Do you play with the Expansion "Making History" ?

[Jacke]

I'm wondering how many KSP players have the "Making History" Expansion.  And if they have it, what features of it are they using.

Edited September 24, 2018 by Jacke

[Francois424]

Why not.  I always said I was going to buy it.  Back to KSP after nearly a year long break, I put my money where my mouth is and got it.

It saddens me these parts do not have any nuclear reactor, nor does it have propellers (real ones, and not 10-20 parts making one).  But it did introduce a 2-man pod and larger solar panels.  2 less things on my wish list "of things that KSP needs" imho.

Really happy with the X-Pac so far.

[panzer1b]

I own it but have the parts and expansion disabled in my primary KSP install.  Main reason for this is that i dont use the parts as i want all the ships i make to be accessible to everyone if they so desire and not have certain people that dont have it unable to use the vessel, and only load them up when i want to try someone elses craft that happens to use MH parts.  That and 90% of the MH parts are completely unnecessary or available through mods if i really want to replicate real life space missions (which isnt something im into, ill stick to my capital ships, starfighters and starbases thank u very much). 

As for the rest of the MHE, missions i never cared for since i have enough of an imagination to make my own up, and ive pretty much stuck with sandbox mode all the time ive been playing KSP (messed with career and sci mode a little but beyond trying it when it came out ive stuck to sandbox).  Now if features like launch sites on other planets were available in sandbox, id so be using MH, but until that happens, i just cant justify the resource use (even if it is minor) for something that has no features which i truly care about (most of the new things are cool, but not really necessary for a sci-fi gameplay experience since its not like MH comes with non-circular cross sectional pieces which are something desprately needed in KSP).

[Aeroboi]

6 hours ago, Francois424 said:

*snip*

and larger solar panels.

*snip*

Where? I got MH but I'm missing these. Is it something with Steam?

[Jacke]

32 minutes ago, Aeroboi said:

Where? I got MH but I'm missing these. Is it something with Steam?

I don't see solar panels in MH either.  I think that might be the upgrade replacement of parts in base KSP.

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Parts

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Making_History_parts

[FinalFan]

I don't have the expansion pack and I can't really articulate why.  Perhaps I feel I need to be "done" progressing through using the regular stuff; I have all the base game's research nodes unlocked but I am still in the early phases of executing my first interplanetary missions.  I think that after I have a few of these under my belt I will probably celebrate by getting the expansion pack. 

[Rocket In My Pocket]

I'm pretty happy with the expansion pack.

Adds some interesting extra parts, and since I'm a bit of a stock part purist that was welcome.

I haven't gotten into playing or designing missions yet but I most likely will at some point, looking forward to it!

[Tyko]

The 1.875m parts were a great addition and filled a big gap. Going straight from 1.25 - 2.5m parts gave an 8x increase in volume, mass.. That’s just too big of a jump. 

[Francois424]

7 hours ago, Aeroboi said:

Where? I got MH but I'm missing these. Is it something with Steam? 

 

7 hours ago, Jacke said:

I don't see solar panels in MH either.  I think that might be the upgrade replacement of parts in base KSP.

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Parts

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Making_History_parts

 

The 2x4 static solar panels ?  I was on my modless install and they are there ?
Gonna fire-up the game in a few minutes then edit the post with their name.

[Aeroboi]

11 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

 

 

The 2x4 static solar panels ?  I was on my modless install and they are there ?
Gonna fire-up the game in a few minutes then edit the post with their name.

That's the OX-STAT-XL Photovoltaic panel which is not from Making history but since version 1.1

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/OX-STAT-XL_Photovoltaic_Panels

Edited September 23, 2018 by Aeroboi

[Francois424]

Just now, Aeroboi said:

That's the OX-STAT-XL Photovoltaic panel which is not from Making history but since version 1.1

Really? umm... I had played extensively in 1.1.3 and didn't notice them, what about the new telescope thing?  Is that MH or also an add-on amongst the many patches since 1.1.3 ?
At any rate, having these new part is great.  I just wish we'd get a couple propellers.  Perfect for Laythe, Kerbin, and Eve... Maybe Duna too.
Might get into the missions later but I need to catch-up on personal projects of mine first.

