Militarization of KSP

[Geschosskopf]

Mirror Kerbalverse Bob agrees with you.

Bizarro! Bizarro!

https://youtu.be/F6ROXLtorwY

[sdj64]

On one hand, the idea of Kerbals going to war seems like something they would never do. On the other hand, the military was and still is a major source of funding for air and space exploration. Many cool designs to make replicas and draw inspiration from have military roots and it's very satisfying to build military designs that work like the real thing. For me, I enjoy the challenge of making missiles out of stock parts, but others might appreciate some small parts more suited for this.

It might be cool to see a mass driver or planetary impact science part in stock that shoots slugs of ore, maybe. Of course people could use it as a weapon, but its intended use would be peaceful.

[Wallygator]

No thank you.

It's not Kerbal Space War...

Go get your war mods, install them and enjoy yourself.

Definitely NOT stock please.

[Sawyer7as]

Couldn't be more against any weapons in this game. To me, this game reminds me of playing astronaut as a kid. It's not a bout fighting it's about discovery, wonder, exploration. Not to mention I even learned something

[Ehco Corrallo]

When I'm playing KSP, I'm playing KSP for science and the glory of space. 

On the other hand, building fighter aircraft with BD Armory is a lot of fun. And occasionally I go on tangents where I do nothing but build combat vehicles for a few hours.

Mostly though, I build airplanes and go to space. 

[egoego]

On 16.6.2015 at 7:57 PM, Wallygator said:

No thank you.

It's not Kerbal Space War...

Go get your war mods, install them and enjoy yourself.

Definitely NOT stock please.

Can't say it better.

[Wjolcz]

Eh. It's been discussed so many times.

The main question is: Would you go exploring if you had to keep fighting on Kerbin all the time?

Answer it yourself.

Edited January 28, 2016 by Veeltch

[adsii1970]

47 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Eh. It's been discussed so many times.

The main question is: Would you go exploring if you had to keep fighting on Kerbin all the time?

Answer it yourself.

The answer is a resounding "NO!" and all we have to do is look at the Earth and her nations. No, I am  not advocating dismantling of the military for obvious reasons, but how much more of the global resources dumped into the military could benefit general society through the development of a global space program with each nation contributing SOMETHING to it.

The problem is that many people fail to understand the basics of human nature, yet want to condemn humankind for doing what has been done for hundreds of thousands of years:

• Yes, there are weapons today that early humans did not have; however, just as in modern times, those tribes that were advanced possessed weapons of great power compared to those that weren't so advanced. A flint arrow-point is great if the other tribe doesn't have archery - but an iron arrow point is much more lethal than a flint one... To possess better weapons than your enemies has always been a basic quest of humankind.
• There is security in having weapons. A good illustration of this is the movie Star Trek: Final Frontier. On the the "planet of galactic peace" the movie begins with a scene with a man who has fashioned a high-powered air rifle that shoots pebbles - which while not as powerful as a phaser, it is just as lethal. Why did this being have one? It provided him a sense of security.

Then there is a second question that must be addressed - should space vehicles be armed? This answer is a resounding YES, but for numerous reasons:

• It is also human nature to assume danger is near in any sort of unfamiliar situation encountered. This is why I believe there will eventually be deep space human craft that will have some sort of armament. Not because there is a hope for a galactic war, but for the sense of security that it would provide for the crew. Let's face it, no one likes to be caught off guard.
• It is also for appearances - imagine the horror on Earth that would happen if an unarmed space craft was journeying out of our solar system and was attacked - it could be ugly for the space program because 1) the crew didn't have any means to defend themselves, or 2) those who would claim this shows the Earth is not ready for deep space exploration...
• Spacecraft are expensive and to reduce the liability of loss, manned spacecraft that venture into deep space should be armed. This simply makes sense. Even cruise ships carry light weapons "just in case" with crew that are trained in their use.

Now that I've shared an introduction of the psychology of weapons and space weaponization, I do lightly arm my deep space craft but not for the "desire" to create battles, etc. I do it for the reasons stated above when understanding human psychology. For any intelligent space-faring race, it would be a little off for them to undergo the expense of crew training, building of a spacecraft for deep space exploration, and not arm it, even if it was only lightly armed.

[BloodDusk]

Since when we stopped using weapons in KSP? We're just using missiles and stuff that would originally go into ICBMs, warheads and fighter planes, bombers, etc. for a different purpose.

A screwdriver remains a screwdriver, even if you hammer nails with it.

[Just Jim]

Myself, I find the idea of militarizing Kerbals quite distasteful.  Even my fan-fiction project I'm trying to avoid real weapons at all costs. 
Lately I'm turned off my most combat games.  See, I was an infantry medic in the Army in the 80's, and while I didn't see much of anything in the way of real combat, I was trained in it pretty much daily.  And in my opinion, most combat games these days seem to be written and developed by folk that never served a day in their lives. They're more like Hollywood's idea of combat, and just not very realistic.

KSP, on the other hand, is a great peaceful way to explore the universe, without the combat.  I think that's what appeals to me most.  All I need to do is watch 10-15 minutes of the nightly news, see all the hate and war and violence in the world, and I can't get KSP loaded fast enough!

