More bang for your buck - What would you like next for KSP?

[Torham234]

Yes I think it would have been much more sensible to include some more practical information about the parts in their description. Back when I was starting out I had to have KSP wiki open pretty often, and most of the part functionality had to be discovered by trial and error... Today I do not really care, as I know all the parts in detail, and I do not even read the descriptions for any new parts implemented as I know they are completely useless...

[borisvolodnikov]

Kethane to become stock.

To save you the trouble of having to copy a directory into your game folder?

[SargeRho]

THe same thing can be said about KSPX' Atlas rocket engine, and all the other things from that pack that have become Stock. Your argument is invalid.

[Cammerbammer]

I'd like for them to make it so that the Mk3 fuselage worked well with, I don't know....anything?

[SpaceSphereOfDeath]

PLERNETS please,

If not, more work on career mode

[TUFOM]

Moarr planets & moons. Asteroids to be added. Second solar system would be awesome but I think it's way too big job at this point. Maybe in 1.0.

More realistic things to be in 0.23: biomes on every body, more detail in planets & moons. (such as trees, plants, rocks etc.)

Edited October 23, 2013 by TUFOM

[borisvolodnikov]

THe same thing can be said about KSPX' Atlas rocket engine, and all the other things from that pack that have become Stock. Your argument is invalid.

I don't think I made an argument (making the tone of your post "invalid"), but I'll make one here: engines are pretty essential to the core experience. Kethane is, at best, an appendage to the core game experience, and to many players, not really of interest.

Overall, I'd rather see new core gameplay features than putting in existing mods that do what they do quite well on their own. This, in addition to comments from the dev team about "not competing with modders" make me suspect that things like an improved aero model, reentry heat, and kethane will either not make it into the core game, or be added very late into the release schedule (that is to say, they are not a priority).

Edited October 23, 2013 by borisvolodnikov
context

[Tommy99534]

I would sort of like to see an animation for Kerbals taking samples, like they pick it up and put it in their pocket.

[hobbsyoyo]

I've been informed by the Department of Health and Kerbal Services that there are no more test pilots available as they are all dead. Thanks to my crazy crumpling designs for mega-awesomeness that never work.

Having said that, I'd like to have welded tank joints or at least stronger struts. There seems to be an absolute limit to how big you can build things before it falls apart on the pad or in flight, even with tons of bracing and even inline tank-to-tank strutting. It's a massive headache for me and I can't figure out a way around it. I also just don't like having to put 5000 struts on moderately sized rockets. It's kind of immersion-breaking to have them in the first place, though I can forgive that if I could have stronger strusts so I don't need so many of them. And yes, I realize that for many people my giant asparagus rockets are themselves immersion breaking.

The other thing I'd like to see fixed is correct fuel flow for asparagus staged rockets. Back in the day, the game used to show how much fuel every single tank had. They fixed it so now only the fuel of entire stacks shows which is great. However, with an asparagus or otherwise cross-fed design, they still show fuel draining out of all the tanks instead of the last ones in the daisy-chain. This gets annoying as sometimes it can be hard to tell how close you are to staging if the fuel levels all are pretty close. One day, I'd like the fuel gauges show only the last tanks in the chain draining; that would be great.

[Highlad]

I would sort of like to see an animation for Kerbals taking samples, like they pick it up and put it in their pocket.

Now there is a good, simple idea that would improve the game

[Torham234]

Indeed a fair point well made.

[Skydrow]

What I think would improve the new update is more probe parts and science parts, such as a robotic arm that can collect samples and a small chamber that can hold samples. These small parts would be discovered pretty late in the tech tree.

[Jean Deaux]

To expand upon the Kethane debate and add some of my own wishes...

Why add kethane? Because Mods are not supported is the biggest argument I can offer. I would like to see a lot of the more popular (or best features of similar mods) become part of the core game. Many of the popular mods are beginning to wane in their support, ISAMapsat and Mechjeb for examples. The game takes long enough to play (I could spend 3 days tweaking a ship design and not get anywhere with it) and not get very much accomplished. Many of these mods provide tools and features intended to make the game more realistic and more enjoyable to play. I can tell you that without Mechjeb, I would not be sitting at my PC burning for a planet holding a heading for an hour, or even 16 hours if using an Ion Engine. Missing tools to aid in design (again much like MJ offers with the Delta V breakdown), where in the wide wide world of any planet would be a decent place to look for discoveries (like ISAMapsat), or the means to replenish supplies once you've made it to that far far away planet (Kethane baby!). They don't have to be that exact mod integration, but certainly some form that performs most or more of the same features we have come to appreciate and utilize.

