New space center facility?

[KingKerb]

What new facilities do you think should be added to the KSC. I personally want a finances building.

[razark]

1 hour ago, KingKerb said:

I personally want a finances building.

What do you envision such a building to do?

[KingKerb]

46 minutes ago, razark said:

What do you envision such a building to do?

I don't know, maybe budget and loans?

[BadOaks]

I know it's been suggested before, but I'd like to see a wind tunnel facility, where your craft would be technically be in flight mode and you could see how the physics / aerodynamics / thermal models affect it. The craft would be constrained in position and optionally in rotation, and you could see overlays for linear and rotational forces, expected g-forces, thermal flux / limits etc. and you could adjust atmospheric characteristics like density, relative velocity and temperature. 

[Gargamel]

2 hours ago, KingKerb said:

I don't know, maybe budget and loans?

There's already a building for that. 

New buildings would have to be associated with a new game play mechanic.   Otherwise you're either messing with something that isn't broken and doesn't need messing with, or just making eye candy.   I'm ok with eye candy. 

[ZooNamedGames]

4 hours ago, BadOaks said:

I know it's been suggested before, but I'd like to see a wind tunnel facility, where your craft would be technically be in flight mode and you could see how the physics / aerodynamics / thermal models affect it. The craft would be constrained in position and optionally in rotation, and you could see overlays for linear and rotational forces, expected g-forces, thermal flux / limits etc. and you could adjust atmospheric characteristics like density, relative velocity and temperature. 

Yes, almost like a place to do RESEARCH. Like a RnD Center! Oh wait...

Seriously though, I've proposed this in the past and still say it'd be a great idea. Also you could actually process the science you receive at the RnD center so it means more to the player. Or the player could "auto process" the science for a % penalty (like 5-10%, not punishing, but a present loss in science). This could be done as a minigame or something. Just another idea.

One issue with new buildings is a lack of gameplay to change. The game is fine with the buildings it has as there's no systems that need a new building.

Two ideas I have right now are-

Engineer's Complex- An online only feature, which would connect to a Squad server, which would allow for users to upload their creations and have others search, browse and download other's creations. Like the Steam Workship met KerbalX. Being built into the game, and made available to all platforms, it would allow for a Steam workship which is available to everyone indiscriminately. If Squad's worried about managing such an endeavor, they can start small and only offer the feature for a small portion of the community and work larger and larger.

Museum/Archive- A place to go back and see your past missions, and more importantly, firsts for your Kerbal career. With the game taking screenshots (automatically without the UI) upon landing on a new planet/moon or entering space/orbit the first time, as well as recording the name of the vessel and providing a little historical record in this building where players can see the first moments in their journey instead of having to take all the screenshots themselves. 

 

[mattinoz]

I'd add two facilities:-

- Payload Building

Just near the Spaceplane hanger could be same building just mirrored. Craft close by can be recovered into the Payload building refueled, existing decouplers reset and a new payload installed no existing decouplers or docking ports. Craft can then be relauched. 

 

- Sub assembly building 

Assemblies made in this building would weld into a single part that is updatable. so you develop up a libary of boosters and other subassemblies but not have then break out into multiple parts in VAB/SPH.

[JadeOfMaar]

9 hours ago, KingKerb said:

What new facilities do you think should be added to the KSC. I personally want a finances building.

Finances are covered by the Administration Building. This becomes even more obvious when you install and use Strategia which changes the way contracts and rewards work, and changes the UI in there too (I think).

[JadeOfMaar]

I'd much rather see "new space center facilities" produced by players willing and able to learn Kerbal Konstructs and to use the awesome new content packs by @Eskandare and @Omega482. New UI and gameplay mechanics? Maybe, just maybe a plugin writer will come along afterward and create the gameplay features. At least it's a possibility:

• There's a mod for a Wind Tunnel but it's not flashy like you're expecting-- just a UI in the SPH, but it's quite sufficient in terms of giving data.
• ResearchBodies adds an observatory facility but doesn't add a KSC building.

Meanwhile.... Kerbal is made to be modded. That's part of why it's as barren as it is without mods. Praying to Squad to deliver everything is a none-too-bright idea.

Spoiler

Pictures are from here:

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by JadeOfMaar

[Eskandare]

21 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

I'd much rather see "new space center facilities" produced by players willing and able to learn Kerbal Konstructs and to use the awesome new content packs by @Eskandare and @Omega482. New UI and gameplay mechanics? Maybe, just maybe a plugin writer will come along afterward and create the gameplay features. At least it's a possibility:

• There's a mod for a Wind Tunnel but it's not flashy like you're expecting-- just a UI in the SPH, but it's quite sufficient in terms of giving data.
• ResearchBodies adds an observatory facility but doesn't add a KSC building.

