What remains to be done after breaking ground

[KerikBalm]

Let me start by saying I'm on the hype train, and I think breaking ground will be a big hit (please no discussion about money/payment).

Stock moveable parts are something that will really improve the game, and players have wanted for a while.

Another thing I wanted was some sort of stock atmospheric propulsion on worlds without O2: ie electric fans, monoprop powered piston engines, whatever.

We will soon have a way to propel our craft using just EC in the atmosphere of other worlds. This will presumably work in oceans too, making stock submarines on Eve a reality.

I'd say the game will be pretty complete, as far as what I desire to be stock... but there are some major features I think could still be added, and some minor things as well.

A minor thing that I'll overlook is the need for larger steerable landing gear... we can just attach them to a serve/joint. We're only looking at a partcount increase of 1-2

Major features/changes:

1) Stock life support, it adds depth to the game, meshes well with surface bases (the current expansion's focus?), and can be made to be largely irrelevant for quick trips to the Mun, not heavily impacting newer players, even if they choose not to disable it

2)... um I think that's it for major features...

Minor features/ part/planet packs:

1) stock electric fan *engines*. While a rotor and a 4 blade prop will work, that's 5 parts, when an engine can be a single part. Keeping part count down is good (as long as creativity isn't restricted), it allows for larger designs.

A 4 engine design would use 20 parts with the current system, that is less  than ideal

2) larger size atmospheric engines, larger LF only cylindrical tanks: Some of my SSTOs have used 40 rapiers... spamming the LF only cylindrical fusalages increases part count too much. Spamming 1.25m engines for larger mk3/3.75m/5meter diameter based space planes increases part count too much.

I'd love more 2.5m sized engines to drop that part count by 30 (with a 2.5m engine the equivalent of 4x 1.25m engines)... something like this for a rapier would be great:

(as the 2.5m engine would be larger, it needs more detail, as you'll be looking at it relatively closer)

3) Nuclear reactors and larger Ion engines. Nuclear reactors would also work well with submarines: it beats spamming the tiny RTGs (again, anything that stops part count from ballooning is a good thing)

4) Rotors that rotate their center section, but not the ends: would be very useful for having inline rotating parts (such as artificial gravity on stations, or contra rotating props), while allowing a main non rotating stack... it seems like to do that now will be more complicated, and it will inflate part count.

5) Part rebalancing:

I still think the wolfhound is OP'd, and I now think the skiff has been over nerfed. The wolfound and poodle simply overlap in role too much. The skiff is too weak for its size... but it seems like it should be overlapping in role with the skipper.

The rapier is based on an engine with an altitude compensating nozzle, and its closed cycle is basically meant for use in vacuum and near vacuum conditions. Its closed cycle Isp sucks too much. It should be at least 315s like a vector, preferably with an Isp curve more like the Rhino's, or at least the skipper's.

 

What do you think KSP needs after making history?

[Kerbart]

36 minutes ago, KerikBalm said:

LWhat do you think KSP needs after making history?

First, and foremost, we’ll need bug fixes after BG is released. It’s hard to imagine those robotic parts cone without bugs, and Squad has a tendency to release big updates untested*

 

*yes, untested. It never fails to surprise me how many bugs are found in five minutes of very generic playtesting.

[RealKerbal3x]

33 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

First, and foremost, we’ll need bug fixes after BG is released. It’s hard to imagine those robotic parts cone without bugs, and Squad has a tendency to release big updates untested*

 

*yes, untested. It never fails to surprise me how many bugs are found in five minutes of very generic playtesting.

There have been several updates in the Daily Kerbal section of the forum which specifically focused on things that the QA team have built with the new robotics, which could mean they’re taking testing more seriously.

I’m going to cross my fingers and hope that SQUAD are attempting to make up for the previous expansion being a buggy, untested mess on release. I’d reckon they don’t want their new DLC requiring 5 patches to reach something resembling stability, like MH did.

