How to got more than one Star System to work....

[Mr. Scruffy]

I´ll start with a sidenote: KSP-forums must be one of the most frustrating places in the webs - people seem to write a lot, but hardly ever seem to read... so this post, as so many others here, will consists of little more than repeatitions of what as already been said, in this very same thread:

- Excessive time-warp to reach another star with sub-lightspeed is out of the question due to the need to keep consistency with the kerbol system and the player run operations there.

- Kerbol being part of a binary/tertiary system is no solution to the problem, but merely an attempt to avoid it altogether.

- Thus we need excessive speeds for interstellar travel, even when with KSPs shrinked distances, to get anywhere in a timely fashion.

- To not ruin intra-stellar travel by having an FTL-drive avaiable, said FTL-drive may only be engaged when no gravity affects it - e.g. outside of any body´s (including stars) SoI. This is btw also the method i read the devs would be contemplating (no, i am not going to search for the source, now - after all logic pretty much dictates this methos, as shown).

- Of course any FTL-drive is science fiction. As such, the devs need not adhere to any RL-examples of theortical drives but are totally free to make one up on their own. IMHO, they should stay well away of the utilization of any ´popular´ name, since those are rooted in our world. E.g. to name any propulsion method a ´v.-Braun-drive´ would do little more than break immersion. I´d probably call it in spoofy popular sf-fashion ; maybe the ´cringe drive´ - cause it makes spacetime, physical laws and professional physicians cringe (not warp).

[loknar]

I´ll start with a sidenote: KSP-forums must be one of the most frustrating places in the webs - people seem to write a lot, but hardly ever seem to read... so this post, as so many others here, will consists of little more than repeatitions of what as already been said, in this very same thread:

Thanks, masterchief!

- Excessive time-warp to reach another star with sub-lightspeed is out of the question due to the need to keep consistency with the kerbol system and the player run operations there.

Why? Leave your stuff orbiting for 10 years. Nothing changes.

- Kerbol being part of a binary/tertiary system is no solution to the problem, but merely an attempt to avoid it altogether.

"Problem" ? You're so negative! The "problem" is you want more stuff to explore, right? Binary star would give you that.

- Thus we need excessive speeds for interstellar travel, even when with KSPs shrinked distances, to get anywhere in a timely fashion.

- To not ruin intra-stellar travel by having an FTL-drive avaiable, said FTL-drive may only be engaged when no gravity affects it - e.g. outside of any body´s (including stars) SoI. This is btw also the method i read the devs would be contemplating (no, i am not going to search for the source, now - after all logic pretty much dictates this methos, as shown).

- Of course any FTL-drive is science fiction. As such, the devs need not adhere to any RL-examples of theortical drives but are totally free to make one up on their own. IMHO, they should stay well away of the utilization of any ´popular´ name, since those are rooted in our world. E.g. to name any propulsion method a ´v.-Braun-drive´ would do little more than break immersion. I´d probably call it in spoofy popular sf-fashion ; maybe the ´cringe drive´ - cause it makes spacetime, physical laws and professional physicians cringe (not warp).

Did the devs give their vision about science-fiction and how far from reality they would be ready to bring KSP? Didn't find any official position on this.

[Anton P. Nym]

From what you linked, the Alderson Drive posits the existence of a parallel universe with no quantum effects, and a fifth physical force that accelerates particles in this parallel universe. Unless I'm missing something important, I'm not sure I'd classify that as "somewhat plausible".

"Somewhat plausible" in that it breaks the bare minimum of physical laws necessary to get something moving faster than light, or at least the bare minimum when it was designed in the '70s, while leaving the planetary mission stuff in the realm of Newtonian physics.

In my mind an undetected 5th force and parallel universe is roughly as plausible as forms of matter neither observed in nature nor synthesized in a lab, which is what the Alcubierre* drive requires.

Not that I'd care if KSP added implausible tech to the late stages of the game, mind you.

That's partly why I first thought that interstellar travel would be the "end game" mission in career; the ability to move between stars most likely makes Newtonian orbital mechanics moot, which breaks the rest of the game unless extreme measures are taken to make it a special case.

-- Steve

* I kept trying to spell that as "Albuquerque", as in "should have taken that left turn at", drive. Yay, brain.

[rkman]

I don't think I'd like (...) waiting years of game time for a probe to enter a new system.

But you're already used to waiting (timewarping) amounts of time in that order of magnitude. A trip to Duna and back takes roughly a Kerbal year.

Excessive time-warp to reach another star with sub-lightspeed is out of the question due to the need to keep consistency with the kerbol system and the player run operations there.

Why? Leave your stuff orbiting for 10 years. Nothing changes.

The question is, is it desirable from a gameplay perspective to allow the player to put their space program on hold until the interstellar journey is done?

[Yuming]

I could agree with interstellar travel only if it was far up the tech tree and did not have FTL. I am thinking of a more realistic avatar style mega ship powered by advanced but plausible engines, with a faster time warp setting once out of the solar system.

