FTL solutions

[technicalfool]

If FTL is confirmed, but people are faffing about exactly how to do it, why not have multiple methods? In career mode, the method used could be limited via either research or money. As for exactly which methods used, here's a list, tell me what you think:

1: Hibernation

Like someone else is suggesting here. You freeze the people on board until they get to where they are going. You could call this this the level 1 version of interstellar travel.

2: Stargate

Either you find them, build them, or both. Perhaps the ability to build them comes after researching a located stargate. These could function either like the X universe, where ships seem to all come out at a slow speed relative to the exit, or like Portal, where fast in = fast out. This could be a more advanced form of interstellar travel.

3a: Warp Drive

More advanced still, and in two flavours! Number one needs a beacon at the destination, basically a probe with a beacon part on it. So, like a stargate, but you can send massive space stations all at once that wouldn't fit through a gate. This could be gained after doing more research into Stargate technology, or it could just be really, really expensive.

3b: Warp Drive

Point your ship toward any discovered star system, hit the button and hold on tight! Only guaranteed to get you somewhere in the sphere of influence and not at an escape velocity. The rest is up to the chemical engines. This could be an option for the normal warp drive plus an advanced computer of some sorts, if there is no beacon at the destination.

[UrstMcRedhead]

Um I think 1: isn't an option because...

I do like the Idea of Space Empires style wormholes between systems though.

[skyace65]

personally i think the build-able stargate option is the best but i don't think it should be a stargate. besides obvious copyright issues i think it would work better if it was more like the mass relays in mass effect but a different look.

definitely build-able over findable though

[boomerdog2000]

Well just don't call it a stargate. We have a lot of options, jumpgate, hypergate, etc. Personally I think this is a great option because it encourages having to use standard technology to get there first. Similar to fast travel in other games. You have to build the gate and send it to the destination before you can use it.

[LeadMagnet]

As Scott Manley (and UrstMcRedhead) pointed out, the hibernation option is a non-starter due to the excessive continuous game play (....Hi, my name is LeadMagnet...and I'm a game-aholic...I've been traveling to the nearest star system for 3 weeks now!)

I love the star/hyper/jump gate idea. Problem is, if you have to build it, you find yourself back at option 1 because you would have to travel to the other star system to construct that "paired/matching/target" gate. What Squad could do is hide them in the solar system. So unless you find them, maybe research how to use them (IE: Stargate story line), your stuck in Kerbol. But, how big do you make them? 4 meters? Or do you have Super Gates (again,

).

Now Warp Drive, has me drooling over my keyboard. However, warping around the Kerbal system would negate the majority of parts in the game. Meaning, at Warp 1 (speed of light, 300 Million meters/sec) you could deploy any craft instantly, anywhere in system. While fun, it would detract from the game IMHO.

Then there's Hyper Drive, which to me seems like the better option. Squad could limit a Hyper Drive system to be "point-to-point", star system to star system. Throw in some R&D to get the tech. A Hyper Jump would unload Kerbol and load {another star system, I vote Alpha Centauri (or Kappa Centauri!)}. Hyper drive would not work inside a star system. So you would still need to rely on current process to land on planets, orbit, etc.

It will be exciting to see what Squad have planned!

[Beeman]

Harvester was talking about warp drives one time. That's probably what we'll have to get us to other solar systems. Unless he's changed his mind, of course...I think I read that in a devlog several months ago >_>

I like Scott Manley's suggestion about building a stargate out of relics and things you find on other planets in the kerbol system, though. They could be heavy parts you have to retrieve from various locations in the kerbol system and take them back to KSC for experimentation. There could be one on moho, one somewhere on Kerbin/mun/minmus as a gimmie, one on Duna, Eve, Laythe, the largest asteroid in the asteroid belt and maybe a couple other locations. I'd be totally down for that, though thinking about it right now completely boggles my mind as to how I'd get the parts back to KSC. But I'm a total noob, so I'd figure it out eventually XD

Right now, though, their plans are to have a handful of predefined solar systems surrounding Kerbol(unless they've changed their minds on this in the last couple months) that you can explore. Beyond that, there's supposed to be procedurally generated solar systems. I think. That's what Nova said a couple months ago on reddit and I have no idea if that's still their goal or not. But I definitely like the sound of it regardless.

[Kegereneku]

Consider my answer to be this list :

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fasterlight.php#id--The_Canonical_List_of_StarDrives

Let the developer chose the most interesting idea.

Myself I don't want ANY other star system, just let the developer make the current planet better with more things to do.

Why ? Because I see no interest in landing on copycat planet and doing nothing else after that.

