3 Years "Away" from KSP: Any Suggestions?

[kiwi1960]

What do I suggest?

For starters, shame on you for being "away" for so long. You had better make up for lost time and play 24/7 for the next 12 months...

Wait.... that is hardly a punishment... sounds more like a reward. Hmmmm... I'll have to rethink my answer and get back to you.

[NeoMorph]

Yeah, wheels and landing gear are really twitchy. My biggest hate at the moment is that when my landing craft land they end up skating sloooooooowly over the surface and just don't settle down like the surface is just ice.

[Corw]

55 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

For a revolutionary idea, maybe they're not mustache-twirling villains who've taken the money and ran.  Maybe it's a lot easier to complain about bugs than fix them.  And maybe it's not something that absolutely needs to infect every single topic.

Well, truth be told, the HarvesteR did sort of ran off

Edited July 11, 2016 by Corw

[Curveball Anders]

3 minutes ago, Corw said:

Well, truth be told, the HarvesteR did sort of ran off

But has anyone seen him twirling his mustache?

(pics or it didn't happen)

 

[Alshain]

36 minutes ago, Brownhair2 said:

Forgive me if somebody already mentioned this, but didn't they make it stock in 1.1.3?

No.  They made some of the parts stock, but the plugin (aka functionality) is not.  The parts behave as a normal probe, antenna, and solar panel without the mod, and the telescope and contracts I don't think was added.

Edited July 11, 2016 by Alshain

[Diche Bach]

Thanks for all the suggestions folks! I'm sure I'll be coming back to reference this thread a great deal as I relearn how to play the game and start "shopping" for mods and such.

[Tyko]

42 minutes ago, something said:

However, reading what happens to some users out there, I'd say you should not be surprised if your game starts crashing at some point...

Since 1.1.3 I've had significantly less crashes to desktop. 1.1.2 CtD regularly.

[Brownhair2]

16 minutes ago, Alshain said:

No.  They made some of the parts stock, but the plugin (aka functionality) is not.  The parts behave as a normal probe, antenna, and solar panel without the mod, and the telescope and contracts I don't think was added.

Wait what? My interest has been piqued 

At any rate some parts of the mod are in the game

[Alshain]

10 minutes ago, Brownhair2 said:

Wait what? My interest has been piqued 

At any rate some parts of the mod are in the game

Ok, so the original functionality was to basically add the Sentinel mission.  The idea (and I'm going to generalize because I don't really keep up with it) is to place a satellite with a camera-telescope that between Earth and the sun, between the orbits of Venus and Earth.  The reason is that the sun has a nasty habit of hiding asteroids, but if the sun is always behind your telescope, not a problem.  So Sentinel aims to identify threats that we can't see from Earth.

The Asteroid Day mod adds this functionality.  When installed, asteroids are not identified from the tracking station unless you have a telescope in a location between the Sun and Kerbin.  It originally added a probe core, a solar panel, a dish antenna, and a telescope/camera.  The former 3 items are now stock.  It also has some unique contracts included for performing the Sentinel mission.  I have not actually played with this mod yet, I just keep finding other things to do.  I plan to in 1.2 though.  However the video I've seen looks like a lot of fun.

EDIT: here is the original video.

 

Edited July 11, 2016 by Alshain

[Diche Bach]

So what is the deal with the specs on "Missions?"

The "Test Mk 16 Parachute" mission is telling me something like:

Alt: 8,000 to 11,000 m

Vel: 210 m/s to 350 m/s (or thereabouts)

Do I actually have to get the chute to deploy at those parameter values or just _achieve_ that altitude/velocity at some point in the mission?

[_Augustus_]

We have planet-adding mods now like OPM, Galactic Neighborhood, Alternis Kerbol, etc.

[Mister Kerman]

16 minutes ago, Diche Bach said:

So what is the deal with the specs on "Missions?"

The "Test Mk 16 Parachute" mission is telling me something like:

Alt: 8,000 to 11,000 m

Vel: 210 m/s to 350 m/s (or thereabouts)

Do I actually have to get the chute to deploy at those parameter values or just _achieve_ that altitude/velocity at some point in the mission?

