Endersmens Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 While that would be good in and of itself, it's not quite the same thing as you lose the front 1.25m node.My suggestion may be completely fueled by my love of the F-14.oh. Well you could put two Mk 2s. But i guess it's not what you're looking for. It would be cool to have fighter style cockpits though. (I saw someone using some, but they never told me where they got it! Anyone know a mod that gives modern fighter parts?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lheim Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Perhaps the people complaining of the 'dev direction' of this game don't need to write their own game to have some cred.. however.They do need to be concrete, not just fatalistically vague.So I challenge Regex to post a list of the issues he'd focus on addressing first.. in prioritized order.Ten to one folks that it's a list of his personal pet peeves, and only that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky_walker Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 So I challenge Regex to ...Again? Seriously?Guy is going to be pissed off....Also, WHY does everyone capitalize my nickname? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas988 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 GuysThis thread is too aggressiveWhat has happened to our civilness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 (edited) Ten to one folks that it's a list of his personal pet peeves, and only that.Isn't that what's on everyone's list of "How to improve the game"? Anyway, you asked, so here is how I would try to have things in KSP within about a year, skipping anything that the devs have confirmed they are working on: Stop making cinematics and put those artists to work on more concrete things in the game, such as fairings and cargo bays, and other awesome parts. Said artists are also freed up to do things like pretty up the game, like Environmental Visual Enhancements does. Said artists could also be creating other Kerbin-side assets, like more airstrips and launch sites. Said artists could also polish up the stock planets and finish the biome maps. Said artists could add a bunch more objects/planets to the solar system in order to make it really come alive. This game is crap as a teaching tool even though it is vaunted as such. We need more realism. Therefore: Fix the aerodynamics immediately. The stock implementation is completely unintuitive and offers the new player no experience whatsoever they can draw upon. This would also solve the problem of people calling a launch in KSP a "gravity turn" when it is clearly not. Fix rocket engines such that isp affects thrust, not fuel consumption. It's backwards and teaches players the wrong thing. Fix jet engines so that they work in a realistic manner. ferram4 has gone on at length about this in other places. Fix the solar system so it has a realistic size (Note: Keep the Kerbin system, it fits the Kerbals just fine, and I like Kerbals!) One way to make it friendlier to newer players is to have Kerbin as a realistic planet with a gravity of 0.75 G. Using realistic engines and part masses would make launches from such a Kerbin a breeze, and pretty quick, while retaining a fairly decent payload fraction. Add proper reentry heating and effects that really mean something. Add life support. It perfectly illustrates the difficulties involved in space flight, just like reentry heating. Add axial tilt to planets. Give Kerbin a mild tilt, enough to make launches from other latitudes than the equator mean something. Utilize the asteroid generation routine to its full potential and add more objects in: KBOs, Jool trojans, comets, an asteroid belt, etc... Realistic fuels and such would be awesome, but they're not really needed (besides, gives us something to mod). OTOH, the nuclear engine really only needs to use Liquid Fuel.[*] Add Kerbal Engineer to the game as stock; it is indispensable.[*] Fix the maneuver node functionality. I have a suggestion in that addresses some additions I think would be excellent.[*] Add the ability to use multiple launch sites at different latitudes.[*] The tech tree in career mode needs some serious progression work and more nodes. I prefer launching manned from the start as I think that's the Kerbal Way, but otherwise the tech tree is crap. Others have written volumes on how bad it is, I'm not going to go into detail.[*] Wrap up all these game modes into a selector of sorts that allows you to choose features you want in your save. Add difficulty selectors for certain features (reentry heat, life support, etc...)[*] While not really on my personal list of "Things That Should Be In The Game", polish up and release the resources feature that was already built. People obviously want it. WHOAH, this is on the What Not To Suggest list, so I'm not going to suggest it. But it really should be done.[*] Stop work on multiplayer now. Release it as a DLC once the game is completed.Given SQUAD's current development speed, that should keep them busy for a year or so. Undoubtedly some of this is probably on the list of things they're going to do at some point, but given that there is no public roadmap for this game I'm going to list the items anyway. I'm not invested in Career mode myself, so I won't touch on it. Suffice it to say I enjoy it as-is but can see some potential for it to be better. There are tons of great suggestions already in on how to make the feature better and I think it should be made better, for those who enjoy it.Also, I'm not going to debate this list because anyone who disagrees with me is clearly wrong. <- This apparently will denote that I am being "flippantly sarcastic" rather than "acidly sarcastic", or something.Again? Seriously?Guy is going to be pissed off....Eh... Some people do that to get under other's skin. No big deal. Edited August 26, 2014 by regex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franklin Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I usually think regex is a pill, but I actually agree with all of that. Not one real quibble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 regex, marry me. No question mark, it's a statement.EDIT: Seriously, there are so many players with this attitude. Speak up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jedi Master Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Am I the only one who's noticed that the tone of the forum has gotten a lot more aggressive and cynical over the last few weeks? I don't like it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nismobg Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I have to agree with regex, all those points are essential! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endersmens Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Am I the only one who's noticed that the tone of the forum has gotten a lot more aggressive and cynical over the last few weeks? I don't like it at all.I've noticed it too. It started with .25. then the Devnotes getting locked. That's SQUAD's post. It's unfair that it has to get locked because of some aggressive people whining and arguing. And now it's this thread. I understand that you're entitle to your opinion, and I respect that, but that doesn't mean you get to shove in other people's faces. All this recent aggressiveness makes me, and i'm sure a lot of others, quite sad. It seems like as soon as SQUAD gets the "best community award" the community decided they had been good enough. I would really like this forum and community return to it's happy, relaxed, and civil state that it was in before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WololoW Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Isn't that what's on everyone's list of "How to improve the game"? Anyway, you asked, so here is how I would try to have things in KSP within about a year, skipping anything that the devs have confirmed they are working on: Stop making cinematics and put those artists to work on more concrete things in the game, such as fairings and cargo bays, and other awesome parts. Said artists are also freed up to do things like pretty up the game, like Environmental Visual Enhancements does. Said artists could also be creating other Kerbin-side assets, like more airstrips and launch sites. Said artists could also polish up the stock planets and finish the biome maps. Said artists could add a bunch more objects/planets to the solar system in order to make it really come alive. This game is crap as a teaching tool even though it is vaunted as such. We need more realism. Therefore: Fix the aerodynamics immediately. The stock implementation is completely unintuitive and offers the new player no experience whatsoever they can draw upon. This would also solve the problem of people calling a launch in KSP a "gravity turn" when it is clearly not. Fix rocket engines such that isp affects thrust, not fuel consumption. It's backwards and teaches players the wrong thing. Fix jet engines so that they work in a realistic manner. ferram4 has gone on at length about this in other places. Fix the solar system so it has a realistic size (Note: Keep the Kerbin system, it fits the Kerbals just fine, and I like Kerbals!) One way to make it friendlier to newer players is to have Kerbin as a realistic planet with a gravity of 0.75 G. Using realistic engines and part masses would make launches from such a Kerbin a breeze, and pretty quick, while retaining a fairly decent payload fraction. Add proper reentry heating and effects that really mean something. Add life support. It perfectly illustrates the difficulties involved in space flight, just like reentry heating. Add axial tilt to planets. Give Kerbin a mild tilt, enough to make launches from other latitudes than the equator mean something. Utilize the asteroid generation routine to its full potential and add more objects in: KBOs, Jool trojans, comets, an asteroid belt, etc... Realistic fuels and such would be awesome, but they're not really needed (besides, gives us something to mod). OTOH, the nuclear engine really only needs to use Liquid Fuel.[*] Add Kerbal Engineer to the game as stock; it is indispensable.[*] Fix the maneuver node functionality. I have a suggestion in that addresses some additions I think would be excellent.[*] Add the ability to use multiple launch sites at different latitudes.[*] The tech tree in career mode needs some serious progression work and more nodes. I prefer launching manned from the start as I think that's the Kerbal Way, but otherwise the tech tree is crap. Others have written volumes on how bad it is, I'm not going to go into detail.[*] Wrap up all these game modes into a selector of sorts that allows you to choose features you want in your save. Add difficulty selectors for certain features (reentry heat, life support, etc...)[*] While not really on my personal list of "Things That Should Be In The Game", polish up and release the resources feature that was already built. People obviously want it. WHOAH, this is on the What Not To Suggest list, so I'm not going to suggest it. But it really should be done.[*] Stop work on multiplayer now. Release it as a DLC once the game is completed.Given SQUAD's current development speed, that should keep them busy for a year or so. Undoubtedly some of this is probably on the list of things they're going to do at some point, but given that there is no public roadmap for this game I'm going to list the items anyway. I'm not invested in Career mode myself, so I won't touch on it. Suffice it to say I enjoy it as-is but can see some potential for it to be better. There are tons of great suggestions already in on how to make the feature better and I think it should be made better, for those who enjoy it.Also, I'm not going to debate this list because anyone who disagrees with me is clearly wrong. <- This apparently will denote that I am being "flippantly sarcastic" rather than "acidly sarcastic", or something.Eh... Some people do that to get under other's skin. No big deal.QFTAlso, I must reiterate and build upon one very important part of his post that should not be overlooked by the devs; stop creating new game modes - wrap them up into one that has toggle-able options upon creation so that everyone gets the experience they wish, and not the experience that they are pigeonholed into. (Note that is a paraphrase with added opinion of my own, not to be misconstrued into me saying that regex said what I suggested above.