0.25 Discussion thread

[cantab]

On life support, I think if it is included it would be a good idea to remove the electricity requirements for probe cores. That way players would still have an option to send a mission where they don't need to worry about ending up unable to control the ship.

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

On life support, I think if it is included it would be a good idea to remove the electricity requirements for probe cores. That way players would still have an option to send a mission where they don't need to worry about ending up unable to control the ship.

So your saying that probes shouldn't require electricity?

[Guest]

So your saying that probes shouldn't require electricity?

I'm pretty sure that's what he said. Respect his opinion.

[Red Iron Crown]

I've taken to attaching a small battery and disabling it in the VAB as an emergency backup in case of power outage.

I think I get cantab's point though: Right now a manned ship can never become uncontrollable; if life support is added the ship can go dead if the kerbals run out of supplies. Making probe cores draw no electricity means there would still be an option for ships that can never go dead.

[cantab]

Pretty much.

Of course you'd still need electricity to run the integrated reaction wheel, as well as any science equipment and so on. Having the basic controllability not depend on it would just make things a bit more forgiving, no more missions being spoiled when the solar panels get themselves facing away from the sun or stuff like that.

[mike9606]

Questions about 25? Why not ask them in the handy 25 thread? (Merged.)

That explains why my post that was on page 2 suddenly was on page 45.

[Wanderfound]

I've taken to attaching a small battery and disabling it in the VAB as an emergency backup in case of power outage.

I think I get cantab's point though: Right now a manned ship can never become uncontrollable; if life support is added the ship can go dead if the kerbals run out of supplies. Making probe cores draw no electricity means there would still be an option for ships that can never go dead.

I've been disabling the probe core's internal battery, myself.

Also getting some use out of locking down fuel tanks; handy for maintaining spaceplane weight balance and ensuring that you've still got some LF when you reenter atmosphere.

[HafCoJoe]

On life support, I think if it is included it would be a good idea to remove the electricity requirements for probe cores. That way players would still have an option to send a mission where they don't need to worry about ending up unable to control the ship.

I see what you mean. So that new players don't end up with an interplanetary bob/jeb/bill capsule with no means of controlling it. I agree newbies should have an easier option. Speaking of which, electricity is probably going to one of the tweakable options at the beginning of save making which could solve some of this. Other than the fact that you can't turn it back on without editing the persistent.

[jonr]

I think a couple small modifications to resources (electricity and possible fuel) could go a long way to make the experience more transparent for new players. I remember my first few flights having the controls go completely dead due to lack of power and having no idea that it was due to the lack of power. Just a couple of ideas to throw out that have probably already been beaten to death in other discussions.

1. Have a warning that goes up that drops you out of time warp when any resource gets below an adjustable lower limit with a default of something ~10% remaining. You can then tap into this 'reserve' by hitting an override. I'm guessing that this is a pretty common feature in most/any real space vehicle. Though I suppose kerbals do usually take a safety third attitude towards things.

2. Far less elegant of a solution would be to have an "emergency backup systems" part that you can attach that must be manually activated via EVA or just a button that would have a small amount of necessary resources.! Larger and more complex backup systems could also be found along the tech tree as emergency resources for a tiny ship are much different than for a larger one.

Anyways the details for .25 look great! Thanks SQUAD!

I see what you mean. So that new players don't end up with an interplanetary bob/jeb/bill capsule with no means of controlling it. I agree newbies should have an easier option. Speaking of which, electricity is probably going to one of the tweakable options at the beginning of save making which could solve some of this. Other than the fact that you can't turn it back on without editing the persistent.

[magnemoe]

Pretty much.

Of course you'd still need electricity to run the integrated reaction wheel, as well as any science equipment and so on. Having the basic controllability not depend on it would just make things a bit more forgiving, no more missions being spoiled when the solar panels get themselves facing away from the sun or stuff like that.

This, had many failed missions because kerbin eclipsed mun so I could not turn and do the circulate burn, another reason for not set up an impact trajectory. Did that with an rover I was testing.