You've got to stage it when all of those parameters are checked green. They only check green when you're currently meeting that condition. You'll need to be doing all of it simultaneously.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Mister Kerman

[Diche Bach]

Interesting . . . so it needs to be a fairly fast but low-altitude trip . . .

Have to say, this science and other career stuff is pretty damn cool!

I don't think issues with rover wheels is going to be a concern for me for many, many hours

Edited July 12, 2016 by Diche Bach
clarification

[Bioman222]

My go-to mod list is as follows:

 

• DMagic Orbital Sciences (Most important, adds a crap ton of science parts and contracts)
• SpaceY (5m and 7.5m parts)
• Kerbal Engineer (Shows important info about rocket, i.e. DV, TWR, etc.)
• Kebal Attachment System (Allows EVAing kerbals to move parts around, I also would get KIS with it)
• Trajectories (Shows where your suborbital vessel is actually going, based on rotation and atmosphere of the body it is landing on.)

[SorryDave]

OP,

You quit playing about the time I started playing. 

For advice, I suggest adjusting the difficulty settings after you play career mode. They do not really make the game harder or easier. You still have to dock or land on the Mun pointing upright and such. 

The settings mostly impact how much grinding you want to do.

enjoy and welcome back!

[wumpus]

Note that not that many of us have reverted to 1.0.5 (although plane enthusiasts might have).

Career mode should be new: watch out how parachutes have changed.  Not only has re-entry become an issue (no more coming straight at Kerbin from the Mun and land while pegging the g-meter), but air resistance is less and parachutes are suddenly delicate.  It shouldn't change your de-orbiting all that much (just expect to set PE at 30k or so) but career mode started out with a mission that just said "go into space"

In beta (two years ago?), that wasn't that hard (nor would it have been 3 years ago if you were following a campaign).  Post 1.0 it typically means going in a parabolic arc to give yourself time to slow down to the point your parachute won't be destroyed (you can also try a powered landing to parachute speed, but that also takes a bit of delta-v).

[Red Iron Crown]

I wouldn't wait, there's a lot to play with in KSP if you haven't played in 3 years. Off the top of my head:

• A lot more parts, for both rockets and spaceplanes
• Capturable asteroids
• Hugely improved aerodynamic model (and hydrodynamics, too!)
• ISRU (creation of fuel on other celestial bodies)
• Career mode with contracts and financial concerns, and a tech tree
• Kerbal specializations into different roles
• Upgradable facilities at KSC
• Lots of quality of life improvements

All that is in stock, there is even more available through mods. There are still bugs, sure, but nothing that I would consider game breaking, certainly not enough to avoid playing altogether.

[Diche Bach]

Couple more Questions:

1. main difference between MechJeb and KerbalEngineer Redux?

I vaguely recall using either both or at least MJ, but cannot recall now. The one thing I'd really like to go ahead and get is whichever one allows me to "do the math" without having to do the math! (what is my max velocity, altitude, etc., etc.)

2. Anyone know what the current situation is with "Kopernicus?" I noticed some cool sounding mods on the Curse site . . . Interstellar or something like that . . . that led to a link to some other ones, then some other ones and  . . . long story short, it seems that quite a few of these mods are not presently compatible with latest Kerbal build?

I'll tinker with them (LOl! already downloaded about 8!

and add them in one at a time leaving the most questionable compatibility ones till last, but if anyone has a quick summary of "best practices" if I'd like to experience the best of "interstellar KSP mods," appreciate it.

The complete lack of "orbital mechanics" (might not be the correct term) in most space games is just so lame: spaceships that turn on a dime and can easily come to a complete stop and for which matching velocity with targets is irrelevant . . . I want to make a "Stellaris" mockup using KSP!!

Edited July 12, 2016 by Diche Bach
typos & problem with image

[Red Iron Crown]

1. Kerbal Engineer Redux is data. MechJeb is data plus autopilot plus some other utilities. If you just want data either is fine.

