[Devs, Read this] What KSP needs

[SkyRex94]

Things left to do

This Thread shall be a mix of disscussion and suggestion about what critical features are left to reach a good so called scope completion and after that whats left to finish the Game. I'll try to draw a logical guess based on what the devs said already, the assumption that scope completion is not soo far away and logical theories what is left to do gameplay-wise.

Starting Point is the current Version 0.24.2

*Lines starting with '*' were added after an edit.

Atmospheres:

- Plausible Aerodynamics (maybe something like NEAR) and maybe simple reentry heat

- More/redone plane parts (already confirmed)

Activities:

Most important point! so i'll write a little more: Problem is as we all know, there is literally nothing to do after landing on another planet (or even on Kerbin) unless clicking on parts. And simply adding biomes to everywhere isn't the answer, because there is nothing to do on mun and minmus too.

A ressource system won't happen, they said, okay so which options are there? If you're not Roleplaying we have three possible motivators Funds,Rep and Science. Funds and Rep could get attention in this case if they implement more complex Contracts e.g. Launching Sattelites, Setup Bases, Timed stays like 50 days on surface, and so on. But the real Motivator has to be Science! Why we're doing mission in Real Life? Money for bringing things for a customer from A to B OR Exploration and Research of the unknown. And i think the contracts are mainly providing the funding of your Exploration Missions. It's an Exploration Game after all,so the Exploration has to be fun (not just the way to get to destination).

That leads to:

Science System Overhaul:

I think we agree simply clicking on several parts to finish the experiments is not realy Exploring-Fun.

So i think there should be certain ways of actually performing the Experiments (Maybe Squad can use parts of the Contract-conditions-system Code for that)

First, you can't do everything everywhere. And you can't do biome specific things in 'high' Orbit, like the gravioli, please remove that that makes absolutly no sense.Suggestions for specific Experiments:

- only one remaining clicking Experiment which provides Data Readouts like Temp. and Pressure

- a Terrain Analysis, which requires you to move a certain distance over the Surface ( for Rovers)

- a long time Lab Experiment (Maybe use the current Lab for it) Requires to be manned and requires a certain time in the enviroment (Surface,Space) before yielding the Science ( Base and Station Use) e.g. 100 days

- a drill-core Experimet, analysises the deeper regions of the ground, but needs like 2 hours to finish

- a dive exploration Experiment , like above but only in 'splashed down'

- an impactor experiment, working as in interstellar, with a experiment active while an impactor has to hit the ground

- a meassurement experiment, requires a minimum of three experiments further apart than e.g. 10 km to measure out the planet (giving multiple landing sites a better purpose)

- maybe a solar particle collector and analysis, works only in Orbit, has a readout for magnetosphere and only yields the science if in high enough particle density aka magnetic field density (or solar orbit) so you have to find the place first.

- a weather research experiment, requires to be in atmosphere and under 10 m/s relative to surface. maybe requires a ballon part

- an orbital observing experiment, requires to be in orbit for a long time around a body e.g. 1 year. *Maybe modelled like a Telescope

- and maybe seasonal Experiments, which yield only 25% of its value per season of the planet, so a permanently base makes sense

*-a life behavior experiment, maybe like the Science Jr. Bay for researching Plants and microorganisms exposed to the enviroment, requires some random(!) time to finish in each situation, so you may have to check back after some time to check if something actually happend.

*- a Assemble-First-Experiment: consists of a part, which can be docked to itself and form a bigger structure. Maybe something like a Particle-Accelerator. So you'd have a slight curved Part, but if you' dock like 20 of them together it'd form a Ring with 1km Radius. Then you can ran the Experiment in that Enviroment (not biome specific), but you'd have to launch several missions first and assemble it somewhere to do so and it makes a nice objective for a big base or station. (It could actually be some kind of a substitude for Ressources, if actually no ressources will be implemented, and it'd be only one new part and some Coding to add a deeper space-building purpose)

Biomes shouldn't yield the same Science, the first you land in should give you 100%, the second 50% , 3rd 40% , 4th 30%... That would encourage to explore new planets but not punish to stay. And the most new Knowledge is gained on the First Landing in Real Life too.

