Opinions on "Kerbal Experience"

[Ippo]

I'd like to imagine that the rookie isn't even aware of the option to over-throttle.

A rookie that is trained enough to fly a rocket into deep space hasn't been told what that big red button right next to the main throttle does?

[Pecan]

The issue is Squad is "Listening" to the same crowd that howled over MechJeb...

Well clearly they aren't listening to me and the others that said the same thing then. We are saying experience as suggested was wrong. We are also saying that Kerbals being the pilots and navigators (ie; providing MechJeb functionality).

People who hate the experience idea are emphatically not the same group as those that hate autopilot.

[CaptainKipard]

I'd like to imagine that the rookie isn't even aware of the option to over-throttle.

But you as a pilot are. It breaks immersion.

The issue is Squad is "Listening" to the same crowd that howled over MechJeb.

This is nonsense. I don't actually use MJ but I do write kOS scripts for repetitive tasks like node execution or rendezvous. It's the same thing, just more involved.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[r4pt0r]

Well clearly they aren't listening to me and the others that said the same thing then. We are saying experience as suggested was wrong. We are also saying that Kerbals being the pilots and navigators (ie; providing MechJeb functionality).

People who hate the experience idea are emphatically not the same group as those that hate autopilot.

I hate the experience idea and I hate mechjeb

[Levelord]

A rookie that is trained enough to fly a rocket into deep space hasn't been told what that big red button right next to the main throttle does?

Well... Kerbals needed post-it notes to remind them to put on their space suits before opening the hatch to space...

[Ippo]

This is nonsense. I don't actually use MJ but I do write kOS scripts for repetitive tasks like node execution or rendezvous. It's the same thing, just more involved.

Plus, they seem to think that the "realism crowd" is against mechjeb. The funny thing is that mechjeb is a lot more useful in RSS than stock... to the point that mechjeb is a recommended mod for realism overhaul.

Let me stress it: the same overhaul that makes engines not reignitable and not throttleable recommends mechjeb.

[Ippo]

Well... Kerbals needed post-it notes to remind them to put on their space suits before opening the hatch to space...

So every kerbal should be well capable of reading a post-it that says "this button unlocks overthrottle".

[Levelord]

So every kerbal should be well capable of reading a post-it that says "this button unlocks overthrottle".

Except that there aren't post-it notes on that button. Seems someone forgot the memo...

[Ippo]

Except that there aren't post-it notes on that button. Seems someone forgot the memo...

There is no post-it on the throttle, for that matter. Yet everyone seems able to find it, just like they find every other control in the craft. And if everything else fails, they can just call mission control on the radio and ask "hey mc, what does this button does again?".

[BudgetHedgehog]

- Thrust/fuel increase bonus would break the laws of physics: as MaxMaps pointed out, the system is being approached as an experienced pilot knowing the limits of the spacecraft and being able tu push it beyond the safety margin. I hear some actual spacecraft can reach thrust above 100%, such as the space shuttle - it would be akin to that. It certainly is more believable than a suggestion that was thrown around: increasing the power of the SAS (the game reaction wheels are already far more powerful than real life "physics" would allow).

For example - I make a rocket that has a TWR of 0.95. It cannot lift off the pad. But if I put Burcus Kerman and his +5 Boots of Thrust in the pilots seat, it suddenly has a TWR of over 1 and can take off.

In what way does that make any kind of sense or does not break the laws of physics? Oh, he knows the intricacies of how to over-thrust, but won't share it with the rookies beside him? They'll leave the mission with a bit more knowledge, but not how to overthrottle even though they were sat right next to someone who could and did.

Also yeah, the Shuttle could throttle over 100%, but that's because they engineered it to, not because of a specific person in the cockpit.

Edited October 23, 2014 by ObsessedWithKSP

[CaptainKipard]

I hate the experience idea and I hate mechjeb

There's going to be overlap obviously it's not a mutually exclusive proposition.

[Levelord]

There is no post-it on the throttle, for that matter. Yet everyone seems able to find it, just like they find every other control in the craft. And if everything else fails, they can just call mission control on the radio and ask "hey mc, what does this button does again?".

Asking about that button

Comes with experience...

[tetryds]

For example - I make a rocket that has a TWR of 0.95. It cannot lift off the pad. But if I put Burcus Kerman and his +5 Boots of Thrust in the pilots seat, it suddenly has a TWR of over 1 and can take off.

In what way does that make any kind of sense or does not break the laws of physics? Oh, he knows the intricacies of how to over-thrust, but won't share it with the rookies beside him? They'll leave the mission with a bit more knowledge, but not how to overthrottle even though they were sat right next to someone who could and did.

Also yeah, the Shuttle could throttle over 100%, but that's because they engineered it to, not because of a specific person in the cockpit.

This could work as a safety lock which is only allowed to be removed by an experienced kerbal when there is one is piloting though.

[Ippo]

Asking about that button

Comes with experience...

Sure. These guys can take command of a mun lander, but they don't have the common sense to ask about a button.

#believable

[Levelord]

Sure. These guys can take command of a mun lander, but they don't have the common sense to ask about a button.

#believable

Well they are Kerbals, their engineers forget to place parachutes and their pilots occasionally crash random craft. I find them fascinating and endearing in their cartoony adventures.

[Ippo]

Well they are Kerbals, their engineers forget to place parachutes and their pilots occasionally crash random craft. I find them fascinating and endearing in their cartoony adventures.

#lolphysics, basically. As much fun as they are (and they really do: I love the kerbals), I think I made my views clear on the matter of magic buffs.

[CaptainKipard]

This could work as a safety lock which is only allowed to be removed by an experienced kerbal when there is one is piloting though.

