Mods in Stock

[John FX]

18 hours ago, Spricigo said:

now Commnet is part of the stock game there is no "KSP install without Commnet" but that is besides the point

No, that is exactly the point. One man's meat is another man's poison. Just because a new feature cannot be removed is no basis for an argument for it to not be included.

[Spricigo]

2 hours ago, John FX said:

No, that is exactly the point. One man's meat is another man's poison. Just because a new feature cannot be removed is no basis for an argument for it to not be included.

The argument is not about it being included or not. A mod feature already exist, just happens to be provided by a mod. So the request for "make [insert mod] stock" translate to "give me something I already have".

 

This game is being developed with mods in mind, "there is a mod for that, use it" is a valid response to any "give me this feature" request.

 

 

PS: If you are a console player you have more pressing matter than "feature of mod X is unavailable for me". You have my sympathy, I'd really  like mods to be available for you also and, even before that, craft/save sharing.

 

 

[NateisKerbal]

Mods in stock is providing you with something  you already have. I think you mean a mod that Squad would update themselves versus the mods updating.

If that's what you mean, I would love to see Kerbal Engineer Redux and Scatter(er?) as part of the base game.

[Deddly]

A few posts were removed from the thread. I'm sure we can have a grown-up conversation and even disagree or misunderstand each other without getting personal about it. Please prove me right

[JK_Kerbineer]

I'm not trying to add fuel to this fire, but hear me out, guys.

If Squad adds more mods that means more bugs. If there are more bugs there are more complaints. More complaints mean more bugfixes. More bugfixes mean more complaints about bugs and why there aren't more mods.

Think from the perspective of a SQUAD dev. About how much time, money, and effort they took out of their OWN lives for this game. Do you think they've turned their back on KSP? They love this game just as much as we do, if not more. I can promise that KSP devs are doing all they can to change the game for the better, but these things don't happen overnight. Think of all the hours they're putting into developing...                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               C'mon guys, just a little empathy for @SQUAD?,

P.S. Sorry if off-topic, but this thread needs a chill-pill.

Edited October 21, 2017 by JK_Kerbineer

[Deddly]

Some posts removed because they were a little rude. 

I said to prove me RIGHT not prove me wrong. 

[John FX]

On 21/10/2017 at 9:25 AM, Deddly said:

Some posts removed because they were a little rude. 

I said to prove me RIGHT not prove me wrong. 

Personally I think a little separation between the discussions about wanting mods, and not wanting mods would be prudent.

Then people can say what mods they do not want and why in one thread, and what mods they do want and why in another.

The two concepts are diametrically opposed so conflict is inevitable. Being able to say some posts are off topic in particular threads may help in reducing tension.

This thread for example was started with the apparent purpose of getting people to say what mods they want, not why they do not want certain mods yet as always descends into argument about not wanting mods even when expressly stated that people should post "what kind of mods would you like put into stock game?".

Just my two cents, back to lurking again.

[Mukita12]

bruh would you guys pls not fighting?!

[Deddly]

1 hour ago, John FX said:

Personally I think a little separation between the discussions about wanting mods, and not wanting mods would be prudent.

It's a fair point, and I saw the second thread that you started for the purpose of forming such a distinction. But it was decided to close that one because it's unreasonable to expect people to only post in agreement when someone says "I think this mod should be stock", just like the other thread rapidly turned into a reverse copy of this one with people saying "I don't think this one should be in stock" and people replied "Oh, I think that one would work well, because...". In either thread, if I were to say "Hey, that's not for this thread, go post it in the other one" it would seem quite rude and we would miss out on a healthy debate. I've disagreed with people many times on a wide range of subjects, and a healthy (read: friendly) debate has changed my mind. Stopping people disagreeing would just encourage polarisation, not a consensus. The great thing about this community is it's mostly mature enough for people to not get worked up just because someone doesn't agree with a suggestion.

Having said that, this little diversion really is off topic, but I'm happy to continue in PM if you (or anyone else) would like to discuss it further.

 

1 hour ago, Mukita12 said:

bruh would you guys pls not fighting?!

It's already taken care of, but thank you. Best to just report it next time, please

[John FX]

1 hour ago, Deddly said:

Having said that, this little diversion really is off topic, but I'm happy to continue in PM if you (or anyone else) would like to discuss it further.

No thanks, discussed it far too much already.

threadjack over.

[dericke]

I'd like to see a toned-down version of Throttle-Controlled Avionics in stock. The first feature from the mod would be multiple throttle groups.There would still be a "primary" throttle which shows in the UI and engines are bound by default to, but users could move engines to a different throttle if desired and bind a separate axis for each throttle group in the control options.

The other feature from TCA that I would like to see in stock is differential thrust. If it were in stock, this feature could be more deeply-integrated. Thrust limiters for non-solid engines would have an "Auto" setting that would let SAS lower the thrust limiter below (never above) the user's setting to help manuever the craft. This would be especially useful for unbalanced designs where the weight shifts during flight as fuel is burned.

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

Snacks! Life Support (I LOVE using TAC, but Snacks is more stock-balanced that TAC)

Edited November 9, 2017 by Bottle Rocketeer 500

[QuentinPlaysMC]

I feel like CKAN would be a great thing to implement into vanilla, either that or implement the steam workshop to allow for modloading.
Even though CKAN itself isn't really a mod, it still requires external installation and adds to the game.