Recreated Tech Tree, more logical and more Nodes. Either make it more expensive in total or decrease the science payout of experiments and contracts.

* Adding new non-Part Nodes for Endgame--- more about that further down.

And a basic Antenna Range, so the big Dishes have actually a use.

(But after all that won't lead to big bases , but it doesn't in real life either. After Apollo Missions no one got there again, because right know there is no reason to do so. Infrastructure comes with ressorces (for the RL moon that could be Helium-3 sometime), so if there won't be one Ressource in KSP you have to get a Mod for senseful Base building, but thats also realistic.)

So this and more Contracts are the possibilities squad has to make more things to do without implementing all new systems.

Activities-continued:

we need more things to do on EVA. In real they do Experiments, Repair things and construct things. We can do Science and repair some things. To construct things we need a simple System for building. Maybe don't even new Parts, just that every EVA-Suit has two new things, a Ground structure and a Pipe. Infinite, like the infinite Flags in the suit. And apply them in the way KAS does it. Maybe also a strut. so you can build structures and maybe even repair crashed ships. Image the situation you crashed on landing and something important (engine) got off but didn't explode? you could strut and pipe it back onto the ship and try to fly this weirdly shaped ship somehow back instead of reload or send rescue.

(But this is not as important as the Science Overhaul)

* make one or two of the suggested Experiments in Science system overhaul require to be set up and activated by a Kerbal on EVA, maybe the Life behavior Exp. , would be another addition for Station and Base To-Do-Things. (Checking the Data also requires interaction with a Kerbal)

Dangers:

-on geological active planets there could be actual dangers like Geysiers or Vulanos that would make it more difficult and interesting than regions like Mun or Ike.(but thats probably not important for Scope Completion)

*- Actual gameplay-affecting storms on atmosphere planets, like Dust storms on Duna reducing view and solar energy and adding force(Wind) to your ship so be carefull with light rovers on slopes

End-Game-Things:

I think Squad seems to focus mainly on new players, but they shouldn't forget about the experienced ones that can complete the tech tree really fast. But there is much more Science so i have a really simple suggestion: Add Endgame Nodes in the TechTree after you've got all the Parts: Really expensive and they don't unlock new Parts, but maybe some small new objects (planets as soon as new ones are implemented) like maybe Comets (really small and weird orbit and hard to reach) that got discovered with the invested science. E.g. if KSP gets 3 Comets, there could be 3 EndGame Nodes to unlock them and give the Science a purpose. And after that One FINAL Node which requires so much Science, that you have to get 90 % of all the Science to get there and unlock it. It would unlock Nothing. Just maybe a long Kerbal-ish-written Text about new Discoveries in the rest of the space. But nothing gameplay-wise, since you Explored everything at that point. Would give the Tech Tree an actual final End where the hole Kerbol system was fully understood by the Kerbals.

*Another thing to unlock through tech tree could be the ability to track asteroids. Like advanced telescopes and maths allow Kerbals to identify these unknown dots in the Telescope-Pictures. After all Newbies won't capture an asteroid first so implementing the ability in the techtree is more purpose for science with all parts already unlocked.

So when all the above or similar things are implemented i would call it feature complete. After that there comes the

Content:

- Visual Enhancements

- Immersive Enhancements (Clouds, Solar Flares, Dust Storms...)

- More Planets to get more diversity (don't basically repeat/copy the current ones, there are things that aren't even in the game yet. Look at our Solar System)

- Sound Enhancements

- Some more Parts

- Performance Enhancements

- more Contract Types

- more IVAs

If i forgot something what you think will be in Scope Completion let me know.

If someone from Squad Reads this and if you can talk about it, please leave a post, espeacially regarding the Science System Overhaul.

Besides please leave your opinions about the suggesting parts and disscuss what you think will/should be implemented to make the Exploring more Fun and if you believe that squad actually implements them?

Edited August 27, 2014 by SkyRex94

[M3tal_Warrior]

I think you forgot actual purpose for Kerbals (like traits) - atm they're just an enhanced probe.

About the science system I've written a blog post how I think it should work - I suggest to screw the science tree (because science doesn't work that way IRL) completely. I know you're used to pay 'science points' to unlock nodes in a science tree in almost every other game, but the whole idea was stupid in the first place.

