KSP-TV SquadCast - Release list and discussion

[montyben101]

No I want no power ups or buffs or anything like that at all, it's not what the game needs

[tater]

I genuinely don't get what's wrong with the idea of spending a little extra money to improve a craft's aerodynamic profile.

Surely that's.. that's like.. the definition of what Nasa does. Spend money to improve the performance of technology.

That's fine. Spend money/science and engineer a new part. Your rocket now has the SRB improved version. Not a temporary "power up." Awful.

[montyben101]

Yes but then they would have to add new parts or change stats on a part which would be overpowered

[Liowen]

Maybe it is not the "magic boulder" they are talking about, but rather a launch tower. I know there use to be one in game, however not everyone hit it when launching a craft. This would mean that a lot of newer players will crash into it more often than an experienced player would. I do not believe there is a mod out there that puts one down on the launch pad, although I could be completely wrong as well. I do like the fact that you have to research the node and do more than just buy it and more on, testing will make career mode be more career-ish. Better particles maybe means clouds (I hope)? The EVA pack switch should only apply to bodies where the pack would be uselss (ie Kerbin, Eve, Laythe) so there is still that option to have one, but I also like the crew transfer thing as moving in a base will be easier (and somewhat more realistic).

[Parkaboy]

The only "Physics buff" that was mentioned in the stream, if the term applies, was a "reduced drag" bonus.

The point of the system is that you can customize your play style. Don't like the "physics buffs"? Don't use them. Use something else. MaxMaps also mentioned increased science, reputation and funds bonus - all of those come up with nice in-game explanations. The reduced drag probably has some explanation, such as "we just came up with a new batch of an experimental coating material" or something.

I personally like the idea of saving up an "engine efficiency" bonus to launch an interplanetary ship. Maybe I can even keep the bonus forever by refueling the ship in orbit and reusing it on several missions.

[Guest]

People wanted tycoon/RTS style game play, now complain when upgrades/buffs are added...eh.

[Sky_walker]

This argument "don't like it - don't use it" is getting old.

You should really try being more creative, cause we're not going anywhere with that.

People wanted tycoon/RTS style game play, now complain when upgrades/buffs are added...eh.

Yes, people wanted Tycoon, not another Sonic game where you get random speed buffs out of nowhere.

[Liowen]

The only "Physics buff" that was mentioned in the stream, if the term applies, was a "reduced drag" bonus.

The point of the system is that you can customize your play style. Don't like the "physics buffs"? Don't use them. Use something else. MaxMaps also mentioned increased science, reputation and funds bonus - all of those come up with nice in-game explanations. The reduced drag probably has some explanation, such as "we just came up with a new batch of an experimental coating material" or something.

I personally like the idea of saving up an "engine efficiency" bonus to launch an interplanetary ship. Maybe I can even keep the bonus forever by refueling the ship in orbit and reusing it on several missions.

I have not watched the video yet, twitch + my ISP = not fun times. Personally I doubt I will use the bonuses at all, while they seem like a neat idea they just remind me of hack gravity things (from what I have read). I also doubt they will be tied to a craft either, most likely once you take it you will have X number of Kerbin days (weeks, months, or years) to make use of it. So if you make a ship and go to say Eeloo with an "engine efficiency" boost that last for 2 years you may have a craft that gets stuck in interstellar space for awhile. On the other hand if you use it on a craft that might not make it home in order to make a critical burn to get home would be the more logical use of the boost, and you could even say that KSC came up with a fix for the ailing craft that could save the crew, and science, for not packing enough fuel.

[Guest]

This argument "don't like it - don't use it" is getting old.

You should really try being more creative, cause we're not going anywhere with that.

Yes, people wanted Tycoon, not another Sonic game where you get random speed buffs out of nowhere.

I don't remember sonic games requiring you to earn currency by launching successful scientific missions to get buffs.

[razark]

Surely that's.. that's like.. the definition of what Nasa does. Spend money to improve the performance of technology.

I assure you, NASA does not bribe its way past the laws of physics.

[Guest]

I assure you, NASA does not bribe its way past the laws of physics.

You're no more in the know than i am to quote that.

Seriously. Of course.

[Red Iron Crown]

People wanted tycoon/RTS style game play, now complain when upgrades/buffs are added...eh.

IMO, unlock better parts = fine, upgrades to existing parts = bad, for the reason of being able to compare ships and techniques with others or helping troubleshoot designs. This is a case where a little less realism to make the game more social is desirable, I think.

[Spuds]

Being the poster of the post in question, I can assure you that the "Miscellaneous Strategies" as they were known weren't limited to "Physics Buffs", I believe there were a few other gameplay-changing things that did not alter the laws of Physics.

I would be fine with these buffs if they were just limited to spacecraft related things. Increasing the ISP would be OK to me, as long as it was rationalized as "using H2 instead of Kerosene for better efficiency", or "Having discussions with companies in an effort to increase payout" for contracts. Things like changing the drag seem a bit out there, if you know what I mean.

[juanml82]

I genuinely don't get what's wrong with the idea of spending a little extra money to improve a craft's aerodynamic profile.

Surely that's.. that's like.. the definition of what Nasa does. Spend money to improve the performance of technology.

But would it be temporary? Say your cash and reputation allows you to, I don't know, improve the fuel pumps in the jumbo tanks so they now weight just a bit less. Why wouldn't your space program keep that buff permanently?

[razark]

You're no more in the know than i am to quote that.

Seriously. Of course.

