Jump to content

KSP 0.90 'Beta Than Ever' Grand Discussion Thread!

KasperVld

By KasperVld
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

ArmchairGravy

ArmchairGravy

Posted
Posted
I like the way career mode is now, I hated it before, now I actually want to play it... It isn't grindy unless you're bad at making a 30 part rocket which can go to the Mun. And if you need to cheat, why not instead of cheating just play career mode on Easy, or just add more starting funds...

Adding more starting funds is cheating. If I want a sub-30 part rocket, I have to unlock an extra node for the larger tank. If I want to actually do some science while I'm on Mun I have to upgrade both the astronaut complex and the R&D building. All of this while doing contracts that generally net 10-20k in funds after the initial large payouts are complete. Not to mention the increased risk of the operations because I don't have patched conics yet.

I don't find any of this fun. I've been playing career since it first released, but this grind for grind's sake is sending me back to sandbox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WuphonsReach

WuphonsReach

Posted
Posted
Yea there should be random failures like the Dang it mod, and there should be a reliability system. I am thinking, more part count can result in overall less reliability. So when you start up you can fly rockets without an engineer but later on you can't just do a super jool-5 mission without one.

That would be an interesting limitation... more part counts is more complexity is more things that could go wrong.

In 0.25, the only time I would break things is if a fairing crashed into the solar panels during ascent. Most failures are the sort of thing where you end up with catastrophic failure and lose the entire vessel.

Ultimately, I think they need something like Dang It and tracking how many times a particular part has flown. For rockets, it would mostly impact SRBs and booster stages which get recovered and recycled. But for space planes, it might hit them pretty hard due to the constant launch/relaunch count. So maybe space plane engines have a much higher MTBF rating then rocket engines.

Some rocket engines are designed to be started once, then never restarted. So the idea that each start-up cycle adds wear and tear on the engine would have merit. Along with total burn time or heat damage.

Micrometeorite strikes could then be modeled in where a part gets broken due to a strike. Probably a rare 1:100k hours of flying event around Kerbin, but maybe it's much more of a common problem around Jool.

You also get into the questions of having to stock spare parts (in some abstract form) as cargo and carrying enough parts to make it to the end of a Jool & return mission. Do you pack along 5t of wire, string and dukt tape, or bring another science instrument?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cdr_Zeta

Cdr_Zeta

Posted
Posted

Hello,

Just thinking why I wanted to come back to KSP well I really never left my heart is always gonna be with KSP; it will be a brand new start but I will also be working my own career mode part placements - I am not seeing any problems doing this...I hope haha.

I am so glad Beta KSP is out they have done ALOT of work here - kept its player base well informed, and the reviews are speaking for themselves; people who missed out on KSP back from v18 onward might be at a little tad of a loss as to how to play - the good ole sandbox mode which I hope is still there fills in this gap for those folks; hyperedit gets massive parts/stations into space for computer FPS checks and game performance so people can build accordingly.

These new features are lookin great I can actually start a new game.

Yes mindcraft is okay but I tried similar programs like 'Starmade' and it actually destroyed my quad-core computer - cpu power supply an all.

Be mindful of CPU useage and temps - monitor this stuff while yer gaming these days with computers gettin more expensive for high quality modes...and you will be a happy KSP space camper.

I hope to start streamin again...

I have to look at the mods again...thank you KSP !

Commander Zeta

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WuphonsReach

WuphonsReach

Posted
Posted

KSP career on normal difficulty should not be an exercise in grinding hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to start doing interesting things.

Balance issues... (mostly). A lot of the contracts (especially parts testing) don't pay out enough to be worth the hassle.

On the flip side, only having (3) tiers of unlock is making things difficult. Most / all of the buildings need 5 or 6 tiers with a smoother progression. For the VAB/SPH, start with 30 parts and double the part limit on each successive tier (30 -> 60 -> 120 -> 240 -> 500 -> unlimited). For the building where you get contracts go with (2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20).

Then the first three tiers of the building could be relatively inexpensive (10k, 25k, 50k) while the upper tiers are far more expensive at (100k, 200k, 500k).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tail_TL

Tail_TL

Posted
Posted
Adding more starting funds is cheating. If I want a sub-30 part rocket, I have to unlock an extra node for the larger tank. If I want to actually do some science while I'm on Mun I have to upgrade both the astronaut complex and the R&D building. All of this while doing contracts that generally net 10-20k in funds after the initial large payouts are complete. Not to mention the increased risk of the operations because I don't have patched conics yet.

