Wait?!? You start with what?

[Doc Anderson]

It suddenly just occurred to me (I'm kinda slow sometimes, especially when I'm distracted by shiny things that fly and explode) that there is a fundamental flaw with the order in which parts are unlocked. If we were actually getting a rocket program off the ground (pun intended) wouldn't you start with UNMANNED (or is unkerbaled?) flights first? Start with small rockets, sub orbital flights, lots of explosions, etc. Then finally get a satellite into orbit. In the process you learn enough to build a capsule and do it all over again with a vict ... er ... astronaut.

Seems to make more sense. Well, to me at least.

[gompasta]

This has been discussed to death. The reason for a MANNED capsule first, is because it is easier. More torque, and no worries about energy, as you have no energy devices to start with. Weight is not a concern that early on, so probes are not nessecary. Plus there are an unlimited number of kerbals, so they have no reason to keep them safe by launching probes.

[Doc Anderson]

there are an unlimited number of kerbals, so they have no reason to keep them safe by launching probes.

True. You can go through Kerbals like popcorn at a double feature. Still, if I want to do a more "realistic" (oh, the irony) space program, I have to do it in the sandbox.

While this game isn't perfect (and be honest, there isn't such a thing) I continue to be impressed with how much enjoyment I get out of KSP ... and it's still an ALPHA!

Best $22 bucks I ever spent.

... gotta go. Popcorn is ready.

[vetrox]

you could always turn on the srbs then EVA your kerbal out whilst he watches the unmanned rocket launch into the sky....or more likely, various directions that aren't the sky.

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

This has been discussed to death. The reason for a MANNED capsule first, is because it is easier. More torque, and no worries about energy, as you have no energy devices to start with. Weight is not a concern that early on, so probes are not nessecary. Plus there are an unlimited number of kerbals, so they have no reason to keep them safe by launching probes.

I am sorry, gom. But you are clearly wrong with that.

Kerbals invented Probes because they started to run out of victims... er... I mean volunteers

[Rakshasa]

This was also one of the things that struck me as weird...

[Doc Anderson]

you could always turn on the srbs then EVA your kerbal out whilst he watches the unmanned rocket launch into the sky....or more likely, various directions that aren't the sky.

Wait?!? Whu?!? "rocket launch into the sky..." Note to self: Tell the other guys at KSC I may have found out what we're doing wrong. Also, we may be able to stop duct taping volunteers in the capsules.

[Sof]

KSP isn't meant to be realistic.

If it is one thing we know for certain about Kerbals, it is that they are either brave or stupid or a mixture of both. From a kerbal perspective, it makes perfect sense to send Kerbals up first.

It isn't meant to be a step by step recreation of the space race.

[Akinesis]

People still don't get it. The Probe Cores are the dominant life forms on Kerbin!!

Has no one watched the Terminator films???

[Kasuha]

Sure enough, first rockets were unmanned. About as unmanned as if you launch a bare SRB. You can do that with first level tech, too.

But early rockets were not automated, which is what you get with a probe core. They all had fixed pre-programmed course and very simple driving logic and to achieve anything more sophisticated they had to send people.

The only really illogical thing I find on the tech tree is that you get wings and jet engines before wheels.

And personally I would start the whole tech tree with plane technology. Cockpit, jet fuel, jet engine, intake, wings, winglet, and wheels. And you only get rocket technology after you do some research on Kerbin.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Kasuha

[Doc Anderson]

KSP isn't meant to be realistic.

I look at it more as KSP isn't meant to be REALLY realistic.

Granted, there are lots of things that aren't quite right, but what continues to amaze me is how much IS right. They got all the big stuff ... the way orbital mechanics work. And they did it in a way that is accessible to non math nerds like me. To quote d@#n near every sci fi B picture of the 1950's ... "Why that's FANTASTIC!" (Thank you comedian Don Reese.)

So we CAN do the Mercury missions ... with explosions!

We CAN do the Apollo missions ... with large amounts of deceleration trauma ... and explosions!

And we CAN send a skycrane to the red planet ... and drop things on it that explode!

Ooh! I'm sensing a theme!

And in the end, who cares if it IS really realistic? It is REALLY fun.

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

I look at it more as KSP isn't meant to be REALLY realistic.

Granted, there are lots of things that aren't quite right, but what continues to amaze me is how much IS right. They got all the big stuff ... the way orbital mechanics work. And they did it in a way that is accessible to non math nerds like me. To quote d@#n near every sci fi B picture of the 1950's ... "Why that's FANTASTIC!" (Thank you comedian Don Reese.)

So we CAN do the Mercury missions ... with explosions!

We CAN do the Apollo missions ... with large amounts of deceleration trauma ... and explosions!

And we CAN send a skycrane to the red planet ... and drop things on it that explode!

Ooh! I'm sensing a theme!

And in the end, who cares if it IS really realistic? It is REALLY fun.

You are both wrong...

Kerbals aren't meant to be seeing things realistic

[Moon Goddess]

The reason for a MANNED capsule first, is because it is easier. More torque, and no worries about energy, as you have no energy devices to start with

Couldn't the devs I don't know, increase the amount of torgue, and increase the onboard battery on probes? Add energy devices to start with?

