Which would you rather have FIRST?

[sickboy]

If given the choice, multiple star systems, i have 0 interest in multi-player, If i want to blow up other people's ships I can play Eve or space engineers. And as far as doing stuff WITH people, apart from helping each other on a space station I hardly see the point.

Now for multiple systems, It's gonna be hard, Can you imagine the time it would take to send a ship to another system with the parts we have? let alone orienting yourself in there to get anywhere.

[Arsonik]

I don't mean to come off as a dick but.... COME ON!!! Don't see the point? I mean you really just sound antisocial. I am as much of a recluse as you can get. I have a small base of close friends. But I'm not antisocial. I can already tell you that even if you are only directly interacting with another person [in KSP] 10% of the time, that's BETTER then 0%!!!! Voice over IP, a chat box, anything to add more life to to game. And if I wanted to blow up other peoples ships... I wouldn't because space combat games are terrible. Maybe I want to roleplay a real space program with close friends? Maybe space station building is my thing, thats all I do? Honestly thats irrelevant. But I could think of a dozen things that you can do with multiplayer that you can't without it. Without even trying. Now, YOU may not enjoy those things. But lets try not to be subjective about this. As best as I can see it, adding new places to go to doesn't add much of a dynamic to the game. Just more of the same. An honest poll of general forums will reveal to you the majority of the people here haven't even been to all of the stock bodies. But without even starting a poll I can tell you 100% of the people here have internet, which means they can access multiplayer if it is implemented. From every aspect I see very little advantage to adding new planets or star system(s), as opposed to multiplayer.

Finally I just want to clarify that there are other things I want more then either of the two options in the poll! And don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to see a new star system! But objectively it doesn't really add anything to the plate. These are just some late night ramblings so I apologize if I come off a bit of a dick.

So I want bulldozers and trackhoes with deformable terrain they can sculpt. I want to level landing fields, bury hab modules, and stripmine planets for stuff to ship back to Kerbin. I want to be able to construct actual buildings like at KSC on other planets, that are permanent and interactive things, not just landed ships. I want boats, submarines, and stuff to make undersea bases. I want the ability to kerbaform other planets over time. I want to be able to tie all this together with regularly scheduled trade runs that work automatically like in the X Universe while I do more interesting things.

Until stuff like that happens, KSP quickly becomes extremely repetitive. You start a new game with a new set of ground rules, like all stock, or using this mod or that, or doing everything with probes or spaceplanes. But eventually you go everywhere that way and there's nothing else to do but blow it up and start over from scratch again with a new set of ground rules. After you do that several times, you start getting tired of it, until eventually you walk away, either for a while or forever.

Quoting the guy below me. Hey SQUAD, start a kickstarter for an expansion implementing this kind of complexity after you ship the full game out. Provided its possible in the current game engine, I can't imagine many people here NOT backing that.

Edited March 1, 2014 by Arsonik

[Geschosskopf]

RE: this poll. I answer "None of the above".

I have zero interest in MP mostly because of my inability to do it (satellite internet = unplayable MP lag). And I'm not particularly interested in having more places to go because at the bottom line that adds nothing to gameplay. Go there, grab some rocks, plant a flag, come home. Or go there, land some utterly useless colony modules, watch them do nothing at all for a while, and eventually unlimber the Whack-a-Kerbal.

What the game needs is more stuff to DO in space. Just getting to space quickly stops being a challenge. And the only difference between getting to Mun and getting anywhere else is having to wait on a transfer window. Kethane and other resources are good to SUPPORT stuff but don't work well as ends in and of themselves.

KSP at present is just about exploration. But exploration isn't a good end in itself, either. I mean, it's limited by the amount of blank space on the map. In the real world, it's practical purpose is to pave the way for exploitation and expansion. So that's where the game needs to grow. What I want to see is making bases and colonies become the focus of the game.

So I want bulldozers and trackhoes with deformable terrain they can sculpt. I want to level landing fields, bury hab modules, and stripmine planets for stuff to ship back to Kerbin. I want to be able to construct actual buildings like at KSC on other planets, that are permanent and interactive things, not just landed ships. I want boats, submarines, and stuff to make undersea bases. I want the ability to kerbaform other planets over time. I want to be able to tie all this together with regularly scheduled trade runs that work automatically like in the X Universe while I do more interesting things.

