Why no procedurally generated craters on Kerbin? They can wipe out the KSP and [cont]

[CjStaal]

They can threaten the KSP and destroy it, effectively ending the game, if you do not do a much needed asteroid redirect! There can also be contracts to redirect threatening asteroids with big payouts for effectively saving continents!

[r4pt0r]

If you are at KSC and an asteroid is coming, It will get deleted while it is still more than 20k away from you I believe. Auto-delete for being in atmosphere and not being actively watched.

[CjStaal]

If you are at KSC and an asteroid is coming, It will get deleted while it is still more than 20k away from you I believe. Auto-delete for being in atmosphere and not being actively watched.

That's what I'm saying though. Why do that? Make it a contract to save the KSP or get the KSP destroyed and an endgame happen.

[Grimfilth]

Investigating giant craters with scorched earth around it sounds like fun, with a temporary global atmosphere change perhaps. If the asteriod lands in sea it will make the atmosphere more foggy and dense, if the asteriod lands on land it will make the atmosphere red and any fast movement in the sky burns, reducing the toughness of parts a lot. And perhaps recovering the asteriod.

[Mlah]

That's what I'm saying though. Why do that? Make it a contract to save the KSP or get the KSP destroyed and an endgame happen.

Because a lot of people would end up getting there saves wiped when an asteroid appears and they don't have the appropriate tech/skills/patience to redirect it. The novelty of an doomsday scenario isn't worth ruining what could be anywhere from several to several hundreds of hour worth of progress, especially seeing as you can already do the redirect missions of your own volition. Remember what sounds fun for one person won't necessarily appeal to everyone else.

Aside from that there is also a mechanics reason for it as a good part of the reason why things in the atmosphere get destroyed when not active is to save computation power and let the game run smoothly instead of constantly have to try to locate and plot trajectories for every piece of debris that in atmosphere.

[Andrew Hansen]

I think rather than having asteroids randomly smashing into KSC, after you decide to TRACK an asteroid, and IF it's on a collision course with Kerbin, you could have a contract to redirect it. The idea of deformable terrain and impact craters seems quite easy to implement to me, since destructible buildings have already been added - and it would also be useful if you crashed a rocket into the Mun or something.

The main problem with having asteroids randomly crashing into Kerbin is that when you're on a trip to Eeloo or you're doing a grand tour, lots of time passes and lots of asteroids would have crashed into Kerbin.

[CjStaal]

I think rather than having asteroids randomly smashing into KSC, after you decide to TRACK an asteroid, and IF it's on a collision course with Kerbin, you could have a contract to redirect it. The idea of deformable terrain and impact craters seems quite easy to implement to me, since destructible buildings have already been added - and it would also be useful if you crashed a rocket into the Mun or something.

The main problem with having asteroids randomly crashing into Kerbin is that when you're on a trip to Eeloo or you're doing a grand tour, lots of time passes and lots of asteroids would have crashed into Kerbin.

You're able to run more than one mission =\

[Capt Snuggler]

I think having the dooms day scenario as a contract is a good compromise. call it a "mission" rather than a contract and have it appear at the top of the contract list. it could also give a huge boost in funding but countered by the big penalty for failure.

procedural craters would not limited to the dooms day mission ether. you could get contracts to impact asteroids in to the mun (and other planets). the craters could create procedural biomes too.