Expanding the Kerbal

[spaceman1999]

With the addition of SCIENCE! I think we need more types of kerbonaughts. eg. scientist, pilot and engineer. What are your thoughts?

[vexx32]

Without a solid idea of exactly what the point of specialising Kerbals would be, I have no stance. The effect of their proficiency and/or specialisation should not, in my opinion, impact too much on the player's own skills for piloting or building, imo. If you can't fly a craft because your Kerbal is too inexperienced, even though you'd normally be able to do it just fine, even unmanned, that's something of a game-breaker for a lot of people, in my opinion. Science is abit iffish as-is, and is probably going to see a fair bit of rebalancing in future, but even then I don't see the need to have specialised Kerbals for it, really.

[Tw1]

When I read this, I thought you wanted to make kerbals bigger..

[RSwordsman]

I can see pilots nominally increasing the flight capabilities of a ship (maybe slightly higher SAS torque and part collision resistance to represent good maneuvering skills) and scientists increasing the science output from gathering data/analyzing it if occupying labs. Engineers? Would it be too cheaty for onboard engineers' effect to be a raised Isp of all engines on a craft?

Incorporating these crew "buffs" would be a cool bit of depth to the gameplay, especially if the effects degrade the longer the Kerbal is not exchanged for another. Now I think that's a whole new can of worms, because I wouldn't want to have to return Kerbals all the way home if they are inhabitants of a far-off base. Maybe having their effectiveness slowly increase upon introduction to a ship, stay at peak for awhile, then gradually go down again until they are rotated into a different (fully separate) craft? Additionally, if they are moved back to their original ship prematurely, the effectiveness would go back to where it was.

Say Jeb (a pilot) is launched into LKO. His effect would start at +1% torque and collision. After awhile as he got more comfortable with the workings of the ship, it would slowly raise to +10%. It would stay there for quite some time, but eventually he would get bored and complacent, where his effectiveness would start going back down. If he were transferred to a new ship at +5% and sent back right away, he would return to +5% and dropping because the long stay with it is still fresh in his mind. But if he were allowed to stay in the new ship and gain some experience there, his potential effectiveness on the original ship would go back in the cycle, raising it again if he were rotated back.

I apologize if it's too complicated to follow; I could explain it better with a white board in real life. I'd also be perfectly happy with static bonuses that didn't require any special crew treatment.

[Mitchz95]

I think it's a very cool idea. There could be mission specialists who increase the amount of science gathered, pilots who can maneuver the ship more quickly, and engineers who increase the efficiency of the engines and/or increase the impact tolerance of various parts.

[r4pt0r]

I think it's a very cool idea. There could be mission specialists who increase the amount of science gathered, pilots who can maneuver the ship more quickly, and engineers who increase the efficiency of the engines and/or increase the impact tolerance of various parts.

this is exactly what i dont like about the idea. if i just floor my cars gas pedal, i better have the same acceleration as if the stig did the same motions.

>this is assuming its an automatic car

Edited January 26, 2014 by r4pt0r
trivial edit

[Stargate525]

this is exactly what i dont like about the idea. if i just floor my cars gas pedal, i better have the same acceleration as if the stig did the same motions.

>this is assuming its an automatic car

Yeah, but you're not in the car. You're on the radio, telling the driver the corners. I mean, we can hire kerbals, have them die, assumedly have to pay for them... If we want them to be anything else besides a specialized, annoying cargo (which is what they are right now), they're going to have to have some sort of purpose.

[r4pt0r]

Yeah, but you're not in the car. You're on the radio, telling the driver the corners. I mean, we can hire kerbals, have them die, assumedly have to pay for them... If we want them to be anything else besides a specialized, annoying cargo (which is what they are right now), they're going to have to have some sort of purpose.

you're implying that we dont play as jeb or whoever is in command module? that in truth we are ksc just giving commands to distant kerbals? that i cant agree with.

also having james kerman on my ship should not magicaly raise my reaction wheel torque, just as having millie kerman should not make my ship more impact resistant. its about designing your ship better. half the game is in the VAB. add another reaction wheel if its a big ship. add banks of them if you want.

If edison were alive today his lighbulbs wouldnt be any more efficient than mine if we had the same lightbulbs.

although he would probably try to steal my un-patented idea for electronic socks...

[Duxwing]

KSP could have three kinds of Kerbal: Pilot, Scientist, and Engineer. Only pilots can control craft. Only Scientists can collect surface samples or work in a Science Lab. Only Engineers can repair damaged parts and repack chutes. Otherwise all Kerbals can do everything else. Players therefore would face an interesting decision between mission capabilities and delta-V requirements and resulting mission costs; e.g., a safety-conscious player might build a larger, more complex, and more expensive rocket in order to add another seat because they want to bring an engineer.