[Mitchz95]

I sometimes dabble in military creations, but I still treat KSP as a game of exploration and discovery. I wouldn't judge those who do lots of warfare and stuff, but I wouldn't want it in the stock game.

[Matuchkin]

Doesn't seem right (what I voted), but to an extent. We can make it so that, in the early career mode, the only missions you get are from the navy, regarding ICBMs. After you are reluctantly given a small satellite contract, society freaks out about it and you are forced to punch in an array of space missions, kickstarting your space program.

[Just Jim]

36 minutes ago, BloodDusk said:

Since when we stopped using weapons in KSP? We're just using missiles and stuff that would originally go into ICBMs, warheads and fighter planes, bombers, etc. for a different purpose.

A screwdriver remains a screwdriver, even if you hammer nails with it.

But you have to bear in mind, history shows Wernher von Braun was opposed to using his rockets as weapons.  He was originally interested in space exploration, but he didn't get much of a choice in the matter.  Build the V2 as a weapon of vengeance, or be shot...

In my opinion, the screwdriver remained a screwdriver until Hitler used it as a hammer!

Edited January 28, 2016 by Just Jim

[razark]

3 hours ago, Veeltch said:

The main question is: Would you go exploring if you had to keep fighting on Kerbin all the time?

Well, the majority of space exploration happened during the Cold War, largely as a result of the conflict between the superpowers, using a lot of equipment originally designed for war, flown by people who were active-duty military pilots.  Even the moon landings happened while the U.S. was engaged in an overseas war.

Would you go exploring if you had to keep fighting on Kerbin all the time?  Nothing says adding military stuff requires you to play KSP as a fighting game.  There's no reason you can't do both, or choose to focus on one.
Is the military necessary in KSP?  No.
Would it fit if added?  Yes.
Should it be added?  No, leave it for mods.

[adsii1970]

2 hours ago, Just Jim said:

But you have to bear in mind, history shows Wernher von Braun was opposed to using his rockets as weapons.  He was originally interested in space exploration, but he didn't get much of a choice in the matter.  Build the V2 as a weapon of vengeance, or be shot...

In my opinion, the screwdriver remained a screwdriver until Hitler used it as a hammer!

Yes, and although I am not excusing the military history of Germany, I will say this - most scientific discoveries have happened as the result of military needs. As you know, it was the V-2 program and its captured rockets that allowed the U.S. to gain years' worth of scientific research in aerospace engineering and basic rocketry. Unfortunately, it is a reality of the connection between science, exploration, and the military.

And no, Hitler never changed the screwdriver into a hammer. The screwdriver remained just that - a screwdriver that was being used as a hammer. Once it is put back in the toolbox, it doesn't magically grow claws nor develop a flattened edge prime for percussion use. It was simply a tool that was used improperty, albeit, it did work...

 

[Just Jim]

26 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

Yes, and although I am not excusing the military history of Germany, I will say this - most scientific discoveries have happened as the result of military needs. As you know, it was the V-2 program and its captured rockets that allowed the U.S. to gain years' worth of scientific research in aerospace engineering and basic rocketry. Unfortunately, it is a reality of the connection between science, exploration, and the military.

And no, Hitler never changed the screwdriver into a hammer. The screwdriver remained just that - a screwdriver that was being used as a hammer. Once it is put back in the toolbox, it doesn't magically grow claws nor develop a flattened edge prime for percussion use. It was simply a tool that was used improperty, albeit, it did work...

 

Yeah, I understand.

It's just I've always thought one of the great ironies of the war, and the V2, was von Braun himself just wanted to go to space. 

Edited January 28, 2016 by Just Jim

[BloodDusk]

3 hours ago, Just Jim said:

But you have to bear in mind, history shows Wernher von Braun was opposed to using his rockets as weapons.  He was originally interested in space exploration, but he didn't get much of a choice in the matter.  Build the V2 as a weapon of vengeance, or be shot...

In my opinion, the screwdriver remained a screwdriver until Hitler used it as a hammer!

But that's one guy specifically. You could say the same thing about Mikhail Kalashnikov. He wanted to do farm equipment and things to help people instead.

Sure, these people had their past haunt them for the rest of their lives, but trying to sugar coat everything is a bit dull. At least give people options. Plus, these types of weapons have other uses besides military use. For example, bombs are used in mining, which is a mechanic present in KSP.

[magnemoe]

3 hours ago, Just Jim said:

Myself, I find the idea of militarizing Kerbals quite distasteful.  Even my fan-fiction project I'm trying to avoid real weapons at all costs. 
Lately I'm turned off my most combat games.  See, I was an infantry medic in the Army in the 80's, and while I didn't see much of anything in the way of real combat, I was trained in it pretty much daily.  And in my opinion, most combat games these days seem to be written and developed by folk that never served a day in their lives. They're more like Hollywood's idea of combat, and just not very realistic.

KSP, on the other hand, is a great peaceful way to explore the universe, without the combat.  I think that's what appeals to me most.  All I need to do is watch 10-15 minutes of the nightly news, see all the hate and war and violence in the world, and I can't get KSP loaded fast enough!