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franklin Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I think the gamemodes vs. game options thing will fix itself when Squad realizes they've made a dozen game modes and it becomes cumbersome and awkward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Iron Crown Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Big Awesome ListI seem to only be able to rep that post once, which does not adequately sum up my agreement with it. Regex for president in 2016! I had to capitalize your name, it was at the beginning of a sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tater Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Spot-on listDead on.Hopefully someone will pay attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franklin Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I'm gonna copy that post word-for-word when I finally get around to my Steam review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I've noticed it too. It started with .25. then the Devnotes getting locked. That's SQUAD's post. It's unfair that it has to get locked because of some aggressive people whining and arguing. And now it's this thread. I understand that you're entitle to your opinion, and I respect that, but that doesn't mean you get to shove in other people's faces. All this recent aggressiveness makes me, and i'm sure a lot of others, quite sad. It seems like as soon as SQUAD gets the "best community award" the community decided they had been good enough. I would really like this forum and community return to it's happy, relaxed, and civil state that it was in before.The game is going in the wrong direction. If you've been gaming long enough you would be able to see that. We don't want the game to fail now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I had to capitalize your name, it was at the beginning of a sentence.~:shakes fist:~Hopefully someone will pay attention.If you're talking about the KSP devs, I daresay a lot of that stuff probably isn't in their plans. I'm actually okay with that because we have so many great mods to fill in where SQUAD is deficient (and not likely to be sufficient). But, since the exercise was "post a list of the issues he'd focus on addressing first", I figured I'd include my (mostly) full wish list (I also skipped the prioritized order because I'm not going to waste that much of my work-day ordering a list when I could be nesting more foreach statements and getting paid). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whirligig Girl Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 (edited) [*] Fix the solar system so it has a realistic size (Note: Keep the Kerbin system, it fits the Kerbals just fine, and I like Kerbals!) One way to make it friendlier to newer players is to have Kerbin as a realistic planet with a gravity of 0.75 G.NO! That would never do! Why are you ALWAYS so insistent on real scale kerbin when you have your great little mod there for you! For the last time, [breaths in deeply]KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REALISTICRe-entry heating, proper aerodynamics, rudimentary life support definitely should be put in the game. But Kerbals are in an ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.IT IS A GAME. IT IS NOT A SIMULATOR. I REPEAT: NOT A SIMULATOR. NOW, REPEAT WITH ME: NOT A SIMULATOR. Edited August 26, 2014 by GregroxMun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ippo Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 "Not a simulator" is not an excuse for the current shortcomings of the physics of a game that deals with advanced technologies.P.S: where do I get in line to propose to regex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 NO! That would never do! Why are you ALWAYS so insistent on real scale kerbin when you have your great little mod there for you!Because KSP deserves better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WololoW Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Rude yellingDoes this alternate universe have it's on laws of physics? If so, why does any of the physics in game correlate to real world physics? If not, why can the planets in the Kerbol system defy normal celestial body physics/limitations/properties? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 NO! That would never do! Why are you ALWAYS so insistent on real scale kerbin when you have your great little mod there for you! For the last time, [breaths in deeply]KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REALISTICRe-entry heating, proper aerodynamics, rudimentary life support definitely should be put in the game. But Kerbals are in an ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.IT IS A GAME. IT IS NOT A SIMULATOR. I REPEAT: NOT A SIMULATOR. NOW, REPEAT WITH ME: NOT A SIMULATOR.Why does life-size planets make it more of a sim than proper heating or life support?Kerbals are in an alternate universe, where their biological makeup means they don't need any form of life support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanKell Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 GregroxMun: I don't read regex as suggesting making everything real-sized, but using non-insane densities for planets. Right now some planets in KSP are approach star levels of density. That's...not exactly a good way to teach kids about space travel. I think also an argument could be made for using the real solar system as an option in the KSP.edu version, since otherwise you will be giving children a quite-wrong impression of how hard or easy spaceflight actually is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WololoW Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 GregroxMun: I don't read regex as suggesting making everything real-sized, but using non-insane densities for planets. Right now some planets in KSP are approach star levels of density. That's...not exactly a good way to teach kids about space travel. I think also an argument could be made for using the real solar system as an option in the KSP.edu version, since otherwise you will be giving children a quite-wrong impression of how hard or easy spaceflight actually is.So very true NathanKell. And very well said might I add. I concur completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 GregroxMun: I don't read regex as suggesting making everything real-sized, but using non-insane densities for planets. Right now some planets in KSP are approach star levels of density. That's...not exactly a good way to teach kids about space travel. I think also an argument could be made for using the real solar system as an option in the KSP.edu version, since otherwise you will be giving children a quite-wrong impression of how hard or easy spaceflight actually is.His post was insulting and argument-insiting, i feel offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts