Pre-Space Stage (expanding pre-orbit technology/contracts)

[Red Cloud]

So, I am not sure how to express this correctly, but I think there could be some fun had with adding a few more "pre space flight" bits & bobs to either the tech tree, or the contracts.

I am not suggesting that the game begins with the Wright brothers, or indeed with apes tossing bones into arcs suggestive of space flight, but it seems that within a jiffy you are in space, and well, poor Kerbal is left behind, and that this misses out on some of the potential fun/crazyness of the early days of space flight.

It also seems that a cardboard box & jiffy tape element of design really suits the games vibe, where failure is to be expected, and laughed at.

Perhaps the planes should come before the rockets?

Perhaps the first flights should be unmanned, followed by sending up dogs & chimps (as you don't mind losing them), or perhaps you should be losing a few kerbals along the way?

I guess what I am suggesting is also a kind of a nod to the X1, X15, and Sputnik, or indeed back to Werner Von Braun, but without necessarily needing or wanting historical accuracy, just a bit more before the space stuff.

At the end of the day, players wouldn't spend long in this phase, but it might be a nice extra layer at the start...

[Kegereneku]

That's a idea shared by many. A mods called "Better Than Starting Manned" (I've yet to try with .024) try to repair the injustice done to probes and make achieving orbit a more meaningful achievement. By rebalancing the tech-tree, adding feature like reentry-mods.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/61632-0-23-5-Better-Than-Starting-Manned-Career-Mode-Redefined-%28v1-57-June-12th%29

Of course there's also a few players who dislike the idea because they want to build interstellar size spacecraft as soon as possible.

But if we want this to make the game stock, we could start by completing parts of radial size 0.5m to include high-thrust engine and longer tank, those would serve as the first unmanned-rocket and be handy parts later. (better than inefficient radial engine I've never used myself).

Then for those worried to be bored launching cheap firework during -a perfectly reasonable amount of time- the starting phase, SQUAD could make more basic science experiment available (thermometer should come first). This way, while the new players will be enjoying learning to control their rocket, experimented players would be flying through more biomes they know gathering science faster.

Anyway I'm of those who think the tech-tree will need a serious rework. Any parts that allow to shape the Rocket should come as soon as possible, ladder aren't too high-tech to come early either.

[Alias72]

Another interesting contribution is FAR with KIDS. The combination of these two mods ensure that you need a rocket the size of an R7 to get into space. my rocket has 3 stages, 4 boosters of 3 ftl 800 tall, one central rocket 5 ftl 800 tall, and a single ftl 800 upper stage. getting to orbit requires something akin to a mun rocket. getting to the mun... I'll let you know later.

[Kerbart]

[...] I am not suggesting that the game begins [...] with apes tossing bones into arcs suggestive of space flight[...]

Well, the monolith is there, so if you want you CAN

[CaptRobau]

So, I am not sure how to express this correctly, but I think there could be some fun had with adding a few more "pre space flight" bits & bobs to either the tech tree, or the contracts.

I am not suggesting that the game begins with the Wright brothers, or indeed with apes tossing bones into arcs suggestive of space flight, but it seems that within a jiffy you are in space, and well, poor Kerbal is left behind, and that this misses out on some of the potential fun/crazyness of the early days of space flight.

It also seems that a cardboard box & jiffy tape element of design really suits the games vibe, where failure is to be expected, and laughed at.

Perhaps the planes should come before the rockets?

Perhaps the first flights should be unmanned, followed by sending up dogs & chimps (as you don't mind losing them), or perhaps you should be losing a few kerbals along the way?

I guess what I am suggesting is also a kind of a nod to the X1, X15, and Sputnik, or indeed back to Werner Von Braun, but without necessarily needing or wanting historical accuracy, just a bit more before the space stuff.

At the end of the day, players wouldn't spend long in this phase, but it might be a nice extra layer at the start...

Probes and especially aircraft are more complicated than manned rockets, which makes it easier for new players to get the hang of things. It might not be realistic, but it works gameplay wise.

[M3tal_Warrior]

Probes and especially aircraft are more complicated than manned rockets

Would you explain why you find a fire-and-forget probe core more complicated than a 10 times as heavy need-for-safe-return command pod? There is no difference in flying. Electricity? Oh come on...

[CaptRobau]

Torque power. The probe will quite easily seem uncontrollable due to the low torque values. A pod responds more clearly to inputs, which is useful for newbies to understand. Anyway, a large part of the Kerbals before probes is because Squad wants players to start with the stars of the game: Kerbals. I can can understand that.

[regex]

At the end of the day, players wouldn't spend long in this phase, but it might be a nice extra layer at the start...

It should be easily skipped if desired. I'm all for a tech tree revamp because it's pretty dumb right now, but IMO players should always have the option of launching manned flights from the beginning. Probe cores from the beginning? Sure, why not, but don't take away crewed capsules.