I mean I know they keep presenting this as a reason why they did manned first but it's simply not true, as they are in control of those things.

[Scrogdog]

Crash test dummies. Solves everything. You get unmanned flights with one very low tech part.

Someone said in another topic that we could do this now by editing a config file, but I've looked and have no idea what the edit actually is.

[frizzank]

a battery is a very basic form of technology. I assume when the game is all done that there will be a tutorial at the beginning to explain how everything works. As well as more learning as the parts get unlocked. That being said I think the devs are aware that there is room for improvement on the tech tree.

[sal_vager]

It helps the player become attached to the Kerbals if they have them piloting the craft at the start, one of the big things about KSP is the Kerbals themselves, to have them sidelined by probes would not be in the spirit of the game, and we may as well call it Probe space program.

Probes came very late in KSP's development, and one of the things I have noticed with the tech tree is that it almost follows the development of KSP itself, with very simple craft being the only ones possible at the start (0.7.3), and spaceplanes and probes coming later.

There's a quaintness about the thought of Kerbals being so enamoured with space that they would forgo even computers and electricity in order to get there, pulling on levers and opening valves by hand in crude but effective rockets...

[The Destroyer]

Kerbals have always looked up to the stars- they want to go there. They may die, but they will get kerbalkind closer to space... that's just the ways kerbals are. Probes are for returning debris and having battles of kerbals vs probes

[Dweller_Benthos]

And personally I would start the whole tech tree with plane technology. Cockpit, jet fuel, jet engine, intake, wings, winglet, and wheels. And you only get rocket technology after you do some research on Kerbin.

"do some research on Kerbin"..... just had a thought, you know how a lot of the parts descriptions read "found lying on the side of the road"? Wouldn't it be funny if you actually did that, get a basic rover and/or airplane to start off, fly or drive around seeing if you can find anything lying around. You get to use what you find. Maybe it's out of sequence, like you might happen to find a mainsail right off (parts would be scattered semi-randomly) but have nothing big enough to attach it to. Heck, your little rover or plane is even too small to haul it back, and you have to leave it for later.

Never happen, but it would be funny.

[SRV Ron]

Kerbal Space Program started out with manned only missions. Career Mode is doing the same for Kerbal historical accuracy.

[KSK]

There's a quaintness about the thought of Kerbals being so enamoured with space that they would forgo even computers and electricity in order to get there, pulling on levers and opening valves by hand in crude but effective rockets...

This. Plus, for real kerbals, probes are what you build when you can't afford a capsule. This is the Kerbal Space Program, not the High Altitude Camera Club!

Umm, also if you want Terran-realistic, there's always sandbox.

[Eric S]

I mean I know they keep presenting this as a reason why they did manned first but it's simply not true, as they are in control of those things.

They're in control of a lot of things were they decided to go with solutions that favor gameplay over realism (scaling of the planets at the top of the list).

Yes, they could increase torque, decrease the power a probe core takes, give probe cores more power, or let you start with batteries, but all of that would affect the later game play balance as well.

Really, if you're the kind of person that is bothered by starting with manned missions instead of unmanned ones, there's probably enough other things wrong with the tech tree that you'll probably replace it with a modded one anyway, and you're not the kind of player that needs to get attached to the kerbals to enjoy the game. Odds are, you're also probably technically competent enough and motivated enough to install a mod to do this.

On the other hand, with starting off with manned missions, they simplify the initial game play and get the player attached to kerbals early on for those players that aren't bothered by this, which is probably more of their core audience.

[Moon Goddess]

Kerbal Space Program started out with manned only missions. Career Mode is doing the same for Kerbal historical accuracy.

But that really only matters for nostalgia for people who started playing back then. Haven't the devs said the career mode is suppose to encourage new players, they don't really care about how the game was in an earlier even more incomplete version.

I started playing in .18 I don't have any nostalgia for early KSP.

[JumpsterG]

Crash test dummies. Solves everything. You get unmanned flights with one very low tech part.

Someone said in another topic that we could do this now by editing a config file, but I've looked and have no idea what the edit actually is.

You can copy the manned pod's .cfg and make 2-3 changes to create a 2nd dummy pod:

-Edit the required crew and crew capacity to be 0 (This makes it a probe core)

-Add RequiredElectric cost so the battery drains (This way it will be uncontrollable after some time goes by)

-If you want NO control whatsoever, set the torque values to 0

I'd test this and post the actual edits, but I'm at work at the moment.

[Moon Goddess]

and you're not the kind of player that needs to get attached to the kerbals to enjoy the game.

Yes I am able to install mods, and I do use them, but Honestly I think it's because I get attached to Kerbals is why I don't want it this way. I don't want to kill Kerbals and don't want to risk their lives. That's what attachment means. Killing them like they are replaceable is not going to get anyone attached to them.

[Commissioner Tadpole]

[...] Plus there are an unlimited number of kerbals, so they have no reason to keep them safe by launching probes.

What if one person is too nice to not care about dead Kerbals(*cough**cough**hack*me)?