The next announced mod to get into stock ksp

[PwnedDuck]

Sandbox was completed months ago.

Don't expect anything new for that mode At a very most you can expect additions that benefit everyone - and 0.26 will have plenty of them. So quit complaining.

Squad should be ashamed of themselves if they call this 'finished'. Nothing but bland science to do on planets, half the solar system it seemed like we would get, no resources, no weather, no life support, no worthwhile aerodynamics, no reeentry damage, no colonisation, basic details like rcs sounds missing and no sandbox purpose for bases, rovers, or stations beyond decoration. Almost all of this career mode stuff just takes the limited game we have now and forcefully limits us even more. It's not till we get new, sandbox, features that the game actually grows.

[juanml82]

Well, it is feature complete. After all, there is only some much you can put in a sandbox, other than sand (~= parts and celestial bodies) before it becomes something else than a sandbox. Thus, for now Squad is mostly concentrating getting career into that feature complete state as well. We shouldn't expect much in the way of balancing stuff or more planets before then, and even so, more biomes! :-)

The key word isn't "feature" complete. It's "scope" complete. That means, including all the game play mechanics. Once that's done, then it will be the time to polish stuff and make decisions about more planets, rcs sounds, better rover controls, better aerodynamics, ISRU, reentry damage, etc.

OTOH, the purchase of Fine Print gives bases and space stations a purpose.

[Franklin]

OTOH, the purchase of Fine Print gives bases and space stations a purpose.

Not really. Fine Print gives you someone asking for you to build space stations, like if your friend on the couch asked you to build one for a beer, but the station itself is still worthless right now.

[Alshain]

Well I just started with Fine Print a few days ago, and just yesterday got my first non-stock contract (aerial surveys). So far I'm impressed.

[juanml82]

Not really. Fine Print gives you someone asking for you to build space stations, like if your friend on the couch asked you to build one for a beer, but the station itself is still worthless right now.

And they give you science and funds for that, thus giving it a purpose.

Speaking of which, which is the purpose of the ISS besides doing science - which Fine Print abstracts in the way of science points?

Heck, what is the "purpose" of landing on Eeloo?

[Red Iron Crown]

Not really. Fine Print gives you someone asking for you to build space stations, like if your friend on the couch asked you to build one for a beer, but the station itself is still worthless right now.

In fairness it's tough to make stations useful outside of contract requirements. Any in-game activity that would reward stations would likely be doable with something much smaller.

[DevoidLight]

In fairness it's tough to make stations useful outside of contract requirements. Any in-game activity that would reward stations would likely be doable with something much smaller.

And plus any activity that rewards keeping a station in orbit for periods of time would be super abusable with time warp.

[S1gmoid]

I don't quite understand all the hate Squad is getting... You need to set a release milestone, do a feature freeze, do stabilization and QA, otherwise you never release. Anyway...

Sandbox IS completed. What you are talking about are features independed on a game mode.

Huh. Sandbox mode IS the core game mechanics. So if we interpret it like this, "Sandbox features" can be summed up as "As a player I want a button to play the core game engine with no further restrictions or gameplay mechanics beyond basic simulation, so I can have fun my own way."

And plus any activity that rewards keeping a station in orbit for periods of time would be super abusable with time warp.

Any and all game rules are abusable. Anyway, there could be some kind of incentive to keep working and not spend hours watching maximum warp... Say, like a slowly decreasing reputation in case you don't do launches, which would keep you launching successful missions with reasonable frequency.

Edited October 15, 2014 by S1gmoid

[Alshain]

I don't quite understand all the hate Squad is getting... Anyway...

Huh. Sandbox mode IS the core game mechanics. So if we interpret it like this, "Sandbox features" can be summed up as "As a user I want a button to play the core game engine with no further restrictions or gameplay mechanics beyond basic simulation, so I can have fun my own way."

Any and all game rules are abusable. Anyway, there could be some kind of incentive to keep working and not spend hours watching maximum warp... Say, like a slowly decreasing reputation in case you don't do launches, which would keep you launching successful missions with reasonable frequency.

Sandbox is a method of bypassing some of the core game mechanics. Like money, reputation, and science.

[Franklin]

And they give you science and funds for that, thus giving it a purpose.

Speaking of which, which is the purpose of the ISS besides doing science - which Fine Print abstracts in the way of science points?

Heck, what is the "purpose" of landing on Eeloo?

It's all up to subjectivity of course, the purpose of anything is up to the player. For you, the purpose appears to be unlocking the part tree (with the claim of gaining science as the purpose of building a space station on request), so I'd argue for you there is no purpose with landing on Eeloo once you've unlocked all the parts. But that's not how I define purpose.

And the ISS has a geopolitical purpose on top of on-going science and research function, since diplomacy, research and exploration in reality isn't tied to unlocking a parts tree.

And plus any activity that rewards keeping a station in orbit for periods of time would be super abusable with time warp.

The argument's been made a hundred times that trickle-in science gains from orbiting satellites and stations could be on their own time path, and unable to be warped. This would nullify the knee-jerk claim of warp exploitation. It would also give satellites and stations some limited purpose for people looking to unlock the parts tree without contract spamming.

[S1gmoid]

Sandbox is a method of bypassing some of the core game mechanics. Like money, reputation, and science.

I'd say the "core mechanics" are the VAB/SPH, launching vehicles, and the whole physics simulation thing. But ymmv.

