Remove or Fix the Stayputnik

[King Arthur]

If you truly believe this, then what are you doing on the forums?

Because partaking in the forums and playing KSP are two entirely different concepts? I'm not sure where you're going here.

I kinda of agree with thereaverofdarkness. As fun as modding is, modding things yourself can take a little bit of fun out of it. I can't explain it. It's like if you know the rules of the game beforehand, you know what's going to happen, and it breaks immersion.

Here's a good example.

Before difficulty was implemented people would manually edit their save files to disallow quicksaving and other things, making the game permadeath/ironman. I can only speak for myself but doing this never made the game as immersive as Faster Than Light, which is permadeath by design. I actually feel emotions when something bad happens in FTL, but not in KSP, because I know I can always change the game.

I consider it hypocritical to be complaining one way or the other about Stayputnik's SAS and/or reaction wheels (or the lack thereof) when we players have the ability to easily address that and be on our way.

In fact the suggestion of just editting the CFGs to your liking did come up back in page 2, but was refused as follows on page 3:

Because editing .cfg files isn't my style.

When some people don't like how a part works and refuse to fix their personal problem themselves even though they have the ability to, that is pure hypocrisy. Whether Squad changes the CFGs or you change the CFGs, the end result is the same. A comparison would be finding that the soup you ordered doesn't have enough salt in it, and then arguing that the chef take it back to the kitchen and put more salt in when you could just take the bottle of salt on the table and do it yourself for the same effect.

If the Staypunik was clearly flawed in a way that nobody could make any use of it, then we have something to be discussing here because that points to a fundamental design flaw. However, the question of whether or not the Staypunik is useless without SAS/reaction wheels is clearly one of personal feelings and agenda; trying to debate something that has no fundamental flaw and which is fueled on both sides by personal feelings on the matter is pointless.

Edited December 25, 2014 by King Arthur

[Superfluous J]

I just put a satellite in orbit around Kerbin out near Mun's orbit. I launched it connected to a manned vessel, sure, but from LKO to completing the contract, the only control I had was through the "useless" Stayputnik.

Anecdote =/= Data but come on, it was a frighteningly easy (and cheap) way to bag a $160k contract for under $10k and just about exactly the accrued science to unlock just the Stayputnik and OX-STAT panel.

[thereaverofdarkness]

Because partaking in the forums and playing KSP are two entirely different concepts? I'm not sure where you're going here.

Here on the forums we play the game together. We share our experiences with each other. This is not just some antisocial single-player game in which every single one of our experiences is entirely private. It is very much a multiplayer game, and so what counts as stock really is important.

[King Arthur]

Here on the forums we play the game together. We share our experiences with each other. This is not just some antisocial single-player game in which every single one of our experiences is entirely private. It is very much a multiplayer game, and so what counts as stock really is important.

So... what do you say about our KSP stories featuring any variety of mods? Or crafts featuring mods? Or stories/crafts featuring mods that have been modified? Or stories/crafts featuring mods and stock that have been modified? Or stories/crafts featuring mods and stock in any combination?

Your argument is senseless and borderline Troll Logic. Yes we share our creations and experiences here on the forums, but nowhere is it explicitly stated that we must all follow the same game rules, nor are we obliged to follow any given set of game rules.

And no, simply coming to share our experiences on a forum does not by itself make a game multiplayer. A multiplayer game is a game where two or more players can concurrently play the same game together live, KSP has no such features barring mods like DMP and is thus a single player game. KSP is a single player game, and thus each player is entitled to play the game the way they want to while at the same time having no say in what other players do with their game. If someone doesn't like how Stayputnik (or any given part) works, they can and should go and change it themselves to whatever they want or like since they have the ability to do so.

Restating the soup analogy: Everyone's here to eat soup, but everyone has different opinions about soup and the chef also has his own opinion about soup. One person happens to want more salt in their soup, that person should simply take that bottle of salt on the table provided by the restaurant and season the soup to his liking himself instead of calling the chef out from the kitchen and making a big fuss about the amount of salt in the soup, calling for a change in the soup's recipe, and wasting everyone's time.

In closing, I feel that this trail of discussion is beginning to derail this thread from its original subject matter. I would advise that perhaps further debate on this subject should be taken to PMs, unless we can somehow manage to drive this back to what this thread was originally discussing.

Edited December 25, 2014 by King Arthur

[Joonatan1998]

Something being stock makes sharing it much easier.

If someone suggests something for stock, don't tell them to use mods.

(or even worse, to make a mod...)

About the suggestion:

No support, the first probe core being basic and weak is a good thing.

[Bill Phil]

Editing .cfg files is cheating in my book. If it's not in the default stock, it doesn't make much sense.

[ghpstage]

Stayputnik is clearly useless I don't know what everyone who doesn't think so is talking about!

Evidence below!