Until stuff like that happens, KSP quickly becomes extremely repetitive. You start a new game with a new set of ground rules, like all stock, or using this mod or that, or doing everything with probes or spaceplanes. But eventually you go everywhere that way and there's nothing else to do but blow it up and start over from scratch again with a new set of ground rules. After you do that several times, you start getting tired of it, until eventually you walk away, either for a while or forever.

[Xavven]

Hey, forgive me if this is too off topic, but how exactly would multiplayer work in this game when time warp is such an important part of it? And when designing your ships is half (and sometimes more than half) of the fun, which is by and large a very single-player experience?

I dunno, I don't think multiple star systems would be reasonable either. At current technology in real life, it would take at the very least almost a century to get to Proxima Centauri, and by then we might have better technology available. This would push KSP much too far into science-fiction as far as the scale of realism to fiction goes, and that would honestly ruin it for me.

So put my vote down for neither. Give me the bigger fuel tanks and engines, contracts, and NASA mission of .24, and then give me better rovers, aerodynamics, life support, and re-entry damage (and parts to go with it), and propellers and balloons. Yes I know there are mods for that. Honestly Squad should buy the mods and put it into the stock game. Hell, I bet some people would give away their mods for free just to get their names on the credits screen (isn't that what they're doing with the logo contest?).

[Specialist290]

I've noticed a few rather heated comments have been posted in this thread lately. I understand that everyone here has their own vision of how the game should be developed, and that each of us has their own list of most preferred features. However, keep in mind even though everyone else may not share your particular vision for how KSP should unfold, they're just as concerned about wanting the end result to be a good product as you are. Keep it civil

[boxman]

Resources

[Rassa Farlander]

I would rather see more parts, mining of some sort, or improved aerodynamics before either of the two options in the poll.

I dont believe there is anywhere that suggests additional star systems.

[timsfitz]

I think multiplayer will be fun. Not, necessarily with strangers though. I'm sure people on these forums will have private servers without the creepers. I'm looking forward to playing online with my bro. We've tried the multiplayer mod but it's too wonky. Multiple star systems would be fantastic as well because I've already been everywhere and found most of the easter eggs in the vanilla game. I don't know if Squad will ever implement other systems though. They said it takes too long to get there with current technology.

[KerikBalm]

Multistar systems would be fine.

Consider a system like the Centauri system: You've got a binary system with stars at least 11 AU away, and then a "companion" star that they're not sure if its orbiting in a highly eliptical orbit, or passing through in a hyperbolic trajectory - Proxima centauri, 15,000 AU from the Alpha Centauri A-B system.

If we lived in a system with a star only 15,000 AU away, interstellar travel would be not so unrealistic.

Not like here on earth, where the next closest star is over 4 lightyears away.

IIRC, the "firefly" star system was like that

[SSSPutnik]

Nobody has yet told me what multiplayer would do other than build a space station around Kerbal. Voice chat can be added instantly with third party software.

I just don't see how multiplayer would work, space is really big, it takes ages to get anywhere.

Yes, space combat has its place in SciFi and I love reading about that sort of thing.

In real life, it AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

Enemy ships are light minutes or hours away. Fixed orbital installations are easy meat for any number of weapons.

At best, unless ships line up like 18th century armies, you would have an encounter at best minutes long, IF you can match trajectory, and probably the best weapon is dumping a bunch of ball bearings in the enemies path. Hardly epic stuff.

KSP is about realism. I'm all for burying bases, mining, habitats we can walk around in, contracts and shipping resources back. Balloons would be a great addition, (as well as for landing!)

Other star systems would be great for challenges, even adding a few asteroids we can do stuff with or Oort cloud objects.

Reentry improvements and a better aerodynamic model would be great.

Setting up bases floating in Jool atmosphere would be fun.

[Rakaydos]

I'm not interested in playing KSP with other people.

I AM interested in opening a second KSP window for my Ion probe burns, while I go manage a completely different mission. Kerbal multiplayer will let me do this.

So multiplayer.

