Update the 'What Not To Suggest' List

[Glaran K'erman]

A ) It's organized in a very clumsy way. Why start with "Already Announced..." and then go on to categorize things by type? Just make it "Announced/Planned" and "Don't Suggest"

B ) Hasn't been updated since before the release of 1.0 and it shows. The links to "relevant" mods for things not to suggest is laughably outdated and wildly incomplete. How about it says not to suggest new asteroids and they don't even have a link to the OFFICIAL Asteroid Day mod?!

C ) The list is not useful or fairly enforceable unless it is regularly updated and reconsidered. Why is it that someone could in theory post all day on a thread for Kerbal Construction Time to be made stock when the chances that will happen approach infinitely close to impossible, and my thread on adding simple life support gets squashed immediately? I don't know either (well maybe I do, should have made OP more informative and checked the list, but then I would have posted something like this and included my request for life support anyway)

 

You see, this is my way of saying that adding a simple Supplies-only (just a single resource) system of life support that drains until the kerbals stop working is not a ridiculous ask at all. What would it add? Four parts (radial, 1.25, 2.5, 3.75 tank) and some non-brain-melting code? Not as ridiculous as suggesting aliens for sure, which I agree belongs on a list of things not to suggest.

By the way, feel free to close this if you really want to. Got my point across now anyhow 

Edited January 4, 2016 by Glaran K'erman

[sal_vager]

You're right it needs updating.

WNTS was originally created because many things were asked with such frequency that it was annoying the members, an example at the time was multiplayer, a more recent example is gas planet 2.

Other things were added because there's no real sense in asking for it, such as weapons and combat, as Squad has no intention of making KSP that sort of game.

 

We don't see the frequency we used to on many topics so many things could be removed, and as the WNTS list was intended to serve the members of this forum it'd make sense to fill it with topics the members don't want to see repeated.

 

Suggestions welcome

[pandaman]

Yes, agreed the WNTS list needs updating.

Whilst the OP's suggestion for a simple LF system is a fair one.  It has been suggested many times  already and also discussed fairly recently.

So,  might I suggest that, as well as a list of mods, the WNTS list also has a list and links to threads that cover the items in it.  This would allow those with suggestions and ideas to easily check out previous discussions on the subject and post in the relevant existing threads.

Edited January 3, 2016 by pandaman

[Alshain]

I don't know why it is there at all if it doesn't get enforced (which it generally doesn't, at least not consistently).  I find it strange that the OP's thread got closed but this one went on for months at the top of this forum and is still technically open (even though it is dead now).  The thread is disregarded half the time and then used as a reason to close threads the other half.  I would say either be consistent or unsticky it, lock it, and be done.

Edited January 3, 2016 by Alshain

[SpaceplaneAddict]

What to add to the WNTS list: Life Support, 'cause I'm sure it's been and is being suggested many multiple tiems. That typo was intentional

[sal_vager]

I'm liking @pandaman's and @SpaceplaneAddict's suggestions so far.

There is a need for the list, but it needs to do what it was set out to do.

[Pthigrivi]

I know it's been been bandied about before, but there could be a place where frequently discussed topics like LS and Multiplayer could be consolidated to keep down on repetitive threads. I tend to think there's a value in brainstorming and hashing out how certain features might eventually be implemented; it's generally the "I want X!" threads that wear thin, which may be where you fell with your post.

I happen to be with you on life support, though I doubt we'd see it before 1.3 even. It's not just the parts, its really how it affects time-warp dynamics. It begs planning tools so players can estimate flight-duration ahead of time and don't warp to Jool and kill (or disable) all of their kerbals. Though I agree it would really make this game if it was done right, I think Squad are right to consider it warily. There are categories of features like weapons and other star systems that are on the obvious 'no' list, others like clouds that are on the 'yes, eventually' list. LS is a bit awkward because its on the 'maybe' list. 

