Sandbox SAS: Should it be limited like Career?

[Carsogen]

Hi all,

In 0.90.0 all sandbox games both new and old enable ALL SAS functions for all craft, regardless of probe core or Kerbal specialization (eg. The Stayputnik and an engineer Kerbal have ZERO SAS in career, but full access to it in sandbox).

I was personally surprised by this feature, and my immediate reaction is that it was accidentally done by the devs. If this is the case then I hope this thread helps alerts them to the issue so they can fix it as they are (thankfully) known to do (all hail the mighty Squad).

However if this was in fact an intended feature, I find it out of place and a bit in-congruent as it makes sandbox and career different in a large, and in my opinion, unnecessary way.

So I made this post and poll (my first poll, hopefully I don't mess it up) to learn what everyone else thinks of this feature, please put your opinion in a comment

For example some may just want all Kerbals to be able to do all functions in sandbox because they may only want to take one Kerbal on a mission and have access to both pilot and engineer (scientist is pretty redundant in sandbox), and that's a totally valid point.

I would reply by saying that to do so would be like having your landing legs and parachute as one part, and that having them perform both functions because it is easier violates the point of game balance and challenge, or that the same could be said for career but the system is implemented fully there.

My goal here is to find out where the majority of people sit on this and hopefully hear some good arguments for why the system should stay as it is (I can't think of any ).

To avoid making this post too long I will say more in a comment below

Cas.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Carsogen

[klgraham1013]

I like the idea of classes, even in Sandbox.

[Carsogen]

*Continued from above*

First off let me just say that I think all Kerbals being automatically lvl 5 is good.

The only reason I can think of for allowing all probes and Kerbals to have all skills in sandbox (pilots and scientists can also repair rover wheels) is that implementing the full system may possibly mess up old sandbox saves, for example if you have some huge ongoing mission that suddenly has no SAS at all because you brought an engineer. While this would be VERY annoying, the same could be said for career, and yet the full system with restrictions is present there.

Would it be possible to get around this by having the new system only affect new craft or new saves? I know that Squad wants to avoid this because when they brought in PorkJet's Mk2 parts all craft in flight ended up with wonky parts. I see their reasoning for not wanting multiple copies of parts eating up memory, but the part version with limited SAS is already in career, so there would be no extra part bloat.

This would allow new missions to be planned with the new system in mind but also leave old ones unaffected, and solves the issue of back-compatibility, although there may be some programming/computational reason why this is not possible and it may have already been considered by Sqaud, I have no idea.

My main question is why are the limitations on functions not based on probe or Kerbal skill as they are in career? I can honestly not think of a reason except the one above, and that's why I made this post. Please can everyone help shed some light on the issue and provide their feedback, thanks

Cas.

[Carsogen]

I like the idea of classes, even in Sandbox.

I completely agree, the classes add so much depth to the game, and I feel like it's a loss to Sandbox if they're not included.

cas.

[theend3r]

It doesn't really bother me. After I unlock all the cores I'll probably mod the game so that all the cores have all the functions anyway.

[Carsogen]

It doesn't really bother me. After I unlock all the cores I'll probably mod the game so that all the cores have all the functions anyway.

Your job would be made much easier if it was a setting in the game (wink-wink poll *cough* )

If people really wanted they could change a setting (if it's put in) or mod the probes to perform all functions.

And let's remember that the only time the new system detrimentally affects sandbox with relation to pre-beta is when using the Stayputnik or no pilot at all. All other probes and even new pilots have access to the traditional SAS functions.

Thanks or your reply!

Cas,

[Giggleplex777]

I don't care too much about the SAS I the capsules, but more about the reaction troque in some of the probe cores. There should at least be some troque-- no matter how miniscule, it'll still be better than having none. Most of my probes from old saves are now obsolete because I can't change their attitude. Months worth of work gone.

All probe cores should have a reaction troque of at least 0.1kN/m so we can at least change the attitude of our small probes without twitchy external reaction wheels or heavy and overpowered RCS.

Anyone with we?

[Carsogen]

I don't care too much about the SAS I the capsules, but more about the reaction troque in some of the probe cores. There should at least be some troque-- no matter how miniscule, it'll still be better than having none. Most of my probes from old saves are now obsolete because I can't change their attitude. Months worth of work gone.

All probe cores should have a reaction troque of at least 0.1kN/m so we can at least change the attitude of our small probes without twitchy external reaction wheels or heavy and overpowered RCS.

Anyone with we?

I wasn't aware that they had removed SAS from probes but now looking at the part list on the wiki I see that yes, they have indeed done so. This also baffles me, if they are willing to implement this change/restriction on probe cores in sandbox, why not the rest of this new whiz-bang functionality that they have inexplicably left out?

I personally like the idea of differentiating between the probe cores in ways other than size (torque capability included) and this is part of my belief that the whole SAS restriction system should be in sandbox, but I see your point as to it breaking ongoing missions (as mentioned above ). It seems as if the rest of the system has been left out to avoid this issue and yet the torque change still applies, which leads me to believe that back-compatibility may not be Squad's motivation on the issue. I can't for the life of me however think of any other motivation.

I have actually just thought of another possible solution: have the restrictions still apply to probe cores, but allow Kerbals to do all other functions regardless of skill. This would allow all previous functionality (repack/repair/SAS) and still keep the depth and variation of the new system. This seems to me like it would work as the probes are honestly quite interchangeable, and this solution would provide maximum play-ability while still retaining the core of the new system.

Cas.

[Avalon304]

SAS should not be limited in Sandbox games... (or there should be an option). I would probably stop playing KSP all together if I had to worry about this...

I would reply by saying that to do so would be like having your landing legs and parachute as one part, and that having them perform both functions because it is easier violates the point of game balance and challenge

Thats a great argument... except that 'game balance' and 'challenge' do not belong in Sandbox. Sandbox is exactly what its supposed to be 'Space Legos'.

[Carsogen]

Sandbox is exactly what its supposed to be 'Space Legos'.

I have to say I don't think I've ever heard two amazing things work together better than space and legos, which is possibly the reason why KSP is so loved by me and many others (and I assume you ).

I see your point, there is something to be said for just throwing a command module on a rocket and it working as intended and as it always has, regardless of who or what is flying it. Simplicity is key, I agree.

That is why I reckon at the very least Kerbals should have all pilot and engineer skills, but probe cores should have the limitations still applied. It's easy to interchange probe parts, and this would allow for challenges like "get to the moon with no SAS" would be possible now, by selecting a probe with no SAS and not taking a pilot.\

It seems to me that the best way to appease everyone is to have a setting in sandbox that turns the SAS restrictions for probes and Kerbals on and off, that way the people who just want to get on with it without worrying about piloting can do just that, and those that want the consistency and challenge to be universal across game modes are happy too .

Cas.

[theend3r]

I don't care too much about the SAS I the capsules, but more about the reaction troque in some of the probe cores. There should at least be some troque-- no matter how miniscule, it'll still be better than having none. Most of my probes from old saves are now obsolete because I can't change their attitude. Months worth of work gone.

All probe cores should have a reaction troque of at least 0.1kN/m so we can at least change the attitude of our small probes without twitchy external reaction wheels or heavy and overpowered RCS.

Anyone with we?

My memory may be failing me but I think that is how it worked in the past and I prefer it that way. Probe cores are just computers. Does your computer have reaction wheels?

[Carsogen]

My memory may be failing me but I think that is how it worked in the past and I prefer it that way. Probe cores are just computers. Does your computer have reaction wheels?

I don't remember ever sending up a probe and then realising it had no torque, but maybe by chance I never used any of the ones without. I also think it's better with more differentating probe cores than just size, but the potential to kill old save ships is still there. And couldn't cooling fans be used as reaction wheels?

[Crimson Sunrise]

Well....

If you have limiting features on sandbox mode, then it's not really a sandbox mode, is it? Some people just want to fly their vessels without having to worry about limitations, otherwise they would be playing career mode instead, wouldn't they?

[Red Iron Crown]

Thats a great argument... except that 'game balance' and 'challenge' do not belong in Sandbox.

Funny that, we had discussions of balance and challenge long before career mode was even a thing.

[thereaverofdarkness]

I'd like to have options to enable/disable things in sandbox, allowing you to tweak just how unlocked it is. There's plenty of room for more options in that custom window...

[Avalon304]

Funny that, we had discussions of balance and challenge long before career mode was even a thing.

When theres only one mode there have to be those discussions. There are now multiple modes of gameplay. In Career 'game balance' and 'challenge' have a place. They have no place in Sandbox mode. Period. Sand box mode is literally space legos. Slap a ship together, put a crew in it (if needed), and have it just work.

[Carsogen]

If you have limiting features on sandbox mode, then it's not really a sandbox mode, is it?

I've always thought of sandbox mode as what career will get to in the end.

When you've unlocked all parts and have no need for science, exhausted all contracts and trained some ridiculous number of Kerbals so high that their children are level 5 pilots, it's basically a shortcut to all the stuff unlocked at the end of the game.

For most games this would get boring very soon, but the beauty of KSP is that you can play FOREVER in sandbox and it's still an amazing and fun game.

This is where I think the problem is with the current system: It makes sandbox NOT the end of the game, it changes it fundamentally.

I think the fact that all Kerbals are automatically level 5 allows for sandbox to continue unhindered while if the SAS restrictions remain in place it would keep sandbox true to being the end game of career.

In Career 'game balance' and 'challenge' have a place. They have no place in Sandbox mode.

Of course they still have a place, it would be crazy to not have stuff balanced and a challenge in place. If that weren't the case then why not just double the nuke's thrust and increase its vacuum Isp ABOVE its vacuum?

