Will this game always be for physics majors?

[GeoffMatheson]

I am a gamer, professionally an artist who is bad, but not terrible, at mathematics--will this game ever be accessible to me? I grasp the concepts that are at play. I understand that the atmosphere has varying levels of density, that I will need several stages where I need to have the right thrust per weight and fuel amount so that I can burn to specific levels of atmosphere, but I will never be able to make heads or tails of this expression:

dv/dt = (T(t) - ½*m(t)*0.0098*e-x(t)/5000Cd(t)*v2(t) - mu*m(t)/(RK+x(t))2)/m(t)

where mu = 3530.35 km3/s2 -- http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=12169.0

without serious, in-game, support. Diagrams/visual simulators/calculators where I can pre-plan my mission and see with immediate feedback if my plan will succeed. But do the game creators care about the accessibility of this game? Is this for physics majors by physics majors? I would love to learn about rocket science, and I think this game could be an AMAZING platform to teach the material but people like me need training wheels or at least an in game structure (tutorial) which presents the mathematics/physics in manageable chunks.

This could be as simple as interfaces which manage all the heavy computational lifting, or a story based tutorial which lets the player take on more responsibility in the missions as they succeed.

[Guest]

Guess. Works for me. I just got to Minimus by saying 'I wanna go there!' and doing it.

[SteevyT]

I also simply play by trial and error. I have a basic understanding of orbital dynamics and stuff like that, but I am clueless when it comes to equations. I am on around the tenth tweak of my newest spaceplane trying to get it to work properly. I don\'t do any math in this game.

[sting_auer]

Disregard mathematics.

Acquire moonbase.

In all seriousness, here is a sort of non-mathematics checklist:

1.) Fuel is good

2.) engines are good

3.) Any weight that doesn\'t come from one of these is evil and should die in a fire.

4.) ASAS is for people who can\'t fly that well without it (this includes me on atmospheric stages)

5.) Make your thrust from engines higher than your weight.

Follow these and you\'ll be fine.

[thorfinn]

Well, I am a physics major but...

Don\'t worry, you don\'t need to understand that to play the game. At all. The conditions of Kerbal space are forgiving enough that trial and error, with just a tiny bit of knowledge, will let you achieve the first objectives. From there on, you\'ll learn by doing and through Wikipedia. Now that we have better trajectory prediction in the map view, you\'ll also get an intuitive feel for complex maneuvers more easily (hint: open settings.cfg and change CONIC_PATCH_DRAW_MODE to 3. At least, I think it\'s more natural.)

I think that KSP is extremely good as a self-learning tool: I could make all the calculations in the correct way, but usually I just eyeball it, and I can say that some concepts of orbital mechanics have actually become more natural to me through experimentation. Some people make threads like the one you linked because KSP has inspired them to learn about the physics more rigorously; there\'s Closette, for instance, who reverse-engineered the (very wrong) aerodynamic model that KSP uses and derived the perfect ascent profile for a rocket, solving our instance of what is a notorious problem in control theory. You don\'t HAVE to do like them; but maybe, just maybe, after playing KSP for some months, you\'ll WANT to

Anyway, the developers are now putting at high priority some sort of 'charting table' mode, for planning maneuvers, that has been on the backburner for some time; it will be needed for mantaining this intuitiveness in the future missions

There is no 'simulation mode' because trial and error, and ludicrous failures, has been a very appealing feature of the game for now. There has been lots and lots of speculation concerning how to change this when the campaign mode will be introduced. A full-featured campaign witrh economics and a large tech tree has always been the end goal of KSP, and when failures will cost money the feel fo the game will have to change drastically. We\'ll see when we get there

[Guest]

Disregard mathematics.

Acquire moonbase.

LOL

+1 to you sir.

[Anomalous_Matter]

I\'m a teenager, and all of KSP makes sense to me. The easiest way to learn is by trial-and-error, not analyzing every but of information and making a perfect spacecraft. Play around, have some fun, watch a few explosions on the way, and eventually you\'ll be an expert. If something doesn\'t go well, ADD MOAR BOOSTERS it\'s all part of the game

P.S. SAS is your friend. Especially on planes.

[Tosh]

As for me (a physics major which have physics completely forgotten ), the game is attractive for giving an ability to, as Russians say, 'feel the physics with my butt'. I don\'t know no equations; I just mess with rocket designs -- and see how they fly. Not reaching orbit? Add another fuel tank. Not taking off? Add another engine. Still no use? Add another stage...

Ofc I could never do without a tutorial; IMO the game badly misses a tutorial on orbital maneuvering. But -- we have tutorials, right here in this forum. And once again, I mostly skip those equations and remember only the basic rules of thumb: 'burn to north when crossing target orbit' or 'burn full way pro-grade when being at 4 o\'clock of the target planet'. And, as always, result of your actions is instantly visible.

