Did they make the game easier recently?

[Rocket Farmer]

Hello

So since the last patch I have been working on SSTOs (and relearning physics in this game again) and I recently decided for a break that I needed some bases on some of the moons & planets.

Last weekend in about an hour I slapped together a 1,000 tonne rig and in the 1st launch it settled within 159m of my target on Minmas with 8 kerbals (room for 29) with return craft for the 8.

Have they made the game easier? I remember with grimness my previous efforts at heavy lifters. They were all marathon builds with steady small tweaks so that they would stay together. This one stayed as one without any modifications and performed perfectly the first time out. I can't remember ever slapping that many mainsails without some rerouting themselves midflight.

Anybody else have thoughts on this?

[Brofessional]

No, but the improved SAS in .21 makes rockets/planes a lot less likely to shake themselves apart.

[sojourner]

No, but the improved SAS in .21 makes rockets/planes a lot less likely to shake themselves apart.

So, basically, yes, they did make things easier.

[Boffinbox]

the game isn't getting easier. you're getting better. launching a megaton isn't an easy feat regardless of the improved SAS.

[Brofessional]

So, basically, yes, they did make things easier.

Rockets twitching and shaking themselves apart was not an intended function though. That's like flying an airplane with a bunch of holes in the wings, then complaining that it's easier to fly when they fix the holes.

[bsalis]

I think the last time the game was made easier was .18

Part bonding was made stronger in that version I think. Nothing recently has been changed to make the game easier that I can think of.

[Linear]

The new SAS doesn't "make" things easier, it fixed the whole scary shakey rocket of death and kerbals falling to their deaths non-intended function bug.

[Xaver]

Maybe you think it is easier, because it is easier to balance the thrust per weight ratio through the new engines (skipper and the new tiny orange one).

Did you use them in your design?

Edited August 31, 2013 by Xaver

[Max Grant]

Honestly I think you're just getting better. I've been doing this for 2 years now and the game is much, much more complicated than it used to be.

Which is why I keep playing it.

[rkman]

Rockets twitching and shaking themselves apart was not an intended function though.

But it did make the game more difficult. Now that it's fixed, it is less difficult.

[Dictatorshipper]

The new SAS makes the game easier in some ways and harder in others, because it can't hold a heading nearly as well as old SAS. I'd say overall it's the same difficulty as .20

[profesorfrink42]

But it did make the game more difficult. Now that it's fixed, it is less difficult.

It made the game more difficult in a sense that you couldn't make certain rockets or they would be too wibbly-wobbly, so you had to go for other designs.

Some rockets would basically make the physics engine cry and destroy itself

[GusTurbo]

The engine still struggles with heavy rockets. I've had numerous craft simply explode on the pad before ignition.

[BigDog]

The engine still struggles with heavy rockets. I've had numerous craft simply explode on the pad before ignition.

A tip for this. Hack Gravity as the rocket loads. Let the Physics Engine engage and things settle down and then turn gravity back on.

[sojourner]

Rockets twitching and shaking themselves apart was not an intended function though. That's like flying an airplane with a bunch of holes in the wings, then complaining that it's easier to fly when they fix the holes.

And the net result is "Yes, the game is easier".

[The Jedi Master]

@sohourner, since I can't quote him directly due to the forum being slow: You sound like that you think it is a bad thing.

[Levelord]

So fixing an unintentional bug is now called 'making the gamer easier'. Really, some of you guys are ridiculous.

[AntonioAJC]

So fixing an unintentional bug is now called 'making the gamer easier'. Really, some of you guys are ridiculous.

Pretty much, I'm just going to stick that the thread's OP is just getting better at the game.

[sojourner]

@sohourner, since I can't quote him directly due to the forum being slow: You sound like that you think it is a bad thing.

It's amazing what people read into a simple statement of fact. I think the game is working much more "as intended" with the new SAS. It works pretty great. This is an alpha game. As some things develop parts of the game will get easier, some parts will get harder. As long as it stays fun, it's all good.

So fixing an unintentional bug is now called 'making the gamer easier'. Really, some of you guys are ridiculous.

