What do you think is next (.24)

[bsalis]

Tweakable tweakables

No, tweakable solar panels, I was a little confused why those weren't in game already...

Tweakable SAS too!

As for aerodynamics... the stock model is good enough. Put wings on stuff and you fly.

[Vrana]

Stock aerodynamics "model"...

dragValue1+dragVaule2+....repeat for EVERY part....=combinedDrag

Velocity=Velocity-combinedDrag.

Yeah... not good enoguh.

[Boris_T_Roach]

Oh I forgot 1

Being able to move Kerbals around inside your ship

Should be simple to setup the rules

If (docked) and (empty seat in target)

{

if (Check docked parts can pass crew through)

{ move crew member }

}

[Vrana]

Nevermind docked ships, you cant transfer crew without EVA even if you have something like two pods next to each other on a snigle craft.

Well, not without mods anyway.

[allmappedout]

I'd like to see more regions (sorry, but using the word biomes for sterile planetary bodies is a personal heresy ) on Eve, Duna and Laythe.

How do we know they're sterile until we do SCIENCE?!

Hopefully a fix for water/horizon lag.

Lord yes! I know you can edit the cfg file to fix the worst atrocities, but it's still a pain!

Edited December 19, 2013 by allmappedout

[Bobbydylan]

Nevermind docked ships, you cant transfer crew without EVA even if you have something like two pods next to each other on a snigle craft.

Well, not without mods anyway.

Yeah, would love to be able to move Kerbals from one crew module to another if they're connected (being on one ship, or docked to another crew module).

[SSSPutnik]

What i'd like in order of personal importance-

1. OBSERVATION. A huge part of space exploration comes from looking at and

mapping things FIRST and then you start blowing stuff up to try and get there. Having a "fog of war" for the solar system that you can uncover with various methods would be great. I'd love the idea that you only start with knowledge of the sun, kerbal, and the mun, but can either send out exploratory probes...

Even Galileo knew of the moons of Jupiter with a really basic scope.

A random solar system ruins a lot of gameplay but it could be an option I guess.

Dunno how you can do multiplayer in a game like this, happy if its never included.

[Luckless]

Even Galileo knew of the moons of Jupiter with a really basic scope.

A random solar system ruins a lot of gameplay but it could be an option I guess.

Dunno how you can do multiplayer in a game like this, happy if its never included.

Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_discovery_of_Solar_System_planets_and_their_moons

Scroll down to around the time we started putting stuff in orbit around our little rock.

Keep scrolling. And scroll some more,... Keep going. You'll reach this decade sooner or later.

But seriously, there is a LOT of stuff that could be generated at game start time to give players something to look for and explore. Maybe make it optional due to the extra overhead such a system would involve, but there are lots of tricks that could be used to simulate it in the game as is. (Such as look-ahead-calculations on the search during lower processor usage times. Calculate out ahead of where the player actually is now and peg a 'discovery' that unlocks when the user gets there, such when the user isn't flying a space craft.)

[SSSPutnik]

Problem with unique systems etc is that it will change challenges considerably.

Re aerodynamics. I actually enjoy the simple model.

That said, a more realistic model would be a nice OPTION.

But, you can do this already with mods.

[Luckless]

I don't see unique systems changing challenges 'considerably', other than you wouldn't be able to just look up delta-v tables. Put in an observatory feature so you can track and accurately position planets to generate a data readout so that you can go plug it into a simple calculator, and then you are good to go with no real extra challenge, just different challenges.

[richiespeed13]

I don't see unique systems changing challenges 'considerably', other than you wouldn't be able to just look up delta-v tables. Put in an observatory feature so you can track and accurately position planets to generate a data readout so that you can go plug it into a simple calculator, and then you are good to go with no real extra challenge, just different challenges.

Yep!

For me, procedurally generated solar systems would add so much replay value.

Imagine how cool it would feel to discover systems, planets and moons that nobody else has discovered before. You would have that feeling every time you land somewhere, that you really are exploring something new.

It would make for some awesome threads full of different things people have found.

For me, it would make this already amazing game, so much more fun.

p.s, the open source game Space Engine does this on a universal scale, and it is great fun finding new things. Maybe the KSP devs could look into systems that game uses to make their own version for KSP.

[Paul Kingtiger]

Maybe some technology changes now that tweakables allows more flexibility. Perhaps we'll see weight reduction technology or ISP improvement tech?

[Vrana]

What i would really love to see is some flight/craft history.

Kinda like this....

Say I launch an Atlas rocket. Game names it Atlas I.

Game records time of launch, crew, SOIs visited/experminets ran/landings, time of recovery if any, causlties if any.

Game stores this information in "space museum" and i can review it at any time by visiting the museum. Dont need to see the whole flight path (tough it would be nice) just some info so recovered flights dont disapper from history.