[Red Iron Crown]

http://i.imgur.com/U1PrGZG.jpg

Seriously. Of course.

Fatality! Finish him!

[Guest]

http://i.imgur.com/U1PrGZG.jpg

Seriously. Of course.

It's pretty annoying how you had to pull the serious card out on the joke, but i understand you want to flaunt your position ;-)

EDIT2: Don't want to sound sour =D

Edited August 30, 2014 by Linear

[cantab]

I like the idea of the "power-ups". It's not like they're throwing the physics out the window, it just means you can get a few engines or tanks with a bit better performance than usual. It's obviously sensible that parts could be improved, and I don't think it's too unreasonable that the supply of improved parts is limited - the space program might not keep paying the premium price or the supplier might not retain the manufacturing capability.

If you really dislike them you're free to stick to baseline performance for all your ships. I expect that will be the standard for "challenges" anyway.

And Parkaboy raised a great point that it gives an incentive for actual re-use of parts rather than just landing everything for full recovery.

My reservation is I'd really rather Squad improved the physics and the celestials instead of adding management-y features. But then maybe they want to do the Unity 5 port first?

[Sky_walker]

I don't remember sonic games requiring you to earn currency by launching successful scientific missions to get buffs.

Yes, you are right - comparison to Sonic is wrong. Sonic at least made some logical sense - he started to roll in order to get more speed. What I read about here is just random buff out of nowhere that doesn't translate to anything in remote proximity to the logic.

[Pecan]

Hmmm, I retyped my earlier post to remove what appeared to be a negative comment that would get tonnes of abuse hurled at me. Obviously I should have had the courage of my convictions as it seems to be a more common view than I expected. So, what I had intended to say as well was, "For the first time I'm disappointed at an update and not looking forward to it. The emphasis of KSP is moving away from a space-simulator without it becoming any sensible or interesting sort of management game."

[Guest]

Yes, you are right - comparison to Sonic is wrong. Sonic at least made some logical sense - he started to roll in order to get more speed. What I read about here is just random buff out of nowhere that doesn't translate to anything in remote proximity to the logic.

Haven't really read much about it, but it seems like you have to pay with funds/science whatever, so there's defiantly some requirement beforehand.

[Superfluous J]

I'd love to see this from the source but the idea of watching videos on Twitch makes me want to tear my eyeballs out. Maybe I'll try to find a way to download the video so I can at least speed up the playback.

In the meantime, I'm willing to give Squad the benefit of the doubt but if you can get a temporary drag decrease for some money... I'm concerned.

Now if you get Blue Shells to throw at other ships, that's a whole other story! BANG BANG POW POW I WIN! YEAAAAAAAH.

Ahem. Sorry about that. I can see possibly starting drag, Isp, lift, etc at a low rate and unlocking materials and techniques that can increase them across the board. I'm pretty sure that space ships today experience less drag than Sputnik's launcher did, though I don't know how much less. I also think that possibly Boeing's new planes have more lift per wing area than the Wright Brothers' flier did. Rather than have 20 different wings and 20 different engines and 20 different pieces of every part with different drag coefficients, having a single "drag of surfaces" thing that improves over time seems very reasonable.

But buffing drag for a launch or two and then losing that benefit? Not a happy horseman, here.

Edited August 30, 2014 by 5thHorseman
OOPS for the funny typo on "Horseman" :)

[Parkaboy]

I have not watched the video yet, twitch + my ISP = not fun times. Personally I doubt I will use the bonuses at all, while they seem like a neat idea they just remind me of hack gravity things (from what I have read). I also doubt they will be tied to a craft either, most likely once you take it you will have X number of Kerbin days (weeks, months, or years) to make use of it. So if you make a ship and go to say Eeloo with an "engine efficiency" boost that last for 2 years you may have a craft that gets stuck in interstellar space for awhile. On the other hand if you use it on a craft that might not make it home in order to make a critical burn to get home would be the more logical use of the boost, and you could even say that KSC came up with a fix for the ailing craft that could save the crew, and science, for not packing enough fuel.

In the stream, MaxMaps mentioned one example where a buff would be applied for the next five missions. I think that means for the next five ships launched. Maybe there's a deadline, I'm not sure. But from his words it did sound that the buff was applied at launch, since that's what the game considers a mission - unless he was talking about contracts.

And come on, folks. Going to the Admin Building, weighting your options and selecting a strategy is hardly "getting a random power-up". It's more like choosing an advantage trait on an RPG game, if anything. I know a lot of people here wanted KSP to be more like a hardcore simulator, but you should have noticed by now that's not what Squad is aiming for. They want a game in the simulation genre, which isn't quite the same thing.

[cantab]

The emphasis of KSP is moving away from a space-simulator without it becoming any sensible or interesting sort of management game.

It's a concern I share. Designing and flying the spacecraft is challenging enough, a complicated and difficult management sim on top of that I'm concerned won't work well. So far Squad seem to have avoided this by simply making the management side easy; I admit I've yet to play .24 but I hear many people get rolling in money, and even before .24 you could finish the tech tree from just the Mun and Minmus.

I'm still looking forward to .25 though.

[Guest]

It's a concern I share. Designing and flying the spacecraft is challenging enough, a complicated and difficult management sim on top of that I'm concerned won't work well. So far Squad seem to have avoided this by simply making the management side easy; I admit I've yet to play .24 but I hear many people get rolling in money, and even before .24 you could finish the tech tree from just the Mun and Minmus.

I'm still looking forward to .25 though.

Building is pretty much a chore for me, flying not much better.