2. Kopernicus is a mod that adds a framework for making celestial bodies or modifying the existing ones. AFAIK there is a current version for 1.1.3.

[Corona688]

14 hours ago, Diche Bach said:

Interesting . . . so it needs to be a fairly fast but low-altitude trip . . .

Have to say, this science and other career stuff is pretty damn cool!

Part-testing missions can be weird, and assignments can be arbitrary, the trick is to make them work to your advantage.  They want to send a sepratron to solar orbit?  Ooookayyyy, what else can you do while you're there?  Use every opportunity to gather data from new regions / biomes.  The world records give you hints too.

Also, be careful what you spend science points on, you can spend yourself into a corner.  There are a few things in the tech tree I find it really hard to do without:

1. Science parts above all - they return more science than you spend easily.  The materials bay has some of the best science returns in the game.
   • The polar scanner and mineral scanner are not worth it just for the science!  Their returns are dismal.  Getting those early was almost a game-ending mistake.
2. Basic electrical stuff - sputnik cores, batteries.  They let you do cheap/easy part testing missions that you don't have to worry about recovering.  Satellite missions can be lucrative, too.
3. Solar Panels - your missions are all very short-lived without them.
4. "Thumper" solids - they make small launches so much easier, and all your early launches are small ones.
5. The LV-909 lander engine, the most efficient little space engine in the game.  You can make do without it, but once you have it, you'll use it in everything forever.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Corona688

[Tyko]

2 minutes ago, Corona688 said:

Part-testing missions can be weird, and assignments can be arbitrary, the trick is to make them work to your advantage.  They want to send a sepratron to solar orbit?

I agree. As a new player the parts testing game me challenges to learn how to control launch speed and altitude. They're also good for unlocking parts further up the tech tree - you can take a contract to test a nuclear engine and then just use that part for other missions without completing the contract. I wasn't sure if this was cheaty or not, but I decided that if some company wanted to loan me high tech parts to use and didn't say when they wanted it back I was free to use it 

[Corona688]

Just now, tjt said:

I agree. As a new player the parts testing game me challenges to learn how to control launch speed and altitude. They're also good for unlocking parts further up the tech tree - you can take a contract to test a nuclear engine and then just use that part for other missions without completing the contract. I wasn't sure if this was cheaty or not, but I decided that if some company wanted to loan me high tech parts to use and didn't say when they wanted it back I was free to use it 

I hope not >.>  I'm not giving those early skippers back

[Diche Bach]

I think I'm gonna roll with MechJeb and without KerbalEngineer for now. I can see that MJ allows you to plug in particular variables so you can see (for example) apoapsis, and speed at apoapsis, which is what a lot of the early missions amount to: get this part to x alt and y vel.

Do you just slap that "computer" part on the hull of your command pod?

[N_Molson]

Just play and have fun !

 

Quote

I wasn't sure if this was cheaty or not, but I decided that if some company wanted to loan me high tech parts to use and didn't say when they wanted it back I was free to use it

Definitively not, though it could be refined a bit (there could be some kind of "availability" limitation for experimental parts) its part of the gameplay

Edited July 12, 2016 by N_Molson

[KerikBalm]

22 hours ago, Alshain said:

Mainly they are centered around landing gear and legs.  We expect 1.2 to fix them (because they are switching to Unity 5.4 EDIT: We think, that also depends on if 5.4 is release by Unity END EDIT).  However, if you don't build rovers or planes you may not notice these problems and 1.1.3 will be ok for you but otherwise, waiting a little longer is a serious suggestion.

The wheels were an annoying change, but they also had some major positives. Its a lot more complicated, and I think some specific values need balancing, but the wheels aren't so bad.

