Game modes, playing style, mods and the definition of fun

[Hupf]

Preamble: This thread got me thinking, but as I don't want to necro it any further, let's try to broaden the Topic a Little.

Space is hard. Exactly how hard can, fortunately, be specified on a very individual basis, which I consider one of the strongest selling points for KSP.

• You just want to build humongous propulsion devices? Sandbox is for you
• There should be some kind of progression to be made, starting simple and getting new stuff over time? Science mode.
• onsider "smart" approaches to problems instead of MOAR BOOSTERS, like having something to do? Career.
• Manned vs unmanned should be a hard decision? Install a Life Support mod (to make manned harder) and RT in conjunction (to make unmanned harder as well, but in a different way, so that you're not tempted to just go unmanned for convenience)

Many other mods (FAR, SETI rebalance...) go into the same direction - "aspect <x> of the game is too easy/simplistic for my taste". Also, I wouldn't personally make a distinction too much on wether a playing style is implemented through a stock gamemode/difficulty setting or a mod (for example, my personal sweet spot is playing either sandbox, stock career or career+USI LS+RT). Also, it's a great practice in my point of view from Squad to include popular mods into the next stock versions - way to listen to your community, yay \o/

 

So, what is your approach on KSP? What kind of emotions to you expect to get from playing? Which kind of challenges tickle you the most? What type of in-game tasks rather annoys you? Which gameplay mod's usefulness would you, personally, question?

[Domfluff]

What I really like about KSP, as opposed to Orbiter, Microsoft Space Simulator or whatever, is that there's a wonderful mix of hardcore simulation and accessibility. The scaled-down solar system and the amazing way that Harvester managed to translate pages of orbital information into the navball+node system is nothing short of brilliant.

So... I tend to make things as difficult as possible for myself (e.g., life support mods, using the patches from Near Future Technology to make nukes use Hydrogen Fuel and downgrade the ion engines, etc.) but everything is a lot closer (and generally easier to get to) than it would be in RSS.

What I'm after in KSP is the chance to solve the same kind problems as in the real world in the general sense, rather than trying to get to the very specifics of the thing. For a manned Duna mission, you should still have to weigh the various options for getting there (Chemical/Nuclear/Electric engines), and the different types of mission architecture (Mars Direct-style ISRU and surface rendezvous, or an "all-up" approach with a larger spacecraft, for example).

For example, at the moment, I've been diving into Nuclear engines, and what purposes they are actually useful for, given the vast volume of hydrogen tanks. At present, I find that the equivalent of a "nuclear third stage" for a Saturn-V class super heavy lift vehicle isn't all it's cracked up to be - there is a payload increase, but it's fairly marginal, and it's debatable whether it's worth the effort. Nukes make a lot more sense on a large scale, and especially when you start talking about gas core or LOX-augmented designs. Likewise, playing around with electric engines has made me realise quite how important T:W ratio actually is for electric engines, since charge depletion is relative to burn time, engines can quickly outgrow the power of solar panels or reactors to (sensibly) support them, so using ion engines and the like for large-mass craft quickly becomes difficult to justify.

That kind of design/research/re-design cycle, and the associated reading it provokes is a large chunk of what I get out of KSP - it's problem solving on a large scale, when the problems are mostly of your own devising. I recently dropped non-essential supplies to a Mun base with airbags, just to see if that was a good idea, and how best to do that. They bounced for several kilometres, and ended up rolling around the rim of a crater, so a couple of Kerbals left the base in a Karibou rover to drive over and load them up. That whole expedition, including the problem of navigating across the surface, and driving into and out of steep crater walls, was entirely caused by my choices, actions and design - that's not something the game had set up for me in some kind of scripted sequence, and it was genuinely difficult and dramatic, in and of itself.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

After a couple of months I'm still trying to figure out how I like to play. One thing that is dangerous to my experience is getting greedy with mods, I have reduced them and added them many times already.

Quote

What kind of emotions to you expect to get from playing?

Generally unbridled rage then triumphant ecstasy.

[r4pt0r]

I happen to like KSP because it makes space easy honestly. I can slap together a few dozen parts and go land on the mun. I dont need to waste time crunching numbers, I've never done any math junk while playing. I just build and go, tweaking things in the event of failure. 

