Career Mode tweaks

[newanzer]

Just some thoughts on tweaks for career mode. I have been play a lot of career mode since I bought the game. A couple of things have popped into my head over and over as I'm gaining research. I don't know if this is meant to be close to historically accurate but, I keep thinking that aircraft parts should be coming earlier in the tech tree than they are. My reason for this is that a lot of the early rocket construction came out of the early aeronautical engineering. We had large cargo planes long before we were sending rockets into orbit. It just seems odd that a lot of the aircraft parts are coming a couple of tiers after rockets. Also that most of the in atmosphere research points are achieved while learning to build rockets, there isn't really anything left for aircraft (unless I'm missing something).

Ok so on to my suggestions (or wish list). I apologize if this has come up before. I did a quick search and didn't find anything.

Kerbals should be able to fly their own craft or at least a laid out flight plan/way point. Accuracy and ability should change through experience to improve how well they follow the flight plan/orbital way point. Career mode only. Perhaps a training center for kerbals could be on the base as well later in career mode. Early kerbal pilots would be 50% accurate but would gain a lot of experience if they fly the mission. If the player flies the mission, only a quarter of the experience would be awarded. Missions flown under computer control would only give 50% of experience. Kerbals coming from the training center would be 80% accurate at start. Max accuracy would be 95%

My reasoning behind this was to give the player more reason to keep their kerbals alive. It would also allow for more missions to be flown at once without worrying as much about keeping tabs on the kerbals. It would also feel as though we are really helping the kerbals with their space program, not doing it all ourselves.

This may not be as well though out but I'm in a bit of a hurry.

Thx

[Unfawkable]

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/58887-Upgrades-%28Kerbal-training-buildings%29

this thread pretty much covers the second part of your suggestin. As for the planes, I wouldn't know, I'm not much of a plane guy in this game.

[newanzer]

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/58887-Upgrades-%28Kerbal-training-buildings%29

this thread pretty much covers the second part of your suggestin. As for the planes, I wouldn't know, I'm not much of a plane guy in this game.

So it does. Sorry I missed it. I think mine might be a little easier on the game mechanics, but other is probably more realistic.

The plane thing came when I realized I could visit the Mun, but didn't have enough parts to build a working plane. This just hit me as a little backwards.

[Sirrobert]

No, this is a GAME. Not a simulation. So it's not historicly accurate. Planes come after rockets, because planes are more complex than rockets.

Also, the devs don't want to add autopilot to the game. Letting the computer fly is autopilot.

And how the hell is it suposed to calculate 'accurate' anyway? The chance of getting the entire flight correctly? And what if you designed it wrong, but the pilot is awesome? He's still going to crash

[Kimberly]

No, this is a GAME. Not a simulation. So it's not historicly accurate. Planes come after rockets, because planes are more complex than rockets

I would argue that a little historical accuracy greatly increases the fun in playing the game, in that it provides a better feeling of exploration and the development of Kerbal society. It could work out very well for players to either build complex planes for studying Kerbin and getting science points, or to focus on the simpler but less immediately practical rockets.

[Sirrobert]

I would argue that a little historical accuracy greatly increases the fun in playing the game, in that it provides a better feeling of exploration and the development of Kerbal society. It could work out very well for players to either build complex planes for studying Kerbin and getting science points, or to focus on the simpler but less immediately practical rockets.

Sure it would, but it should be gameplay first, accuracy later (way later).

As it is now, you start with a few parts, and expand into more parts. You can't build a plane with 3 parts. You can build a rocket with 3 parts

[allmhuran]

Actually, out there in the real world planes came after rockets too. So the game is in fact historically accurate.

[iMAniaC]

When I saw that planes came later than rockets in the tech tree, I thought right away that Kerbin does not have the same availability of oil as Earth does. Without oil, maybe Kerbin did not have the kind of internal combustion engine revolution that Earth had and thus planes were not really a feasible idea until they invented/discovered whatever fuel(s) the space program uses (like maybe some synthetic or bio-produced equivalent). That thought immediately appealed to the sci-fi buff in me.

I've only played KSP for a few days, however, so there may be descriptions around in-game invalidating my thoughts about their no-oil society, but for now, that's the personal theory I'm going to stick with until evidence to the contrary (or a cooler idea) surfaces

[Sirrobert]

When I saw that planes came later than rockets in the tech tree, I thought right away that Kerbin does not have the same availability of oil as Earth does. Without oil, maybe Kerbin did not have the kind of internal combustion engine revolution that Earth had and thus planes were not really a feasible idea until they invented/discovered whatever fuel(s) the space program uses (like maybe some synthetic or bio-produced equivalent). That thought immediately appealed to the sci-fi buff in me.

I've only played KSP for a few days, however, so there may be descriptions around in-game invalidating my thoughts about their no-oil society, but for now, that's the personal theory I'm going to stick with until evidence to the contrary (or a cooler idea) surfaces

You start with rockets cause rockets are simpler than planes. That's the only reason.

It's a nice lore explanation though

[horndgmium]

Guys. Planes came before rockets. However, rockets came before space planes. Those are two very, very different things.

[Stratoroc]

we're also talking about a race of little green aliens who strap boosters first, and parachutes maybe. I don't see anything wrong about not having access to plane parts before likely mun landings. Also didn't one Chinese guy strap a chair to a bunch of rockets centuries before the first successful glider? I recall seeing something like that in mythbusters once.Now why cars come long after interplanetary missions and space stations is a little beyond me. But I guess kerbals had to look at the planet from above to declare "hey, we can make things move along all that land"