KSP 0.90 'Beta Than Ever' Grand Discussion Thread!

[Maciek0921]

Great update, however I have a question. What about resources? It's beta now so you won't implement new systems but you told few months ago that you're still working on resources and you just had to change the way it worked and we can expect it in next uptade. What happaned? It is last system I'd like to see in KSP.

[noahtech]

Never thought of myself as "elite" before but I'll take the compliment as I absolutely LOVE career mode now. There's no shame in knocking the difficulty down or giving yourself extra staring funds or science or rep. It's not cheating to tweak a single player game so it's fun for you.

In 0.25 I tweaked the game super hard for a playthrough. Had a blast but it was quite a chore to just get anything done. If 0.90 hadn't come out I'd have started my next career on "Easy" mode just to get through that early grind quicker. It never occurred to me to think that this was somehow "wrong."

Maybe Squad can add an option to start you off with fully developed facilities in the difficulty settings. That way everyone can be happy!

[gorkyporky]

The update is great, but is it only me or are the contracts just plain bad? I mean, they just dont make sense? I mean "Test the LV-909 landed at kerbin!" is ok i guess, eventho it doesnt really make sense. "Test the stack decoupler landed at kerbin.". What? "Test solid rocket boosters splashed down at kerbin!"? How does that make any sense at all? And all the other part testing contracts just have random numbers for testing mid flight, that you never actually achive during an actual mission, so you have to make one specificaly for them, and, for me at least, that just burns more funds than it generates. Am i doing somrthing wrong here? Because this was the biggest turn of from the career mode, since they implemented funds, and it still isnt very fun for me. So far i just keep having less and less funds, so i cant upgrade my KSC to even do any meaningful mission, since i dont even have EVA capability or maneuver nodes unlocked. Do you guys have any tips on how to tackle this? Are missions designed specificly for part testing worth it or not?

[SpaceXray]

Where is iiiiit????

Only they playthrough.

I am unhappy

[Guest]

Maybe Squad can add an option to start you off with fully developed facilities in the difficulty settings. That way everyone can be happy!

You can already do this through config edits.

[dryer_lint]

So... does anyone know how to edit savefiles to downgrade buildings?

[SelectHalfling0]

It was only PorkJet making the parts. He simply didn't have time to make the IVA for it. He did a great job in such a short time anyway.

I'm very happy with the update.

I wouldn't be suprised if the modding community made one for the time being. Squad will get it done soon^tm I'm sure.

[Guest]

So... does anyone know how to edit savefiles to downgrade buildings?

Make sure to make a backup copy of the persistent.sfs before messing with it. Then look for :

SCENARIO
	{
		name = ScenarioUpgradeableFacilities
		scene = 5, 6, 7, 8
		SpaceCenter/LaunchPad
		{
			lvl = 0.5
		}
		SpaceCenter/Runway
		{
			lvl = 0
		}
		SpaceCenter/VehicleAssemblyBuilding
		{
			lvl = 0
		}
		SpaceCenter/SpaceplaneHangar
		{
			lvl = 0
		}
		SpaceCenter/TrackingStation
		{
			lvl = 0.5
		}
		SpaceCenter/AstronautComplex
		{
			lvl = 0.5
		}
		SpaceCenter/MissionControl
		{
			lvl = 0.5
		}
		SpaceCenter/ResearchAndDevelopment
		{
			lvl = 0
		}
		SpaceCenter/Administration
		{
			lvl = 0
		}
		SpaceCenter/FlagPole
		{
			lvl = 0
		}
	}

Change the lvl = ? to zero, assuming it currently isn't, and it might work. I haven't fooled with this stuff yet so be careful and make backups.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Otis

[Xavven]

The update is great, but is it only me or are the contracts just plain bad? I mean, they just dont make sense? I mean "Test the LV-909 landed at kerbin!" is ok i guess, eventho it doesnt really make sense. "Test the stack decoupler landed at kerbin.". What? "Test solid rocket boosters splashed down at kerbin!"? How does that make any sense at all? And all the other part testing contracts just have random numbers for testing mid flight, that you never actually achive during an actual mission, so you have to make one specificaly for them, and, for me at least, that just burns more funds than it generates. Am i doing somrthing wrong here? Because this was the biggest turn of from the career mode, since they implemented funds, and it still isnt very fun for me. So far i just keep having less and less funds, so i cant upgrade my KSC to even do any meaningful mission, since i dont even have EVA capability or maneuver nodes unlocked. Do you guys have any tips on how to tackle this? Are missions designed specificly for part testing worth it or not?

