T1 runway can be about 1/2 to 2/3rds of the current length (check with new aero), and a max level runway should be quite a bit longer, especially with the more realistic aero.

2. Give the player more real-world takeoff and landing support, starting with a simple version of FAR's SPH/VAB aerodynamics calculator.

[Renkov]

I agree that the runway shouldn't be worse that the grass lands around it. I can see the different tiers being different lengths and widths. Lights up at night. Or has other attributes. Especially since the roadways around the Space Center are flat, they seem to have that technology available.

[Pecan]

I am a supporter of Dres and all things Lumpy, so I like the runway.

I'm kidding. I hate Dres.

That's just crazy talk.

May your trains ever derail!

[Greenfire32]

I'm OK with the bumpy T1 runway, so long as the terrain around it is worse off...which it isn't.

So my problem with the T1 runway isn't that it's pretty much how it should be, it's that the area on either side of the runway is MILES better for takeoff and landing.

Make the terrain bad enough that a runway is needed or (gasp) add population that would require a runway to avoid slamming into, and the problem more or less evaporates.

[GoSlash27]

That's just about the first thing you can build that resembles a plane (unless I've for some reason adapted myself into a weird way of unlocking tech). At that point I've unlocked the cockpit, only one type of wing, one type of control surface and the basic jet engine.

^ Yup. The first parts in the current tech tree lend themselves very well to building a rough field STOL airplane... although it's silly that we have to wait so long for landing gear.

I'd fuss about the odd tech tree progression, but they're changing all of that.

While I haven't had problems with the runway as-is, I like the idea of lengthening/ expanding/ reinforcing/ and lighting through upgrades.

There's no good reason to have it lumpier than the surrounding terrain.

Best,

-Slashy

[Volodyuka]

I've been asking for a longer runway for quite a few versions.

Not only a longer runway needed, but also an air brakes and turboprops for "mark 1" planes.

(I really want to made Tupolev tu-95 strategic bomber replica...)

[monophonic]

I agree that the runway shouldn't be worse that the grass lands around it. I can see the different tiers being different lengths and widths. Lights up at night. Or has other attributes. Especially since the roadways around the Space Center are flat, they seem to have that technology available.

Yes, this is good. Except you are forgetting that the rest of the space center is effectively at tier 2 level. #bringbackthebarn

[Xavven]

I also mostly agree with the OP, despite the success reported by others.

A lot of this game works according to the sound rule that difficulty ought to start out approachable, and ramp up as players unlock more of the game and try more ambitious things.

I am also presented with a line of gravel that calls itself a runway, something you need real skill or good luck - or rockets - to get something off of.

At game start, if you build something that looks like a rocket and keep it simple, it will probably fly. Mostly straight up too, fulfilling simple contracts on the way. Fun!

At the same time, if you build something that looks like a simple plane, it probably won't even get off the ground if you haven't upgraded the runway. It'll veer off to one side and blow up starting with a wing. It will deconstruct if you try and go fast enough to launch many perfectly good designs. It is likely, in fact, to blow up over and over again, despite the overpowered landing gear and soupy lower atmosphere KSP provides to you, in ways that have turned a number of players, including me, off that portion of the game.

So, what changes do I suggest?

1. Make the runway asphalt-smooth from the start, and have the primary effect of level be to lengthen the track. A T1 runway can be about 1/2 to 2/3rds of the current length (check with new aero), and a max level runway should be quite a bit longer, especially with the more realistic aero.

2. Give the player more real-world takeoff and landing support, starting with a simple version of FAR's SPH/VAB aerodynamics calculator.

I was thinking about this very concept as I was reading this thread. Difficulty progression is very important. KSP needs to give players what they need to succeed with small planes, limited parts, and low player skill, but force you to upgrade the runway before attempting larger planes with more parts once the player's skill has improved.

A lumpy runway penalizes players with low skill, so it's the wrong solution. It should start off as pavement.

I actually think that widening the runway is the solution, as well as having weight limits just like the launchpad has. This would encourage new players to build simple, light, single engine planes before trying out SSTOs, SSTOs that haul a decent payload, and SSTOs that have enough leftover delta-v to actually go somewhere else.

This might be getting a little off topic, but I think Squad needs to consider this same game progression concept when it comes to the tracking station. New players NEED maneuver nodes and patched conics to get to the Mun. It turns out that it's the EXPERIENCED players that are able to get there in early game. That's backwards! Here, I'll propose a solution: early tracking station gives you nodes and patched conics from the get-go, but only within the Kerbin system. To get that info on interplanetary journeys, you need bigger dishes with more highly accurate measurements, etc. Maybe Tier 2 gets you nodes and patched conics out to Eve but not Moho, and Duna but not Dres/Jool/Eeloo. T3 gets you everything Moho to Eeloo. This gives new players the tools they need and encourages them to explore areas that are less challenging until their skill is built up enough to tackle the harder celestial bodies.