Just to throw out some ideas for sticky topics, these tend to come up a lot:

- Contracts and Strategies

- Science and the Tech Tree

- Experience and Skills

- Part Ideas

- Planet Ideas

- UI Adjustments

- Multiplayer

- Habitation and Life Support

Edited January 4, 2016 by Pthigrivi

[Glaran K'erman]

Well, I don't feel crazy anymore right now. Listen, if the list was consistently updated, enforced, and contained something I wanted to suggest, not a problem I wouldn't bring it up. It just needs to be updated and/or modified to in a way like @pandaman suggested.

Edited January 4, 2016 by Glaran K'erman

[Alshain]

5 minutes ago, Glaran K'erman said:

Well, I don't feel crazy anymore right now. Listen, if the list was consistently updated, enforced, and contained something I wanted to suggest, not a problem I wouldn't bring it up. It just needs to be updated and/or modified to in a way like @pandaman suggested.

The problem is, it will never happen.  Even if someone took the time to update it again, 3 to 6 months later it would be forgotten... again.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

1 hour ago, Pthigrivi said:

Just to throw out some ideas for sticky topics, these tend to come up a lot:

- Contracts and Strategies

- Science the Tech Tree

- Experience and Skills

- Part Ideas

- Planet Ideas

But you see, When people mention these, they usually have their own version, making each suggestion of them unique. Things like Multiplayer are really a fixed idea, so, I hope you see what I'm trying to say

[Pthigrivi]

I do, and Im sympathetic to that. This is really a question only answerable by the mods, but I guess I wonder what would be most fruitful, a series of somewhat repetitive, perennial requests that quickly become locked, or a few consolidated spaces in which to discuss frequent topics. Right now there are about 6 different threads with various ideas about contracts just in the last few weeks, some of which contain great ideas, but all of which mostly talk past each other. Is that useful? If people have differing visions about contracts or the science system or the UI (as Im sure they will) they surely could be hashed out collectively? 

I'll be honest, I spend a great deal of time on this board because I love this game and find it fun to think about how it could progress. Still I have no illusion whatsoever that mine or any one of our ideas would be scooped up whole-cloth and plugged in to the game. No one should. I'm sure though that from time to time the dev's do peruse this forum to gather a general sense of the community's thoughts and feelings about the direction KSP is taking. My thinking only is that it might be more helpful to gather an aggregate opinion on a few of these stickier issues. It would also allow board members who might not care much about a particular topic to easily avoid it if they wished. 

 

4 hours ago, Alshain said:

I find it strange that the OP's thread got closed but this one went on for months at the top of this forum and is still technically open (even though it is dead now). 

 

I wouldn't judge the mods too harshly on that particular oversight. As mentioned in the first sentence that thread was started shortly after life support had been mentioned by the devs as a revived possibility (in a squadcast or devnote, I cant remember which). I started the thread within that brief window with the hopes we could talk about how or even whether it would work in stock. I still think its a topic worthy of discussion, but now that it's off the devs immediate docket for consideration I understand the mod's position on WNTS threads. 

[sal_vager]

I'm thinking I'll replace both existing threads with a new thread called "Commonly Suggested" which will link to a master thread on each major topic.

That should mean we'd see just the one multiplayer thread or lifesupport thread instead of many "Add feature 'commonfeature'" threads for things already suggested.

That should keep discussion going without all of us having to say "It's been suggested" to everyone who thinks they are the first to have thought of it

 

Edit1

I'll draft up something soon, it'll probably be a bit bare to start and I'll add masterthreads to it as necessary.

 

Edit2

Still on it, looking for threads and spellchecking and stuff.

[magico13]

19 hours ago, Glaran K'erman said:

Why is it that someone could in theory post all day on a thread for Kerbal Construction Time to be made stock

Sorry for the sort-of off topic, but was this just an example you thought of or was it something you actually saw? I'd be interested in seeing that thread, if it was real (great place to get ideas from).

sal_vager's idea sounds like a good plan. One master thread per topic where people can discuss and share ideas rather than a bunch of closed threads cluttering up various sections of the forum. Would also make it easier for the devs (KSP devs or modders) to get ideas for if they wanted to implement the suggestion.