-Duxwing

[helaeon]

I think you don't want to have specialization of the kerbals take away items from the game, but act as a new feature or enhancement. You don't want it to feel like the game is fighting you with arbitrary things.

Any Kerbal can man the lab and it works just fine just as it does now. Scientist kerbals (or those with a low stupidity stat) increase transmission value of science as they can "speak science" and clean experiments faster. You can still do what we do now and suffer no penalty.

Engineer Kerbals can restore to working order any part that has been damaged or broken. (Most parts will remain somewhat repairable by any Kerbal, just as now). Smash your engine on landing? Scotty Kerman can replace it. Of course there would need to be some kind of limit or balance to that.

With the new reputation & contracts system coming up. Civilian kerbals can be taken on flights to add cash or fufill a contract (these would be one time fliers that need to have one regular for each 1-2 civilians). There could be a class of Kerbal that is like a CDR Hadfield that adds bonus reputation/prestige from flights. No idea what to call that class.

Maybe all of these are a tag that is added so as kerbals are randomly generated there is a chance to add extra flags, and for each flag there is a lesser chance of another being added.

Additions, new features, new missions, new things to do rather than making regular flights a chore because you don't have any kerbals with the right stat to make it behave normally.

[Stargate525]

you're implying that we dont play as jeb or whoever is in command module? that in truth we are ksc just giving commands to distant kerbals? that i cant agree with.

also having james kerman on my ship should not magicaly raise my reaction wheel torque, just as having millie kerman should not make my ship more impact resistant. its about designing your ship better. half the game is in the VAB. add another reaction wheel if its a big ship. add banks of them if you want.

If edison were alive today his lighbulbs wouldnt be any more efficient than mine if we had the same lightbulbs.

although he would probably try to steal my un-patented idea for electronic socks...

I'm not implying anything. I'm outright saying things. We clearly don't play as whoever is in the command module, as that a)is often changing and b)occasionally absent completely. Not to mention that the way the camera, tracking station, science panels... the entire game is set up against the notion that we the player are an astronaut or pilot.

It's the difference between a racing simulator and a racing rpg: in the former, there is zero game mechanic between your driving ability and the objectives while in the later there are skill, ability, and other mechanics that alter how the players' skill is displayed in the game. In a simulation, the driver might as well not exist. In the latter, the driver is very much an integral part of how the player interacts with the game.

Squad has already added bravery and stupidity meters into the game. Unless they're very stupid, which I doubt, they will eventually serve some sort of purpose. You say it's designing your ship better; fine. Why can't it also be about crewing your ship with the best and brightest?

I really, REALLY don't get your Edison thing, btw.

[r4pt0r]

im saying that a pilot cannot change the stats of a craft. 2 kerbals in 2 copies of the exact same ship should have the exact same flight characteristics.

one wouldnt be stronger because an engineer is onboard. that makes no sense.

one ship wouldnt turn faster because one kerbal has more flight points or whatever you want. cuz that would not make sense.

both would have the same parts and by extension the same abilities.

Edited January 27, 2014 by r4pt0r

[Capt Snuggler]

I agree that "pilot Kerbals" changing flight characteristics would not be good. the player is piloting. it would be very frustrating to have your control inputs stupified because the kerbal in the seat is not good. at the moment a probe core + an RTG + some SAS gyros, can fly as well as any kerbal. pilot kerbals would be obsolete almost from day one. maybe this could be partially resolved by making probe cores crazy expensive, when money is added?

that said, the kerbals do need to be fleshed out. right now all they do is collect surface samples, write reports and add massive amounts of weight to your craft.

mission specialist kerbals could boost science gains in there field of expertise. geologists, astrophysicists, medical doctors, engineers, etc should all feature in game.

But pilot skill does need to be represented in some way (for Jeb) but how? maybe kerbals could black out? it would be like when a probe core looses power, except the edges of the screen could also go dark and or blurry. specialist pilot kerbals (Jeb) could have higher G tolerance and therefore are less likely to blackout? this is a real thing BTW http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-LOC

but there still needs to be more to it than this, but i think it would be a start.

*edit: sending a great pilot Jebediah Kerman with no other expertise to study the surface of Duna is not going to offer the same scientific insight as great geologist, James Kermin. The right kerbal for the right mission.