[Cheif Operations Director]

On 2/6/2016 at 8:05 PM, Dfthu said:

Asteroid day

Better burn time

Realplume

Stock faring tweaker

Stock clamshell fairings

 

we have stock clampshells

[Hay]

On 14-12-2017 at 8:21 PM, Cheif Operations Director said:

we have stock clampshells

You quoted a post from early 2016 tho

[Cheif Operations Director]

53 minutes ago, Hay said:

You quoted a post from early 2016 tho

Oh lol did see that

[Titandesdieu]

I think that transfer window planner should be stock because there is almost no other way to know when a transfer window open

 

[Hay]

On 21-12-2017 at 4:39 AM, Titandesdieu said:

I think that transfer window planner should be stock because there is almost no other way to know when a transfer window open

 

FYI you can manually calculate when there's a launch window tho.

[MacGregor]

(Sorry for any misspellings) 

For stock I would add... 

1) snacks 

2) astrogator or some other launch window planner 

3) outer planet mod 

[Guest]

Atmosphere Autopilot and KER.

Anything else I can manage without but those two are essential.

[Jiraiyah]

Ok, when i thought about the answer I would give you, tons and tons of mods came to my brain, but here is the thing :

lots of mods are just parts we can totally ignore asking squad to implement them in game. but....

there are some mods that these days became a must have.

for example Module Manager, Aset props, Aset Avionics, Raster Prop Monitor ! does anyone mod KSP without these specially module manager?

beside that, some mods that make KSP look nicer like Textures Unlimited, KS3P, Visual Enhancement pack. now, you may argue that these mods make ksp heavier and not all computers can handle them, well, the answer is that, the developers can simply give few options that are turned off by default and you can turn them on if you want to depending on your computer's aspects. in my eyes, these are the very first mods that SHOULD be integrated in KSP.

beside these, there are some mods that add functionality to the game, like at least one life support mod (my choice would be USI), Precise Maneuver, RCS build aid, Targetron, Trajectories, and many more. I can't even think of one instance of my game without these mods, adding them to KSP would be easy and at the same time making the vanilla game much richer. so, the second step would be these mods.

finally, we come to some mods that beside adding parts to the game they add more functionality "playing" wise. like USI's MKS or Konstruction. or Survey Scanner Plus, Scan sat and some more mods. these are again something that if i was the head of KSP development, I would add to the game.

At the end we come to some mods that tweak ksp's already existing behavior like FAR. this one, I am not sure, although having it would be nice as part of vanilla, on the other hand it may cause some bugs during time or cause more problems between updates. honestly, I would give green light to FAR itself.

Other than these categories, the remaining mods are almost always part mods. i would keep them out of vanilla for sure.

[InterplanetJanet]

whale_2's World Stabilizer and similar Kraken repellents - having things jump in the air, bounce, and break, or explode due to random overheating (from parts that don't make heat) just because you load/visit them is a serious BUG IMO, not a mod.

Better Burn Time

a switchable (maybe in Game Settings?) that would emulate KJR and other strengtheners - if I can set kerbals to come back from the dead, I should be able to do this as well.

something that would allow me to just set a node's burn time and have it go for the time & thrust-percentage programmed (if there's a way to do this in stock, I haven't found it)

 

[saxyomega90125]

On 11/9/2017 at 5:48 PM, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

Snacks! Life Support (I LOVE using TAC, but Snacks is more stock-balanced that TAC)

Try USI Life Support. It only adds three or four resources (including recycling stuff) and a handful of parts, so it's perfectly stock-balanced IMO. More functionality and options than Snacks, but not nearly as time-consuming as TAC.

My only complaint is a couple parts designed to integrate with other USI mods, at least in the 1.2.2 version (I don't update often). Easy fix though - delete the parts yourself.

On 12/20/2017 at 10:39 PM, Titandesdieu said:

I think that transfer window planner should be stock because there is almost no other way to know when a transfer window open

 

I would rather do transfer predictions in a separate program than stock or a mod... unless I do them by hand. That's something you don't do often so I don't want it cluttering the game up.

By the same token I used to use FAR, but since Squard added an aerodynamics system it's been good enough for me coupled with DRE, especially considering the increased CPU load of FAR and its incessant compatibility issues with Trajectories.

Mods are awesome, but for Squad in many areas there is something to be said for keeping it simple.

 

 

I started stock-only in 0.25 and didn't try any mods until I'd had 0.90 for a while. Now I have... [checks GameData] 64 mods installed, I believe, but there are four I truly cannot enjoy KSP without:

- Mechjeb

- KW (if only for the engines)

- EVE

- KAC (this one REALLY needs to be stock)

I also use TweakScale on solar panels and other surface-attached parts on literally everything I make. I could live without it, but anyone who has tried to build a rover, a tiny probe or lander, or a microsat knows you need TweakScale for that.

Edited February 24, 2018 by saxyomega90125

[michaelt359]

Planetary base systems and extra station parts

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

@saxyomega90125 I have tried USI already. I agree with your statements,  but maybe if LS were in stock,  maybe there should be 3 levels: easy, intermediate,  and hard.