[Aeroboi]

9 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

Really? umm... I had played extensively in 1.1.3 and didn't notice them, what about the new telescope thing?  Is that MH or also an add-on amongst the many patches since 1.1.3 ?
At any rate, having these new part is great.  I just wish we'd get a couple propellers.  Perfect for Laythe, Kerbin, and Eve... Maybe Duna too.
Might get into the missions later but I need to catch-up on personal projects of mine first.

The telescope is to scan for asteroids. I don't use it often because I'm not sure what I need asteroids for. I didn't know it's release version but I just checked and the wiki says version 1.3

I'm also a big fan of propellers and would want them in the game also. Still, a desperate man can make them using stock bearings and reaction wheels. Although it might be a bit tricky to learn. AFAIK they don't work well on Duna due to the thin atmosphere. ION planes do work there. It's only annoying to bring xenon from Kerbin all the way over there.

I think most of the parts added since v1.x are very useful, but I don't really complain easily so there's that

[Rocket In My Pocket]

11 minutes ago, Aeroboi said:

The telescope is to scan for asteroids. I don't use it often because I'm not sure what I need asteroids for. I didn't know it's release version but I just checked and the wiki says version 1.3

You'll get contracts to place Sentinels in a given solar orbit, then scan X number of Asteroids. They are insanely profitable.

Other contracts want you to capture a certain size of asteroid and having a scanning network of Sentinels can help give you a wide choice of Asteroids with different orbits.  Ie. You may find the type you want but the trajectory will be awkward to intercept. (Took me forever to find a suitable A class one time.)

Or you can just mine them for Ore, or build a base on them, run EVA reports near them in different situations for science rewards, tons of stuff really!

Edited September 23, 2018 by Rocket In My Pocket

[Aeroboi]

@Rocket In My Pocket I think I need to play more career to really utilize all the benefits. But that does give me some good ideas for a planned career mode. It always happens I never continue most careers so let's see if I get at it lol

[Rocket In My Pocket]

7 minutes ago, Aeroboi said:

@Rocket In My Pocket I think I need to play more career to really utilize all the benefits. But that does give me some good ideas for a planned career mode. It always happens I never continue most careers so let's see if I get at it lol

I'm the same way, I typically restart my Career every time a major patch drops. Lol.

Lately though I've been good, been playing the same save since like 1.3ish? The game is finally settled down enough where you can keep a save going through patches.

Best of luck on sticking with your new play through!

Edited September 23, 2018 by Rocket In My Pocket

[swjr-swis]

19 hours ago, Jacke said:

I'm wondering how many KSP players have the "Making History" Expansion.

Are you really though? You are preemptively excluding people that still stick with 1.3.1 (or earlier versions) for any number of reasons.

It's like claiming you're wondering how many people use 20 inch rims on their cars by starting all 10 possible answers choices with "I drive a Ford 150 and ...."

 

Edit: it seems I missed the 'or earlier' in the first options. I'm pretty sure I'm not dyslexic. Risgedard.

Edited September 23, 2018 by swjr-swis
objection, move to strike

[Geonovast]

1 minute ago, swjr-swis said:

You are preemptively excluding people that still stick with 1.3.1 (or earlier versions)

First poll option:

I'm playing KSP 1.4.0 or earlier and don't own the Expansion

[Jacke]

Just now, swjr-swis said:

Are you really though? You are preemptively excluding people that still stick with 1.3.1 (or earlier versions) for any number of reasons.

What the frak ?!?   First two options!  (Thanks, @Geonovast.)

Quote

I'm playing KSP 1.4.0 or earlier and don't own the Expansion

I'm playing KSP 1.4.0 or earlier but do own the Expansion

 

[Klapaucius]

If nothing else, the Mission Builder is the best hyper-edit tool out there--it is far, far more versatile than the mod and much simpler to use because you simply place a craft on a map: you do not need to enter in coordinates (though you can do that as well).  It's like a solar system sandbox mode.  Being someone who likes to build planes (and just starting on Rovers) I love the ability to shoot to the surface (or orbit) or bottom of the sea (you can select your craft placement on the surface or bottom of any body of water) of any planet and test out a design.