Moreover, if speaking about physics, I\'ve learned more when playing KSP than I have when studying in high school and university. Especially it concerns orbital maneuvering and aerodynamics.

So -- yep, the game is accessible to anyone who (a) is interested in space travels, and ( can read forums))

BTW 'General Discussion' section suits better for a topic like this

P.S. Darn, ninja\'d.

[Rico88]

Welcome to the Forums!

This game is a simulator, it\'s natural it uses the laws of physics, which are not easy understand and to utilize. However you don\'t have to worry, the developers are aware that not everyone is a physics expert. We are going to get a flight planing system in the next update, which will make you able to plan your missions and will offer visual guidance for the necesseary manuvers. More advanced tutorials are also a planned in the future.

Until then, there are a lot of user made tutorials and guides on the 'How to' thread, written in the laymen language, which will help you to learn and understand everything you need to know.

[GeoffMatheson]

You all make very good points. I am an artist and normally love to play and explore concepts through trial and error -- but this is physics! Kerbals are putting their lives at risk and it just frustrates me that I don\'t know how something is going to work before I fire it. :/

[SteevyT]

You all make very good points. I am an artist and normally love to play and explore concepts through trial and error -- but this is physics! Kerbals are putting their lives at risk and it just frustrates me that I don\'t know how something is going to work before I fire it. :/

Honestly, neither do I, I just have gotten very good at going 'Oh, ****' *spacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebar*

[707-Engineering]

You all make very good points. I am an artist and normally love to play and explore concepts through trial and error -- but this is physics! Kerbals are putting their lives at risk and it just frustrates me that I don\'t know how something is going to work before I fire it. :/

Tell yourself a lot of kerbals are going to die, either screaming or laughing, either way, trial and error was the way for me.. and i ended up on minmus.

just try out different designs, or look at known designs, and of course watch the tutorials here, they help greatly !

[sal_vager]

You eventually get a 'feel' as to what works, I can make a Mun capable ship now and not have to worry about it failing on the first flight, though I am new to aircraft.

I do not use any maths or ratios when building or flying,as has been mentioned KSP gives you the tools to eyeball your flight, once you get your head around things it becomes natural.

There are many user made tutorials to choose from should you need help though, and a strong community willing to help you out, all you have to do is ask

There are many good people here and we all started out like you.

[GeoffMatheson]

Honestly, neither do I, I just have gotten very good at going 'Oh, ****' *spacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebarspacebar*

ROFL. (im clearly taking this too seriously) but that moment when their screaming faces turn into static haunts me.

[Rico88]

You all make very good points. I am an artist and normally love to play and explore concepts through trial and error -- but this is physics! Kerbals are putting their lives at risk and it just frustrates me that I don\'t know how something is going to work before I fire it. :/

Yeah, happens to me too all the time

But as you play more and more you\'ll gain enough experience to more or less determine these things. You will learn how to make stable and efficient designs soon enough.

[Tosh]

You will learn how to make stable and efficient designs soon enough.

...or begin to enjoy Kerbals\' faces turning into static *chuckles evilly*

After all, these green dudes are here exactly for this purpose...

[thorfinn]

I am an artist and normally love to play and explore concepts through trial and error -- but this is physics!

Don\'t worry. Come to the dark side. We have candy. And many more girls than the engineering department

Well, right now we don\'t have game objectives, so if everything worked the first time, where would the challenge be?

Kerbals are putting their lives at risk and it just frustrates me that I don\'t know how something is going to work before I fire it. :/

I look forward to the day when KSP becomes the 'let\'s play Werner von Braun' simulator it\'s destined to be, and to play the campaign very carefully, without losing a single Kerbal. Actually, if I wasn\'t so thrilled by following in real time the developers while they make this game, the best thing to do would be forget at all KSP for at least a year and come back when it\'s complete....

...but this is not that day. Today, we crash rockets and kill Kerbals for science! ;D

Well, truth to be told I\'m with you concerning spaceplanes. One of the things that KSP teaches you is that rocket are easy, and aircraft are hard. Right now, we really don\'t have a way to tell a hideous deathtrap from a good aircraft without flying it in all conditions. Things like center of gravity and center of pressure markers in the Hangar are pretty much a requirement.... I hope they\'re implemented soon.

And, oh. Whenever you feel discouraged, just watch this:

...or begin to enjoy Kerbals\' faces turning into static *chuckles evilly*

After all, these green dudes are here exactly for this purpose...

It\'s interesting how three placeholder, barely-animated figurines became a sensation just because the one in the center seat smiled maniacally without concern for what happened

[Nibb31]

First of all, it\'s alpha software, so a tutorial and a campaign are planned, but they will not be done before the main game mechanics are done.

