|
Yeah, that. Hopefully fixing that will also fix the bug that sneaks Jeb into every mission.
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 16:13 |
|
|
Is KSP's name database in a text file somewhere in the install, or are they procedural?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
Okan170 posted:Maybe Melzor Kerman could be as memorable as one of your main Kerbals, or whoever else. Like, you start out with your basic 3 Kerbals, and then build on that, much like you build your own spaceships. MAN I should have reverted the mission that killed Richbro Kerman. In my head he had a big fierce grin and a big fierce beard and he was bankrolling the spaceplane program all on his lonesome with his profits from Kerbin Records.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
Gau posted:Is KSP's name database in a text file somewhere in the install, or are they procedural? IIRC each name is composed of two syllables, chosen randomly from a premade list.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
haveblue posted:IIRC each name is composed of two syllables, chosen randomly from a premade list. Sounds super easy to add and edit* *Says this before looking for it.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
haveblue posted:IIRC each name is composed of two syllables, chosen randomly from a premade list. Some of the names are preset but are not accessible. I think those include some YouTube personalities.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Met posted:Some of the names are preset but are not accessible. I think those include some YouTube personalities. Now I'm going to have to keep killing kerbals until I find Scottsidiah Kermanley.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Okan170 posted:Is there a place to download this outside of the forums? I've been searching and it seems I'm a victim of my own bad timing WRT the forums being down. Curse's search is... interesting. Here you go, latest iteration of SCANsat afaik. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11993505/SCANsat-v6.zip
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Nevets posted:Now I'm going to have to keep killing kerbals until I find Scottsidiah Kermanley. That would be Scott Kerman. Girlbals is just the team petname, female Kerbals are just Kerbals. Gender was unintended, the names Bill, Bob and Jeb were placeholders but they got so much traction from the community we can't ever remove them now. Add to that the fact that their design already looks rather male and whoops, we made a guy only race. It's fixable and as an indie studio we have a lot of freedom as far as what we can do, we don't have to adhere to industry standards of 'make them cute as heck or hot as hell'. From my personal point of view, I see no harm in adding them, plus I have been dying to have actual, real data on what inclusion does to game sales and if the industry is right in saying 'well women won't buy it anyways so why bother'. Regardless of them being right or not, it feels like the right thing to do. Worst case scenario we made a small amount of people happy.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised if the effect on sales is impossible to spot, I'm sure there's a minority of people out there that won't buy the game with only one gender but for the most part if they want the game, they probably already have it. Maybe a sales boost from positive PR? Who knows. But it's still worth doing, it's not all about the bottom line. It'll make people feel better about having equal representation, which is the sort of effort that improves the company in the long term.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I wouldn't be surprised if the effect on sales is impossible to spot, I'm sure there's a minority of people out there that won't buy the game with only one gender but for the most part if they want the game, they probably already have it. Maybe a sales boost from positive PR? Who knows. Squad is heavily invested in the educational aspect of their game. Now that they are going forward with academic versions, they don't want your girls to feel squelched when they play the game. It's perfectly logical and thoughtful of them, honestly.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Yeah, this game is play-rocket-science, which means it'll suffer from the bias of STEM against women. So any women who would be interested in playing probably would be already and would not be motivated merely by the inclusion of female kerbals. I'd be surprised if its a noticeable bump in sales. That being said, the news blurbs that would accompany the inclusion could pull in some more people, and it certainly wouldn't hurt to have female pilots to relate to (not to mention the historical figures that could included--another vote for Katherine Kerman!). On an anecdotal level, I know my daughter really pays more attention into things that have female characters. So its really a no-downside addition.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Please explain in as much detail as possible how kerbals having gender detracts from the KSP experience Because then you're just trying to be inclusive and that's intrinsically bad!  Specifically, appealing to non-straight-white-males for its own sake is bad and compromising the developer's artistic vision, but more appealing to straight white males is always good and should never be questioned. DStecks fucked around with this message at 23:22 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Synnr posted:Well here ya go, first is the aggressive one I believe? Thanks for these. It now freezes somewhere else entirely but it's different and thats enough for me right now! Her-bals are the best idea 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:I think this one is the best concept so far- little physical differences, but nothing to make them any less competent. As far as female Kerbals go, this is perfect. Feminine, still retains the goofy aspect of the males, without being   girl Kerbals .While watching some videos where the texture replacer mod turns Jebediah Kerman into Ms. Jebedia Kerman, I find myself wondering "Why does she have lipstick and big eyelashes?" Even aside from the whole 'why is an astronaut wearing lipstick'-thing, it actually weirds me out a little because Kerbals should not be trying to look like supermodels ewwww. Psawhn fucked around with this message at 23:26 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:I have been dying to have actual, real data on what inclusion does to game sales and if the industry is right in saying 'well women won't buy it anyways so why bother'. If that's your goal I would imagine you would get better mileage out of making the inclusion of girlbals an actual 'thing'--give interviews and bang the drums with progressive sites/blogs/outlets that aren't associated with gaming but ARE associated with women's issues about how super awesome y'all are for adding them. Say that 'despite some resistance from the community (emf) we think it's essential that girls have the same opportunities as boys to be accidentally smashed into planetary bodies due to the accidental absence of parachutes...'