[Barklight]

13 minutes ago, Waxing_Kibbous said:

After a couple of months I'm still trying to figure out how I like to play. One thing that is dangerous to my experience is getting greedy with mods, I have reduced them and added them many times already.

Generally unbridled rage then triumphant ecstasy.

Couple this with my super hard mode campaign I started this past weekend.  Hard+SETI Balance+RT2+FAR+DangIt+USI LS (had to drop TAC)+Kerbal Construction Time.

More rage and frustration than anything else... Then pride & feeling genuinely great when something crazy works.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

Usually my style is:

-Easy to launch rockets/spaceplanes/rocket or spaceplane SSTO's

-No LS please.

-Realistic physics, no FAR tho.

 

[moogoob]

I play mostly sandbox, and don't run any mods other than Mechjeb and cosmetic things like EVE and Chatterer. When I do play career, I tend to go towards roleplay, taking inefficient craft or mission profiles in exchange for... well... jollies. *shrugs*

That said, I refuse to cheat fuel in. The fuel/thrust balance is one of the main balancing factors of the game.

[Alshain]

3 hours ago, Domfluff said:

What I really like about KSP, as opposed to Orbiter, Microsoft Space Simulator or whatever, is that there's a wonderful mix of hardcore simulation and accessibility. The scaled-down solar system and the amazing way that Harvester managed to translate pages of orbital information into the navball+node system is nothing short of brilliant.

The concept is certainly brilliant, the implementation leaves something to be desires

[Superfluous J]

I like that, in spite of my continual changing tastes regarding the game, there's always a setup in which I can do what I want. I've played Sandbox, Science, Career, modded, unmodded, modded in a different way, modded in another different way, and each one was unique in one way or another and uniquely memorable. And there are several ways I've played the game in the past that I'd like to revisit and try again, because the switch from 0.x to 1.x really changed how things work and what I did before, I can't do again even if everything else is exactly the same.

[ExavierMacbeth]

Personally I play a mod heavy Custom Career mode using Tree Toppler to instantly unlock all research but leaving the "Pay to Unlock" option for specific parts enabled. I like having the financial limitations & career mode missions without the science grind to get up to the things I like to play with.

Sorta bugs me we have a Science mode (Career without Missions/Finance) and not a Mission mode (Finance without Science) but at least there is a mod that allows me to generate the combination

[jros83]

I have enough fun vanilla that I feel no compulsion for any mods. To be frank, I feel mods have been overhyped and are forced on people by an alarmingly high number of the playerbase. It's to the point where you can't get advice on how to solve a problem in a vanilla game because everyone who answers is talking about how they solve it with a mod they are using, or what mod to get to solve your issue. I don't like that. I enjoy the game Squad built. Mods are nice and there's nothing wrong with them in principle or practice, what I feel is wrong is the fact that a large chunk of the community acts as if you NEED mods....

[r4pt0r]

13 minutes ago, jros83 said:

I have enough fun vanilla that I feel no compulsion for any mods. To be frank, I feel mods have been overhyped and are forced on people by an alarmingly high number of the playerbase. It's to the point where you can't get advice on how to solve a problem in a vanilla game because everyone who answers is talking about how they solve it with a mod they are using, or what mod to get to solve your issue. I don't like that. I enjoy the game Squad built. Mods are nice and there's nothing wrong with them in principle or practice, what I feel is wrong is the fact that a large chunk of the community acts as if you NEED mods....

I second that. I greatly enjoy the base game as squad designed it

[WuphonsReach]

9 hours ago, ExavierMacbeth said:

Personally I play a mod heavy Custom Career mode using Tree Toppler to instantly unlock all research but leaving the "Pay to Unlock" option for specific parts enabled. I like having the financial limitations & career mode missions without the science grind to get up to the things I like to play with.