I'm honestly surprised that people who prefer sandbox over career aren't really mad about this situation, it's a whole new feature that they've just been denied from using! If a new resource system (maybe if we say it enough it'll happen:P) was brought in and kept out of sandbox there would be rioting in the street!

Cas.

[Crimson Sunrise]

I've always thought of sandbox mode as what career will get to in the end.

When you've unlocked all parts and have no need for science, exhausted all contracts and trained some ridiculous number of Kerbals so high that their children are level 5 pilots, it's basically a shortcut to all the stuff unlocked at the end of the game.

For most games this would get boring very soon, but the beauty of KSP is that you can play FOREVER in sandbox and it's still an amazing and fun game.

This is where I think the problem is with the current system: It makes sandbox NOT the end of the game, it changes it fundamentally.

I think the fact that all Kerbals are automatically level 5 allows for sandbox to continue unhindered while if the SAS restrictions remain in place it would keep sandbox true to being the end game of career.

Of course they still have a place, it would be crazy to not have stuff balanced and a challenge in place. If that weren't the case then why not just double the nuke's thrust and increase its vacuum Isp ABOVE its vacuum?

I'm honestly surprised that people who prefer sandbox over career aren't really mad about this situation, it's a whole new feature that they've just been denied from using! If a new resource system (maybe if we say it enough it'll happen:P) was brought in and kept out of sandbox there would be rioting in the street!

Cas.

Fair enough. However, that goes against the definition of what a sandbox is software wise.

[Red Iron Crown]

When theres only one mode there have to be those discussions. There are now multiple modes of gameplay. In Career 'game balance' and 'challenge' have a place. They have no place in Sandbox mode. Period. Sand box mode is literally space legos. Slap a ship together, put a crew in it (if needed), and have it just work.

Sorry, but your opinion is not fact. Period. There is challenge in sandbox, the same challenge there has always been: To build and fly spacecraft. It just lacks the additional challenge of science, funding, etc. There is balance in sandbox, in that the tradeoffs between different component choices are fairly even. If there was no challenge or balance in sandbox people wouldn't find it fun to play, and many do.

Also, sandbox is not literally space lego. This is literally space lego.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Red Iron Crown
Typo fixed.

[Crimson Sunrise]

Sorry, but your opinion is not fact. Period. There is challenge in sandbox, the same challenge there has always been: To build and fly spacecraft. It just lacks the additional challenge of science, funding, etc. There is balance in sandbox, in that the tradeoffs between different component choices are fairly even. If there was no challenge or balance in snadbox people wouldn't find it fun to play, and many do.

Also, sandbox is not literally space lego. This is literally space lego.

Speaking for myself only, career mode has been confusing for me since it was introduced, so I only play the sandbox mode. Since I most often casually do vessels to play with, I have a vested interest in not having the confusion of career mode interfering with my sandbox playing.

[Brotoro]

I don't care too much about the SAS I the capsules, but more about the reaction troque in some of the probe cores. There should at least be some troque-- no matter how miniscule, it'll still be better than having none. Most of my probes from old saves are now obsolete because I can't change their attitude. Months worth of work gone.

All probe cores should have a reaction troque of at least 0.1kN/m so we can at least change the attitude of our small probes without twitchy external reaction wheels or heavy and overpowered RCS.

Anyone with we?

They removed all torque from some of the probe cores? This is a very bad thing. I have a lot of small communication satellites that have OKTO2 probe cores...and now those satellites are adrift with no way to control their attitude. This makes me unhappy. The satellites I have the OKTO2 probe cores on a rather small...so a tiny bit of torque would save them. I agree that all probe cores should have at least 0.1kN/m of torque.

The whole thing about changing what the different probe cores can do makes me unhappy. The difference between the HECS and OKTO and QBE cores was the symmetry of the attachment points, and you could use the one that fit best for whatever you were building. This is no longer the case, and so I am sad again.

[Frozen_Heart]

It should at least be a difficultly option in sandbox. I'd rather have all functions available.

[John FX]

I would say no, as that would defeat one of the main things about sandbox which is that it is supposed to be the state of play where you have all the best abilities of a career game.

I'm honestly surprised that people who prefer sandbox over career aren't really mad about this situation, it's a whole new feature that they've just been denied from using!

Nobody has been denied the use of any feature. What you are complaining about is that sandbox has no restrictions or limits on the feature, the same as always, the same as every sandbox.

Edited December 18, 2014 by John FX

[RainDreamer]

Nah, some people prefer the look of Stayputnik as a satellite, so sandbox would be the only way for them to have a stayputnik that is fitting to their design and still fly decently. At the least, give them an option to use them like that.

[John FX]

Nah, some people prefer the look of Stayputnik as a satellite, so sandbox would be the only way for them to have a stayputnik that is fitting to their design and still fly decently. At the least, give them an option to use them like that.

Not such a bad idea, why not have the functions of a pod be tweakable in sandbox? Then you can have one that does everything in the shape you want.