Meanwhile.... Kerbal is made to be modded. That's part of why it's as barren as it is without mods. Praying to Squad to deliver everything is a none-too-bright idea.

  Hide contents

Pictures are from here:

 

Agreed! If anyone is interested in making Kerbal Konstructs statics get in touch with @Omega482 or myself @Eskandare and we'd be happy to explain the dimensions of how buildings are created. Omega and I have gone over @bac9's notes extensively. Here is a great write up on the creation of the KSC buildings: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/developerarticles.html/the-making-of-the-new-ksc-r71/  

Checkout the Kerbal Konstructs mods.

 Omega's mod, https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/169891-wip-omega482s-dev-thread-omegas-stockalike-structures-no-textures-required-alpha-now-available/

My mod (It'll be better after the next update): https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/174336-kerbin-side-remastered-14x/&

and damonvv's mod: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/174368-145-170-tundras-space-center-v11-april-13th-stockalike-ksc-launchpads/&tab=comments#comment-3366232

Edited April 15, 2019 by Eskandare

[OrbitalBuzzsaw]

1) Add two more runways, one facing north-south and another facing 30deg northeast/210deg southwest in an x shape. Call them KSC 09 (default), KSC 00/36, and KSC 03/21

2) Reorient the default in the VAB to be rather than facing north facing east (i.e. when you press W on a rocket it turns 90deg east rather than north) and add a second launchpad for polar launches (yes I know Woomerang, but maybe another one on the other side of the KSContinent?

3) Generally more airports (not launch sites, airports) around Kerbin and contracts to suit (e.g. carry Something Kerman from the Kerbal Space Center to Hyperion Field, etc)

4) The aforementioned wind-tunnel

5) The Propulsion Laboratory - Give the propulsion laboratory x amount of science, and then every 30 days there is a 0.1x % chance that they will improve a random engine's (or at 2x the Science cost a specific engine's) ISP by 10, up to a maximum of 50.

[linuxgurugamer]

Ignoring length, the only reason to have runways  at different angles is do planes won't  have to land in a crosswind.  Lacking weather  and wind. There is no need for angled runways 

[Magzimum]

8 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Ignoring length, the only reason to have runways  at different angles is do planes won't  have to land in a crosswind.  Lacking weather  and wind. There is no need for angled runways 

You make a valid point, and I agree that from a purely functional point of view, the east-west runway is all you need to get things into orbit.

But... Moar Runways!

• It would look cool.
• It would allow for new challenges in this forum.
• It would hardly slow the game down.
• It wouldn't be difficult to program for Squad if you just add the extra runway(s) without any options of where to launch from. It would be as easy as adding some easter eggs somewhere.

 

[linuxgurugamer]

33 minutes ago, Magzimum said:

It wouldn't be difficult to program for Squad if you just add the extra runway(s) without any options of where to launch from. It would be as easy as adding some easter eggs somewhere.

Are you sure?  Think about how difficult it was to get the current runway working as well as it does (no terrain seams, no hidden bumps, etc).

If I had a nickel for every time someone said "It wouldn't be difficult to program", I'd be able to retire now

[Kerbart]

On 4/15/2019 at 12:27 AM, ZooNamedGames said:

Museum/Archive- A place to go back and see your past missions, and more importantly, firsts for your Kerbal career. With the game taking screenshots (automatically without the UI) upon landing on a new planet/moon or entering space/orbit the first time, as well as recording the name of the vessel and providing a little historical record in this building where players can see the first moments in their journey instead of having to take all the screenshots themselves. 

The museum as a repository for screenshots with geodata, finding plaques, exporting screenshots with IG-like filters applied ... what a great idea!

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

If I had a nickel for every time someone said "It wouldn't be difficult to program", I'd be able to retire now

Please don’t retire. There are 684 mods that need you!

But you are right! As my late father used to say, “nothing is impossible for the person who doesn’t have to do it themselves”

[Magzimum]

2 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Are you sure?  Think about how difficult it was to get the current runway working as well as it does (no terrain seams, no hidden bumps, etc).

If I had a nickel for every time someone said "It wouldn't be difficult to program", I'd be able to retire now

No I am not sure. But I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that once you got one runway figured out, you can add a second one much easier.