While these integration's of mods don't necessarily have to come in the short run, I would like to see them become part of the core game and therefore a supported feature.

Tools/Features I would love to see implemented in the short run include...

1) An AGL indicator that works similarly to the speed indicator to automatically swap between the ASL and AGL altitude reading as you're ascending or descending and within a certain range of the terrain. (Ever land on the dark side with no way of telling how far above the ground you are?) Also allow for manual toggling as the speed indicator does.

2) Stable spaceplane maneuvering. Flying a plane is always in extreme moves with lots of jerkyness. There are no subtle ways to maneuver. Maybe even some "counterweight" pieces to aid in putting weight in areas of the plane to help keep it balanced. (I almost always need more weight in the front, give me a heavy nosecone).

3) Improve strength between in-line mated components. I feel that stacked parts should be considered welded or bolted together and should not require a boatload of struts used as nuts and bolts to hold two pieces together. It is ridiculous to have 5 parts to a ship and 50 struts to hold them all together.

4) Find and kill the space Kraken!!!!

5) MOAR PARTSIES PLEASE!

------------

Comments offered as experience feedback and not meant as food for trolls.

[FlamedSteak]

The three big things I'd like to see are;

1. A financial system (probably not too hard to code into the game, but the planning and balancing would be a massive piece of work)

1.(a) Targets included in the financial system; e.g. Put a Kerb on the Mun for additional $Texas in funding.

2. Life support (Oxygen, water and food (which leads me into my next one))

3. Resources - I really think this needs to be implemented in conjunction with Life Support as the two go hand in hand. If you can't collect oxygen and water off-Kerbin; missions to the outer Solar System would be (or should be) impossible.

Also, yes! a sample taking animation. I must admit I was a little dissapointed when it wasn't in this update.

[CalculusWarrior]

A much-anticipated feature I'm looking forward to is in-game delta-v calculations.

Perhaps it could be integrated with Mission Control? You plan your mission there, which tells you what your total delta-v should be, then go to the VAB and it tells you the amount of delta-v your rocket currently has.

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

A much-anticipated feature I'm looking forward to is in-game delta-v calculations.

Perhaps it could be integrated with Mission Control? You plan your mission there, which tells you what your total delta-v should be, then go to the VAB and it tells you the amount of delta-v your rocket currently has.

The total DeltaV needed (for whatever mission) should never show up in the game as an exact number (or any number) IMO; that's for you to find out.

An ingame (VAB) DeltaV meter would be nice, but luckily we've got some mods to take care of that... although it's kinda weird it isn't a standard feature already.

[trekkie_]

I want to see atmospheric and weather effects. I want to see kerbin sized storms on jool, 200 knot sandstorms on duna......try landing in that basically, realistic environmental factors a craft might face, and the ability to overcome them or plan to avoid them.

it'd also be cool if they added a new animation for kerbals where you can make them pick up some soil from the local area, throw it up and see how it interacts based on the planets gravity.

[SkipSpikowski]

I'm pretty sure we'll need biomes to be completed before we can get resources, it only makes sense.

economy>biomes>aerodynamics>better plane parts>resources

[TheBeardyMan]

For 0.22.# patches:

<ul>

<li>Fix Apollo science nerf: transfer science between pods by EVA or docking at 100%</li>

<li>Biomes for remaining planets and moons</li>

<li>Micro-biomes for anomalies</li>

</ul>

For 0.23 and beyond:

<ul>

<li>Resources and mining</li>

<li>Economy for career mode:

<ul>

<li>Funding decays if you do nothing</li>

<li>Funding is maintained with successful missions</li>

<li>"Firsts" give major funding increases</li>

<li>Disasters give major funding decreases</li>

<li>Funding falling to zero isn't a game over if you have mines producing resources that you can sell</li>

</ul>

</li>

<li>Tweakable parts; in career mode with economy, each tweak configuration would have monetary R&D and tool-up costs (plus science costs if you're pushing the boundary of a tweakable parameter)</li>

</ul>

[SunJumper]

1) Simple implementation of "biomes" on other worlds. Basically:

* Mountains

* Highlands

* Lowlands

* Shoreline

* Ice Plains

2) More science:

