do you use stayputnik?

[adsii1970]

No - in my opinion, it is a problem of the tech tree. It's Soviet analog, Sputnik was nearly identical. Besides beeping and sending radio signals, it didn't do much... but it was the first.

[Superfluous J]

1 hour ago, sal_vager said:

Is it? It's 300 funds on my screen, while the rovemate is 800.

The next cheapest probe is the QBE at 360.

I made the mistake of checking the wiki instead of the game. I don't know the prices that well because even in hard career I find money's the least difficult currency to manage.

[Ten Key]

43 minutes ago, monstah said:

By the time I feel the urge to launch a probe, I have better ones already unlocked anyway.

That means the tech tree is giving you newer probe cores way too early. 

[Kerbital]

I actually wanted to do fully automated (autonomous?) Science playthrough without involving a single Kerbal. But I can't find any mods that give you an automated control unit right from the beginning. Modular Rocket Systems has a cool module that unlocks realitvely early, but still had to fly a Kerbal a few times. I can probably edit some settings file to get a module early.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

It's great for launchpad part tests, other than that not at all.

[suicidejunkie]

3 hours ago, Kerbital said:

I actually wanted to do fully automated (autonomous?) Science playthrough without involving a single Kerbal. But I can't find any mods that give you an automated control unit right from the beginning. Modular Rocket Systems has a cool module that unlocks realitvely early, but still had to fly a Kerbal a few times. I can probably edit some settings file to get a module early.

If you design an unbalanced rocket that will fall over when physics kicks in, you can get science points for recovering "A vessel that survived a flight"

If you allow for Kerbals to walk around the surface without getting into a rocket, you could also scrape up enough to get a probe core by kicking things around and doing the KSC science.

Or you could just skip that by setting the starting science points to 35 or so in order to buy a stayputnick right off the bat.

[Kerbital]

1 hour ago, suicidejunkie said:

If you design an unbalanced rocket that will fall over when physics kicks in, you can get science points for recovering "A vessel that survived a flight"

If you allow for Kerbals to walk around the surface without getting into a rocket, you could also scrape up enough to get a probe core by kicking things around and doing the KSC science.

Or you could just skip that by setting the starting science points to 35 or so in order to buy a stayputnick right off the bat.

I did that exactly: gave myself enough science points so I could get the automated command module. I didn't know about the surviving rocket award!

[monstah]

16 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

I made the mistake of checking the wiki instead of the game. I don't know the prices that well because even in hard career I find money's the least difficult currency to manage.

I care more about mass than funds, in any case, and the OKTO-2 is superior in any way but price. What I do to make the Stayputnik marginally superior in a niche is to give it some ablator with an MM patch, and increase its impact tolerance so that there is some chance it survives a sea crash by itself.

And I don't think this is a problem just with the tech tree. The game has a sandbox mode too, after all, so any part that gets obsolete when you unlock a better one should be rethinked.

[Sharpy]

Money IS an issue in career, but probes cost such peanuts compared to heavy boosters differences like 2000 funds are really non-issue.

Imagine there are different brands of soda and you argue which is better: "Yours costs $0.07 a can while mine is $0.03 so the price speaks in favor of mine".

 

[GoSlash27]

19 hours ago, Ten Key said:

That means the tech tree is giving you newer probe cores way too early. 

Ten Key,

 I agree, but OTOH I think the tech tree is too slow in providing biome scanning.

15 hours ago, suicidejunkie said:

If you design an unbalanced rocket that will fall over when physics kicks in, you can get science points for recovering "A vessel that survived a flight"

suicidejunkie,

 I actually turn off the SAS during the atmospheric phase, so that doesn't bother me so much. It just becomes inconvenient once I leave the atmosphere.

Best,
-Slashy

[CaptainTrebor]

18 hours ago, Waxing_Kibbous said:

It's great for launchpad part tests, other than that not at all.