[linuxgurugamer]

5 hours ago, Magzimum said:

No I am not sure. But I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption that once you got one runway figured out, you can add a second one much easier.

Trust me, it's not that simple.  It all depends on the implementation and underlying structure.  It seems simple, but without knowing how it works underneath, it's impossible to say whether it is simple or not.

The words "unreasonable assumption" don't belong in programming.

[snip]

Edited April 19, 2019 by Snark
Redacted by moderator

[Magzimum]

4 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

The words "unreasonable assumption" don't belong in programming.

But they do belong in a forum where the players discuss some modifications to the game.

[StrandedonEarth]

What I would like to see as a DLC-class addition is a much deeper implementation of the Kerbal Konstruction Time mod. Not just the rocket-assembling and research time, but the entire supply chain (short of resource extraction). After all, being able to design, build, and launch several rockets in the span of hours (if not minutes) of game time is rather OP. How does that fit this topic? Because it would require not just a factory, but likely an entire factory row (one per supplier)! And it becomes part of a bigger mechanic.

Back in the early-access versions, when in the editors, the top-right corner of the part detail windows had "Qty: 999." (Unfortunately, I don't have my old alpha versions anymore, or I'd post a screenshot of it. Perhaps someone else could provide that screenie?) This implies that at some point in time there were thoughts of implementing part inventories. These inventories need to come from somewhere.

So, as one progresses through the tech tree and new parts become available from new suppliers, new factories are built. KKT also includes research time, which would give time to build the factories. When new parts are researched, it would start with a small inventory on-hand, and more would have to be ordered as desired. The factories could produce parts on demand when a rocket is built, adding cost and build time, or have batches ordered ahead of time (larger production runs are cheaper per unit) which would reduce the rocket build time since parts are already on hand. Buying additional production lines in each factory would allow multiple part production runs from that supplier, building different parts from that supplier simultaneously. Possibly, the VAB  (or a sub-AB) could produce runs of sub-assemblies, if ordered.

Now we get into a new mechanic, giving the Astronaut Complex and kerbal professions new purposes. I never liked the current skills progression; it's totally passive with no player choice of what skills are acquired. I would much rather choose what skills my kerbals train to acquire (yes, training time too!) even if the training itself is completely hands-off. New skills that could be acquired (relevant to this post) would be research-time buffs for scientists and production-time buffs for engineers. Scientists and Engineers (with or without buffs) could be assigned to R&D, factories, and the VAB/SPH itself to reduce research and build times.

For those that would argue that time is a useless mechanic since it can be warped through, that is only partially true. Time becomes important when trying to  be ready for a transfer window, especially if planning multiple launches. Supply chain management could add a whole new dimension to the game.

 

[Snark]

Some content has been removed.  Just a friendly reminder to keep things on topic, folks.  Addressing the OP is on-topic, making comments about each other is not.  Thank you for your understanding.

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, Magzimum said:

But they do belong in a forum where the players discuss some modifications to the game.

Why?  Its still referring to programming, where nothing can reasonably be assumed

[Vanamonde]

Rather than get mad at each other about the ins and outs of game coding, why don't we talk about additional facilities we might like to see added to KSC? 

[Kerbinchaser]

I would love to see a "test pad." A small, mid-game building that connects to the main launchpad where you can just blast engines and decouplers. I think it would be such a neat little addition and would be a minor but fun structure. 

I would also like more runways. One maybe at a 90-degree angle to the first one. It would add so many more possibilities for airport operations and polar orbit SSTO landings.
 

Spoiler

(Kinda like this. Credit goes to reddit user u/LinksSpaceProgram)

 

[Magzimum]

Facilities I would like to have:

Extra Runway

As mentioned above, just for fun.

Craft test facility (e.g. wind tunnel or "modeling facility")

In addition to the extra runway, I would also love to have a facility to test crafts. Some called it a windtunnel (an earlier post by @BadOaks ), but I would also be happy if it was the Kerbal Aerodynamics Modelling Program (KAMP).

I use the cheat a lot to get my craft into a particular orbit (e.g. Eve) to get its characteristics right before building a giant launcher and fly the mission. I use a Sandbox game for tests, and then copy the craft file into my Career game. I'd like to do that inside the Career game without cheating.

Edited April 20, 2019 by Magzimum

[Aeroboi]

A 270° <> 90° runway. Polar launches using SSTO's should be doable. The flat KSC complex is big enough it seems.

A shipyard for building marine vessels.