A manned mission using larger engines than the 909 has the option to start the engines to get power and use this power too turn and burn. An manned mission can also use kerbals to extend solar panels.

The only real difference is either too forget power who is fail for both manned and unmanned, or forget to extend solar pannels while not having any backup.

[tater]

I'm not in favor of endless probe batteries. One, put a solar panel on it. If you are in eclipse… you planned poorly. It's just a probe (I have a couple such flying dutchmen because I failed to remember to deploy the solar panels). A possible solution is for a probe core to have "emergency mode." That's why you want RTGs.

[HafCoJoe]

I'm not in favor of endless probe batteries. One, put a solar panel on it. If you are in eclipse… you planned poorly. It's just a probe (I have a couple such flying dutchmen because I failed to remember to deploy the solar panels). A possible solution is for a probe core to have "emergency mode." That's why you want RTGs.

I like that. An emergency mode that like only lets you deploy solar panels or something... ANYWAYS, back to .25. Who's looking forward to the "punch it" button?

[Wanderfound]

As mentioned upthread: just about any spacecraft should have at least two batteries (and the internal battery of a probe core is fine for one of them).

Use tweakables to lock one off as emergency reserve and you will never have a power shortage emergency again. No heavy RTGs required.

I did kind of enjoy the desperation solutions of using EVA Kerbals or collisions with other spacecraft to spin the panels into a better orientation, though.

[r4pt0r]

wait, you can turn on locked batteries if the probe is dead?

[Wanderfound]

wait, you can turn on locked batteries if the probe is dead?

As far as I know, although it's been a while since the issue came up. Probably worth using TAC-FB to test and confirm.

[timsfitz]

Yes you can unlock batteries at any time.

[Levelord]

I am disappointed that SQUAD aren't adopting the cargo bays from SP+. That was the one important feature I wanted from that mod, otherwise having these other extra parts feel pointless to me.

[Yakuzi]

I am disappointed that SQUAD aren't adopting the cargo bays from SP+. That was the one important feature I wanted from that mod, otherwise having these other extra parts feel pointless to me.

They're not?!? That's very disappointing indeed...

[Daishi]

I am disappointed that SQUAD aren't adopting the cargo bays from SP+. That was the one important feature I wanted from that mod, otherwise having these other extra parts feel pointless to me.

...they aren't? ...but Porkjet said they would be

[Ravenchant]

I am disappointed that SQUAD aren't adopting the cargo bays from SP+. That was the one important feature I wanted from that mod, otherwise having these other extra parts feel pointless to me.

Oh, how I hope you are just messing with us.

[Frozen_Heart]

I am disappointed that SQUAD aren't adopting the cargo bays from SP+. That was the one important feature I wanted from that mod, otherwise having these other extra parts feel pointless to me.

Eh? Porkjet stated that they would be added?

[Red Iron Crown]

So, according to the Squadcast, 0.25 has gone to QA. Time to start refresh spamming the SteamDB and finding my boarding pass for the #HypePlane.

This thread needs some title changes, perhaps adding "gigathread" and "electric guitars".

Edited September 1, 2014 by Red Iron Crown

[haltux]

That same argument could be made for many mods. I'd rather be able to tailor the game to exactly how I like to play rather than have Squad tell me what they think easy, normal, and hard mode should be.

That was true as long as KSP was only a sandbox game. Now that we have a career, it does not work any more.

The career is a game with a learning curve and a difficulty that has to be fine tuned very carefully by Squad. It's pricesely their job to make the game easy, normal or hard without mods.

[Yakuzi]

This thread needs some title changes, perhaps adding "gigathread" and "electric guitars".

And a sticky!

@ Levelord: Could you link the reference which mentions that SQUAD is not including the SP+ cargo bays?

[KasperVld]

I am disappointed that SQUAD aren't adopting the cargo bays from SP+. That was the one important feature I wanted from that mod, otherwise having these other extra parts feel pointless to me.

As people mentioned, Porkjet said they would be implemented. Unless you have a better source closer to SP+ than the creator of SP+ I'd go with that