The additional experiments are quite a cool suggestion, I'd like to see them (they're discussed in other threads too).

In the end I don't think it's useful to talk about scope completion in here - Minecraft has shown there is no real scope completion in a continual developed game (v1.0 was something that 'had be done at some point', it didn't really change the development), and even if there is at some point, I'm sure it's more useful to give the devs ideas all the way. It's not as if we would gain something from the dev status renaming.

[r4pt0r]

I would also like some sort of experiment that kerbals can deploy on the ground, something like this: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5947HR.jpg

I also propose making ground based eva reports time dependent a little (kerbal must be on or just above ______ surface for ___ seconds prior to eva report). take time to hop skip and jump around like the real astronauts did. give me reason to keep my kerbals on the surface for longer than 10 seconds.

perhaps let us place experiments on the ship maybe a stack mounted or radial "experiment holder" that has 3 expirements, that kerbals have to grab and carry off to deploy http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/images/transport_lg.gif

Also of note: https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/about.php

Planned Features:

A Tycoon-Style Career Mode.

Take on Contracts to attract interest in your Space Program.

Hire astronauts, train them, and make them into heroes.

And a whole lot more!

Would a Squad employee mind mentioning what is included in " a whole lot more"? I remember a thread a few weeks ago asking what "scope completion" meant to squad.

Edited August 2, 2014 by r4pt0r

[Tuareg]

I would also like some sort of experiment that kerbals can deploy on the ground, something like this: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5947HR.jpg

I also propose making ground based eva reports time dependent a little (kerbal must be on or just above ______ surface for ___ seconds prior to eva report). take time to hop skip and jump around like the real astronauts did. give me reason to keep my kerbals on the surface for longer than 10 seconds.

perhaps let us place experiments on the ship maybe a stack mounted or radial "experiment holder" that has 3 expirements, that kerbals have to grab and carry off to deploy http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/images/transport_lg.gif

Also of note: https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/about.php

Would a Squad employee mind mentioning what is included in " a whole lot more"? I remember a thread a few weeks ago asking what "scope completion" meant to squad.

i would like to know what will they be trained for...

[CaptRobau]

I also propose making ground based eva reports time dependent a little (kerbal must be on or just above ______ surface for ___ seconds prior to eva report). take time to hop skip and jump around like the real astronauts did. give me reason to keep my kerbals on the surface for longer than 10 seconds.

I don't see that work well. Adding a timer will just mean that people will stand still for ten seconds, waiting for the EVA report to work. People would hop around more if there was anything to do/see but the ground and non-interactive ground scatter, which is what needs to be changed if one wants people to do more at a landing site than getting Reports, Samples and plant a flag before returning to Kerbin.

[fairytalefox]

Man, you're my champion. But please don't mess with gravioli. They are an euphemism for RL neutrino, so why not to try to find them in the deep space? (Not with a lipstick-sized device, of course...)

I suggest to screw the science tree (because science doesn't work that way IRL) completely. I know you're used to pay 'science points' to unlock nodes in a science tree in almost every other game, but the whole idea was stupid in the first place.

Not so stupid actually from the viewpoint of game design, but you have a point. I believe it would be good to implement a simplified/combined system: in order to unlock node X you have to spend Y science points AND perform tests Z and T.

[M3tal_Warrior]

Not so stupid actually from the viewpoint of game design, but you have a point.

I don't think it's even that - there are games out there that don't have a science tree (I play one of them frequently, Hearts of Iron III) but soft dependencies. It works like that:

In order to research a better main armament for tanks, you need expertise in three fields (can be 1-4 fields, depending on the subject): Tanks (affecting research with 50%), tank tactics (20%) and artillery weapons (30%). The more expertise you have in those fields, the faster your research works out (with a great dependency on the time it was researched IRL and the year you are in atm). Upon finish the main field of expertise gets a boost (that diminishes over time again). Of course you research quite a lot in parallel, depending on how many of your nations brainiacs you push into your science sector, but it greatly helps to do a lot of tank research in 1938, so you might be able to use '45 tanks in '42 (but shipping around with cruisers from 1918, since you can't do everything in time). Of course there are some hard dependencies, like you can't research mechanized infantry before having a clue how motorized infantry works out in your army, but it all models real life science astonishing well, and isn't very complicated once you have researched a bit.