[technicalfool]

Consider my answer to be this list :

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fasterlight.php#id--The_Canonical_List_of_StarDrives

Let the developer chose the most interesting idea.

Myself I don't want ANY other star system, just let the developer make the current planet better with more things to do.

Why ? Because I see no interest in landing on copycat planet and doing nothing else after that.

That's a lotta "drive" types, that also seem to cover transporters and displacement-type devices! I still think having multiple options open for warp drive types would be good though. Start with either stargates, or something that can get from where you are to somewhere in a discovered star system's SOI, and you must be in a stellar orbit (as opposed to a planetary orbit) to do so. Later research lets you drop warp beacons in orbit around something.

Once you've researched to the point of having warp beacons, you've already made a few interplanetary flights, so being able to drop warp beacons around every planet in the Kerbol system and being able to zap between them would simply be a reward for playing the game to that level.

As for why other star systems, well, I think it would be silly to have a single system with masses of planets in it. You might also find other star systems might have different resource ratios. So, the Kerbol system might have a whole load of the resources required to get things up and running, but only rare amounts of the resources required to build the more advanced rocket/stargate/whatever parts. Other star systems might have a far more plentiful supply of the more exotic resources.

Plus, from a pure game engine development point of view, I think multiple star systems would be a good thing. iD and Epic already license out their flagship game engines to 3rd parties, as they allow developers to build an arena-based shooter or other 3D game in a fraction of the time it would take to build everything from scratch. Now if Squad were to make a competent engine capable of simulating interstellar star travel.. then say, ended up licensing it to David Braben for use in an Elite followup...

See where I'm going with this?

[Kegereneku]

A lot ? That's ALL OF THEM !

What I find king of silly is the idea that one solar system isn't enough.

Going in a new solar system for resources would be ridiculous even if you created some Unobtainum MacGuffinite a la Avatar. And I don't want to see KSP turn into anywhere close of a resource-managing game.

Gathering Fuel is one thing, building resource something else.

Then for FTL.

I know you want it to be gradual but allowing multiple FTL system is dangerous because it has the potential of ruining a gameplay with unforeseen consequences unless you put a so much restriction than twisting space-time into a non-Euclidean causeless Möbius strip will become a new game.

Everything must be centered around the gameplay and it's not like you won't need some "shortcut" from -say- the Mun-Arch to Tylo so you don't need to wait for a launch window because you forgot to bring a part.

At most, have only 2 or 3 others stars system with specific purpose (I truly HATE procedural-galaxy proponent).

See where I'm going with this?

To something that is baseless speculation, pure-dream and certainly not as easy/fun than you believe ?

Remember that KSP's engine is Unity. A developer would have to start from Unity-scratch anyway.

I would still love a new Elite game.

[Beeman]

But managing a space program has always been the goal of KSP. Apparently from the start of development, they've been wanting to have career mode play out somewhat similarly to a tycoon game. Of course, they've also considered making complex resource gathering a separate post-release expansion pack(which made everyone super angry).

Fortunately, there'll always be sandbox mode for people like you who don't enjoy such features. Even I would like to sit down and play sandbox from time to time without having to worry about life support(though I"d rather see it as a toggle option for sandbox), research, discovering planets and so on.

But for the most part, I've been waiting patiently for career mode. The structure of discovering planets, experimenting with game mechanics to research better parts to do fun things like scan planets for resources and/or anomalies then go put small to medium mining bases there with satellites and stations providing orbital support/communication back to Kerbin is what gets me most excited for KSP's future(especially now that they're finally working on it actively). A lot of people are waiting for career mode just as I am. Adding other solar systems...and the procedural systems beyond those first few predefined systems surrounding Kerbin is just more content to explore and play around with. Why wouldn't you want more content? More goals and things to go look at? It's like...what would be the point in adding a new planet to the Kerbol system, when we've already just about got one of each type? They're going to add another gas giant(maybe two!), but we've already got one. So big whoop. The point is just that it's something fresh and new. Just something more to travel to. I don't see why anyone would complain about that, new content for a game they already like a whole lot >_>

[technicalfool]

Remember that KSP's engine is Unity. A developer would have to start from Unity-scratch anyway.

Ish. Unity is a gigantic framework for loading assets, building a scenegraph, manipulating meshes and materials, calculating collisions and other physics, grabbing input, and the various other things you need to build any game with. This doesn't mean you couldn't make a more specialised "general engine for producing space games with explorable planets and star systems" out of Unity, which would make things a hell of a lot quicker for producing a huge space-based game than starting from scratch with just Unity.

But yes, this thread's about FTL, not the likelihood of Squad licensing their game engine out like iD or Epic.