Some of them are really bad, I will agree. In fact, I complained about them when they first came out. I will say that testing the LV-909 while landed at Kerbin is a perfectly valid test. Just do this: http://www.space.com/22379-spacex-grasshopper-rocket-sideways-flight-video.html and it will quench your thirst for realism. I'm sure SpaceX got a LOT of science done by running that simple test!

But yeah, it feels unrealistic and cheaty when I can take two contracts like:

Test the launch stability enhancer landed at Kerbin

and

Test the stack decoupler landed at Kerbin

and make a quick 5000 funds and 8 science by building a "rocket" that's just a command pod attached to a gantry with a decoupler on it, with no fuel or rocket. It's like, "YOU PRESSED THE STAGE BUTTON! YOU WIN 5000 FUNDS!"

[dryer_lint]

Make sure to make a backup copy of the persistent.sfs before messing with it. Then look for :

Change the lvl = ? to zero, assuming it currently isn't, and it might work. I haven't fooled with this stuff yet so be careful and make backups.

I tried this already but this code isn't in my persistent.sfs...

[Norpo]

Honestly, I think all "Test X landed at Kerbin" contracts should be removed, or at least with a reward cap. Sure, they're good if you have absolutely no funds, but they're boring and outright grindy, moreso than regular test part contracts.

"okay now we know that it doesn't spontaniously disappear when you hit spacebar thank you we couldn't of tested that ourselves here take our money"

I just don't do them, but i'd prefer they don't generate at all so I don't have to cancel them all the time.

[noahtech]

You can already do this through config edits.

So then adding a gui for it shouldn't be too hard.

[Grinser]

Hi everyone!

I really loved KSP when I got a year ago. I stopped playing when I got to Minmus and everything further just looked like a linear progression of more parts, more docking, more fuel and more time acceleration to me. Which is boring to me. Why would I invest 100 times the effort just to go somewhere for science I don't need? Anyway I've played 0.9 now. Several things are obvious to me, good and bad:

the good

I do like the additional progression options. Upgrading your different buildings seems like a really nice addition. I think the skill system is a sweet idea. This is rather short because I mostly like the potential these systems offer. Balancing is still off by a long shot but it's easier to tweak numbers than comming up with whole new game systems.

the things I don't like:

I started on normal and find it super hard.

- No maneuver nodes is a really hard limitation.

I saw some pages earlier that "You just have to learn the basic rocketry formulas." and "Just burn prograde when the moon rises." and I feel justified to ask, is this even still a game? Is KSP a flight sim now? I mean yeah, learning about space and rocketry is cool but having to learn it as a basic requirement just seems off to me. Also, it's not like the guys at ...Space Agency didn't plan their missions. I'm sure that a lot of calculations and course plotting went into each and every single mission ever. KSP currently offers nothing like that. Right now I feel like the target audience is supposed to be people who know the formulas and plotting software already and just play KSP because their new kernel is compiling or their new drone parts haven't arrived yet. Which is fine btw. I just feel left out. It's not a learning curve I'd take on if I wanted to have fun anymore.

- There is a very hard mismatch between the contracts you get and the parts you have available.

I'm supposed to get someone to survey kerbin but have to do it with rockets instead of planes because... they're in the third (proper) science tier? How am I supposed to rendevous with a lost Kerbal without maneuver planning or at least target setting so I can measure my relative velocity? Imo you have to rethink the unlock progression, right now it makes no sense to me. There is also the fact that often you need to progress somewhere for a single part only very far down the unlock tree. It makes sense to have a progression for fueltanks, engines, science equipment etc. but why are docking ports, fuel transfer lines, and basic wings so hard to get? Or just wheels?

The contracts don't make sense in some cases. The easy ones are just not worth the investment anymore. If you can only take two contracts and your rocket costs 4000 or 5000 monies already, you're not going to take the one that gives you 2000 total. Also somehow "splashed down" is somehow still a location to reach? It is it's own challenge to build ships in flight sim that destroys parts that fully submerge but I feel like that's something that could be left to sandbox mode. It certainly doesn't make sense for a space agency.

- the building upgrade limitations don't make much sense

Why is the mission control building limiting contract amount but not scope?

Why is the tracking center limiting my math and not my... well... tracking? Upgrades could just scale down errors and make better estimates possible instead of unlocking the abillity to make any estimates at all.

The R&D lab should modify how effectively you can use certain experiments, not put a hard limit on how much science I can get or spend. If I get my 1000 science by going everywhere on kerbin by foot with a thermometer, that should be my decision, as opposed to deducting a comets composition by looking at it's trail or something else you'd actually need a lab for.

things that disappoint:

The new build options aren't really that great. There are still lots of assumptions being made when building that I can't turn off or modify, namely how parts inherit their orientations. The offset option seems to have fairly large tolerances. The new part filters display empty filter categories for some reason.

