Gripes About Kerbal Experience

[klgraham1013]

I re-iterate: realism is an acceptable sacrifice for fun. If it's part of a game and it's reducing the fun, it doesn't matter how realistic it is, it shouldn't be that way.

So having to plan missions properly, making sure you have the right crew, that ruins the fun for you? Do you also get upset when you don't have the budget for the rocket you want, or enough science for the next node?

Not to be mean, but this used to be a game about challenge. When I first started playing, there were these amazing stories about landing on the Mun; about crazy missions gone awry. That's why I started playing. To be challenged. To feel like I accomplished something with every single mission. Now people complain if they have to plan in the slightest? What is happening to this game...

[Greenfire32]

Making it unreasonably hard for new players runs counter to that goal.

I guess this is where I have to take a little and give a little in return.

I'm not at all new to KSP. I've been playing since...I don't even know how long ago. But I'm super new to Career mode (didn't like the first or second iterations of the mode and stuck with sandbox). So the fact that now I'm finding career mode fun and enjoyable unlike before possibly means I'm in the minority here, but I firmly believe it's much better now than it was previous.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that as a "new player" (to career mode), I find neither the default difficulties too hard, nor do I think that as long as the option for "custom difficulties" exists, then there is zero argument for it being "too hard."

If it truly is too hard for any given person, they have the ability to adjust the settings accordingly. And that is the sole reason why I think this entire discussion (not just between yourself and I) is 100% without grounds.

Not to be mean, but this used to be a game about challenge. When I first started playing, there were these amazing stories about landing on the Mun; about crazy missions gone awry. That's why I started playing. To be challenged. To feel like I accomplished something with every single mission. Now people complain if they have to plan in the slightest? What is happening to this game...

Agreed. However, I will say that not having maneuver nodes in the beginning has opened my eyes as to just how spoiled I've gotten XD

[Ziff]

An arbitrary class system with arbitrary rules--so you're telling me an engineer can't press the big blue button that says "SAS"?

There is no big blue button that says SAS unless you have a probe core with stability assist on it. When you hit "T" for Stability Assist, what's really happening is Jeb is grabbing the controls and saying, "I have control." Bob and Bill are cowering in the corner. I mean really, look at their pictures. That's what they're doing.

An absolute necessity for pilots, limiting science options in the early game and even part of the midgame

Clearly you haven't even played career. There is no science limit placed by not having a Scientist with you. Jeb or Bill can still get out and get the science experiments done and take samples. A scientist will only add a bonus onto what science you've recovered. Also, you don't have to have a pilot. I did a 3.5 minute manual burn holding course with the keyboard in fine controls mode. It's easy, it just take's some practice.

No way to reassign the randomly-selected classes, meaning you might not have the classes you need to fulfill your mission

There is a crew tab at the top when you are a building a ship in which you can select whatever crew members you want to fly the mission. It's been there since 0.21, July of 2013. You can choose who you hire in the Astronaut Complex.

[Tw1]

Not to be mean, but this used to be a game about challenge. When I first started playing, there were these amazing stories about landing on the Mun; about crazy missions gone awry. That's why I started playing. To be challenged. To feel like I accomplished something with every single mission. Now people complain if they have to plan in the slightest? What is happening to this game...

While I'm still seeing many elaborate things happen, I see this happening as well. I believe it's a problem with the career model. Once there was no goals, just opportunity. Here's the parts, there's the planets, go!

Now the game is built for the task completers. Fly over here, check of that list, click away that science.

Simple designs and simple plans are good enough for most of these missions.

This is an issue with the progressive style of gameplay,

I would have preferred to see game-ish mechanics take a backseat to a space experience, with funds based on some sort of reputation, based on how much science your space program as a whole is doing. Balanced so you can sustain a space program that's just exploring the Mun, but if you want the funds for more elaborate exploration, you have to start reaching further. Combine that with a science system that let's you build up a picture of each world, but doesn't have this sense that data is no longer worth collecting after the first visit.

CThere is no science limit placed by not having a Scientist with you. Jeb or Bill can still get out and get the science experiments done and take samples. A scientist will only add a bonus onto what science you've recovered. Also, you don't have to have a pilot. I did a 3.5 minute manual burn holding course with the keyboard in fine controls mode.

This is sort of true, but what is "bonus" to one, is "total possible" to another. It's true what burns without SAS are fine as long as your thrust and com are aligned. But there can be difficulty getting some ships to stop. IDK. So far, I've been liking how it encourages teamwork. It would be nice if a piloting Kerbal's behaviour changed though, so it actually looked like they were controlling something.