Of course, since time is a major factor in HOI, and in KSP it's not, one has to find something to make up for that - knowledge (aka science points to unlock possibilities) would work out quite well here, since that's what you gain when having probes and Kerbals out there telling you news about the universe. I think it would give some depth and flexibility to the game, as well as a fine grained regulator for difficulty (one could use a factor on the knowledge thresholds to ease/toughen the research and thus the game).

[SkyRex94]

Man, you're my champion. But please don't mess with gravioli. They are an euphemism for RL neutrino, so why not to try to find them in the deep space? (Not with a lipstick-sized device, of course...)

I didn't mean to erase the Detector. I meant that it's stupid to get different results in HIGH SPACE for different biomes. I don't think the Graviolis are any different 1 million km over Desert than over Grasslands. That's what i meant.

[M3tal_Warrior]

I meant that it's stupid to get different results in HIGH SPACE for different biomes

No, that makes sense. Gravity is a function of the mass of a body; on different spots it's different on the basis of density. So say you take a reading landed somewhere, you measure the exact gravity over that spot (say 100 cm²). Do that at a higher altitude and you get maybe 1 m², so the smalles changes in the density of the landmass aren't noticed any longer, you get an average for this square meter. Proceed higher the average is about a bigger area, and even (or only) in high space you would have the possibility to get an average reading about the whole biome, and not just a part of it.

[SkyRex94]

No, that makes sense. Gravity is a function of the mass of a body; on different spots it's different on the basis of density. So say you take a reading landed somewhere, you measure the exact gravity over that spot (say 100 cm²). Do that at a higher altitude and you get maybe 1 m², so the smalles changes in the density of the landmass aren't noticed any longer, you get an average for this square meter. Proceed higher the average is about a bigger area, and even (or only) in high space you would have the possibility to get an average reading about the whole biome, and not just a part of it.

I know that Gravity is not equally spread in Real Life. Biggest Example is that the 'dark' side of the moon is significantly lighter than the side facing Earth. But that's for bigger areas if you go high up and it seems not realistic that measuring the Coast or Slopes from really far away makes any difference to the neighboring biome. It makes sense for big things like Water or Poles, but for KSP i think its pretty dumb gameplay wise as you have to (without mods) trial and error to get readings of small biomes like Coasts to get a reading from high up. And if you measure the values from space near you'd scale them up to get the bigger picture, so i think gameplay wise its no fun trying to hit biomes from high up.

Edited August 3, 2014 by SkyRex94

[M3tal_Warrior]

I see your point. True, it's not easy to hit them, but possible.

[Dr. Moustache- PhD]

Some very good suggestions in the OP. I particularly like the complex science experiments over distance, making rovers have a real in game purpose.

[fairytalefox]

I don't think it's even that - there are games out there that don't have a science tree (I play one of them frequently, Hearts of Iron III) but soft dependencies. It works like that:

Thank you for the explanation. The system seems to be quite interesting but kinda difficult to learn and master. And since we already have loads of, literally, rocket science in KSP, when we're talking about things like target audiences, attention spans, learning curves and things and stuff, well, it's better IMHO to keep some aspects of the game as simple as possible.

It doesn't mean that SoI III has bad research system, of course. What I'm trying to say is that, unfortunately, not all good systems are good at any time and place.

[Hannu]

I agree, especially things you mentioned in science system overhaul would be great, because now science is couple of clicking and I can get full points if I stay 1 minute on surface. But longer manned experiments would work reasonable only, if extended time takes costs in mass and money. So, Kerbals should consume resources, which need room and mass and I must choose do I heavy lander with resources for 500 days or do I separate unmanned service flight. I suggest that everything (food, oxygen, entertainment stuff etc.) will be included in one living resource to keep game relatively simple. If there is not resource cost, I can land, accelerate time 100000 x and make a cup of tea. It would not add anything but boring waiting periods.

I suggest that pods could include living resources for 30-50 days so, that player do not have to think that before first typical Mun and Minmus trips. More resources could be packed in separate resource containers, like fuel tanks. Consumption rate could be around 1-2 kg per kerbal per day.

I hope also, that next planets will have inclined axes (20-40 degrees) and at least some tiny moons (like Bop or Pol) in very inclined and/or retrograde orbits. Even better would be change axes of at least some planets in current system.

[Bomoo]

Looks like we had some similiar idears, OP.

[Laie]

Experiments:

- only one remaining clicking Experiment which provides Data Readouts like Temp. and Pressure

- a Terrain Analysis, which requires you to move a certain distance over the Surface ( for Rovers)

- a long time Lab Experiment (Maybe use the current Lab for it) Requires to be manned and requires a certain time in the enviroment (Surface,Space) before yielding the Science ( Base and Station Use) e.g. 100 days

- a drill-core Experimet, analysises the deeper regions of the ground, but needs like 2 hours to finish

- a dive exploration Experiment , like above but only in 'splashed down'

- an impactor experiment, working as in interstellar, with a experiment active while an impactor has to hit the ground

- a meassurement experiment, requires a minimum of three experiments further apart than e.g. 10 km to measure out the planet (giving multiple landing sites a better purpose)

[more]

Excellent approach!

I'd like to add that I'd rather do away with (most of) the tech tree. Having been a newbie not too long ago, I assure you that having all parts immediately is somewhat overwhelming, but having to make do with subpar equipment is infuriating. Building a ship in the knowledge that it will fly exactly once before being replaced by something much, much better is no fun.

I suggest an achievement-based upproach: unlock the 2.5m parts and standard docking after the first orbit; unlock all equipment after the first return from either moon. That should be tutorial enough for the newbies (I had designed a small handfull of rockets before I managed to make orbit) and not stall the experienced players. Under that approach, science points would be just another currency: as long as you rake in the science, you'll have no problem funding further missions. Make a contract that states this if you feel like it.

[M3tal_Warrior]

Thank you for the explanation. The system seems to be quite interesting but kinda difficult to learn and master.

Not at all. It sounds difficult if explained, but you don't have to know all this to research. Newbies who don't read the manual click 'research' on 50 types of equipment/troops and wait until they're finished. After some years (ingame) they see their teams research stuff they've researched before faster. I have to admit not reading the HOI III manual will most probably result in getting behind other nations pretty soon, for a ton of reasons not involved in the science system.

As for KSP I've had some thoughts how this could work. I think it's easy.

I'd like to add that I'd rather do away with (most of) the tech tree. Having been a newbie not too long ago, I assure you that having all parts immediately is somewhat overwhelming, but having to make do with subpar equipment is infuriating. Building a ship in the knowledge that it will fly exactly once before being replaced by something much, much better is no fun.

I was a newbie to the game half a year ago, and I strongly object to that. Science and research is - to me - a core functionality of the career mode, I'd hate it to be like you want it to be. There is a mode for it, it's called 'sandbox'.

As for 'unpar equipment' - there is no such thing. The first 3 rockets I build were used to unlock necessary nodes in the tech tree, so Kerb-01 to Kerb-03 were one time launches (glued together within a minute, if even). Kerb-04 is still used to shoot satellites into orbit, Kerb-05 to Kerb-07 for rescue missions, Mun/Minmus low-payload launches and as 'satellite family deployers'. These are all M-sized rockets. L and XL parts I solely use to leave the Kerbin SOI or to launch stations and suchlike.

Like I said: You lack patience? Go play sandbox.

[blspblackdeath]

Just yes to this threat.

[Laie]

I was a newbie to the game half a year ago, and I strongly object to that. Science and research is - to me - a core functionality of the career mode, I'd hate it to be like you want it to be. There is a mode for it, it's called 'sandbox'.

Well, I hated it when I had to piece together something with a tri-coupler that I could have made better and simpler with rockomax parts. Much more oportunity for failure through oversight -- which was fun for a while, but by the time I had set my sights on the Mun, it was tedious. Building landers without legs, ladders or even solar panels is, well... let's just say that I don't see how it improves gameplay.