Yep, this is all I use it for.

[John FX]

Nope, don`t use it except if Mechjeb is controlling it. We had aeroplane autopilots during WW1. The first rockets all had some form of automatic control. Even sputnik 1 launched under the control of an autopilot, only the payload was uncontrolled.

I play to relive the terran space race and every launch except sounding rockets had some form of autopilot. I also explore possibilities for the current space program in RO.

There is no place for a probe core with no ability to control a probe in my game.

[suicidejunkie]

3 hours ago, GoSlash27 said:

suicidejunkie,

 I actually turn off the SAS during the atmospheric phase, so that doesn't bother me so much. It just becomes inconvenient once I leave the atmosphere.

Best,
-Slashy

There would be no atmospheric phase in this idea; you don't have any probe cores unlocked, and Kerbals aren't allowed outside the VAB, so the engines can't be started.

The rocket will remain in the pre-launch landed state, unless it tips over on physics load.  By getting it to move under the force of gravity, it will count as launched, and then you can recover it for Science!

Not likely *enough* science to research a probe core, unless you turn up the science % to max, of course.

[Ten Key]

8 hours ago, monstah said:

And I don't think this is a problem just with the tech tree. The game has a sandbox mode too, after all, so any part that gets obsolete when you unlock a better one should be rethinked.

And this, I think, is the crux of the problem. You can't have a functioning tech tree if you aren't willing to let the early parts go obsolete. And a functioning and sensible tech tree is a critical part of a well balanced career mode.

One way of sidestepping this problem may be to include multiple versions of certain parts in career mode. So the first stayputnik you get in career mode is a prototype that has stats appropriate to its place on the early tech tree, and then later on the player has an option to research an "uprated" version identical to its sandbox counterpart. This would allow all the parts in sandbox to be balanced against each other, while providing a managed progression on the tech tree for career mode. 

[GoSlash27]

1 hour ago, suicidejunkie said:

There would be no atmospheric phase in this idea; you don't have any probe cores unlocked, and Kerbals aren't allowed outside the VAB, so the engines can't be started.

The rocket will remain in the pre-launch landed state, unless it tips over on physics load.  By getting it to move under the force of gravity, it will count as launched, and then you can recover it for Science!

Not likely *enough* science to research a probe core, unless you turn up the science % to max, of course.

suicidejunkie,

 Yeah, I don't disagree with any of this. I think we're just talking past each other. My point was that it's not difficult to make a stable rocket that doesn't need SAS to keep from tumbling. It's just a PITA to work with in vacuum.

Best,
-Slashy

[SpacedCowboy]

Anyways, back to topic, Nope! Fixodent always works fine for me.

Seriously, just like Captain Trebor and Waxing Kibbous say, the only good use for it is on the test pad.

[magnemoe]

Stayputnik is an very rarely used part, think last time was back in science mode before we got career. 
Its pretty easy to unlock an better probe core with sas once you have it. Had it had sas it would be more interesting but the octo is better becuase its easier to use, either on top on an MK1 pod or inside an service bay. 

[cantab]

I like it for drone planes. I fly using trim (Alt+WASDQEX) and don't care for SAS on aeroplanes, I like the look of the Stayputnik, and it saves me needing a nosecone though that only really matters in early career 30 part limit. I also like the Stayputnik for a rocket "Control From Here" point; placing one on a backwards nosecone on the first or second stage of a tall rocket and controlling from it prevents SAS-induced oscillations if the top is a bit flexible, and the main command pod or probe core will give the SAS.

But as the main probe core on a rocket? Rarely, if ever.

[Parpaza]

Nope, never used it. And I probably never will.

[suicidejunkie]

I like it as an overhead command dome for ground bases.

Useful for wrangling Kerbals in habitat modules doing science (MPL) or engineering (EL) without needing an actual command pod.

And since I have a mountain-mounted world-wide-web of RT relays, there's always a connection to KSC.