Add a small building for the museum. Just like it was done in BARIS.

[Luckless]

Maybe some technology changes now that tweakables allows more flexibility. Perhaps we'll see weight reduction technology or ISP improvement tech?

Replace the current engine parts with tuneable classes so you can pick the specs needed, rather than being stuck with purely preset options? Tune a second stage engine for upper atmosphere like real engines are tuned for improved ISP in its target range. Maybe even be able to adjust the actual weight/thrust of a given engine by a small margin. Less total thrust makes for a slightly lighter engine, more thrust a heavier one. But don't scale it linearly, rather have it a nice bell curve, so that thrust to weight ratio drops slightly as you go away from the default centre value for thrust.

Would really let the number crunchers tinker in very fun ways.

Maybe throw in a variable tuning engine (So it doesn't drop in efficiency as much based on changes in atmospheric pressures) with slightly lower thrust to weight, but could be far more effective for SSTO systems.

What i would really love to see is some flight/craft history.

Kinda like this....

Say I launch an Atlas rocket. Game names it Atlas I.

Game records time of launch, crew, SOIs visited/experminets ran/landings, time of recovery if any, causlties if any.

Game stores this information in "space museum" and i can review it at any time by visiting the museum. Dont need to see the whole flight path (tough it would be nice) just some info so recovered flights dont disapper from history.

Add a small building for the museum. Just like it was done in BARIS.

I actually really like that idea. Not an excessively complex feature, but a nice level of polish. Include a 'camera' module that can be mounted on probes or handheld by crew members, and then include 'screen shots' along with it. Would work very well with a social media tie-in system.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Luckless

[Frogbull]

For 0.24 or 0.25 or 0.26 or 0.27 or 0.28 or 0.29 or 0.30 or 0.31 or 0.32...

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

Aesthetic updates:

- Animated Clouds (on Kerbin, Eve, Duna, Laythe and Jool)

- More differences between Kerbals (gender, mustaches, many haircuts, different skin colors)

- Cities on Kerbin (and we must be able to see the cities lights at night from space)

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

Gameplay updates:

- Multiplayers mode

- A Saturn analog with a ring system and many Moons

- Comets and asteroids with strange orbits

- Useful skills between Kerbals (a skilled Kerbal will have a good SAS effect and an unskilled Kerbal will do *****)

- Kerbals can learn new skills with XP (a Kerbal who returned from the Mun will gain XP)

- Parts cost and economy (with rewards for successful missions and if you bring back on Kerbin rare ressources like Kelium-3)

- Life support, survival way (a Kerbal needs water, food and oxygen to stay alive)

- Extractable resources (Kelium-3, Water, Oxidizer, Fuel, Monoprop)

- Greenhouses (Solar + Water = Food)

- Temperature Management (like in Deadly Reentry)

- Fairings (and friction impact)

Edited December 19, 2013 by Frogbull

[Bobbydylan]

What i would really love to see is some flight/craft history.

Kinda like this....

Say I launch an Atlas rocket. Game names it Atlas I.

Game records time of launch, crew, SOIs visited/experminets ran/landings, time of recovery if any, causlties if any.

Game stores this information in "space museum" and i can review it at any time by visiting the museum. Dont need to see the whole flight path (tough it would be nice) just some info so recovered flights dont disapper from history.

Add a small building for the museum. Just like it was done in BARIS.

I love this idea!

[larsmaehlum]

A craft type system would be really cool. With independently named subassemblies retaining their name, so you can see that the Saturn 5 launch X took Apollo 10 to orbit.

But first, contracts and money please. And more performance tweaks.

[CalculusWarrior]

I'd love to see a kerbal ranking system.

Right now, if you go on missions with a brand-new kerbal from the Astronaut Recruiting Centre, that kerbal is going to act the same way whether its his first mission or five millionth. (Assuming he survives that long) Even if your kerbal does something incredibly heroic, like taking command of the command vessel and saving the day, he'll just be put right back into the pool of astronauts pending selection for the next mission. Now, that's what happens in real life; astronauts aren't showered with extra fame and glory just from doing heroic deeds (their entire job is one massive heroic deed), and no one astronaut is prioritized for mission selection based on mission history.

Of course, that's no fun! I propose a sort of experience system, where kerbals are ranked in a sort of military type manner (i.e. rank in front of their name such as Captain Jebediah, Major Thomples, Corporal Billy-Bobery, etc.). However, Squad has expressed reluctance in the past towards making the game militaristic, so the ranks could instead be something like Commander, Copilot, Rookie, and so on (in fact, almost like the ranking system on the forums ) And like the ranking system on the forums, perhaps you could gain the ability to rename pilots' ranks to something more befitting their personality. For example: Crazy Badass Wonder Pilot Bob Kerman. Okay, maybe that isn't so accurate.