Sorta bugs me we have a Science mode (Career without Missions/Finance) and not a Mission mode (Finance without Science) but at least there is a mod that allows me to generate the combination

I do something similar but set myself to start Career games with 5000 science and 500,000 funds.  Then I use a mod that lets me convert Science into funds at a ratio of 1000 funds per science point (Kerbal Science Exchange).  That gets me to about the middle of the tech tree from the start with a few upgraded buildings to tier 2.  After a few years of playing, I don't feel like starting from scratch in a new game, nor do I want everything unlocked.

My mod list always includes: KCT (Kerbal Construction Time), UKS/USI-LS for life support, Stage Recovery, State Funding and RemoteTech.

[WinkAllKerb'']

(sorry) : : : : : : : : : : : : 

 

• Synonyms
• Examples
• Word Origin

noun

1.

something that provides mirth or amusement:

Edited December 4, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''
i'm mortal ... yup you tooo ....

[Superfluous J]

9 hours ago, jros83 said:

I have enough fun vanilla that I feel no compulsion for any mods. To be frank, I feel mods have been overhyped and are forced on people by an alarmingly high number of the playerbase. It's to the point where you can't get advice on how to solve a problem in a vanilla game because everyone who answers is talking about how they solve it with a mod they are using, or what mod to get to solve your issue. I don't like that. I enjoy the game Squad built. Mods are nice and there's nothing wrong with them in principle or practice, what I feel is wrong is the fact that a large chunk of the community acts as if you NEED mods....

I try very hard to answer every question with a stock answer, and then recommend a mod or two that will make the person's life far easier. I notice a lot of others doing the same. I don't feel this is forcing anything on anybody, but instead making sure they are aware of all of their options.

[Wjolcz]

9 hours ago, jros83 said:

I have enough fun vanilla that I feel no compulsion for any mods. To be frank, I feel mods have been overhyped and are forced on people by an alarmingly high number of the playerbase. It's to the point where you can't get advice on how to solve a problem in a vanilla game because everyone who answers is talking about how they solve it with a mod they are using, or what mod to get to solve your issue. I don't like that. I enjoy the game Squad built. Mods are nice and there's nothing wrong with them in principle or practice, what I feel is wrong is the fact that a large chunk of the community acts as if you NEED mods....

Well... I really don't want to argue, but the game is almost unplayable without KER and KAC. At least for me. I also added KIS and KAS just in case I'll be in need of fuel hoses when on the ground. Also Watneying things, amirite?

 

I like the game a lot, but it still needs some things to be implemented.

[steuben]

I play bi-modaly. full career for the gameplay challenges, money and part constraints. sandbox for modeling, booms, goofing around, playing with  designs and ideas for career, etc.

I play with some mods hyper-edit, ker, rcs build-aid, hanger extender, kkv, kerbalcam. but no parts packs or resource packs.

[egoego]

Bi-modal is my style too. Career for some long time entertainment (and maybe even learn something), sandbox to just fool around and have some fun.

I prefer stock, just because my personel experience with mods in games in generall is bad. Too much hassle. There are some great mods and I am happy about any that get integrated into stock, but installing, getting them to run, keeping them updated ... No, thanks.

[Vermil]

My entire point with playing without mods, is to have fixed limitations. I am forced to adapt to the "realities" of my Kerbin world, instead of changing that and what is possible.
My challenge is to cope, and still put kerbals on the surface of Laythe, Eve etc. Not using mods is an important part of how I derive my fun and my satisfaction from KSP. I am Robert Goddard, I am Werner von Braun. I take small steps, learn and progress. Mods would ruin it all.

...That said, - I do not intend to play without mods forever. I think there will come a time when I have met all the challenges of exploration, journeying and discovery. Then I will likely want to do other things, like colonizing planets and moons. And since the stock game doesn't seem to evolve in that direction, it's likely I will want mods. Also, by then I'll know everything about piloting, and be pretty bored. So while I do think Mechjeb is for wankers, I suppose I'll use that too, one day.

The first mods I'll use will probably be things which I think are simply missing. Like habitat rocket modules for long distance trips (today I use structural parts), fuel tanks, bigger more modern command pods, larger diameter parts.

 

Edit: P.S.  One mod I'll never use is Hyperedit. That is just ridiculous amount of cheating yourself. If you use that, either for positioning or testing, you've never had any space program at all, and you don't have a clue what that is about. Judgmental, eh? Well, doesn't matter, there you go.