There are new biomes or so I've heard but still no option to scout them out before making a manned mission. I really want an observatory or at least a camera science module so I can send satellites to take pictures first. Also a color overlay for planets so I can see where I already got science from and where I'm still not all knowing. So basically I expected something like what you already showed in the

and it's not there.

In closing

I like the progress but progress in one area shows flaws in others. I feel like the good outweighs the bad fairly evenly. I'll certainly play around with this update for a while.

[WanderingKid]

Oh. What about the unmanned pods like the stayputnik?

Stayputnik was purposely built without SAS. You need to upgrade the probe to at least the OKTO before they get SAS.

[Guest]

I tried this already but this code isn't in my persistent.sfs...

Are you running 32 bit or 64 bit?

So then adding a gui for it shouldn't be too hard.

Maybe not. Getting it up on Squad's priority list....., well, maybe not so easy.

[dryer_lint]

Are you running 32 bit or 64 bit?

32bit. This is an existing save by the way, not a new save.

[rdwulfe]

Welp, it's finally happened. Stock KSP can no longer run on my system with only 2GB of memory. Maybe ATM will be an option soon, but if not my space program is likely done forever. If that's so, thanks to HarvesteR and everyone else at Squad for the hundreds of hours of geeky fun.

This is not a complaint. This is not Squad's fault in any way.

I only have 2gb and I run fine with KSP, lincourtl! What else do you have running? (Check the Task Manager, and also check to make sure you're displaying all, not just for your process).

Admittedly, I close Steam, my browser, my stupid programs that my Printer wants running, my MOM.exe and whatever else the dumb catalyst control panel wants runnin--- I kill everyhing not absolutely needed... But damnit, KSP RUNS!! -- And I've yet to have a single crash with 0.90.

[JeanHavoc]

Well that explains that. I somehow set a thrust limiter that was holding up my rocket without realizing it. At any rate - at least to contribute here it all seems pretty interesting so far. Flying without maneuver nodes or patched conics is a pain though, I think in the future I might upgrade that capability first, despite the cost, it just seems really worth it to me. Also, I don't get much use out of my non-Pilot Kerbals early in the game - but I imagine the scientist will be pretty good to have along once I get two and three seat capsules/landers. The Engineer I'm not as sure about yet, repacking chutes could be a useful benefit down the line though. Anyway, I'm having a good time.

Edited December 16, 2014 by JeanHavoc
Fixed.

[djnattyd]

Haven't had chance to play yet but I have a feeling I'm going to enjoy 0.90 more than any other version.

Oh and to the people complaining about how the lack of manoeuvre nodes spoils the game, at one point they never existed at all.

[Rowsdower]

New Mk.3 cockpit IVA!

This is addressed in the FAQ, Jedi. The no new IVA part, not the lack of light bulbs.

Great update, however I have a question. What about resources? It's beta now so you won't implement new systems but you told few months ago that you're still working on resources and you just had to change the way it worked and we can expect it in next uptade. What happaned? It is last system I'd like to see in KSP.

Hi, Maciek. Deep space refueling is currently slated to be implemented sometime during the beta period. 0.90 is just the start of beta, so we've still got time to go

[Wjolcz]

Oh and to the people complaining about how the lack of manoeuvre nodes spoils the game, at one point they never existed at all.

Yup. I remember my first rendezvous. At that time I didn't even know there could be something like manouver nodes and how they could be used.

Back in my days we were eyeballing everything.

[Guest]

32bit. This is an existing save by the way, not a new save.

We're probably straying off topic for this thread. Maybe open a new support thread for this? I do have one last suggestion. Just paste that code into the save you do have and see what happens. If it doesn't work, then just restore the backup and try to get support. I'm sure there are others experiencing the same issue. There may or may not be a fix.

[SelectHalfling0]

Yup. I remember my first rendezvous. At that time I didn't even know there could be something like manouver nodes and how they could be used.

Back in my days we were eyeballing everything.

I started playing way after maneuver nodes were implemented. I am excited for the new challenge.

[noahtech]

Is it just me or does the tech tree seem to be ordered completely wrong. I'm often getting parts that I can't use at all (granted some of these parts are from mods). I'm getting space plane parts before I've even gotten the landing gear for a plane.

[Superfluous J]

Is it just me or does the tech tree seem to be ordered completely wrong. I'm often getting parts that I can't use at all (granted some of these parts are from mods). I'm getting space plane parts before I've even gotten the landing gear for a plane.

Nope. It's not just you. Now that the game's in Beta I fully expect the tech tree to eventually get another pass. Hopefully at that time they'll make custom tech trees much easier to make, and will also fix some glaring problems (like the fact that the "basic plane" package node doesn't including landing gear.