[Devs, Read this] What KSP needs

[M3tal_Warrior]

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

I'd call it adding realism and complexity to the game, being good for both current and future players. The best games with highest replay value I've played in my whole life were highly complex games, for you find a zillion ways to do things more efficient/different. Of course it takes a lot more to learn the game then, but I guess the learning curve in KSP is quite good and the game values even little achievements in the beginning quite good, so players get a warm and cozy feeling while even blowing up the first rockets on their way to space.

[JayCheetah]

I'd call it adding realism and complexity to the game, being good for both current and future players.

How would you provide complexity for "veterans", while keeping it "easy" enough for new players not to get overwhelmed?

I guess the learning curve in KSP is quite good and the game values even little achievements in the beginning quite good, so players get a warm and cozy feeling while even blowing up the first rockets on their way to space.

The true learning curve of KSP is actually getting something in an orbit or land on another planet/moon, but the current Career Mode only provides with minor limitations on how you are gonna get there ( limited parts and funds )

The feeling that you achieved something by blowing up a first rocket can also happen by playing Sandbox.

My concern is that when a player learned the basics of orbit and such, the mandatory collecting of science and funds to gain access to more parts ( to actually build the vessel you like to see ) has become redundant.

[M3tal_Warrior]

How would you provide complexity for "veterans", while keeping it "easy" enough for new players not to get overwhelmed?

Complexity in stuff you approach first when you're already progressed into deep space and such, or you try to optimize in the second/third approach while still staying functional for newbies without knowing how it exactly works. Like giving a learning ability to Kerbals, dive into their traits (add a few more & make them useful), redo the R&D system (I proposed something on those rails - you don't have to know how it works to actually use it, although it won't be most effective the first time), adding resources on other bodies, maybe a crane too, enhance the EVA system (repairing, welding, fuel lines, experiments), redo the funds system, introduce supplies, add a system for subcontractors (for supply chains in endgame etc)...

This all will either not be affecting or will even help new players on their way to first orbit, Mun & Minmus mission and landing. Of course new rockets pose new challenges, but as I recall right once you worked out your first few orbits it's always the same - launching rocket, separate stages, refuel in LKO, progress further. The most interesting things then are bases (which lack stock functionality atm), Hohmann transfers, slingshot maneuvers, trying new designs and fiddle around with planes.

My concern is that when a player learned the basics of orbit and such, the mandatory collecting of science and funds to gain access to more parts ( to actually build the vessel you like to see ) has become redundant.

Yes, this is why I'd love to see some financial/colonial/RPG management in late game - it would add to the experience.

Edited August 7, 2014 by M3tal_Warrior
added blog links & clarified one sentence

[SkyRex94]

I'm really glad to see all these positive responses and ideas and disscusion on this Thread and my Post. That confirms that more people here would like to see some changes to some important parts of the game (e.g.Science System !) Let's hope the devs stumble upon this and maybe leave a comment about the significant suggestions and ideas.

Additionally i had some more ideas and updated the First post. Don't worry you don't have to read everything again if you have already , i marked all the lines where i added something.

[SkyRex94]

snip

These are some of the reasons why i thougth about the Endgame Content and the Science system Overhaul. And if complexity arrives in later game instead of systems that affect the start it'll be good for both sides. Easy start for new Players but challenging for the advanced.

please leave your opinions about the additions i made to the first post.

[M3tal_Warrior]

please leave your opinions about the additions i made to the first post.

If I can do you a favor here:

*-a life behavior experiment

Although it contains the bad word 'random', I see no problems - it'll add to the experience.

*- a Assemble-First-Experiment

You're talking to a chemist - I'm in favor for all science stuff! (at reasonable gain)

* Adding new non-Part Nodes for Endgame

Unlocking game relevant stuff is always cool, but I don't like that 'last page of book' attempt for the last part. It will mark an (implied) end where I don't like to see one.

*- Actual gameplay-affecting weather

Me gusta!

*Another thing to unlock through tech tree could be the ability to track asteroids.

Make that building upgrades and you can count me in!

[SkyRex94]

So, as most of the posts here were positive responses to my ideas,

this is the last bump of the thread, hoping the devs might finally read and maybe comment on it.

Cheers

[tntristan12]

I would love to see the science system overhauled. So much! The thing that's always bugged me about the science system is the disconnect between gameplay and what you'd expect. It simply requires too much suspension of disbelief to think that an experiment you conduct in high orbit will be preserved after re-entry and recovery. Each experiment needs a hierarchy of how much science can be gained from it. For example:

- Observing mystery goo in high orbit yields the most science if analyzed in a lab module in orbit. Moderate science if the results are transmitted. However, if you leave orbit and/or apply an acceleration impulse to the ship, you've destroyed the experiment and it automatically resets, so you cannot return the experiment to kerbin for science.

- A soil sample gathered from another world yields the most science if returned to kerbin for analysis. Analyzing in a lab module would yield moderate science (like 75%). Transmitting observations about the soil yields some science but not very much.

- A crew report is worth the most if you transmit it, because the report is still fresh in everyone's mind, but recovering in a lab or at the space center may not necessarily return more science, because why should a report be recovered physically when it is just the subjective views of those on the mission?

Every experiment should be different, and have its own level of difficulty in obtaining science from it. Perhaps there's a limited window in which you can analyze it (I.e. the experiment can only be done when there is no direct sunlight - taking a dark side radiation measurement for example), and if you transmit to recover science before going to a lab and the lab would produce more science then taking it to a lab would recover the difference, since it would likely turn up things that basic observation couldn't.

If stuff like this was implemented, science in my opinion would become much less of a grind, and more like a unique problem to solve for every varied case.

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

You do realize - Scope Completion means all the basic features are added, right?

[hawk_za]

dose anyone have any new information on if kerbals will still be able to be trained to fly and land in some further patch i have memories of this being part of scope completion goals

as i have heard nothing in a while i am fearing that it is probably going to be dropped from the game

thus leaving me with mech-jeb as my only hope to land my crazy contraptions on the mun

[tater]

Simple thing I just posted in the realism thread.

You know the info icon while in flight? Or the contract icon in flight? Make a similar one for delta v in the VAB. The content would be a list of worlds in the system, and it shows the dv required (min) to get to each world from the surface of Kermin, and puts a check next to each that your current build can get to. This is for new players (ideally it could also show the actual dv of your build for more experienced players).

This is in the spirit of their current UI choices, and gives a new builder incredibly useful data (and the min dv by no means guarantees they'll even get to orbit, lol, just that a good player could get to the target).

[Andrew Hansen]

<snip>

That's awesome! I would love to have that in Engineer as a GUI overhaul. Then it might actually get put into the stock game. After all, even when using Engineer, you have to use an external delta-V map to figure out if you have enough fuel. But for more advanced players who want to see actual numbers, an extra tab could be put in the Tracking Station (just like there's two tabs in the R&D building) with a delta-V map that you can look at. You could include a small button in the VAB to view the delta-V map.

I would absolutely love to see this in the stock game. And with KerbalEdu and stuff, I don't see how you can get away with not having delta-V in the game.