Edited December 5, 2015 by Vermil

[Guest]

I like it to be kind of realistic, and not complicated. USI Life Support, Remotetech, etc. are the mods I would say maximize the "fun v. realism" balance.

[Valerian]

I usually play in career without any extra parts with Better Than Starting Manned because I like to have a slow, balanced, and rewarding progression, and have a challenging game that forces me to find solutions with the limited resources, technologies, and maximum parts/weight, and have some strategy in the science tree.

However I feel like I'm missing out on all the many parts add-ons out there, because I'm afraid that the game would not be properly balanced (suddenly too much science at some point), and I have been a bit too lazy to try yet ^^

Anyway, right now I spend all of my time coding

Edited December 5, 2015 by Valerian

[CalculusWarrior]

On 03/12/2015, 19:48:05, jros83 said:

I have enough fun vanilla that I feel no compulsion for any mods. To be frank, I feel mods have been overhyped and are forced on people by an alarmingly high number of the playerbase. It's to the point where you can't get advice on how to solve a problem in a vanilla game because everyone who answers is talking about how they solve it with a mod they are using, or what mod to get to solve your issue. I don't like that. I enjoy the game Squad built. Mods are nice and there's nothing wrong with them in principle or practice, what I feel is wrong is the fact that a large chunk of the community acts as if you NEED mods....

Funnily enough, if you'd said that a year ago, I would have disagreed immensely; I was running a great deal of mods back then (I think I was running whichever x64 bit version of the game was out then). Now however, I only have a couple; Scatterer for visuals, and Kerbal Engineer. It's quite amazing how far the base game has come and how much more of a complete game it feels like, to the point where even many of the 'quality-of-life' improving mods are simply obsolete.

[kotomikun]

On 12/3/2015, 7:48:05, jros83 said:

I have enough fun vanilla that I feel no compulsion for any mods. To be frank, I feel mods have been overhyped and are forced on people by an alarmingly high number of the playerbase.

 

I have a lot of mods, mainly to expand the solar system and do calculations; but the only one I think everyone absolutely needs is PreciseNode or Kartographer or some other way of tweaking maneuver nodes. Finding an interplanetary trajectory without those is insanely fiddly and frustrating, even if you know where you should aim, adding a lot of artificial difficulty to going beyond Minmus. You pretty much have to use external transfer planners or hand-calculation to go anywhere interesting in pure stock. Or I do, at least; some people seem to be zen masters of the maneuver handles...

[Valerian]

3 hours ago, kotomikun said:

 

I have a lot of mods, mainly to expand the solar system and do calculations; but the only one I think everyone absolutely needs is PreciseNode or Kartographer or some other way of tweaking maneuver nodes. Finding an interplanetary trajectory without those is insanely fiddly and frustrating, even if you know where you should aim, adding a lot of artificial difficulty to going beyond Minmus. You pretty much have to use external transfer planners or hand-calculation to go anywhere interesting in pure stock. Or I do, at least; some people seem to be zen masters of the maneuver handles...

this, and a Kerbal Engineer ins the VAB/SPH for planning the Delta-V and TWR of each stage.

[panzer1b]

i have to say my enjoyment (or rather what i liked out of the game) has changed some from the time i started playing to now, but its currently and for a long time was military based.

I started out making very simple ships, trying to get something to not explode in my face (these days i consider getting to orbit a joke, but back then it wasnt all that easy).  I then took the time to try and land a 2 way mission with a kerbal to every planet.

After i finished with that, i got into military styled gameplay, since there wasnt all that much left to explore (and i have always enjoyed military or combat games the most of everything ive played), so i started to experiment with various ways to destroy stuff.  This was ~0.21 or so, so i wasnt the first to create the idea of massive capital ships and missiles, but it was before i even started using any forums or online stuff, so i actually started out with little experience and had to think of how to make both armor and weapons that worked.

Around this time i also discovered mods, such as the gattling gun by DYJ made ages ago (and i actually went so far as to create my own weapons mod roughly based on that minigun mod but better in every way), i used B9 alot (back when no real good large plane parts), damned robotics pack (which was before it was called infernal robotics) for stuff like turreted capital ships, mech suits, you name it.  Overall i started to use mods to fill holes i felt the stock game had, and to make certain designs easier.