Like all bad ideas, the explanations for them tend to grow out of control. What would be the point of that "safety lock"? Am I in control of the ship or not? I don't care about safetly locks, I just want to fly. This adds nothing useful. It's just a bit of lore to "explain" something silly. It's excuses, not reasons. Usually you start from a foundation and work your way up to overcome something. The problem here is that the Kerbals already exist in the game (for what it's worth) and they have almost nothing to do. I think part of the problem Squad is having is putting the kerbonauts on too high a pedestal, when reasonable people know that they are only the most visible contributors to a space program. They (squad) then for whatever reason feel they need to give them something worthy of that pedestal to do.

I would love a more strategic approach to this, with engineers and experimentalists playing a larger more complex role, and pilots being mostly there to be your avatar, as you control the ship. Without an official "autopilot", which would give pilots a larger role, I don't really see what else they could do.

Well they are Kerbals, their engineers forget to place parachutes and their pilots occasionally crash random craft. I find them fascinating and endearing in their cartoony adventures.

I gotta say I really dislike this kerbal nature thing people bring out in defense of arguments. It's forced lore. I am the one building the ships. I am the one piloting.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[Parkaboy]

if anything the rookie would be more apt to overthrottle

1) The pilot of a spacecraft cannot choose freely how to handle the vehicle: he has to follow the mission profile, which in KSP means "the player's input". If the player asks for 100%, why on earth is the pilot giving 105%? He'd get his ass fired as soon as he steps back on earth.

Both of you are missing the point: the rookie doesn't know the limits of the engine, so he has to respect the limits put before him. He doesn't overthrottle. If he did, he engine could explode. The veteran knows the ship as his mistress and can disregard the safety limits. Hould he be fired for that? Maybe in your game: your program has stricter procedures, so you go and turn off the option. Not in mine: I'm the one running the freaking space program in my game, and I decide who I hire or fire. I don't follow NASA protocol, unless I want to. I'm not just the pilot in my game - or I would be playing Orbiter.

The problem with this "explanation" is that it doesn't make any sense.

No, you just don't agree with it. It's fine, you're entlited to your opinion. But you're defending your opinion as the fundamental law that governs the universe (physics!!!), and you want all our games to conform to your vision, when we should all have the option to play as we want, matching our different styles and interests.

People could have a lot of fun with this feature. If you can't or don't see how, that's okay. But if you don't want other people to have fun, because of "physics", well, that's kind of sad.

[Ippo]

People could have a lot of fun with this feature. If you can't or don't see how, that's okay. But if you don't want other people to have fun, because of "physics", well, that's kind of sad.

I'm not saying they can't or shouldn't have fun. Go ahead, enjoy it all you want. I still feel the game is lessened at a fundamental level just by this idea existing, though, and no amount of fun you are having will make me enjoy this monstrosity.

[r4pt0r]

>kerbals

>respecting limits of the equipment

now really?

[CaptainKipard]

Both of you are missing the point: the rookie doesn't know the limits of the engine

The pro crowd keep bringing this up and the anti crow keep saying "this is not like driving a car". Astronauts know their ships completely. Otherwise they wouldn't be allowed to fly. Can we please move on now?

[Levelord]

I gotta say I really dislike this kerbal nature thing people bring out in defense of arguments. It's forced lore. I am the one building the ships. I am the one piloting.

Well by your logic all video games have forced lore, since you take direct control of the events happening in that game.

Anyway Harvester had stated himself that kerbals aren't exactly stupid, but lack regard for their own personal safety. In other words, they are quite careless despite having advanced technology. I mean it's your game playthrough so you are free to imagine what your game is like, but to say that it's forced lore despite what the trailers show and what the game's creator has stated, is being willfully ignorant. Harvester sets the original tone of what the Kerbals are like and we just take it from there.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Levelord

[BudgetHedgehog]

Both of you are missing the point: the rookie doesn't know the limits of the engine, so he has to respect the limits put before him.

Anyway Harvester had stated himself that kerbals aren't exactly stupid, but lack regard for their own personal safety.

So.. do the rookies overthrottle or not? Is it accidental or intentional? It seems that they would be prone to (lack of regard for personal safety), while simultaneously not overthrottling because they don't know the how the engine works and so respect its limits.

Can you see why this line of reasoning makes no sense? This is why I have a problem with it - Squad made an answer to a question that didn't exist so now they have to make the question.

Edited October 23, 2014 by ObsessedWithKSP

[CaptainKipard]

Well by your logic all video games have forced lore, since you take direct control of the events happening in that game.

Anyway Harvester had stated himself that kerbals aren't exactly stupid, but lack regard for their own personal safety. In other words, they are quite careless despite having advanced technology. I mean it's your game playthrough so you are free to imagine what your game is like, but to say that it's forced lore despite what the trailers show and what the game's creator has stated, is incorrect. Harvester sets the original tone of what the Kerbals are like and we just take it from there.

Look some games do and some don't. Games where you play a character, you go into into it knowing that's the character and you're just following the

. BTW play Stanley Parable if you haven't already.

KSP isn't one of those games. It's meant to be open to your interpretation but for some reason Squad and a large section of fans insist on parroting this notion that Kerbals do things in a haphazard way. Well screw that is what I say. It's my game and I, like many others, love meticulous planning and flawless execution.

[Levelord]

So.. do the rookies overthrottle or not? It seems that they would be prone to (lack of regard for personal safety), while simultaneously not overthrottling because they don't know the how the engine works and so respect its limits.

Can you see why this line of reasoning makes no sense?

My original reasoning is that they aren't aware that the overthrottling exists. Since they needed post-it notes to remind them of the simplest no-brainer things in the cockpit, that seems like the most logical and plausible explanation. I never said rookies overthrottle from the get go, that was your response to a different poster.