There would be two ways to give kerbals those ranks. One would be that they accumulate experience points naturally over time, but weighted for the amount of time they spend doing different things. For example, a kerbal which manages to lift off of Dres, but is forced to ditch the ascent vehicle and head home, spending 100 days in his EVA suit and aerobrakes at Kerbin and rendezvous with a space station there, would level up a lot faster than a kerbal you left sitting around the R&D centre. The second way of levelling up a kerbal would be to assign a medal or something. If a kerbal did something especially heroic to save a mission (okay, I know its not actually the kerbal saving the mission but work with me here!) you could assign him a "Medal of Honour" which might upgrade him a rank or two, differentiating this kerbal from the rest. (Like flags, you could attach messages detailing what exactly it was that this kerbal did; it might be that he remembered to pack extra snacks)

Perhaps even the Stupidity and Courage stats could be modified along with a kerbals rank; more experienced kerbals scream less. It couldn't be too much however, there still is entertainment value watching the little guys freak out. Anyways, what I've described here is more for the benefit of roleplay than anything else; it wouldn't impact gameplay much at all. As such, I have my doubts that it would be included in 0.24 (or even any 0.2x), but it is still something I'd love to see in future versions. At the very least, add a dialogue in the Astronaut Centre which lets you know which missions a kerbal has been on, because right now, the kerbals are all so similar, and I find myself forgetting which kerbal was the pilot of my mission to Jool, and which one was flying planes around KSC for the last two weeks.

Are there any improvements/changes that should be made to this idea?

[bigbadben]

Procedural generation does not necessarily mean random. Case in point, Elite games. A hundred billion systems, all the same between every different player, by using the "seed" concept of procedural generation, in where your equations generate seeds that the orbits, size, types, biomes, and all that stuff is generated. It may seem random, but actually mirrors all other players. Then you could have large amounts of systems, large amount of diversity, and multiplayer would still work.fine.

[Great General Kaboomsky]

Budget and reputation system please!

Also, is requesting an experience progression for Kerbalnaughts on the banned subject list yet?

I could see that being nifty.... Something to the effect of "Since Jeb is such an experienced pilot, he can eke out just an extra bit of control over the craft, or just an extra 1% more Dv from the rocket’s fuel supply (though, that would probably not be as realistic, so maybe dump that one.)

Edit:

There would be two ways to give kerbals those ranks. One would be that they accumulate experience points naturally over time, but weighted for the amount of time they spend doing different things. For example, a kerbal which manages to lift off of Dres, but is forced to ditch the ascent vehicle and head home, spending 100 days in his EVA suit and aerobrakes at Kerbin and rendezvous with a space station there, would level up a lot faster than a kerbal you left sitting around the R&D centre. The second way of levelling up a kerbal would be to assign a medal or something. If a kerbal did something especially heroic to save a mission (okay, I know its not actually the kerbal saving the mission but work with me here!) you could assign him a "Medal of Honour" which might upgrade him a rank or two, differentiating this kerbal from the rest. (Like flags, you could attach messages detailing what exactly it was that this kerbal did; it might be that he remembered to pack extra snacks)

This, absolutely. I love the idea of having a (preferably limited) supply of commendations that could be handed out to the Kerbals that survive particularly harrowing journeys. I could see the realism fans complaining if this gave a serious "stat boost" but I would love to see something like it even if no boost were given. Anything that can "set off" a particularly brave grey-suit as a cut-above (other than my own imagination) would be neat.

Edited December 19, 2013 by Great General Kaboomsky

[Madrias]

Bugfixes! Would love to see them start crushing a lot of the little bugs, and some annoying ones that keep popping up.

[Wheffle]

I'm personally not understanding why people are so afraid of things like realistic aerodynamics, life support and randomly generated solar systems. I don't know if any of those will be in the final product (except aerodynamics, hopefully), but there's nothing to be afraid of with any of them. They all seem like experience-enhancing additions to me.

Anyway, I'm really looking forward to an economy. Science limits the kinds of parts you can use, and money will limit how many you can use. I love the challenge!

I'm also really looking forward to resources, and I hope they get started on that soon, but I have my doubts that 0.24 will include that.

[FITorion]

How on earth is redone aerodynamics a "neat feature" and not something that constitutes scope completion?

Because "Scope Complete" does not mean Finished. Scope Complete is having the Skeleton of systems that all the other features will fit into.

Having an aerodynamic model at all is part of scope complete. Having a better model is part of Feature Complete. They are not the same thing.

[TheCrimsonCorndog]

Estimated Burn Time needs fixing. The bugtracker considers this a "feature", which is ridiculous.

It's a core game mechanic, and it's broken. Come on guys...

[Arsonik]

I'm hoping for a small asteroid sized space brothel/night club in low kerbin orbit. I will at least settle for some vending machines to refill my snack and drink compartments in the mean time until we can all agree on what music to play at our space disco.