Edited May 29, 2019 by RealKerbal3x

[djr5899]

I don't have a ton of time put into the game (about 1000 hours, which is nothing compared to a lot of the folks here).  I've still never visited much of the stock solar system (Mun, Minmus, Ike, Duna, and some flybys in the Jool system is all I have done).  There are several things though that I would love to see added:

1.  I would agree a stock life support system would be a huge addition.  Even if you can toggle it on or off would be great.  Would be nice to have to do planning for longer trips, or have a forced reason to do a supply mission or crew rotation to orbital bases and labs.
2.  An expanded repair system, including the ability to assemble craft in space.  I've tried a few times to build larger craft in space by launching piece by piece, and connecting them together via multiple docking ports.  Not very stable.  And, I don't know how many times I've launched a satellite or an unmanned craft, and forgot batteries, solar panels, or simply to raise the antenna to keep contact with the vessel.  It would be great if I could send an engineer to add a part, assemble larger pieces of craft using couplers and not just docking ports, or even recover a dead satellite/base by raising antenna or charging batteries.
3.  Additional space ports.  Either add some ports that only become available after you "find them" in a current save, or add the ability to build your own space port on a planet as part of base building.  I have both PC and Xbox One versions of the game.  Adding a space port on the Mun was a game changer for me in terms of visiting more distant planets.  You expend far less fuel leaving Mun than Kerbin, which means you open up 
4.  Additional stock lighting.  Would love to see a light-house type rotating light (which, I guess with the new parts coming in DLC that may be possible), but, in general, lighting options are very lacking.  I use Surface Lights mod to handle this today, but this seems like a really simple thing to add some lights of different sizes for plane based craft, labs, ships, and bases.

[Jimmidii]

4 hours ago, Kerbart said:

First, and foremost, we’ll need bug fixes after BG is released. It’s hard to imagine those robotic parts cone without bugs, and Squad has a tendency to release big updates untested*

 

*yes, untested. It never fails to surprise me how many bugs are found in five minutes of very generic playtesting.

Hundreds of thousands of new eyes on code will always find new bugs. Especially when two of those eyes are Danny's.

[Kerbart]

19 hours ago, Jimmidii said:

Hundreds of thousands of new eyes on code will always find new bugs. Especially when two of those eyes are Danny's.

The issue is not that incredibly creative people find some edge-case bugs (easy to reproduce does not mean it’s not an edge case). The issue is that everyone seems to be finding bug in the first hour of playing.

I remember that one release had, in vanilla stock, my Kerbals explode the second they stepped onto a planetary surface. How can you not notice? Engines with the center of thrust offset, creating solid amounts of torque...

QA probably exists of a large amount of test cases that are thoroughly tested, but they should also playtest to find the bugs they are not looking for. That seems to be missing in the process.

Edited May 30, 2019 by Kerbart
Fxied typo

[Pthigrivi]

I like all these. A few plus 1's and a few additions:

1) Yes life support, w/ greenhouses and habitation modules.

2) Yes stock propellers to keep part count down.

3) Yes larger LF tanks, and also low dry mass tanks for vacuum?

4) Yes reactors, larger Ions. Also a few more Nerva and VASIMR options.

Some more nice things:

1) Alarm clock and transfer window aid in some form.

2) Real-time surveying and biome overlays in map view.

3) Overall tech-tree and part balance pass.

4) Overhaul of the Story-line contracts so they persist and don't break.

5) Construction and research time
 

Some real luxury items:

1) Clouds, aurora, a thin Joolean ring etc.

2) A 5m heat shield and a couple of ballutes

3) Submarine ballast and dirigible parts.

4) Stock KAS, Trajectories factoring drag and other possible skill perks.

5) Kerbal uniqueness--Suit colors by class, different hair, glasses, etc.


 

Edited May 29, 2019 by Pthigrivi

[tater]

A stock ability to randomize the solar system in some fashion would be cool. Scale, as well as planets. Not "procedural," but they can be picked from a curated list of candidate worlds (their cfg files can set what scaling options are allowed for each planet, since some can take different scaling than others).

This would actually allow people to explore again, since they won't know everything about every world.

[mattinoz]

5 hours ago, tater said:

A stock ability to randomize the solar system in some fashion would be cool. Scale, as well as planets. Not "procedural," but they can be picked from a curated list of candidate worlds (their cfg files can set what scaling options are allowed for each planet, since some can take different scaling than others).

This would actually allow people to explore again, since they won't know everything about every world.

Why not Procedural?

Well, at least key based procedural for sharing and caring purposes. That would keep the download and storage size down and create a natural "fog of exploration" if the detailed terrain doesn't exist. Until someone is looking at it. Hopefully would also allow for lightweight ground changes, build features,  in part by having game parts that can re-write the terrain file but also by changing how much the engine needs to know about the local surroundings at anyone time. (wishfully thinking I know)

 

 

[Klapaucius]

Life support sounds excellent. 