*edit edit: you could even have specialist kerbals who cant handle Zero-G and spend most of thier time "incapacitated" (vomiting). you would need to rack up their flight hours before they can perform any meaningful science or land them on a planet.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Hyomoto]

Right now I'm pretty sure the Kerbal stats only affect their facial expressions, so I think people may be reading to far into that one. Squad may have a different idea but they've never indicated that they had interest in RPG-lite mechanics. As others have stated, KSP is a game about player skill and knowledge, and buffs/debuffs only get in the way of your ability to perform. As it is right now, people get tangibly better at the game because the exercise a better understanding of its mechanics. Though a better pilot might be the equivalent of strapping on another reaction wheel under some plans, it doesn't really jive with the rest of the game. That being said, I sort of like the idea of Kerbals having specialized tasks to some extent, it would be interesting to have the pilot die and leave Kerbals stranded. However, astronauts are trained in a wide variety of skills for this very reason, if one of them is incapacitated, the others need to be able to handle his normal duties.

So really the question is where do you go with the game versus logic? The best option of the top of my head is leave them as they are, but add in a few special types to help with missions or science. That way you aren't reducing the effectiveness of the Kerbals, you are just adding in another type with a separate purpose. I don't think they should be required for general purpose, more a form of 'cargo' for various missions, such as bring a gravity expert into space for his studies.

[Capt Snuggler]

Though a better pilot might be the equivalent of strapping on another reaction wheel under some plans, it doesn't really jive with the rest of the game. That being said, I sort of like the idea of Kerbals having specialized tasks to some extent, it would be interesting to have the pilot die and leave Kerbals stranded. However, astronauts are trained in a wide variety of skills for this very reason, if one of them is incapacitated, the others need to be able to handle his normal duties.

I too, don't like the idea of "strapping another reaction reaction wheel" as a buff for a good pilot. I think "pilot kerbals" (Jeb) should be able to withstand higher G-forces and remain conscious and in contol. where as non-pilot kerbals would experience G-LOC under high G conditions.

this would differentiate science orientated kerbals from pilot orientated kerbals and also keep Jeb in a job.

this would also complement the players pilot skill as staying within a safe g-force margin would keep your guys conscious. the craft would handle the same no matter who is piloting BUT pilot specialists can stay conscious during high-G maneuvers, as they have a better blackout threshold.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Mobjack]

What the stats tell me is the Squad doesn't plan on taking specialized Kerbal skills seriously.

Having different Kerbal types could give an incentive to perform multi-Kerbal missions, but there are probably better ways of doing it.

[Capt Snuggler]

Right now I'm pretty sure the Kerbal stats only affect their facial expressions, so I think people may be reading to far into that one.

What the stats tell me is the Squad doesn't plan on taking specialized Kerbal skills seriously.

then why bother having an Astronaut Complex at all? they're all the same. as it stands, the kerbals them selves have very little reason be in the game. all they do is sit screaming in the bottom left of the screen and plant flags some times.

They really need to be fleshed out, one way or another.

*please note. my blacking out/G-loc suggestion is not Random failures / malfunctions. the G-LOC would be predictable and avoidable provided you

A: fly carefully

B: design well

and C: put the best kerbal in the pilot seat.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Keymaster89]

I think that this idea is good, but specialization shoudn't change ship's statistic. A Specialist is simply a Kerbonaut that can do more things that other Kerbonaut can't.

Pilots in command module = Can place Advanced Manouver Nodes to design and perform even more perfect manouvers.

Structural Engineers on EVA = Can repair more severe structural damage (and more efficiently if spare materials will be needed like heat shields or hull damage) ones the damage system will come in place.

System Engineers on EVA = Can repair more severe system damage to system like engines and electronics.

Hydraulic Engineers on EVA = Can repair more severe system damage to hydraulic systems like life support, water recycle, landing gears and external fuel ducts.

Scientists with Lab = Add 10% more to the Lab's transmit rateo and can store better the experiments in the Lab so if u get them back to Kerbin with it they will always max they science yield.

Doctors with Hitchhiker Storage Container = Can help recover other crew members when they are injuried (ones they can be hurt, maybe someday they will suffer damage from hard hit something, long falls, high G force, radiation exposure, mental illness due to looooong inactivity, ecc.)

and so on....

Any Kerbal is able to operate like any other, Specialist excel only in their field, so nothing that u extremly need but it's sure useful to have!

Train specialist may also cost a fair amount of $ make them even more valuable.

[KvickFlygarn87]

my un-patented idea for electronic socks...

*gets notepad*

Tell me more about these "electronic socks"...