[skyace65]

Thanks, masterchief!

Why? Leave your stuff orbiting for 10 years. Nothing changes.

"Problem" ? You're so negative! The "problem" is you want more stuff to explore, right? Binary star would give you that.

Did the devs give their vision about science-fiction and how far from reality they would be ready to bring KSP? Didn't find any official position on this.

the problem isn't that people want more stuff to explore. the problem is people want to be able to have a real extreme endgame goal! having binary star system just doesn't have that same sense of accomplishment compared to having to build up resources and money to be able to go to different solar systems entirely.

and I'd also rather not have the timewarp. in a way it just makes things seem almost boring that while this is taking forever nothing is happening in the main system.

[MrKicker]

Why not just move the stars closer together?

See, I can be smart.

[chaos_forge]

Why not just move the stars closer together?

See, I can be smart.

That's basically what the multi-star system idea is . . .

[Trainsfan]

Why not just move the stars closer together?

See, I can be smart.

That could work, but only to an extent. Remeber- We don't have full-sized celestial bodies in KSP, so why do the distances have to be the same way? Answer: they already aren't. So what makes this any different?

if we make the distances more "Kerbal" this idea could easily work. I don't have time right now to average it all out, but based on the part size "Half- sized" would be a good rough bet. so that 2.98 minutes on page 1 suddenly becomes 1 minute 30 seconds. Easy. that 50 light years? ~15 minutes. Not terrible, again you can still do other stuff while its traveling. We don't have N-body Physics, if multithreading ever gets implemented those 2 systems, the galactic center and all your spacecraft will be an easy job with a little tweaking of the current system.

Of course, all this will still take time, but for the dev's sake we aren't suggesting eveything to happen at once. Let's at least finish the current system and career mode, then we can return to this topic.

[postman]

I'm pretty sure the devs can think of something if they ever plan to implement this, I haven't read the whole thread, not sure if it contains any amazing ideas that make this irrelevant.

It would also be great if the OP could include some of the best ideas in the first page.

However, here's what I got, sorry if it's been repeated, can't be arsed to read it all.

Upon leaving the SOI of the sun, some set radius away from the sun, an interface comes up (Assuming you have some fancy engine part that is required, if not, you're left to the kracken. How you get that device in career mode is up to the devs, I like monolith involvement). Maybe in career mode, the player has to find the right ascension and declination of the star through some other means, and enter that information before their engine will work. Perhaps in the future the interface could be a fancy galaxy map or something. For now we assume it's a list with the names of each system in it. You select a system from this list, and then see your engine do some fancy effects. It would be amazing if they could make a fake type warp drive, engine turns all blue, makes cool noises, and then the ship moves away really really fast until it teleports. SEE: Star trek: TNG. Maybe just move the camera backwards instead of the ship, I don't really know. However, this really isn't necessary at all, it just gives the nerd in me a hardon.

But after that, simply have the reverse effect happen, in the new system. And then you're traveling at the same speed you left the kerbol system at, but this time, towards the center of the new solar system.

Like people have said, first and foremost it is a game, meant to be fun. There's no realistic way to get to another solar system in KSP and have it be fun. Rules will have to be broken, and things will have to be made up for this to work. I think it's best if the amount of sci-fi usage is minimal though.

TL;DR: Go to edge of kerbol system, a menu comes up if criteria is met (fancy engine effect maybe), and you're in new system at the edge, same speed as when you left.

Edited August 10, 2013 by postman

[Cashen]

I would find it hilarious if, just to troll the people who want more planetary systems, they added a star. One star, 10-something lightyears away.

And so you take forever to get there with your big interplanetary starship and your 50 colonists.

And when you finally get there you realize...

...

It's just a red dwarf with no planets.

[Geckgo]

I rather like something like the cluster idea. I pondered the binary system. Making a point for the two starts to orbit around could be done, it was discussed for making L points. In a binary system it would not pose the same problem that it does there. I (and I think most others) would be willing to accept the planets not having scrambled orbits just like we accept the current physics of "planets and moons on rails". If the two stars were a reasonable distance apart, cool. The cluster could have further out planets.

No need for a warp upgrade. IMO the people that want that are not thinking it through or just don't care about the flow of the game as a space sim. For myself, any interplanetary missions are usually left to run while I do other stuff. When they get to a decent point, I go check in on them and adjust, but I don't like the idea of just running my clock down while nothing is happening on Kerbin. Leaving stuff out there for a bit makes it more fun, and I can send multiple missions everywhere at the same time. Just like IRL.

More powerful and efficient engines toward endgame would be good enough for me to keep having fun for a long time. It should be terribly hard to go to a different star, as in nearly beyond the capability of even the best parts, and it should take a long time while you do other stuff. Just my opinion. 5-6 ingame years would be fine with me, maybe longer.