[Joonatan1998]

I think scientists and engineers should only be unlocked when you get level 2 astronaut complex.

It would be far less confusing for new players than having to select from 3 classes from the start.

[Ziff]

This is sort of true, but what is "bonus" to one, is "total possible" to another.

It's not sort of true. It's entirely true. Read what I was commenting on instead of just commenting on my comment. The other poster claimed that the necessity of having a pilot over a scientist is "limiting science options in the early game and even part of the midgame" My response to that is 100% entirely true. A bonus is a bonus. Having a scientist nets you a little extra science in the cases where you can bring one along. You do not need one at all to get science. Not having a scientist doesn't make it so you can't take samples or move science data to the command pod. (Actually, I don't think it's working right anyway, I haven't seen a bonus anywhere.)

It's true what burns without SAS are fine as long as your thrust and com are aligned. But there can be difficulty getting some ships to stop.

Sure, and that's what a Pilot is for. If you have terribly designed off center ships that you can't fly yourself, bring a Pilot. If you want extra science, take the time to design a good craft and fly it manually, or slap a probe core that has SAS on it, or stick two command pods on it so you can bring a Scientist and a Pilot, or use a Landing Can with 2 Kerbals, or wait till you get the 3 man command pod. If you want one kerbal that can do everything, go play in Sandbox mode. There are plenty of options here and different ways to do things, but the current system is not limiting in any of the ways it was claimed to be in the comment I was responding to.

Edited December 18, 2014 by Ziff
A word

[kalor]

I see both sides to this. In some ways, it seems backwards. In others, exactly as it should be.

I would like to see a Final Frontier like system in place, that actually impacts what the kerbals do, what they want for pay, possibly even going so far as to change their stats a bit. A kerbal that has survived a landing on Eve and made it back is going to be less terrified of a relatively easy and simple Kerbin landing.

I'd also like these stats to DO something. What effects could courage and stupidity (or lack thereof?) have on gameplay? Maybe less brave Kerbals introducing errors (+/- small inputs for pilots, small chance to fail in repairs for engineers, a small penalty or possibility of failing to complete an experiment, for scientists?) into thei activities, and less stupid kerbals balancing that out, making the controls more precise, etc.

The way I see it, as it stands now, this really isn't an experience system, anyways. More of a personal milestone per kerbal system. You don't gain more EXP by repeating a mission, which for game purposes, is okay-ish. But you can't tell me there is nothing left for a Kerbal to learn from a trip to the Mun after the first one, surely? I would like to see more of a diminishing returns system for the experience, so that each time they do it, they learn less... but are still advancing. Obviously, this requires changes to the core of the system, but I think it would be a good series of changes.

I really like the idea of more than one field of each category, and each Kerbal having SOME skill in them, even if it isn't much. It adds a bit more depth to them, particularly if they can grow and get better in each field. This gives more of a reason to keep the most valuable Kerbals safe, and yet, to place them into danger whenever possible

Overall, I think the system is okay-ish. As long as more is coming, to add more to it. As it is, it is a mediocre function in an otherwise great game.

[tater]

I think it is fine. Science is already too easy to gain quickly, anyway. I started a vanilla career to test 0.90. I have 2 scientists in an orbital lab. That's it. I've unlocked all the 300s, upgraded most facilities (VAB/launch pad, and research all the way), and still have over a million in the bank. Landed Mun and Minmus, with just Jeb as pilot (the few surface collections are in the CM right now, so those few hundred have not even been counted yet, only transmitted science (landed Jeb mk1, then rescued him later and used that craft and a CM to go to Minmus).

You're saying I was limited because I really needed to use mission specialists? I WISH I had been so limited. I think in actual Kerbin days my space program is only a few months old, too, I know I'm well short of a Duna launch window just from looking at the map (forgot to check date).

[Greep]

What's this about the pilot the only useful one? He kinda sucks o.o The pilot can be replaced with a .1 ton part with a few weightless solar panels and a battery, before upgrading your R&D. The only thing that replaces the scientist is the currently overpowered outsourced R&D which anyone can tell is going to get axed. I wouldn't be surprised if they took out resource trading altogether considering what a mess it is.

Edit: But back to complaining about experience xD I just dislike how experience for a system is capped at one. It'd be cooler if it were done like science, where duplicates give you receding gains. It sounds weird that someone going to the Mun three times is no more experienced than someone who went once.

Edited January 1, 2015 by Greep

[NWM]

The "specialization" system works well, only some mention:

XP gaining - One of the most difficult mission - visiting Eve pays less than a Low-G Jool moon?! Balance it!

No benefits ove 3rd-4th level!?

Add it to Science game mode too (optionally)!