Using the KSP engine for an realistic space combat game would be an good idea.
But yes this should be an separate game who would probably not use kerbals that is unless the PR effect of using them was high enough. 
Game would be very different in many way. Far more scifi. in that nerva would be an starter engine, fusion and orion would be mid game. 
it would require multiplayer with the complication that the players might want to mess up for each other in any way also outside of combat. 

 

[Guest]

There's enough war and the glorification thereof everywhere else already. I certainly don't want to see it in KSP. If people wish to use mods that add weapons and warheads to their game, that's their business. Keep it out of the stock game.

[PTNLemay]

I once had a thought that it would be fun to implement a sort of ulterior end-game campaign in career mode where strange alien spacecrafts appear out beyond the orbit of Eeloo.  Big ships the size of large asteroids filled with smaller ships.  Up till this point the Kerbals had been a peace-loving and fully cooperating civilization, but these invaders quickly deploy weapons and start attacking the infrastructure that the player has established all throughout the game up till now.  And that would prompt the player to unlock the next level of the tech tree, weapons.

Maybe also add a further tech tree beyond that one that would lead to alien translators and interstellar diplomacy.  So you could choose to fully destroy the invaders, failing that you'd be destroyed by them, or you'd try and befriend them.  Either way, in the end we'd find out that the invaders are humans.

[Wallygator]

24 minutes ago, PTNLemay said:

I once had a thought that it would be fun to implement a sort of ulterior end-game campaign in career mode where strange alien spacecrafts appear out beyond the orbit of Eeloo.  Big ships the size of large asteroids filled with smaller ships.  Up till this point the Kerbals had been a peace-loving and fully cooperating civilization, but these invaders quickly deploy weapons and start attacking the infrastructure that the player has established all throughout the game up till now.  And that would prompt the player to unlock the next level of the tech tree, weapons.

Maybe also add a further tech tree beyond that one that would lead to alien translators and interstellar diplomacy.  So you could choose to fully destroy the invaders, failing that you'd be destroyed by them, or you'd try and befriend them.  Either way, in the end we'd find out that the invaders are humans.

Humans. Yes.

Likely Meri-kans with a highly weaponised space programme destined to create and sustain an exceptional-istic galactic neoliberal hegemony...  Opps... sorry I was channelling my inner Chkomsky there...  (Cracked myself up on that one, really.)

But seriously and on topic even more: NO.

[Mitchz95]

1 hour ago, PTNLemay said:

I once had a thought that it would be fun to implement a sort of ulterior end-game campaign in career mode where strange alien spacecrafts appear out beyond the orbit of Eeloo.  Big ships the size of large asteroids filled with smaller ships.  Up till this point the Kerbals had been a peace-loving and fully cooperating civilization, but these invaders quickly deploy weapons and start attacking the infrastructure that the player has established all throughout the game up till now.  And that would prompt the player to unlock the next level of the tech tree, weapons.

Maybe also add a further tech tree beyond that one that would lead to alien translators and interstellar diplomacy.  So you could choose to fully destroy the invaders, failing that you'd be destroyed by them, or you'd try and befriend them.  Either way, in the end we'd find out that the invaders are humans.

Cool idea, but definitely not the kind of thing I'd want to see in stock. I'd happily try out a mod that does this, though.

[Fluburtur]

I wouldn't want weapons in stock but setting up a base with BDA and attacking it is fun, and most of the time it's stuff controlled by probe core because my base chassis has seats and I don't want to bother putting kerbs in it.

And I always use the same pilot to do that and I always bring her home when im not flying drones.

Blowing random stuff up can be relaxing between two missions but again, when I play serious it's 100% stock

[helaeon]

People are free to do with their own games whatever they wish.

For myself, I've been playing the ultra violent games from back in the DOS days even before we even had 3d accelerators. Frankly I got really good at blowing stuff up and I got bored. KSP the point is don't kill anyone and don't blow anything up. Seems far far more challenging to me.

I also rather like that the only tyranny the Kerbals know is the rocket equation. If you're fighting a war one group is trying to dominate or subjugate another, I like that the Kerbals seem to not be interested in that at all.

[panzer1b]

Personally, military things is what keeps me playing KSP, since i basically explored most of the places ive wanted to explore, and peace, while good in reality, is kinda boring in games (at least for me).

That said, i am a fan of 100% stock weapons, as its fun to try to find a way to destroy someone with seemingly innocent parts like rocket engines with ibeams strapped on the front or similar tech.  I used to be an avid mod fan, and back when i even made my own spin off of the DYJ gattling gun mod, as well as helped baha some with his mod, but these days i stick to stock weapons as its way more challenging and rewarding to destroy stuff with those.  Ohh, and stock weapons are actually more akin to WW2 technology, using unguided ballistic impactors, and primitive guided missiles like those wire guided ones germany was developing, and stock ksp combat is more like older technology compared to the (not really my thing) modern missiles everywhere, automatic aiming systems, and plasma rifles the military uses (ofc they keep the plasma rifles at area 51 as those are top secret ).

And in case anyone asked, im against any squad weapons, itd make the game less fun if we didnt have to engineer weapons but were given them from the start.