[erkha343]

I would like them to scale it down like they have with everything else, without making it a multiple star system. Then give us antimatter engines and other sci-fi propulsion at the very end of the career. I do not like the warp drive idea.

[Geckgo]

Judging from the Easter-eggs, I'd expect a type of homeworld/babylon5 scenario to play out at some point, where the Kerbals really start looking for their origins. A nearby starsystem might make a good candidate for the homeworld of their species. In homeworld, the idea was that it took years assembling the main ship in space and getting everything ready before it could start it's journey. Bab5 was a different scenario that I don't see happening in the kerbal universe.

[3_bit]

I imagine reworking Kerbol's config to have a limited SOI might work. That is, if Kerbol even HAS a config file anything like those of the other planets, then duplicating Kerbol, changing it's textures and placing it elsewhere. Not that adding planets MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE due to the fact that all planets/moons in KSP are on rails, so you pretty much plugin orbital info and that's how it all works. In theory, if you classified your Sun as a planet, you could add moons to it, and it would function JUST LIKE a REAL solar system, but I don't know if the engine at this point supports planetary satellites having satellites that are't player entities

So, long story short: could it be done? yes, if my hypothetical mindset on KSP's physics engine is correct.

Would it be perfect?: No.

[SuperWeegee4000]

I'll be honest: I don't think they should add any new star systems. It would be a burden to get to on the users, the Great Code Apocalypse for the devs, and would expand the scope of the game to the point where it's no longer original.

[SeventhArchitect]

Guys. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/43839-0-21-KSP-Interstellar-%28Warp-Drive-Solar-Thermal-Power-Research%29-Version-0-4-2-%28Beta%29?highlight=exotic+matter

[Kegereneku]

A token opinions :

- We are used to Warp-time being cheap, but if we want a credible manned-mission we Have to keep it as limited as possible. (manned-mission and technological research depend on it)

- Think that Eeloo is already hard to reach ? Just wait when you'll need a launch window between Jool and gas-giant further away.

- The key to avoid unbalanced-engine is to not require it.

And this is why I think KSP will require inner-system FTL (yes) to balance the gameplay anyway.

An idea I had for the FTL-thingy is a "stargate" that require to land on a small moon, FTL-ify, then relaunch from another moon.

ex : you land near the Mun arch, pour energy, press some gameplay button, and reappear ready to launch on another Mun.

There's here a lot of room to build a big infrastructure,and it can get very creative if we are given a VAB on the other side.

[Sigma88]

A token opinions :

- We are used to Warp-time being cheap, but if we want a credible manned-mission we Have to keep it as limited as possible. (manned-mission and technological research depend on it)

- Think that Eeloo is already hard to reach ? Just wait when you'll need a launch window between Jool and gas-giant further away.

- The key to avoid unbalanced-engine is to not require it.

And this is why I think KSP will require inner-system FTL (yes) to balance the gameplay anyway.

An idea I had for the FTL-thingy is a "stargate" that require to land on a small moon, FTL-ify, then relaunch from another moon.

ex : you land near the Mun arch, pour energy, press some gameplay button, and reappear ready to launch on another Mun.

There's here a lot of room to build a big infrastructure,and it can get very creative if we are given a VAB on the other side.

It's impressive seeing how little deltav you need to force your way somewhere without an optimal launch window

http://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/

[chaos_forge]

It's impressive seeing how little deltav you need to force your way somewhere without an optimal launch window

http://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/

Holy necroposting, Batman!

Anyways, the whole thing about launch windows to other star systems is why I'm a fan of implementing binary star systems: since the relative location a star to its partner doesn't change, you don't have to wait 100 years for a launch window, just launch whenever.

That said, I'd be fine with KSP 1.0 having only one star system and the whole issue being postponed to an expansion.

[tntristan12]

If other star systems become a thing someone has to do a relatively mod. The opportunity is just too ripe! Who wouldn't love to see time dilation effects in action?

[comham]

It would be cool for one game to span from Space Age chemical rocketry to absurd far future galaxy-crossing space travel, a lá the Revelation Space universe, but it's clearly not within squads scope for KSP.

[cantab]

Anyways, the whole thing about launch windows to other star systems is why I'm a fan of implementing binary star systems: since the relative location a star to its partner doesn't change, you don't have to wait 100 years for a launch window, just launch whenever.

An object distant from Kerbin will have launch windows, and they'll be once every Kerbin year.

[chaos_forge]

An object distant from Kerbin will have launch windows, and they'll be once every Kerbin year.

Fair, but once every Kerbin year is definitely a lot more managable than once every 100 years.

[ChrisHale]

Has any brought up the suggestion that you could make Kerbol a binary or more star system? You wouldn't have to deal with the light year distances and have the star just orbiting each other with there own sets of planets. Although I would love to see a small Kerbal galaxy with a black hole at the centre you could go visit.