[KN_Namida]

As the good old list of The Rules of the Internet states: proofs or it didn't happen.

I know multiplayer is going into KSP at some point in the future, that's been said by the developers, and I really like the idea.

But other planetary systems? Please link where did you find that information, I didn't know of such a thing being officialy considered for the stock game. Also, I'd vote against it, totally. KSP is a sandbox-driven simulator, and the simulation part plays a major role here. I already posted in another thread that, if we had another planetary system added to the game, placed at a realistic distance from the Sun (scaled down by a factor of 10, as everything in the KSP universe is) it would still take you many real weeks of letting the game run non-stop day and night moving at escape velocity away from Kerbol to reach the nearby star.

Besides, if even the kerbal system isn't completely finished yet (asteroids -don't know how many- are going to be implemented soon, some celestial bodies need an art-pass, and maybe some more planets or moons are going to be added in the future), then why would we need another system?

Give me more stock parts and things to do any day, but another system is definitely something I don't need. And have you people realized how inneficient, compared to its real-world counterpart, the fuel is in KSP? the amount of delta-V necessary to move such great distances (and maybe come back) would be prohibitive, you'd need to assemble the ship in orbit and probably need 3 or more launches...

[montyben101]

Why would you want more star systems if more planets still needs to be added to the game? Plus multiplayer will be MUCH more fun than anything else they could add to the game at the moment!

[SSSPutnik]

I'm still not seeing anything that actually makes multiplayer worthwhile.

Multiple ships running at same time doesn't require multi...

[KasperVld]

Moved this thread to the development discussion forum, also removed the poll because we can't have polls in this forum

And just to be superfluous I'll quote Rowsdower because I think some people are being confused by the statement from the OP about multiple star systems coming to KSP.

Sorry, Jodo. Right now they're not being talked about and even if they were, it still wouldn't be a guarantee unless specified.

[KN_Namida]

I'm still not seeing anything that actually makes multiplayer worthwhile.

Multiple ships running at same time doesn't require multi...

Think of the possibilities, not at what can be done as of now: you could have a co-op experience and try colonizing the system with a friend(s) of yours (if you put a password on the server that you give only to some of your friends, so no griefer comes and ruins your day), or you could organize a space race to the Mun, or try something like the Gemini missions, this time not docking to yours but to someone else's ship like it should be... and so on, I could keep going, it reall comes to your imagination.

[KerikBalm]

if we had another planetary system added to the game, placed at a realistic distance from the Sun (scaled down by a factor of 10, as everything in the KSP universe is) it would still take you many real weeks of letting the game run non-stop day and night moving at escape velocity away from Kerbol to reach the nearby star.

Please consider a less typical start system, like I already mentioned, the alpha centauri system.

1 star at 1.1 AU (scaled down 10x from 11 AU), and another at 1,500 AU (scaled down from 15,000 AU)

And have you people realized how inneficient, compared to its real-world counterpart, the fuel is in KSP? the amount of delta-V necessary to move such great distances (and maybe come back) would be prohibitive, you'd need to assemble the ship in orbit and probably need 3 or more launches...

#1) the fuel is not inefficient, the fuel has very realistic ISPs.

What is inefficient, is the parts... the fuel tanks are too heavy when empty, and the engines are too heavy (ie, their TWR is too low), but this balances out how easy everythin is given the 1/10th scale of the game.

[LordOfTheOrbits]

And have you people realized how inneficient, compared to its real-world counterpart, the fuel is in KSP? the amount of delta-V necessary to move such great distances (and maybe come back) would be prohibitive, you'd need to assemble the ship in orbit and probably need 3 or more launches...

Actually fuel in ksp is about as efficient as in real life. The highest specific impulse ever archived using a chemical rocket was 542s, but it was a tripropellant rocket and there wasn't any tripropellant rocket used in real life yet. I think the highest specific impulse ever archived with a actually used rocket was 454s with the CE-7.5 used in the GSLV Mk-2 rocket. Also in ksp the universe is scaled down by a factor of ten, so it would be a lot easier to do interstellar travel in ksp than in real life.