[Alshain]

I'd say the "core mechanics" are the VAB/SPH, launching vehicles, and the whole physics simulation thing. But ymmv.

I agree, but the contracts system and the science system are also.

[SkyRender]

After toying a bit with Fine Print, I support its addition to KSP stock. It really does make Career mode more robust.

As for future mods beyond Fine Print getting into the stock game, the VAB/SPH function of Kerbal Engineer Redux is high on my list (although hopefully without needing a part to activate it!). After that, definitely Kerbal Attachment System. It's just so handy to be able to remove and place small parts with your Kerbals, and the various connection systems like the winches and pipelines are also dead useful.

[Hannu]

The argument's been made a hundred times that trickle-in science gains from orbiting satellites and stations could be on their own time path, and unable to be warped. This would nullify the knee-jerk claim of warp exploitation. It would also give satellites and stations some limited purpose for people looking to unlock the parts tree without contract spamming.

That would be very bad thing. I should just wait long time to do something. I did it with old MapSat-mod (typically over night) and it was extremely annoying. I dont also like that my computer takes 200 W electricity and heats my house when I do not actively play. Only way to get some reasonable idea to long term research contracts is techical resources. They may be life support things for manned missions or crew circulation if time is very long and wearing or limited lifetime of components for unmanned missions. Practically long time needs more mass, more costs and more advanced technology and building skills. Maybe even service flights.

[Franklin]

The idea behind trickle-in science from satellites and stations is that you don't wait around to 100% your gains from mapping a surface. It just rolls in over the course of your game, providing some background function for orbitals beyond contract spamming and putting junk up in orbit just to complete a single task and look cool. In a proper implementation you wouldn't be waiting on a single trickle-in, it's a background function.

[Sandworm]

Another option for long-term sat science might be random waypoints, simulating events on the surface. The mission might read, pass a satellite over point X at Y altitude. Having a robust sat already on orbit. along with some knowledge of orbital mechanics, would allow you to complete the mission without a new launch.

A quick and dirty way might be to nerf the FinePrint's survey waypoints to include spacecraft.

[Alshain]

The problem with science from stations is that it's not useful. Even on hard mode by the time you can build one, you have most the science you need and there are easier ways to get it even then.

I'd rather see "space hotels" that earn revenue rather than science from stations as that would just be a wasted of development time.

[Franklin]

The problem with science from stations is that it's not useful. Even on hard mode by the time you can build one, you have most the science you need and there are easier ways to get it even then.

I'd rather see "space hotels" that earn revenue rather than science from stations as that would just be a wasted of development time.

Why not both?

One argument for science from stations is that science isn't really science-y right now. It's a click-fest to unlock parts. Nobody in their right mind chases science gains for the sake of exploration, which is part of the problem. So if you see science as a currency then yeah, getting science from end-game parts isn't very useful, but perhaps science could be made [far] more interesting by making it more fun and engaging.

[Alshain]

Why not both?

One argument for science from stations is that science isn't really science-y right now. It's a click-fest to unlock parts. Nobody in their right mind chases science gains for the sake of exploration, which is part of the problem. So if you see science as a currency then yeah, getting science from end-game parts isn't very useful, but perhaps science could be made [far] more interesting by making it more fun and engaging.

When I read stuff like that I start to fear KSP introducing World of Warcraft-style grind fests.... Collect 24 rocks from this crater and 12 rocks from that canyon.... by the way, they randomly spawn even though the Mun has been there for billions of years....

No thank you.

[Franklin]

When I read stuff like that I start to fear KSP introducing World of Warcraft-style grind fests.... Collect 24 rocks from this crater and 12 rocks from that canyon.... by the way, they randomly spawn even though the Mun has been there for billions of years....

No thank you.

The irony of your fear is that's already how KSP handles science. "Collect 100% science from <random planet>'s <random biome> and do it with <random science part>. Okay, mission accomplished! Here's 100 Gold (Funds) and 50 XP (Science)." I can't tell the difference, really.

[Alshain]

The irony of your fear is that's already how KSP handles science. "Collect 100% science from <random planet>'s <random biome> and do it with <random science part>. Okay, mission accomplished! Here's 100 Gold (Funds) and 50 XP (Science)." I can't tell the difference, really.

Nope, you get science every time you gather and you don't have to get 100% (I rarely do) and you don't have to walk around in circles aimlessly for hours waiting on things to spawn. It's nothing like that.

[Franklin]

Beyond the element of having to find something that spawns vs. going to a random place it's exactly the same (I'd even argue those are similar), also I'd argue a lot of rovers were built to walk around for hours trying to find something, but that's neither here nor there.

[Alshain]

Beyond the element of having to find something that spawns vs. going to a random place it's exactly the same (I'd even argue those are similar), also I'd argue a lot of rovers were built to walk around for hours trying to find something, but that's neither here nor there.

But that's what makes it different. That's the whole point. It's interesting to go to new and different places, it's boring to sit in the same place all day. That's why WoW is so boring. Your basically saying if you remove all the boring parts it becomes not boring.... well duh.

[Franklin]

I'm not sure we're arguing the same thing, but if you think a quest contract that asks you to go to <random height/location> achieve <random speed/orbit/landing> and fetch science from <random part> isn't the same as any run of the mill MMO fetch quest I'm just going to have to agree to disagree.

[Caelib]

My bet is clouds or procedural fairings.