To the OP, they added some stress tolerance that will make all wheels explode (not break like the old rover wheel animations, but *explode*... although rover wheels can still break in a repairable way as before from lower stresses)... *all* wheels including aircraft landing gear. The same is apparent with landing legs, but those always seem to explode, I've never seen the intermediate "broken but repairable" condition for them since 1.1. Some of the stress toelrances seem too low, but htats a minor balance thing. You can also now adjust their friction coefficient (ie traction), and suspension strengths. Also they have an "autostrut" function... which I'm not sure exactly why it was added or how it works, but it means I can now deploy and recover rovers in a cargobay (previously, upon connection to the cargoship, the newly connected rover would clip through the cargoship, and explosions would result upon undock - that no longer happens)

My main issues are that sometimes the editor freezes. The other stuff can be fixed by just changing your designs, or a quick text file edit to the part.cfg if you really think they are too weak.

 

20 hours ago, Diche Bach said:

...  They were just talking about career mode "eventually" being in the game when I got distracted by other stuff.

So let me ask this:  Has no one yet built an interstellar mod? Even just mod model Proxima Centauri? Modeling something like an Orion-pulse interstellar vehicle or a colony ship would be freakin' cool. Of course, even a whole GALAXY would be even more cool, but I'd settle for just one additional solar system that was positioned at an approximately accurate distance

IIRC, there are some mods that add other star systems... or at least approximations... like a bigger, glowing Jool much much farther away basically. I'm not sure how well they work, I don't think KSPs solar panels will work when in proximity to the other "stars"... they just use the distance to Kerbin's sun for their power calculations.

Career mode is what I play most... but... after the tech tree is all unlocked.. meh... its sandbox with limited funds. Its a bit grindy, and the random contract system isn't as good as a set of "missions" or "goals" with more direction behind them. This has been made a bit better from when it first came out.... the "worlds first" rewards for new accomplishments, and some contracts that seem to have progression (escape atmosphere followed by orbit... dock two vessels in orbit... flyby mun, explore/land on mun, explore duna, etc)

Also there are less contracts to just launch the nth satellite into a specific orbit, or the nth science data from kerbin/rescue a kerbal stranded in orbit, and more encoruaging you to build up stations by adding on components.

Still overall... it needs some work

20 hours ago, Mister Kerman said:

Honestly I'd say if you focus on rockets and ask any questions you have, you'll be fine and not run into too many annoying bugs. The editor in the SPH and VAB is a lot more user friendly now too. KSP rules. Bear with the bugs; It's what we do.

Yes... the rotate, reroot, and offset gizmos are great! as are the subassemblies! loading craft files from either SPH or VAB, switching from mirror to radial symmettry in either building... massive improvements,

19 hours ago, Diche Bach said:

Have to say, I'm puzzled though that they have yet to make any "pay-for" DLCs. The base game was dirt cheap if memory serves, and I'd happily contribute $5 or $10 here or there for substantial content/functionality packages . . .  It's all good! I'd put this game almost in the same category as Minecraft: insanely cheap, and while not as customizable, very much more than your average indie game.

Well, I think pay for DLC would anger the fan base. Also given how much extra content the fan base already uses in the form of mods, I don't think it would sell well anyway. Who would pay for a DLC planet, when you can download the Outer Planets mod for free?

Also, I haven't played minecraft, but KSP is really really customizable... so I don't understand your comment. Other people have compared Minecraft and KSP... but they are also really different (with some significant similarities however).

 

The biggest change since you left was the aero update... that's great. Also the stock mining.

They also did a water update... some parts are dense enough to sink, which means... submarines are a thing now! (as are hydrofoils and other stuff)

http://i.imgur.com/v5ENaz9.png

http://i.imgur.com/vzOoQPo.png

http://i.imgur.com/fwSr4TR.png

http://i.imgur.com/6BxPah4.png

(all stock except for the engines... although stock jet engines work underwater and you can use those)

 

My mods:

Kerbal Engineer

Hyperedit (just for testing)

Outer Planets mod

+ Kopernicus is a required mod for this, and I've made my own modded planet with it http://i.imgur.com/KME9U6b.png

My own small part mods (electric fans, turborockets, air augmented rockets, Xenon ISRU).

Transfer window planner

Considering the atomic age pack, and some others... maybe after I get a new computer