I don't find any of this fun. I've been playing career since it first released, but this grind for grind's sake is sending me back to sandbox.

As I already mentioned, Play on easy mode if you don't want to add more starting funds by itself. Currently I'm playing on Moderate preset difficulty and I'm finding it fun, there are contracts that reward 145,000 (And ofcourse more) funds, it isn't such a grind if you can choose your contracts wisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bekiekutmoar

Bekiekutmoar

Posted
Posted

I've always been sceptical about Career Mode being too easy and avoided it at all times. However, it looks like version .90 really makes a positieve difference with Career Mode transforming from a joke to a descent and challenging game-mode in my opinion. In hindsight, it probably wasn't very 'fair' of me to ridicule career mode, as it was FAR from completed. More or less the same as complaining about the performance of a car while the engine and tires aren't added yet. In my opinion, update .90 is the best update of 2014 with actually a reasonably large amount of parts added too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WanderingKid

WanderingKid

Posted
Posted
Well, the elitists should be happy. KSP is now hard and grindy. Scraping money from contracts so I can upgrade buildings so that I can build workable rockets and my Kerbals can start collecting science. Good times. :rolleyes: Time to do something I've not had to do in career KSP on normal difficulty: cheat.

Use money for Science. Outsourced R&D is absolutely broken right now in returns.

I wouldn't say I'm an elitist, there's a lot of this game I plain suck at. I just like a hard game. I don't find the funds grind to be grindy, at least not at the moment. The variety of contracts is interesting to me, and I'm enjoying engineering solutions. I'm playing on Hard, have lost a Kerbal, etc... Nope, I haven't done my Mun shot yet but I'm at Tier 5 through the tree and am at the 'grind' point you mention.

I really like this implementation at the more difficult levels. Makes you think, makes you budget, and makes you trade off on different things. Now, if we had to heavily grind for science AND money, that'd be driving me batty.

Edit: RE: satellites

It was badly phrased in Fine Print too. Power <> batteries. Power = Recharge. Solar Panels, generator, etc. Any antenna should work, I usually use the first one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tail_TL

Tail_TL

Posted
Posted

Edit: RE: satellites

It was badly phrased in Fine Print too. Power <> batteries. Power = Recharge. Solar Panels, generator, etc. Any antenna should work, I usually use the first one.

Ah thanks for confirming this, not a big deal that its wasn't more specific but eh... Just gotta use common sense lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NASAHireMe

NASAHireMe

Posted
Posted

This update has made the game a lot more difficult. Which means the tutorials should probably be looked at again, because games where you need to learn everything from youtube vids aren't often fun.

Yeah, totally agree. If the game wasn't bafflingly confusing for an absolute beginner, it's somewhat worse now. Actually, who knows, maybe it only looks that way to us because we've already been playing and have to start over again without our 'bad habits'.

Regardless, I second the idea that most, if not all, of the tutorials (video or text) will have to be rewritten again. Obviously, tutorials that explain basic orbital dynamics and concepts are still relevant, but many are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bitslizer

bitslizer

Posted
Posted
Anyone else got an issue with the 'Run Test'? It no longer appears on engines/other parts. Eg: I got a contract to test a T45 in orbit, but no Run Test is available...

it may just be to activate it through staging, if you double check the contract it should say which method

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xavven

Xavven

Posted
Posted
That is one budget space program. Wait! Its actually a secret "Geology program" setting Whereby you get out and slowly walk around collecting all the science from Kerbin's biomes! and returning the data to the capsule one at a time! and NEVER go to space! Because GEOLOGY!

LOL! A geology program where you can't collect any samples without building a Mk-1 capsule first so you can EVA! And.... nope... we can't build the capsule. Darn. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ravensoul6@hotmail.com

[email protected]

Posted
Posted
LOL! A geology program where you can't collect any samples without building a Mk-1 capsule first so you can EVA! And.... nope... we can't build the capsule. Darn. :(

Haha, I missed that when I first looked at it, I thought it was funny because the only thing he could afford was the capsule.

Just move the starting funds up ever so slightly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Xavven

Xavven

Posted
Posted

If you find your current career mode too grindy, just turn the difficulty down. You get more money and science from each contract, and building upgrades are cheaper. Hard mode shouldn't be a cakewalk. In fact, there were several entire threads dedicated to complaining about "Hard" being too easy back in .25!

6 hours in to my Hard career save, and I think it's the perfect level of challenge for me so far. Loving it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...