Secondly part of the fun is trial and error. The first challenge is to build a rocket that can get to orbit. You will crash a lot at first (just like most real life space programs), but you will start to get the hang of it. Once you get to orbit, try playing with the orbit, raising it, lowering, changing inclination, and practice reentering at the KSP.

One of the secrets of this game is to stop looking at the rocket and to learn to use the navball and the orbital map. For most missions, I hardly ever look at the rocket except for landings and keeping an eye on the fuel guages.

There is really no need for maths, you can pretty much do moon mission without even looking at the numbers, just by looking at the orbital map.

[HarvesteR]

This thread just made me very happy. One of the main concerns I had when the game was still unpublished, was that the mechanics of space flight would be too unintuitive and complicated and require players to go through too steep a learning curve.

The plan here is that the game will do a lot of math, so you don\'t have to. I\'m very happy to hear that people don\'t need to do any math anymore to go places. That means the plan is working.

@OP: A Flight Planning system is exactly what we are going to work on for the next update. You\'ll be able to create maneuvers on the map view, and see the changes they make to the orbits, before actually executing them. With that, learning the ropes of space flight should hopefully be much more intuitive, as you\'ll be able to learn by experimenting, without risking any failure... That is, until you actually get to flying the planned flight.

BTW, I\'m not a physics major either. I majored in Game Design, and never took a calculus class in my life. Whoever said Wikipedia is bad for learning was lying.

Cheers

[sgtblazing]

Guess. Works for me. I just got to Minimus by saying 'I wanna go there!' and doing it.

Exactly how I got there with stock parts.

[Bluejayek]

BTW, I\'m not a physics major either. I majored in Game Design, and never took a calculus class in my life. Whoever said Wikipedia is bad for learning was lying.

I\'m currently taking a masters in physics, and the first place I stop to learn anything is still wikipedia... When there is no wikipedia page on a topic I feel lost.

Also, I don\'t really do any math for orbits either. I just sort of guesstimate.

[Blexie]

As a pseudo-intellectual, the best way to learn is to keep firing things that look like they might work perhaps maybe if you\'re lucky.

Eventually you develop a kind of gut feeling as to whether something will work or not, without using maths, the best replacement is experience and dumb luck.

[Alehkhs]

This thread just made me very happy. One of the main concerns I had when the game was still unpublished, was that the mechanics of space flight would be too unintuitive and complicated and require players to go through too steep a learning curve.

The plan here is that the game will do a lot of math, so you don\'t have to. I\'m very happy to hear that people don\'t need to do any math anymore to go places. That means the plan is working.

@OP: A Flight Planning system is exactly what we are going to work on for the next update. You\'ll be able to create maneuvers on the map view, and see the changes they make to the orbits, before actually executing them. With that, learning the ropes of space flight should hopefully be much more intuitive, as you\'ll be able to learn by experimenting, without risking any failure... That is, until you actually get to flying the planned flight.

BTW, I\'m not a physics major either. I majored in Game Design, and never took a calculus class in my life. Whoever said Wikipedia is bad for learning was lying.

Cheers

Quick question concerning this: Once a 'campaign' of sorts is available in-game, will technologies like auto-symmetry, orbital maps, or flight planner be available to the player right from the start? I\'ve enjoyed being with KSP from the early stages and had the opportunity to accomplish goals before they were eased: Learning to build a working rocket without auto-symmetry, achieving orbit before the map was implemented, landing on the Mün before patched conics, 'docking' with lander legs before docking was officially supported and assumedly auto-pilot was involved.

I found and continue to find such challenges to be fun and feel that it would take away from the full progressive experience for such tools to be available right from the start for a campaign mode.

[GoodGuy]

Hey, don\'t talk about majoring in physics, I\'m just a 13-year old in 7th grade that knows more about orbits than my science teacher ;P. And all of that came from KSP. I also landed on the Mun at least 6 times before patched conics. (I also got a 76% average in Spanish, but I know more than most of my classmates. I got a 76 \'cause I didn\'t do most of my homework \'cause of KSP. :-[) I really think this is almost as intuitive as it gets.

The MOST important part of the game is the beginning. Thats where players are introduced to the game mechanics (not literally ). Its not when you suddenly get a calculator and it tell you to do this. Players are not interested in the main story right now. They are going to be getting used to the controls/what to do. The best advice about the beginning you can get is:

[glow=red,2,300] MAKE NO ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT THE PLAYER.[/glow]

The player might not even know that Kerbin is round. Or he might be Stephen Hawking. But NO MATTER who they are, they get KSP easily. This is why we like KSP. And keep up the good work, HarvesteR & co.

P.S I agree with not having all the instruments/tools at the beginning of the campaign.

[VincentMcConnell]

1.) Fuel is good

2.) engines are good

3.) Any weight that doesn\'t come from one of these is evil and should die in a fire.

ROFL!!!!