- - - Updated - - -

Has Squad considered hiring a game consultant, by the way? I've been binge watching Extra Credits on YouTube where they talk about game design. The author (goes by the name James) is a game developer consultant and he has a ton of insight. (No, I'm not affiliated with them in any way.)

[worir4]

I would love for some coloured runway lights as you level up. And maybe something on the screen to indicate the distance from the runway as you get to a higher level. It would cost the flag industry but pilots would appreciate it.

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

The whole upgrade system is a joke, I just edited all my buildings to t3.

[impyre]

I chalk it up to the runway being a "work in progress". If you've ever looked at construction areas, they are often quite uneven (due to machinery moving around and dirt being shuffled)... even moreso than surrounding terrain. Crop dusters often use a smooth grassy field for takeoffs and landings... it seems to me that if you're trying to launch/land a plane that cannot handle landing in a construction zone, you should probably taxi to the field before takeoff and land on the field when returning.

[Superfluous J]

I actually think that ... the solution [is] having weight limits just like the launchpad has.

The runway DOES have weight limits, just like the launchpad has.

Just to be clear, I do not like the starting runway either. I just have no problem spending the very low cost to upgrade it before ever using it to take off or land, and I have no problem turning my planes around if I somehow unlock landing gear before I've upgraded it.

I also dislike the idea concept of playing ultra hardcore mode and then getting mad at anything that causes you to fail. That includes bugs and design decisions you don't agree with. Bugs are WHY I won't play with no reverts or quicksaves.

[impyre]

I would love for some coloured runway lights as you level up. And maybe something on the screen to indicate the distance from the runway as you get to a higher level. It would cost the flag industry but pilots would appreciate it.

Some kind of ILS hud system that's toggleable when in a cockpit would be friggin awesome. It's capabilities could even scale with an upgraded runway. IE: unlocking more approach functions and greater ranges.

- - - Updated - - -

The runway DOES have weight limits, just like the launchpad has.

Just to be clear, I do not like the starting runway either. I just have no problem spending the very low cost to upgrade it before ever using it to take off or land, and I have no problem turning my planes around if I somehow unlock landing gear before I've upgraded it.

I also dislike the idea concept of playing ultra hardcore mode and then getting mad at anything that causes you to fail. That includes bugs and design decisions you don't agree with. Bugs are WHY I won't play with no reverts or quicksaves.

Also, what he said. (I upgraded mine once before ever using my first aircraft... which makes sense since you don't even get decent aircraft parts until later in the tech tree anyhow)

- - - Updated - - -

I was thinking about this very concept as I was reading this thread. Difficulty progression is very important. KSP needs to give players what they need to succeed with small planes, limited parts, and low player skill, but force you to upgrade the runway before attempting larger planes with more parts once the player's skill has improved.

A lumpy runway penalizes players with low skill, so it's the wrong solution. It should start off as pavement.

I actually think that widening the runway is the solution, as well as having weight limits just like the launchpad has. This would encourage new players to build simple, light, single engine planes before trying out SSTOs, SSTOs that haul a decent payload, and SSTOs that have enough leftover delta-v to actually go somewhere else.

This might be getting a little off topic, but I think Squad needs to consider this same game progression concept when it comes to the tracking station. New players NEED maneuver nodes and patched conics to get to the Mun. It turns out that it's the EXPERIENCED players that are able to get there in early game. That's backwards! Here, I'll propose a solution: early tracking station gives you nodes and patched conics from the get-go, but only within the Kerbin system. To get that info on interplanetary journeys, you need bigger dishes with more highly accurate measurements, etc. Maybe Tier 2 gets you nodes and patched conics out to Eve but not Moho, and Duna but not Dres/Jool/Eeloo. T3 gets you everything Moho to Eeloo. This gives new players the tools they need and encourages them to explore areas that are less challenging until their skill is built up enough to tackle the harder celestial bodies.

- - - Updated - - -

Has Squad considered hiring a game consultant, by the way? I've been binge watching Extra Credits on YouTube where they talk about game design. The author (goes by the name James) is a game developer consultant and he has a ton of insight. (No, I'm not affiliated with them in any way.)

I agree with everything you said. Extra credits is awesome. Your suggestion for how to scale the runway is excellent... it makes the most sense in my opinion. Adding ILS support could also be an upgrade objective. But I also *really* like the length idea too.

[MGCJerry]

I like the T1 runway. It would be great in sandbox if you can rollback to previous tiers of buildings (but not their limitations). I'd love the ability to be able to build rovers in the SPH and launch them directly onto the "rallyway" and play around. Id even like if there was a similar type landscape near KSC to test rovers.