IMO the tech tree should allow the player to explore in many different directions, perhaps even letting them choose a starting point (aircraft, automated rockets, crewed rockets) from which to begin their journey. OTOH, I also believe that there should be no attempt made to shackle the player to some rigid set of achievements that must be met in order ("do this, now do this", etc...) Once you're in orbit you're halfway to anywhere, and a trip to Duna doesn't take all that much more fuel than a trip to the Mun. If you want to limit the player in that way something like life support is much more subtle and believable, especially for long-time players.

[Sirrobert]

What you want is realism, for the sake of realism. This is something that should never be done.

On the probes side: The point of the game is to shoot Kerbals into space. That's what you start with

[M3tal_Warrior]

Nope, I want realism for the sake of being a little more difficult and being a lot more fun. If I don't want realism, I play a Lego game.

[No one]

What if they just took away parachutes until later in the tech tree? (And also added probes to your starting equipment)

You would still be able to launch Kerbals to start with, but you'd have to either use retrorockets and learn how to land without parachutes, or accept the reputation loss and Kerbal death. Or you could use probes first.

[Wanderfound]

What if they just took away parachutes until later in the tech tree? (And also added probes to your starting equipment)

You would still be able to launch Kerbals to start with, but you'd have to either use retrorockets and learn how to land without parachutes, or accept the reputation loss and Kerbal death. Or you could use probes first.

The core of the idea appears to be making the tech progression more realistic. Parachutes date back to Leonardo Da Vinci.

[M3tal_Warrior]

Why would someone do that? I'm pretty sure it's more easy to do a parachute than to assemble an engine. This so makes no sense, and will be an additional motivation killer for newbies.

[No one]

If players are given a choice in what to start off with and there is an attempt to make progression realistic, there should be risk in sending manned missions. At the moment, there isn't much risk in sending a manned capsule on early missions. Slap on a parachute and the Kerbals will pretty much always survive. Making parachutes come later on in the tech tree would be a way to accomplish this and would be easy to implement. (As opposed to reentry physics, which would be less easy to implement and is on the WNTS list)

[M3tal_Warrior]

I still don't see why this is a problem...

[Sirrobert]

If players are given a choice in what to start off with and there is an attempt to make progression realistic, there should be risk in sending manned missions. At the moment, there isn't much risk in sending a manned capsule on early missions. Slap on a parachute and the Kerbals will pretty much always survive. Making parachutes come later on in the tech tree would be a way to accomplish this and would be easy to implement. (As opposed to reentry physics, which would be less easy to implement and is on the WNTS list)

You already have choices aplenty.

Install a mod and boom, exactly what you want

[Red Cloud]

That's a idea shared by many. A mods called "Better Than Starting Manned" (I've yet to try with .024) try to repair the injustice done to probes and make achieving orbit a more meaningful achievement. By rebalancing the tech-tree, adding feature like reentry-mods.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/61632-0-23-5-Better-Than-Starting-Manned-Career-Mode-Redefined-%28v1-57-June-12th%29

Of course there's also a few players who dislike the idea because they want to build interstellar size spacecraft as soon as possible.

But if we want this to make the game stock, we could start by completing parts of radial size 0.5m to include high-thrust engine and longer tank, those would serve as the first unmanned-rocket and be handy parts later. (better than inefficient radial engine I've never used myself).

Then for those worried to be bored launching cheap firework during -a perfectly reasonable amount of time- the starting phase, SQUAD could make more basic science experiment available (thermometer should come first). This way, while the new players will be enjoying learning to control their rocket, experimented players would be flying through more biomes they know gathering science faster.

Anyway I'm of those who think the tech-tree will need a serious rework. Any parts that allow to shape the Rocket should come as soon as possible, ladder aren't too high-tech to come early either.

I think reply comes the closest to getting the idea. It's possibly just one or two tech sections nailed before the current first one. Like you said, a basic flight with a mission to gather some data seems in the vibe of the game.

Another might be the need to unlock the SAS component in the first couple of techs. Let's face it, with SAS most flights are very controlled, without it there's that element of greater chaos, which is what makes me laugh the most.

I think another part of one of the replies touches on the idea that more kerbals should die in the early stages of the game.

Maybe it's my own fault for saving alot and reloading, but I never lose a kerbal. This seems like a bit of a shame. As someone said, once you have a parachute, it's easy. Maybe you unlock the parachute, but start with kerbals having parachutes, so they have to bail out of the first couple of flights to survive...or the first flight doesn't even have a personal chute, it's something the great kerbal scientists think of after the first death!

I just thing the "home made space flight" nature of the game and the charm of the game could be added to with a bit more badly functioning low tech kit in the early stages.

I don't think it goes as far as strapping a kerbal to a chair with a load of fireworks tied to him, but it's that kind of vibe.

[Nuke]

what i want is the chuck yeager kerman experience. i mean this kind of stuff was the prelude to the space program. break the sound barrier and flying at the edge of space were important steps for later spaceflight. it would be cool to start the game with no space capable parts and have to pump up your tech doing atmospheric test flights.