After that i got into SSTOs extensively, since the idea of single-stage-to-anywhere really got stuck in my head, and i started experimenting with various ways to make them work.  I was a habitual abuser of RAM intake spam (like 30 intakes on a 20t ship), and well i got used to the pre-1.0 aero and how you could take advantage of it to get incredible ranges.  Nukes/ions and turbojets were most of my builds at this time, and many of them also had weapons.

I also continued constant military development, got into vehicles, especially turreted tanks for some time (spent a while developing both replicas and just overall cool looking turreted tanks that were combat useable) throughout this time, although i did focus way more on SSTAs (single stage to anywhere) then anything else.

When 0.90 hit i basically gave up on most mods, since i actually started to enjoy the challenge of stock constrcution, and especially stock combat.  Mods made combat easier, but it was more satisfying to destroy a hostile ship with stock weapons (which actually required a share of engineering and not just strap a missile-cannon onto a ship and point it a a target).  I started getting into some forum combat too, where i found alot of people made some very good ships.

After 1.0 hit, my SSTAs had to be redone so i focused alot on those and tried to recreate the glory days.  I succeeded in 1.0.4 where i made a craft that had 7.9K dV after reaching LKO, and it could go to most planets minus tylo, jool (landing on jool doesnt seem to work), eve (i think we all know why thats impossible with a SSTO that has to launch from kerbin and return), and moho (too much dV needed there and low TWR doesnt work there either).

Once 1.0.5 hit, my SSTAs all suffered majorly, and i just got fed up with the constant nerfing to SSTOs and only SSTOs, so i basically completely got over my obsession of sending single stage designs to anywhere, and gave up completely on anything that had excessive range and didnt use a regular staged launch to get in orbit.  I finished development of my final long range SSTO that i had to keep around, but teh rest of my SSTOs were basically intended for refueling when needed and not go anywhere on a single gas tank.

Now i focus alot on a good variety of combat with capital ships, fighters, bombers, tanks, buildings, ect.  I kinda focus more of appearance and sci-fi style then anything else, and just build a variety of primarily combat vessels, and then use them for combat, and learn from mistakes, flaws, and constantly improve my builds in both armor and firepower.  I also have learned alot of tricks to lower part count without killing off performance, an have been using those to try and keep my ships below 300 parts, and most else ~100-150 max.  I do still enjoy the occasional peaceful exploration mission, and do send those too.

Finally, i never got into science or career mode as i came from a time where sandbox was the only thing, and i have more then enough of an imagination to set up my own goals and scenarios.  ive often enough used hyperedit to say leave a stranded ship somewhere, and then sent a mission to save the crew, with the occasional mix of random pirate attacks and running into hostile factions along teh way (so even my rescue ships are armed).  I dont knwo why, but i cant seem to find any fun in 100% peaceful stuff, KSP is a military sci-fi space combat game and not a peaceful exploration game!  career and science modes i view as artificial tasks that i can just as easily set myself.  i do actually look at the price of craft (especially when i do faction vs faction so that one side can have cheaper but perhaps weaker ships but another more expensive/heavy/powerful but not numerical superiority).  I also impose my own technological limits that i see fit (the stock tech tree is crap anyways, why is the bloody armor plating so far up the tech tree, a ibeam or stuctural panel is stuff that we had before the 1800s), but do limit tech to say no nuclear engines (for pirates or primitive factions), or say no ions, no RTGs, limited negine oiptions based on ISP or cost, ect.

Ohh, and my current mods are mostly limited to cosmetic or utility stuff only.  I feel that 1.0 has enough parts to make almost every one of my builds doable in stock, and since i gto into DMP where i occasionally hang out, i like to keep my game and ships as stock as possible so that i can actually use them in multiplayer.  The only mods i still uyse that are not purely cosmetic are occasionally KAS, BDArmory (although less and less so as i like stock combat most), and sometimes the robotics pack when i want to make some whackjob walking robot or something completely stupid and unrealistic.