[Ravenchant]

Besides, if even the kerbal system isn't completely finished yet (asteroids -don't know how many- are going to be implemented soon, some celestial bodies need an art-pass, and maybe some more planets or moons are going to be added in the future), then why would we need another system?

Agreed. As someone put it, right now- once you're through with a planet, the rest is just different coloured landing sites.

the amount of delta-V necessary to move such great distances (and maybe come back) would be prohibitive, you'd need to assemble the ship in orbit and probably need 3 or more launches...

And the problem with that is...?

[SSSPutnik]

Think of the possibilities, not at what can be done as of now: you could have a co-op experience and try colonizing the system with a friend(s) of yours (if you put a password on the server that you give only to some of your friends, so no griefer comes and ruins your day), or you could organize a space race to the Mun, or try something like the Gemini missions, this time not docking to yours but to someone else's ship like it should be... and so on, I could keep going, it reall comes to your imagination.

Colonizing the system can be done without multiplayer, alls that does is lessen the work , and excludes you from doing the ones they have already done. You want to wait a month OE so whilst your friend finishes the Eeloo base?

A space race, OK, I'll give you that one, but really you could see who would win in advance since its all mathematics.

I can do Gemini now...

Sorry, I just really don't see the point of multiplayer, if anything it would damage the game. The devs say they are working on it, so... As long as they leave sandbox mode!

Other star systems are not high on my priority list, maybe leave it to a mod.

As to how long it would get there, just add more time acceleration options, fixed!

Edited March 1, 2014 by SSSPutnik

[Red Iron Crown]

I've got zero interest in multiplayer.

This, exactly.

So, by extension, I would rather have other star systems than multiplayer, though we would need some new propulsion systems to make interstellar travel feasible, propulsion systems that would make interplanetary travel as easy as going to the Mun or Minmus is now.

I would rather have more and different celestial bodies in the Kerbin system than either of the options the OP gives.

Edit: Also, the Kraken seems to punish those who dare get too far from the body they're orbiting, interstellar flight will need those problems fixed. Plus I believe KSP uses 32-bit floats to store altitude, they may not be sufficient for interstellar altitudes.

Edited March 1, 2014 by Red Iron Crown

[Shna_na]

While I know that multiplayer will be first, I've seen that as a little early. The game is still in an unstable state, a state of flux where huge things are being adding, fixed, changed, and removed constantly. Multiplayer will just mean more bug fixing than there needs to be. I'd prefer if they went for interstellar first.

[vetrox]

Neither option really excites me.

However If i had to choose one it would be multiplayer. I'm quite content with the kerbol system. The planet factory mod and Real solar system are plenty to keep me occupied should i get bored of standard ksp.

[KN_Namida]

Colonizing the system can be done without multiplayer, alls that does is lessen the work , and excludes you from doing the ones they have already done. You want to wait a month OE so whilst your friend finishes the Eeloo base?

A space race, OK, I'll give you that one, but really you could see who would win in advance since its all mathematics.

I can do Gemini now...

Sorry, I just really don't see the point of multiplayer, if anything it would damage the game. The devs say they are working on it, so... As long as they leave sandbox mode!

Other star systems are not high on my priority list, maybe leave it to a mod.

As to how long it would get there, just add more time acceleration options, fixed!

Well, obviously the single player components of the game will remain untouched, don't worry about it: we'll still have single player sandbox and career.

I'm not against multiplayer, we all played just that until now. I just think that multiplayer could somehow enhance the experience (in some ways), giving you more to do. And it all comes down, as I said, to what you can come up with. When you start KSP and decide to unwind a bit in sandbox mode, you ask yourself "What could I do today?". Maybe you'll build a space station. Maybe a voyage to Dres. or Maybe you just want to burn something up into the Sun, you decide.

And the same thing could be applied to the multiplyer, the only difference being "Guys, what are WE going to do today?".

I'm aware some people just prefer to have a singleplayer experience, and I understand that. Multiplayer will not be for everyone, but if you can come up with the right ideas, then it definitely is for you.

[OTehNoes]

Definitely multiplayer, I'd love to be able to share my creations in game with people, and go exploring!

Multiplayer is something that we have nothing of the like in the game, whereas there is plenty of room to improve on already existing bodies in the game, more places to explore on planets etc.