[crazyewok]

Without a solid idea of exactly what the point of specialising Kerbals would be, I have no stance. The effect of their proficiency and/or specialisation should not, in my opinion, impact too much on the player's own skills for piloting or building, imo. If you can't fly a craft because your Kerbal is too inexperienced, even though you'd normally be able to do it just fine, even unmanned, that's something of a game-breaker for a lot of people, in my opinion. Science is abit iffish as-is, and is probably going to see a fair bit of rebalancing in future, but even then I don't see the need to have specialised Kerbals for it, really.

The whats the point of Kerbals? May as well have everything unmanned. Kerbals are just silly little graphics at the moment that have no game impact.

[Capt Snuggler]

The whats the point of Kerbals? May as well have everything unmanned. Kerbals are just silly little graphics at the moment that have no game impact.

and that is what people in this thread is attempting to fix. by offering solutions and ideas to make kerbals the basis of more interesting, fun, and important game-play features.

[crazyewok]

and that is what people in this thread is attempting to fix. by offering solutions and ideas to make kerbals the basis of more interesting, fun, and important game-play features.

chop Im just countering the argument that they shouldn't have a impact.

Im all for mission specialists for certain missions and giving bonus to flight. Also colonists for late game.

There not really any more to add.

[Stargate525]

im saying that a pilot cannot change the stats of a craft. 2 kerbals in 2 copies of the exact same ship should have the exact same flight characteristics.

one wouldnt be stronger because an engineer is onboard. that makes no sense.

one ship wouldnt turn faster because one kerbal has more flight points or whatever you want. cuz that would not make sense.

both would have the same parts and by extension the same abilities.

On paper, sure. But you can't tell me that the plane piloted by Manfred von Richtoffen would perform exactly the same as the one piloted by Gunther Pastor. Similarly, you can't tell me that a ship crewed by crack engineers won't perform better than one staffed by part-time car mechanics.

[Capt Snuggler]

chop Im just countering the argument that they shouldn't have a impact.

Im all for mission specialists for certain missions and giving bonus to flight. Also colonists for late game.

There not really any more to add.

sorry I totally missed your point. my bad. cool, I'm glad you agree!

On paper, sure. But you can't tell me that the plane piloted by Manfred von Richtoffen would perform exactly the same as the one piloted by Gunther Pastor. Similarly, you can't tell me that a ship crewed by crack engineers won't perform better than one staffed by part-time car mechanics.

yeah but in this case the plane is piloted by the player through the Kerbal. as long as the Kerbal is capable of controlling, then the player remains in control.

when a probe core looses power = player looses control also when a kerbal looses consciousness = the player looses control.

I don't like the idea of craft characteristics changing with different crew. the craft should perform the same no matter who's on board.but the science return should depend on the "skill" of the person who is conducting the experiment or writing the report or gathering the sample etc.

attributes could be

*Pilot skill: G-LOC threshold. a low threshold = blackouts and loss of control, if in command at the time of black out. this is what I mean. this attribute should also include another buff but I'm not sure what yet...

*Engineering skill: = enhances the speed to conduct repairs. and reduces data loss from science transmission. maybe even fit basic parts? you can't hook up a new engine, but maybe you could attach a strut or fuel line or permanently lock-in and tighten a docking port?

*Astrophysics/astronomy skill: = enhances the amount of science gained from conducting experiments in orbit. (including crew reports, materials bay etc)

*Geology/chemistry skill: = enhances the amount of science gained from conducting experiments on surface. (samples, crew reports, etc etc)

*The Right Stuff/Coolness: = enhances public support (reputation) gained from crew reports, eva reports and planting flags.

*specialist/VIP: = a mission specialist or VIP is a unique kerbal who you don't actually hire, but needs to ether conduct experiments OR go on an adventure holiday off kerbin. they are one-time crew members who are essentially just passengers. they usually don't have any other attributes. they are just there to do their thing and go home (and pay you).

these attribute names are fairly dry and would be replaced with something much slicker/more fun, but you get the idea. these attributes are possessed by ALL kerbals but at varying levels (they passed the application exam). they can all be learned too by performing relevant tasks. with enough active flight hours, anyone can be an ace pilot and do enough rock samples, any kerbal becomes a fully certified geologist.

Edited January 28, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[tetryds]

Piloting skill and training of kerbonaults for setting G-LOC threshold is the best idea I've heard in here.

What about having a pre-sas like we did before, when it would function like the not-locked SAS and have that based on piloting skill?

Or even make atmospheric flights where this "Pilot SAS", when enabled, depending on the pilot skill, would assist the ship to always point towards the prograde surface speed, or any trim from it (to make sure it goes straight).