Yes that's a Stayputnik on Eve. It crash landed after leaving its parachute in the factory.... and an unfortunate night time landing with a low CoM

The second is just entering the Jool system, with aerobraking it could certainly make Jool and Laythe orbits, maybe the smallest moon too

Both weigh less than 18 tons

The last is the Mun, powered by 14 batteries due to not having solar tech

It can go to Duna too, and both Gilly and Ike are likely achievable as is

The above was all achieved using low tech level parts. If you were to beeline Science Tech and Flight Controls while ignoring everything else, you could achieve a Mun landing like that, and just adding Electronics can get you to any of these planets.

Far left is the battery powered Mun probe

The second is identical to the Mun except the 14 batteries are replaced by 4 solar panels, that's all it needed to go to Duna, Eve and Jool. With a 7s to replace the 909 this thing can go just about anywhere.

Third is another use I found for Stayputnik, to launch mat labs and goos straight upward through high altitude and into space. Doesn't even need a reaction wheel.

Admittedly there are issues with using it.

• Without SAS any sources of random imbalances, such as from time acceleration or wobbly radially mounted thrusters can quickly prove unsalvageable
  
• Lack of SAS means practice is needed
  
• Lack of a torque wheel means you have to get a reaction wheel to turn it, in practice making it more expensive than a Command Pod and just as heavy as the next core
  
• Tech location is abysmal. Without batteries there is very little it can do, and the next, and much better probe comes in the next tech level. This is the real issue with the part, should come earlier but the whole tech tree needs to be re-examined as its nonsensical on all fronts.
  

None of these make it even close to useless however.

• Its light enough that purely linear rockets can get it just about anywhere, limiting the wobble potential
  
• With practice and the fine controls mode (caps lock) its actually pretty easy to control
  
• It can clear exploration contracts earlier than anything else
  
• Using this instead of rushing to the next core saves up 90 for other, more pressing techs like Aerodynamics or Fuel Systems.
  

Far form being useless, I find it to be top notch as a functional part, as well as fun to use.

Edited December 25, 2014 by ghpstage

[Kegereneku]

If find the demonstration above convincing, especially this part :

Tech location is abysmal. Without batteries there is very little it can do, and the next, and much better probe comes in the next tech level. This is the real issue with the part, should come earlier but the whole tech tree needs to be re-examined as its nonsensical on all fronts.

Reworking the Tech-tree to allow less frustrating unlock of the right parts (still in a balanced way) would certainly solve the problem.

KSP new system is indeed making the game harder and favoring a lot manned mission, but it give Career mode an actual progression.

[Anquietas314]

Stayputnik is clearly useless I don't know what everyone who doesn't think so is talking about!

Evidence below!

[...]

Far form being useless, I find it to be top notch as a functional part, as well as fun to use.

Until I read that last line, I was going to ask how exactly your screenshots using the stayputnik show that it's useless, but it looks like you just added a couple extra negations you didn't intend to

[RobotsAndSpaceships]

Yeah, I already deleted almost all my stock probe cores in favor of AIES, but the stayputnik was really asking for it.

[Rakaydos]

The staputnic isnt any more a "Pilot" piece than a Scientist is.

Unlocking the Stayputnic unlocks satelite contracts, which reqire a stayputnic or better probe core. Satelite contracts are lucrative, so you must either come up with a manned satelite launcher, wait for a more stable probe core, or figure out how to fly the satelite into position without SAS.

[Kesa]

To make designs easily flyable without SAS is a very interesting challenge! I just wish the stayputnik is available earlier.

[thereaverofdarkness]

So... what do you say about our KSP stories featuring any variety of mods? Or crafts featuring mods? Or stories/crafts featuring mods that have been modified? Or stories/crafts featuring mods and stock that have been modified? Or stories/crafts featuring mods and stock in any combination?

Your argument is senseless and borderline Troll Logic. Yes we share our creations and experiences here on the forums, but nowhere is it explicitly stated that we must all follow the same game rules, nor are we obliged to follow any given set of game rules.

Being free to mod the game is not the same as being obligated to mod it. You're saying the OP is obligated to mod it rather than suggest that the stock should be changed. I'm explaining why that's a completely absurd assertion. You are the only one derailing the topic, and I'd like to ask you to be more civil here and stop using personal attacks when confronted by an opposing viewpoint. Let the OP have his thread. You've said your piece and I disagree as do several others reading this and the OP most likely. Stop repeating the same argument and either say something new or just post somewhere else.

[CaptainKipard]

I consider it hypocritical to be complaining one way or the other about Stayputnik's SAS and/or reaction wheels (or the lack thereof) when we players have the ability to easily address that and be on our way.

Hypocritical would be me complaining about no SAS and not adding it myself. Damn words and their meanings. They're so inconvenient.

If the Staypunik was clearly flawed in a way that nobody could make any use of it...