Well, would you call fixing that bug "making the game harder to play"? Isn't the point of fixing bugs to make it easier to play as intended? Can you give an example of an intentional bug? Edited August 31, 2013 by sojourner

[Levelord]

Well, would you call fixing that bug "making the game harder to play"? Isn't the point of fixing bugs to make it easier to play as intended? Can you give an example of an intentional bug?

The point of fixing bugs is to fix bugs. It has nothing to do with difficulty because bugs go either way; like the infini-glide bug to other bugs which works to the player's advantage, to unrealistic wobbling of rockets due to SAS. How this equates to intentionally wanting to make the game easier, is an immature line of thought. Both are considered bugs because they don't follow the basic lines of logic set by the physics engine.

[sojourner]

The point of fixing bugs is to fix bugs. It has nothing to do with difficulty because bugs go either way; like the infini-glide bug to other bugs which works to the player's advantage, to unrealistic wobbling of rockets due to SAS. How this equates to intentionally wanting to make the game easier, is an immature line of thought. Both are considered bugs because they don't follow the basic lines of logic set by the physics engine.

You missed the whole "easier to play as intended" part, didn't you? The SAS wasn't working as Squad intended, making the game harder to play in that respect than they intended. Therefore, and this is the tricky part, the game is now easier to play in regards to SAS. As intended. Not all bug fixes will result in easier game play, which I stated in an earlier post, but in this case it did. Edited September 1, 2013 by sojourner

[Morrigi]

I want the Kraken back. Things are too easy without it...

[regex]

You missed the whole "easier to play as intended" part, didn't you? The SAS wasn't working as Squad intended, making the game harder to play in that respect than they intended. Therefore, and this is the tricky part, the game is now easier to play in regards to SAS. As intended. Not all bug fixes will result in easier game play, which I stated in an earlier post, but in this case it did.

Where do I get a copy of this magical SAS that supposedly makes the game easier to play?

[Levelord]

You missed the whole "easier to play as intended" part, didn't you? The SAS wasn't working as Squad intended, making the game harder to play in that respect than they intended. Therefore, and this is the tricky part, the game is now easier to play in regards to SAS. As intended. Not all bug fixes will result in easier game play, which I stated in an earlier post, but in this case it did.

Difficulty implies that you can do something about a problem if you have enough of a skillset to do it. A wobbly rocket caused by the SAS will wobble itself to pieces and randomly explode regardless of whatever skill you have at your disposal, so I fail to see how the wobbly SAS of previous versions had anything to do with difficulty. You're arguing along the lines similar to saying that fixing the ship switching bug (that causes space stations to explode) makes the game easier.

Bugs in the physics engine won't care if you are a skilled/unskilled player and will destroy your ship whenever it feels like it. How can this be regarded as a difficulty problem when the skill of the player has nothing to do with the outcome?

[Dunbaratu]

Note the original post talked about slapping together a vessel. And that DID get a lot easier. A LOT easier. Mainly because before if you had ASAS it *COULD* hold your attitude fixed but only if you are willing to have it constantly spend monoprop fuel trying to fight against itself.

In a sense what makes the new SAS easier to dock with than the old ASAS is really nothing more than the mere fact that you can use it at ALL to dock with. Before you had to keep it turned off while docking since having both RCS and ASAS on at the same time would throw away all your monoprop fuel pointlessly.

As for launching, I got into the habit of never using ASAS or SAS on the launches because it was so buggy before, such that now I don't see much need to go back to using it (and I did test and there is still a lot less wobble if it's left off, even in 0.21, so I'll probably continue to launch without it.) But when it comes to how it performs once in orbit, there's a world of difference. The reason it actually works now and can be left on is that now it knows how to use reaction wheels. I don't think it knew that before. In the past it would always resort to using RCS even for the tiniest of adjustments. Now it won't use RCS if the reaction wheels are doing a good enough job, which means it no longer wastes monoprop fuel as it constantly re-corrects itself back and forth.

Edited September 1, 2013 by Steven Mading