(though wouldn't an Elite game based on the KSP engine be awesome?)

[boomerdog2000]

As Scott Manley (and UrstMcRedhead) pointed out, the hibernation option is a non-starter due to the excessive continuous game play (....Hi, my name is LeadMagnet...and I'm a game-aholic...I've been traveling to the nearest star system for 3 weeks now!)

I love the star/hyper/jump gate idea. Problem is, if you have to build it, you find yourself back at option 1 because you would have to travel to the other star system to construct that "paired/matching/target" gate. What Squad could do is hide them in the solar system. So unless you find them, maybe research how to use them (IE: Stargate story line), your stuck in Kerbol. But, how big do you make them? 4 meters? Or do you have Super Gates (again,

).

What if you have to build a gate in the kerbol system and it can send ships to a neighboring star system but with little to no precision. IE you could be orbiting at a given range of altitudes of the other star. This lack of precision would remain until you build another gate in the neighboring system. Also to fix the "gate being too small for future ships" issue we could make the gate in the shape of a shallow U instead of a circle.

[Beeman]

The gate could even just be a little beacon to show that you've achieved warp technology. It doesn't have to be a big ring you assemble and fly through...though I admit, that would be really fun to put together.

It could even be a HUGE asteroid sized ring that orbits Kerbin but doesn't show up until you've done the proper science on or retrieved all the parts. As for the other rings...they could just be pre-built, waiting for you to connect yours. Or maybe there's an "in" ring in each solar system but you have to construct the "out" ring to get to the next solar system.

I feel like the parts should just unlock a warp drive part, though. Seems more sensible. I still think that collecting the parts from around the Kerbol system to unlock said technology would be a really good incentive to have mapsats everywhere, though...and it'd just be fun to collect them things.

[imasquare]

Hm, I somewhat like the idea of gates et el. Does anyone remember the gates from Mass Effect? How they had to travel next to them at speed for them to be slingshotted off another system. I was thinking something similar could be implemented, you fly at the 'McGuffin Gate/Object', and depending on your initial velocity/angle - you will then be sling-shotted off into a distance that may be logarithmically/square etc. proportional to these values. If you use the right values you can be thrown to a different star system near the target planet, if you're off a bit you may be on the outside, if you're off by a margin more you wind up lost...in space.

The above solution would require skill in setting the correct apoapsis and burn times for the encounter with the 'McGuffin Gate/Object', it could be fun and rewarding, yet comical if you get it wrong.

You're able to find these other star systems with 'McGuffin Gate/Objects' using the telescopes/radio telescopes you research on Kerbin, and they show up on a larger map of the galaxy/cluster etc.

I think this may be able to keep the spirit of building simple rocket ships, but also expanding the KSP universe and keeping it fun.

Although warp drives are a good idea, they don't seem to be in the spirit of what KSP is trying to achieve.

Having said all of the above, as mentioned previously I would rather see FTL/other systems implemented in DLC.

[Sean Mirrsen]

My favorite, and by far the one I see most fitting to the Kerbalverse, is the Kearny-Fuchida Jumpdrive, from the Battletech franchise. Appropriately limited by the lack of certain features in the Kerbalverse.

Let's see.

1) Jumping distance is 30 LY, and is near-instantaneous.

2) Jumping requires a slow recharge over the course of a week, via solar power.

2a) Charge is applied to giant battery cells, of which several can be charged, and later used in sequence - providing the ship can carry them all.

3) Jumping is only possible to and from gravitational L-Points, or the polar Zenith and Nadir points of a planetary system, a certain (large) distance from the star.

3a) Kerbalverse lacks L-Points. Meaning that the drive is limited to Zenith and Nadir points, requiring a polar orbit.

So we have a large, power-dependent drive system that needs a slow recharge between uses, can only be used for inter-system travel (or jumping between the Zenith and Nadir of the same star if you want), and requires establishing a polar orbit around the Sun with a certain apoapsis to use. This means a single big carrier craft - a JumpShip - with a number of smaller ships docked to it to perform the actual exploration and work. Operation requires good design, skill in docking and ability to establish a difficult orbit. In other words, it's a perfect test of KSP aptitude.

The carrier doesn't even necessarily have to be heavy on the parts - the only important ones are the jumpdrive, the fuel cell, and the array of several large solar panels to keep it recharging. The rest is just typical fuel and nuclear engines. The amount of Delta-V to get a polar orbit might be pretty large though, so if that's actually too difficult to be practical at all, I suppose changing it to be "just very far away from the Sun" should be good enough.

[KasperVld]

Sorry but faster than light travel is on the what not to suggest list. Thread closed.