Kerbin Infrastructure and Improvements

[Spricigo]

 

11 minutes ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

Not that kind of infrastructure 

Here is a excerpt ... I added it recently so you might not have seen it

Another strcuture possibility is a Landing Zone. The Landing Zone is practically a helicopter pad just bigger. It has a Flag type marker with a target marker. This gives the ability for Falcon 9 Style Landings

 But what is preventing you F9 style landings at  KSC, Inland KSC or Old Airfield?  You already get a flat ground and good recovery rate, the target marker is missing but can be easily be placed if you feel it necessary. A better signaling of those places would be nice for immersion but that is about it. Maybe you should prefer more of those but you already have 3 close to equator, meaning that you'll eventually fly above it no matter how inclined your obit is.

 

[Rocket In My Pocket]

2 hours ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

Do you think their should be a additional structure to the old space center called "Research Lab" the Research Lab can allow you to make your own rocket engines and tanks with your own statistics. It would use a model so if I wanted to model it after the biggest tank that would be the color scheme if I wanted the orange tank that would also be the color scheme. This way instead of squad being forces to make new engines they can focus on other things and we get to run OUR OWN R&D Facility We don't unlock things we make them from templates of current stock parts. So If I was to make a Space shuttle Maine engine less powerful and les fuel consuming with less gamble I can do that and change its texture at will. So the Research Lab also Consumes Science and doesn't make it. Also maby a test stand at Baikonuber this way it just isn't some new launch site it's useful, to unlock it both the R&D Facility and Launchpad at KSC need to be fully upgraded. What do you think

Once again, I think you are getting carried away.

These are all good and interesting ideas, assuming we had unlimited time, resources, and money.

You may need to reign in your concepts a bit if you want your idea to be seriously considered by Squad for addition to the stock game. You are proposing some very serious changes here that would involve a lot of work to implement. I like your enthusiasm, but you should try to have realistic expectations.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Rocket In My Pocket

[Cheif Operations Director]

16 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

 

 But what is preventing you F9 style landings at  KSC, Inland KSC or Old Airfield?  You already get a flat ground and good recovery rate, the target marker is missing but can be easily be placed if you feel it necessary. A better signaling of those places would be nice for immersion but that is about it. Maybe you should prefer more of those but you already have 3 close to equator, meaning that you'll eventually fly above it no matter how inclined your obit is.

 

I can do it but it's more realistic with a landing pad and what about the customizable part

7 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Once again, I think you are getting carried away.

These are all good and interesting ideas, assuming we had unlimited time, resources, and money.

You may need to reign in your concepts a bit if you want your idea to be seriously considered by Squad for addition to the stock game. You are proposing some very serious changes here that would involve a lot of work to implement.

This is true 

 

16 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

 

 But what is preventing you F9 style landings at  KSC, Inland KSC or Old Airfield?  You already get a flat ground and good recovery rate, the target marker is missing but can be easily be placed if you feel it necessary. A better signaling of those places would be nice for immersion but that is about it. Maybe you should prefer more of those but you already have 3 close to equator, meaning that you'll eventually fly above it no matter how inclined your obit is.

 

Nothing but SpaceX doesn't land in the middle of a feild 

7 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Once again, I think you are getting carried away.

These are all good and interesting ideas, assuming we had unlimited time, resources, and money.

You may need to reign in your concepts a bit if you want your idea to be seriously considered by Squad for addition to the stock game. You are proposing some very serious changes here that would involve a lot of work to implement.

This is true 

 

16 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

 

 But what is preventing you F9 style landings at  KSC, Inland KSC or Old Airfield?  You already get a flat ground and good recovery rate, the target marker is missing but can be easily be placed if you feel it necessary. A better signaling of those places would be nice for immersion but that is about it. Maybe you should prefer more of those but you already have 3 close to equator, meaning that you'll eventually fly above it no matter how inclined your obit is.

 

Nothing but SpaceX doesn't land in the middle of a feild

Im sorry for that endless reply technical difficulties 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Cheif Operations Director

[Spricigo]

8 minutes ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

Nothing but SpaceX doesn't land in the middle of a feild 

Yes, but that have to do with the immersion, which is important but that is not my point.

My point is that is better for your proposal to put it clearly that is because of immersion. You don't want to base your proposal with the idea that it is, from a pure gameplay perspective, 'necessary because the lack of infrastructure' when that idea is easily dismissed.

About the Research Lab I have to agree with @Rocket In My Pocket that you got a bit carried away. That make your idea more complex and thus more difficult to implement and to balance out.

 

Also I still think that your idea could be much more interesting if the whole production chain was a thing. Granted that can become quite complex quickly and, in fact, something that may deserve its own thread, but imagine moving your VAB and Launchpad to a place closer to a Rockomax factory to get a better price for the parts they produce, or even investing some money in transportation (ships, railroads, etc) to reduce the time things get delivered to KSC.

[Cheif Operations Director]

18 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

Yes, but that have to do with the immersion, which is important but that is not my point.