It makes sense that players start with only a small subset of parts. But after their first Munar landing, I see no reason to withhold anything anymore. Unlocking the tech tree should be a means to other ends, not an end in itself. Problem is, right now we have no other ends except filling out the tech tree... but the OP had a few excellent suggestions.

[M3tal_Warrior]

Wait, you actually landed on the mun without having everything researched except maybe the LV-N? I have unlocked almost everything prior to my first landing. Gravioli research of Mun and Minmus is giving away thousands of science points without having to land a single time. Drop probes / planes for Kerbin with all 7 experiments in every biome do the rest. That's the only time I use tri- and quadcouplers. Maybe one small hop out of Kerbin SOI (to get HO Kerbol data) and you're done.

I mean, yes, I landed on the Mun, and on Minmus, but with fully fledged 20 ton research rovers, including all experiments plus lab and 20k electricity on XL rover wheels. That was my first landing outside Kerbin actually.

[micha]

I would also like some sort of experiment that kerbals can deploy on the ground, something like this: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5947HR.jpg

I also propose making ground based eva reports time dependent a little (kerbal must be on or just above ______ surface for ___ seconds prior to eva report). take time to hop skip and jump around like the real astronauts did. give me reason to keep my kerbals on the surface for longer than 10 seconds.

perhaps let us place experiments on the ship maybe a stack mounted or radial "experiment holder" that has 3 expirements, that kerbals have to grab and carry off to deploy http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/images/transport_lg.gif

Using the Munar Surface Experiments mod in combination with Universal Storage and Kerbal Attachment System pretty much gets you what you're after.

From my last mission:

http://imgur.com/a/Rzvbe?gallery#15

NB: There are issues with KAS on Win64 (or rather, most likely the issue is the underlying Unity engine). Seems to work perfectly fine under Linux though.

[Laie]

Wait, you actually landed on the mun without having everything researched except maybe the LV-N?

Nah, I wasn't quite as patient. My first career isn't even six months ago, but I have no savegames anymore so I could check my progress... didn't know about ALT-F5 and only ever overwrote my last quicksave. I also had no idea that I should "rush" the gravioli detector nor am I the kind of person who'd babysit a pod for hours until it crossed every biome. I probably had covered most of Kerbin plus all high&low orbits with the instruments at hand, though. Can't tell you exactly what tech I bought with it, but seen from today I probably made bad decisions. I'm pretty sure I would not have done a series of landings with ever more tricked-out 1.25m vessels if I had rockomax parts at my disposal.

Those tricked-out 1.25m vessels were fun. The 1.25m rockets to launch them were not. Also had no mechjeb back then... some Delta-V data would have helped a lot at this stage. It eventually did.

[r4pt0r]

Using the Munar Surface Experiments mod in combination with Universal Storage and Kerbal Attachment System pretty much gets you what you're after.

From my last mission:

http://imgur.com/a/Rzvbe?gallery#15

NB: There are issues with KAS on Win64 (or rather, most likely the issue is the underlying Unity engine). Seems to work perfectly fine under Linux though.

yeah cool. I want that stock please. I only play stock.

[M3tal_Warrior]

I'm on an unmodded install (except for Docking Port Alignment, for the stock docking interface is bugged/useless), so I have no delta-v info, no mass info (except what I calculate manually) - I do it the hard way. But I'm not stupid and damn lazy, so at first glance at the science tree my question was: Where do I get better experiments to max out my science points? Second question was: How much do I have to spent on rocketry parts to deploy them? That's how I work - call it German Efficiency.

[JayCheetah]

I like most of the idea's the OP posted.

To me KSP career mode as it is now is very grindy and boring to be honest, which is most likely the result of me playing the game for quite some time before any off these features were added.

Adding my own restrictions and heavily mod the game makes it still playable.

I do realise that the game is still in development, being in an alpha state with small updates added every now and then.

Perhaps that's where the core of the problem lies, since a lot of players have been playing the game for long enough to make any of these "small" additions to the game, like Science, Funds and Contracts are just not compelling and/or challenging enough.

I see this as a Early Access Syndrome. Being able to play a game while it is still in development seems like a great opportunity, but you will basically finish all relevant content before the game is actually finished.

So are we looking into "fixing" the game for its current player base or for future new players?