No, no it only takes most of us to make changing stock reasonable, not all of us. Your soup analogy breaks down if a minority of players wanted to keep Stayputnik without SAS because they can remove it as easily as I can add it.

Obviously what's most reasonable is making fewer people be forced to make personal changes. This point applies not just to this but every aspect of the game, and a lot of people somehow forget that.

Tech location is abysmal. Without batteries there is very little it can do, and the next, and much better probe comes in the next tech level. This is the real issue with the part, should come earlier but the whole tech tree needs to be re-examined as its nonsensical on all fronts.

Have a look at this and joint the discussion.

Edited December 26, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[Rakaydos]

No, no it only takes most of us to make changing stock reasonable, not all of us. Your soup analogy breaks down if a minority of players wanted to keep Stayputnik without SAS because they can remove it as easily as I can add it.

Obviously what's most reasonable is making fewer people be forced to make personal changes. This point applies not just to this but every aspect of the game, and a lot of people somehow forget that.

Have a look at this and joint the discussion.

Kipard, the Staputnic isnt a pilot core. it is a satelite core.

As the first probe core to be unlocked, it also unlocks satelite contracts.

Withot batteries, it can only survive a few minutes after engine shutoff- once it's in place, you cant fly it around anymore. it's stuck in the orbit you left it in. As a satelite.

Without SAS, a more experienced pilot is required to launch it, making shuttle designs worthwhile

It's called a Stay-Put-Nic. It's not meant to fly anywhere.

[Bill Phil]

The problem isn't the Stayputnik. The problem is where it is. It's pretty far in the tree. So far that I actually could avoid it by doing a moon landing mission. Just one landing. I got over 1000 science. Nearly 2000 actually. Not to mention that the Stayputnik is a LVL -1 pilot. When a LVL 0 pilot has SAS, that makes the Stayputnik nearly useless. So it must be moved to earlier in the tech tree.

[CaptainKipard]

Kipard, the Staputnic isnt a pilot core. it is a satelite core.

As the first probe core to be unlocked, it also unlocks satelite contracts.

Withot batteries, it can only survive a few minutes after engine shutoff- once it's in place, you cant fly it around anymore. it's stuck in the orbit you left it in. As a satelite.

Without SAS, a more experienced pilot is required to launch it, making shuttle designs worthwhile

It's called a Stay-Put-Nic. It's not meant to fly anywhere.

That's a decent point, but you still have to launch that satellite somehow. Maybe when the part set becomes more complete, and the tech tree gets overhauled things will fall into place a bit more.

[GusTurbo]

I like the idea of the Stayputnik, but it should come earlier. I also think the game needs a "probe" that is entirely uncontrollable as a starting part.

[CaptainKipard]

I like the idea of the Stayputnik, but it should come earlier. I also think the game needs a "probe" that is entirely uncontrollable as a starting part.

In what sense. You can build a satellite that's completely uncontrollable already.

[NERVAfan]

I'd like the Stayputnik to get SAS functionality back and stay where it is in the tree, and add a 1.25m, Command Pod Mk1 shaped "Sounding rocket nosecone" part at Start or Basic Rocketry that has no SAS and is heavier.

[Bill Phil]

I'd like the Stayputnik to get SAS functionality back and stay where it is in the tree, and add a 1.25m, Command Pod Mk1 shaped "Sounding rocket nosecone" part at Start or Basic Rocketry that has no SAS and is heavier.

That'll work. Oh mighty devs, please heed our cries!

[ddenis]

So, reading this thread I've came to a conclusion, and it was expected, that all opinions are divided:

• 50% of participants think that Stayputnik is useless in current state or it's broken, as thread name says.
  
• 50% - think that it perfectly in gameplay and have fun playing with it in it's current state.
  
• Some part think that it has to be moved in tech tree.
  
• And the majority of the gamers haven't opened, read or care about this thread and the Stayputnik (is it with or without the SAS)
  

Edited December 28, 2014 by ddenis

[Anquietas314]

• 50% of participants think that Stayputnik is useless in current state or it's broken, as thread name says.
  
• 50% - think that it perfectly in gameplay and have fun playing with it in it's current state.

I don't think it's quite 50-50, *1 sec while I tally it up* 2:12 with 2 including OP thinking it's useless and 12 mostly happy with it by the end of page 5 (by then I'm starting to lose track of who I've already counted), plus a few more-or-less neutral comments and a whole bunch of other stuff (fallacies bit). I thought it would be more like 40-60, but I guess not.

[Rakaydos]

At most, I'd give the stayputnic a really energy-efficent reaction wheel with no SAS. So an "Advanced Stayputnic" would be a flat octo core (all the piloting SAS stuff, no reaction wheel, low mass) with a Stayputnic "Reaction wheel" on top (Iconic shape, energy efficent reaction wheel)

[Kesa]

In what sense. You can build a satellite that's completely uncontrollable already.

May be in a sense that it can fullfill satellite contract.