My point is that is better for your proposal to put it clearly that is because of immersion. You don't want to base your proposal with the idea that it is, from a pure gameplay perspective, 'necessary because the lack of infrastructure' when that idea is easily dismissed.

About the Research Lab I have to agree with @Rocket In My Pocket that you got a bit carried away. That make your idea more complex and thus more difficult to implement and to balance out.

 

Also I still think that your idea could be much more interesting if the whole production chain was a thing. Granted that can become quite complex quickly and, in fact, something that may deserve its own thread, but imagine moving your VAB and Launchpad to a place closer to a Rockomax factory to get a better price for the parts they produce, or even investing some money in transportation (ships, railroads, etc) to reduce the time things get delivered to KSC.

I can get behind your last paragraph. The only concern I have with your last paragraph is the times things is the time thins get delivered part I think that investing in railroad and ship should only Reduce part cost Their shouldn't be a limit on how many launches can be done in a day with delivery because they it becomes easy for Pay to Play style gameplay to emerge and that is not at all what we want KSP to turn into that's how it dies. I don't think that's what you meant thought So please clarify...

When I said part editor it would allow you to only fix statistics for your liking for example I want to make a rocket with a diameter of 25 feet but I can't do that because no parts allow for that . Even if They did I would want to use the KS-25s but their two small. I would need something in size to the mainsail, but the mainsail doesn't give enough gimble so now I have to choose a hyperfast rocket with the orange tanks or a cumbersome Saturn V size tank. I also prefer the textures to the middle tank (the white) but can't. With a part editor where you can establish "nodes" and then drag them out to make it bigger and smaller (like simple planes) and then edit the statistics would make serious KSP players like my self have a much easier chance of making our own rockets. I would also creat rocket diversity, Almost every single Falcon 9 model outheir looks the same, same engines, same tanks, same everything but with this people Could better replicate Merlin engines. The concept for part editor is select a part you want to edit (once completed it will go to sub assemblies perhaps) Adjust Diameter of Engine throat combustion chamber and nozzle then adjust your stats such as fuel consumed per second, Newtons of thrust, ect then save it and your done you have a new part that is exactly to your liking and can replicate and rocket engine in the world and maby even make our own engines, this way the freedoms of running your own space program are given too the game went from what it is now: launch rockets complete mission get science and money, upgrade, repeat, 

To:

Launch Rockets complete mission get science and money make your own rockets 100% to your own liking from parts your have unlocked in normal R&D, Repeat.

 

Edit:

This would all be in reason you can't just make a tank that would a million fuel and then add a engine with 10000 newtons of force their are limits based on preparations for example a smaller poodle can't exceed XYZ amount of thrust UNLESS Scaled up/edited to be bigger, when I say toggle statistics especially for engines I mean tootle what 100% thrust is considered so you can set a thruster limiter for the part and then when actually in flight what ever your Limit is is 100% let me explain

max thrust 100 Newtons, I set Limiter to 70 Newtons of thrust so now when I launch 100% throttle is 70 Newtons and should I throttle to 99% of full thrust potentiometer it is 99% of 70 not 100 they want to toggle back to 100 is use the "Research Lab" With this addition I plan on making a rocket 25 feet in diameter and 240 feet tall but I game doesn't have the ability to be that precise only the player can predict what you want your statistics to be. Instead of begging squad for a 25 ft Tank How about I be given the freedom to make it 25 24 23 etc even decimals. With this we can create rockets on the scale of the sea dragon with no lag in addition because we are using parts that we created with our own values set and the game will read them like any other part so a Sea Dragon Should run as well as a Redstone (excluding graphic lag) 

Thoughts?

Edited December 9, 2017 by Cheif Operations Director
Thought came it me

[Spricigo]

 

8 hours ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

Their shouldn't be a limit on how many launches can be done in a day with delivery because they it becomes easy for Pay to Play style gameplay to emerge and that is not at all what we want KSP to turn into that's how it dies. I don't think that's what you meant thought So please clarify...

Not a concern to me. If KSP becone that kind of game (I don't think it's likely to happen, just considering for the sake of the argument) I'll just go play something else (plenty of options, including older KSP versions).

In any case there is lot of difference between adding a time factor to rocketbuilding and adding real money cost. What I suggested was that a corcern about how long you need to wait (/warp) before a vehicle is ready can drive the decision to expend funds and science to enable a new building, a gameplay reason to go along the immersion reason. 

 

About the research lab I get the idea, that's not the issue. The problem is the fact that including it would require more work than just adding launch sites with some extra flavor to each one. A simpler proposal will have better chance.

[MiffedStarfish]

I’m assuming this is only for career and science mode?

I like the simplified idea of @Rocket In My Pocket. I’d be against a cutscene video, as the worst thing about cutscenes is that you have no control over anything while they play. One of best bits of ksp is that except for loading screens, every moment of screen time you are in control and can manipulate the environment.

[Cheif Operations Director]

3 hours ago, MiffedStarfish said:

I’m assuming this is only for career and science mode?