[impyre]

Maybe there should be a "proving ground" that you can construct or upgrade to resemble less-friendly lithospheres. Slopes and hilly areas, small craters, etc... you could test lander and rover layouts.

[Baenki]

Why don't make the Tier I runway resemble an airfield for small sports planes.

The runway itself could be a smooth, ground level strip of grass which is outlined by some flags and lights.

You could still have the Tier I limitations. Heavy airplanes would sink into the ground, so weight and part limit.

To limit it's length put some stoppers on the end. A fence, maybe a heap of dirt.

Just for the looks put some white numbers and an outline on the grass. Like the paint on soccer fields.

Then for TII upgrade to a smooth, groundlevel dirt runway. Just a higher mass/part and size limit.

After that a simple paved airfield which is a little longer.

For the last Tier ad a fully fledged, extra long runway, like the RL space shuttle used.

[Renegrade]

In Soviet Russia, runway lands on YOU!!!

Oh wait, we're discussing (again) how the T1 runway sucks, not making runway jokes.

Anyhow, to repeat my sentiment from the last thread like this, the idiocy isn't in the fact that the runway is more like a mountain range than a road, but that the terrain (and shoulders) around the runway is significantly smoother than the actual runway itself..

[Guest]

Whole "upgrade" and "tycoon" things is a joke.

Really, when first LF/OX rockets flew, not even mentioning Gagarin's flight, as first capsule is manned, there were a heap of V and Star shaped piston engines available, constant speed props, even turbines were widely used, at least at Gagarin/Sheppard's time. Not mentioning long concrete runways, all kinds of airplane parts and so on. Bah!

Where is my V-1710 Allisons with contra-rotating props?!!!

[Renegrade]

Whole "upgrade" and "tycoon" things is a joke.

Really, when first LF/OX rockets flew, not even mentioning Gagarin's flight, as first capsule is manned, there were a heap of V and Star shaped piston engines available, constant speed props, even turbines were widely used, at least at Gagarin/Sheppard's time. Not mentioning long concrete runways, all kinds of airplane parts and so on. Bah!

Uh, the tech tree is just flat out insane (and supposedly redesigned for 1.0 anyhow). I like how wheels are a T5/T7 technology for instance.. wheels.

Granted the airplane wheels are magic semi-indestructible weapons of mass non-destruction, but that's due to the way KSP handles collisions.

[monstah]

Whole "upgrade" and "tycoon" things is a joke.

Really, when first LF/OX rockets flew, not even mentioning Gagarin's flight, as first capsule is manned, there were a heap of V and Star shaped piston engines available, constant speed props, even turbines were widely used, at least at Gagarin/Sheppard's time. Not mentioning long concrete runways, all kinds of airplane parts and so on. Bah!

Where is my V-1710 Allisons with contra-rotating props?!!!

Yeah, science mode came out and I was REALLY into it. I never went back to sandbox since, and now I look back and I just can't figure why. The grindfest, just so pointless.

[Alshain]

My problem with the T1 runway is not that it is hard, but that it is hard and then gets easier. Your at T1 when the game starts, presumably for a new player that is the first thing you get, which discourages plane building for new players. It's like it is backward in a way. Really, you could probably leave it a little bumpy, but it's just too extreme, even landing an low speed it makes your plane not want to stay on the ground. I'm not opposed to the idea, but I just don't think it worked the way it was envisioned, largely due to the way the game is designed.

[Renegrade]

My problem with the T1 runway is not that it is hard, but that it is hard and then gets easier.

Eh, that's not that big of a deal in and of itself -- the other upgrades also make things easier afterall. However, I would agree that the scale of the difficulty is too high and newbie-smacking. Which just brings to light the fact that the surrounding terrain is still better as a runway than the runway itself. The kerbals could have just used one of those powder-line making things that schools use and drawn a halfway decent tier-1 runway on the bloody grass.

The mass limit is a sufficient limitation for it anyhow.

Actualy, that lines-on-grass concept would make a good tier-1 runway. Make a smallish-sized green runway with white lines for demarcation, with a relatively smooth, large model (like the T2 runway's model). The newbies would then be able to practice precision landing on the small outline, but wouldn't instantly crash and burn if they overshot a bit.

[Alshain]

Actualy, that lines-on-grass concept would make a good tier-1 runway. Make a smallish-sized green runway with white lines for demarcation, with a relatively smooth, large model (like the T2 runway's model). The newbies would then be able to practice precision landing on the small outline, but wouldn't instantly crash and burn if they overshot a bit.

If they bring back the barn, that's kind what I think they will end up having. Grass runways are not unheard of.

[Renegrade]

If they bring back the barn, that's kind what I think they will end up having. Grass runways are not unheard of.

That would certainly be better than the current T1 bumpy monstrosity.