Large steerable landing gear AND better very small gear for mini-planes. Even the smallest gear we currently have is not good for super light aircraft. You tend to bounce terribly on takeoff and landing.

I'd also like the ability to launch any craft on the water from the SPH or VAB saving you having to put wheels on your subs or boats.  You can do this in the Mission Builder, but it would be great to have in the vanilla game.

Even with the new DLC features, I still think the vanilla game needs some stock props like the kind you see in the Firespitter mod or like in Simple Planes.

Edited May 30, 2019 by Klapaucius

[tater]

7 hours ago, mattinoz said:

Why not Procedural?

Well, at least key based procedural for sharing and caring purposes. That would keep the download and storage size down and create a natural "fog of exploration" if the detailed terrain doesn't exist. Until someone is looking at it. Hopefully would also allow for lightweight ground changes, build features,  in part by having game parts that can re-write the terrain file but also by changing how much the engine needs to know about the local surroundings at anyone time. (wishfully thinking I know)

 

 

Randomized planets are probably yucky. Better to have them vetted.

Loads of people have made new planets, and perhaps there could even be a contest to submit planets, or merely a folder the game pulls them from.

[Frozen_Heart]

Stock life support would be nice.

 

Keep it simple and forgiving, in the style of the rest of the game. Single resource, which is gradually used up by kerbals. When they run out they go into hibernation, and will only wake up when more is generated.

 

All command pods and parts able to hold kerbals could have a supply, along with containers which you can send up. Maybe have a greenhouse module (similar size and shape to the science lab), which very slowly generates it too.

[kerbiloid]

On 5/29/2019 at 1:51 PM, Kerbart said:

how many bugs are found in five minutes of very generic playtesting.

So, first of all, this saves the gamers' time. They don't have to wait a month  instead of five minutes.

[Zero266]

1. Stock life support

2. Refurbish all the planets with better textures and such.

3. A tiny radial decoupler PLEASE

4. Electric/LF props, ballasts, balloons

5. Nuclear fission reactors for bases far from the sun

[IncongruousGoat]

Nothing.

Yes, literally nothing. I'm floored that the devs are still adding features, even though it's clear (from the existence of the DLC) that sales of KSP itself aren't making much money these days. But, as far as I'm concerned, they could drop all development right now and I would still be happy. Sure, we can all quibble about parts & mechanics we'd like to see added, but let's be honest - we're all enjoying the game perfectly fine as it is. The game, in its current state, is fun. The modding scene is alive and well, as is the community (as evidenced by the fact that we're having this discussion in the first place). There is no feature that Squad could add that would make me like the game more than I already do. It's perfectly acceptable as it is.

[mattinoz]

14 hours ago, tater said:

Randomized planets are probably yucky. Better to have them vetted.

Loads of people have made new planets, and perhaps there could even be a contest to submit planets, or merely a folder the game pulls them from.

Could there be a Hybrid?

So each planet type has a bunch of tiles that can mix and match to make a whole planet and a randomised system takes care of stitching them together.  4 Planets variations then become maybe 40 tiles making 100's of variations possible. Add community content to that mix and fun ensures.

[klgraham1013]

On 5/29/2019 at 5:51 AM, Kerbart said:

First, and foremost, we’ll need bug fixes after BG is released. It’s hard to imagine those robotic parts cone without bugs, and Squad has a tendency to release big updates untested*

 

*yes, untested. It never fails to surprise me how many bugs are found in five minutes of very generic playtesting.

This man speaks the truth.

On 5/29/2019 at 10:31 AM, Jimmidii said:

Hundreds of thousands of new eyes on code will always find new bugs.

One pair of eyes should know to test that the IVA works on your new pod model.  There's a mighty long list of the simplest things that have gotten through QA.  Making excuses doesn't help anybody.

[FleshJeb]

On 5/31/2019 at 3:36 AM, klgraham1013 said:

Making excuses

You found the name of the next DLC?

[klgraham1013]

3 hours ago, FleshJeb said:

You found the name of the next DLC?

No.  That was the name of the 1.0 update.

[kerbiloid]

An opening animation like in Game of Thrones every second series now. KSC getting mounted from the animated mechanisms.

Spoiler

From the second attempt...

 

Edited June 3, 2019 by kerbiloid