I like the simplified idea of @Rocket In My Pocket. I’d be against a cutscene video, as the worst thing about cutscenes is that you have no control over anything while they play. One of best bits of ksp is that except for loading screens, every moment of screen time you are in control and can manipulate the environment.

It's also for Sandbox, I want science implemented at a currency in sandbox but not to unlock parts

[Cheif Operations Director]

6 hours ago, Spricigo said:

 

Not a concern to me. If KSP becone that kind of game (I don't think it's likely to happen, just considering for the sake of the argument) I'll just go play something else (plenty of options, including older KSP versions).

In any case there is lot of difference between adding a time factor to rocketbuilding and adding real money cost. What I suggested was that a corcern about how long you need to wait (/warp) before a vehicle is ready can drive the decision to expend funds and science to enable a new building, a gameplay reason to go along the immersion reason. 

 

About the research lab I get the idea, that's not the issue. The problem is the fact that including it would require more work than just adding launch sites with some extra flavor to each one. A simpler proposal will have better chance.

Remember you can still Play the game as is will the research lab Their you don't have to edit parts it's jut a option

[MiffedStarfish]

Nah, I’d be completely against implementing any form of currency or limitations in sandbox. With the them it would not be a sandbox.

[Cheif Operations Director]

Just now, MiffedStarfish said:

Nah, I’d be completely against implementing any form of currency or limitations in sandbox. With the them it would not be a sandbox.

Yes but Sandbox has no reason in it like WHY are you launching its only for your entertainment and if they made a way to just give yourself the science for free when you need it, you can have it as a currency and then just get free Science when you need it IF YOU WANT, 

Read my next post

Improvements of Kerbin

It explain it better

[MiffedStarfish]

30 minutes ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

its only for your entertainment

Thats why. I dont want what are at best extra steps, and at worst barriers, getting in the way of my entertainment.

What you are suggesting is just science mode with the f12 menu.

Edited December 10, 2017 by MiffedStarfish

[Cheif Operations Director]

Just now, MiffedStarfish said:

Thats why. I dont want what are at best extra steps, and at worst barriers, getting in the way of my entertainment.

Their not barriers if all you have to do is flip a switch to make them disappear

[MiffedStarfish]

Then they're extra steps. Sandbox is a sandbox, and any form of currency or limitations, whether they can be bypassed or not, would stop it from being sandbox.

[Cheif Operations Director]

Ok so other than building craft what are your accomplishments in a sandbox FOR KERBIN

[MiffedStarfish]

Sandbox isn't about accomplishing things for Kerbin. If I wanted to accompish things for Kerbin I'd play the other modes. Ksp for me is all about building and flying (and occaisonally competing) crafts, Which is why I'm against anything which would even slightly hamper me in doing that. Adding currency would in my eyes be nothing but a negative change.

[Cheif Operations Director]

I would play the other modes but I would want the parts unlocked from the begining and that can't happen, I would play career with missions and such if I got all the parts unlocked from the begining.

[MiffedStarfish]

Ok, that makes sense, but I think it would be better as its own mode instead of modifying Sandbox.

[Cheif Operations Director]

6 minutes ago, MiffedStarfish said:

Ok, that makes sense, but I think it would be better as its own mode instead of modifying Sandbox.

Then we lose our saves,

It is enabled in settings it would make coding it easier if you want to have ininfity currency turn it on if you don't turn it off,  have to switches for credits and Science for Sandbox then we have the freedoms also would you be in support of Sandbox getting mission control, not for credits or reputation just for missions sake for us to do something like we get a contract they are not required and yield no benifits unless currency is enabled, Maby sandbox type missions like launch so and so'/ satellite it will be added to sub assemblies with this name that is the satellite you need to launch then we could be a launch provider? Like the idea?

[MrChumley]

In the alt + F12 "cheat" menu there are buttons to add and subtract science points.  There is also buttons to max tech tree, and buildings.  I play in career mode after clicking those two buttons.

[Cheif Operations Director]

1 hour ago, MrChumley said:

In the alt + F12 "cheat" menu there are buttons to add and subtract science points.  There is also buttons to max tech tree, and buildings.  I play in career mode after clicking those two buttons.

Console players don't get that option. 

Edited December 10, 2017 by Cheif Operations Director

[Spricigo]

7 hours ago, Cheif Operations Director said:

I would play the other modes but I would want the parts unlocked from the begining and that can't happen, I would play career with missions and such if I got all the parts unlocked from the begining.

I know that you play on console, so no debug menu to completely solve that. However you can still start a carrer with increased starting science and increased science rewards. 

[Cheif Operations Director]

Just now, Spricigo said:

I know that you play on console, so no debug menu to completely solve that. However you can still start a carrer with increased starting science and increased science rewards. 

Already tried it, it isn't good enough

[DAL59]

@Cheif Operations Director, the next update releases a debug menu for console.

[Cheif Operations Director]

14 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

@Cheif Operations Director, the next update releases a debug menu for console.

Where does it say that?