* .625m Science Jr

* Mapping with the grav/therm sensor

* Laser system for measuring altitude above the surface (and thus mapping the topography of the body)

* Geiger Counter

* Sample collection system for probes

* Science experiments >50AU from the sun (interstellar medium basically)

3) Implementation of note-pads and eventually hard drives in the manned capsules

4) Higher science increments for "quantum leaps":

* Into space

* Into Orbit

* Manned landing

* Interplanetary mission: Inner Solar System

* Interplanetary mission: Outer Solar System

* Interstellar mission (if other stars get implemented, I don't expect them for a while)

5) Rebalance the tech tree so that it can only be completed by 'mining' all bodies in the system for all science types

6) More nuclear engines to put much deeper into the tech tree

* 2m LV-N

* Liquid Core LV-N (Possibly gas core too)

7) More RTGs:

* Micro RTG - supplies the needs of two probe cores

* .625m RTG - ~2E/s

* 1.25m RTG - ~12E/s

* RTG mass is proportional to power output

8) 2m and 1/2m SRBs

9) Higher friction on the surface of airless bodies.

10) As others have suggested, life support

[Torham234]

The total DeltaV needed (for whatever mission) should never show up in the game as an exact number (or any number) IMO; that's for you to find out.

An ingame (VAB) DeltaV meter would be nice, but luckily we've got some mods to take care of that... although it's kinda weird it isn't a standard feature already.

So instead of finding the relevant information in game, you have to alt + tab and look at the deltaV map of the Kerbol System. I guess the paralel would be not having an ingame map in a Dungeon crawler. While it was quite fun drawing you own map on a squared paper while playing Dungeon Master, I think most players would agree that having a map ingame is a better option.

And I agree that Kerbal Engineer redux should already be stock. That is probably the single most useful mod you can have in KSP.

[Luis]

So instead of finding the relevant information in game, you have to alt + tab and look at the deltaV map of the Kerbol System. I guess the paralel would be not having an ingame map in a Dungeon crawler.

Ah, but just like most dungeon crawlers, you could have a map that gradually reveals itself as you explore. So mission control could have delta-v numbers for places you have already been to, with an accuracy that improves with each repeat visit. This would encourage 'stepping stone' type missions, where you build on the knowledge gained in your one-way probe mission to Duna, to plan your manned return mission, for example.

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

So instead of finding the relevant information in game, you have to alt + tab and look at the deltaV map of the Kerbol System. I guess the paralel would be not having an ingame map in a Dungeon crawler. While it was quite fun drawing you own map on a squared paper while playing Dungeon Master, I think most players would agree that having a map ingame is a better option.

And I agree that Kerbal Engineer redux should already be stock. That is probably the single most useful mod you can have in KSP.

If you want to ALT+TAB out of the game and use Google for your answers, your free to do that. But not all of us (at least I) don't like to play that way. I look at my space program as "a mystery". I highly doubt NASA ever tabbed out of their simulators to look things up. The point is, you carefully need to calculate everything or use trail and error. Looking up the key values to get to whatever planet would kinda ruin the game for me.

How much DeltaV is needed, is a pretty big chunk of the puzzle... I don't want that to get spoiled.

[Levelord]

If you want to ALT+TAB out of the game and use Google for your answers, your free to do that. But not all of us (at least I) don't like to play that way. I look at my space program as "a mystery". I highly doubt NASA ever tabbed out of their simulators to look things up. The point is, you carefully need to calculate everything or use trail and error. Looking up the key values to get to whatever planet would kinda ruin the game for me.

How much DeltaV is needed, is a pretty big chunk of the puzzle... I don't want that to get spoiled.

I'm pretty sure NASA has the information available to them at hand and also the fact that their staff are all highly trained, compared to the layman like us who needs to look up the tables and references. Also, NASA never gambles with their space program or voluntarily leaves anything to chance.

[taccca]

It seems a lot of people are hoping for what some consider essential/common sense/realism mods to be implemented and I would be one of them

In my Order of priority

Aerodynamics - Ascent and Rentry (ie FAR and Deadly reentry)

Data - Building and INflight (ie Engineer redux) I know people love flying by the seat of their pants so make it a tab etc that you never see unless you click it.

Communications - more realistic comms system (ie RemoteTech)

I love the idea of fleshing out mining, currency, science etc but i would prefer some of the realism/physics improved which in its self would make the game more difficult before everything else

thats just me though