The Mission Builder works with planet packs as well, so over the last week I have been flying around any world I can find with an atmosphere as well as exploring alien oceans (I have a submersible plane).  It is really fun to try flying in different gravity environments and in soupy atmospheres--it creates whole different design needs.  My best alien worlds plane won't get off the ground on Kerbin--and interestingly does not do that well on Duna either, but it shines on the weird worlds in the Galileo, Outer Planets, Gael System and Kerbol Origins packs .  At some point I will post a video compilation of the flights.

 

 

Edited September 24, 2018 by Klapaucius

[Jacke]

Wow, that's all rather cool, @Klapaucius.

2 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

If nothing else, the Mission Builder is the best hyper-edit tool out there--it is far, far more versatile than the mod and much simpler to use because you simply place a craft on a map: you do not need to enter in coordinates (though you can do that as well).  It's like a solar system sandbox mode.

One of the things I use Hyperedit for is making sure my designs for landers and rovers will work on remote system bodies.  So, I could use the Mission Builder for that instead?

Build a lander, rover, or like Klapaucius does, a plane or submarine.  And you can just drop it in the planned destination to make sure it will work there.

 

[Klapaucius]

1 hour ago, Jacke said:

Wow, that's all rather cool, @Klapaucius.

One of the things I use Hyperedit for is making sure my designs for landers and rovers will work on remote system bodies.  So, I could use the Mission Builder for that instead?

Build a lander, rover, or like Klapaucius does, a plane or submarine.  And you can just drop it in the planned destination to make sure it will work there.

 

Yes you can.   I threw together a 5 minute video (it's rough but functional) that demos how it works--because that is probably easier than trying to just describe it.  The first time you set up a mission it will take you to a Mission Briefing dialogue. You can just click okay and ignore everything. You only need to do this once.

So, you spawn a vessel. You can then choose to have it either: landed, in orbit, or at a launch site (Woomerang, Dessert etc.)  If you choose landed, you then have to determine the position, which you do using the tools seen in the video, choosing your celestial body and your coordinates on the body. You can start on the surface of the water, or you can untick a box and start on the bottom of the sea.

If you choose launch site, you can also spawn a custom launch pad and place it anywhere. The game will even place them on the sides of vertical cliffs (above or underwater) should you so desire.

Finally, you can put it in orbit and define all your orbital parameters: eccentricity, apoapsis. periapsis, etc.

Once you test your Mission you can create quicksaves or restart just as a normal launch.  

Supposedly you can adjust the light cycle as well, but it does not seem to work very well. The Mission Builder, like all things in KSP, has a few bugs, but they've fixed a lot of them. There used to be a real problem with vessels spawing inside launch pads and exploding, but it looks like they have mostly fixed this. Occasionally I will have a craft explode upon placement. Usually that is fixed by moving it just a few degrees and the problem is solved.  The only other thing to note is that crew is assigned in the Mission Builder menu and not in the hangar. I constantly forget to do this step.

 

 

[Kernel Kraken]

You can pry 1.3.1 out of my cold, dead fingers.

[swjr-swis]

2 hours ago, Jacke said:

First two options!

My bad: the wording just didn't make sense to me. 1.4.0 doesn't fit with the category 'or earlier', as far as I'm concerned. I realize now though you must be referring to MH being delayed to the next patch.

I guess that shows how much I don't play MH. Or '1.4.0 or later' (*) for that matter.

(*: 'or later' currently being limited to 1.4.1 - 1.4.5, but not necessarily excluding 1.5 'or later'. The significance of 'or later' may be extended to include other major or minor revisions, until such time as a version is released deemed worthy of succeeding 1.3.1. No kerbals, version numbers, compound phrases, or qualifiers were harmed in the typing of this disclaimer. Some kerbals may be harmed as soon as this disclaimer is done and we all can go back to launching rockets.)

[Jacke]

8 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

My bad: the wording just didn't make sense to me. 1.4.0 doesn't fit with the category 'or earlier', as far as I'm concerned. I realize now though you must be referring to MH being delayed to the next patch.

"KSP 1.4.0 or earlier" meant any version of KSP before "Making History" was released with KSP 1.4.1. You didn't understand what I meant, but others did.  And I would have preferred if you just asked me what I meant instead of what you posted.

I have changed the language of the options to be more explicit.

[Bill Phil]

Have it, rarely use it. The parts don't really do much for me. I'm not a fan of how they're balanced. I do sometimes use the thrust plates, which need to be stock, but that's mainly because... well, they need to be stock. They allow clustered engines.