. Try to get headlines like: Why Squad thinks putting girls into space is the right thing to do I mean, why would females who don't currently play a lot of games want to play YOUR game? For the same reasons women who didn't want to smoke cigarettes DID want to smoke 'torches of freedom'.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Obama 2012 posted:If that's your goal I would imagine you would get better mileage out of making the inclusion of girlbals an actual 'thing'--give interviews and bang the drums with progressive sites/blogs/outlets that aren't associated with gaming but ARE associated with women's issues about how super awesome y'all are for adding them. Say that 'despite some resistance from the community (emf) we think it's essential that girls have the same opportunities as boys to be accidentally smashed into planetary bodies due to the accidental absence of parachutes...'. Try to get headlines like: It's always so nice to find someone else who speaks my language. But seriously all that comes as a secondary if nice effect. I like the idea of just doing the right thing since we can. Luneshot posted:That's exactly why I like it so much. I think it's the perfect route- enough of a difference to be recognizable, but it doesn't go with the "standard" differences between the sexes that most videogames do- or to be more specific, it doesn't go the "skinny body and HUGE TITS" Responses to us saying that girlbals are part of the plan have been mixed, yeah. People seem to get that the 'big boobs, skinny' route is dumb and wouldn't fit Kerbals as a whole. Although people try. But then the community leaned hard to the other side of the industry standard, to the point that this got a lot of traction on the forums. We are not okay with going with 'kawaii as can be' either. Thats currently our design challenge, to come up with something that is female but feels equally disposable as the male kerbal. Maxmaps fucked around with this message at 23:51 on May 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Psawhn posted:As far as female Kerbals go, this is perfect. Feminine, still retains the goofy aspect of the males, without being That's exactly why I like it so much. I think it's the perfect route- enough of a difference to be recognizable, but it doesn't go with the "standard" differences between the sexes that most videogames do- or to be more specific, it doesn't go the "skinny body and HUGE TITS"  route.There's a pretty big contingent of female gamers out there, and there's absolutely no reason not to represent them too. It shouldn't even be about sales- it's about the fact that you're not representing 50% of the world population, many of whom are dying for some non-sexist female characters in games.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
    Took six kerbals to Minmus to check delta v requirements, found something to do when they were there. Turns out that six seemed to be the magic number for stacking them, even at that number they started slipping, then staying stable at five tall. Maybe a lower gravity body would be the trick to stacking more? Oh, and having women represented in the game too would be good.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
so one of my friends suggested I built a space bike to do sick jumps with for jeb. Turns out making a space bike is really difficult (who knew) and took several iterations to get anywhere close to right: First attempt:  ended up like this:  Second attempt actually left the runway:  but the front wheel fell off. It did, however, go fast.  very fast.  (90km). The third iteration (and most successful) went as far as fixing the front wheel. Successful enough to warrant a manned test flight:   Which went very well  Until the craft went supersonic. At which point it started pitching down into the ocean. Instead subsonic flight was tested instead:  There was too much pitch control and the wings snapped off. Unfortunately the pilot crashed into the water. Tomorrow: I will make space bike get to space, again. This time with the front wheel and a kerbal.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
If anything Female Kerbals should be included simply because its pretty disrespectful in a game that now carries a NASA badge not to. Both Women and Men have died in NASA missions, they were all there for the pursuit of knowledge, its kinda weird that it would be any other way in KSP. Though, when the character customization pass comes, Id love to see a little prop randomization too. Nothing big, maybe different hair colors, facial hair, glasses, a few short but serviceable hair styles, just a few little touches to make each Kerbal slightly individual. Edit: Ok, and yeah this is going to be sappy but, Maxmaps is this something Squad could implement before the release of the edu version? Its a small change but I think the inclusion of both sexes in a learning environment is a positive message that really should be out there for young minds. Spaceman Future! fucked around with this message at 00:30 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:Link success at a game to the player's skill level? preposterous! I see rocket design as one of the aspects of player skill level. So a mission can fail (by no means exclusively) due to: -something breaking on launch -TWR being low on launch -Not having enough delta-v for Kerbin ejection -squandering delta-v due to piloting -Lander not having enough delta-v for ascent/descent -Lander not having enough TWR for ascent/descent -return vehicle not having enough delta-v -Not enough parachutes With detailed figures on a per-stage basis, the list gets reduced to: -something breaking on launch -squandering delta-v due to piloting -Not enough parachutes The first one is often resolved with more struts or a slight redesign, the last one is learned early on and rarely a problem. So the final list is: -squandering delta-v due to piloting Get to orbit; mission success no matter the destination! Doesn't seem interesting from a gameplay perspective. And I see everyone's point about running out of gas being a lackluster failure that requires mission restart or (not mentioned in previous discussion) a rescue mission. e: so other/all aspects of gameplay may need to be reevaluated, especially with economy implementation. Corky Romanovsky fucked around with this message at 00:15 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:I see rocket design as one of the aspects of player skill level. So a mission can fail (by no means exclusively) due to: The rocket equation is not hard, they give us isp and manoeuvre nodes display dv. Calculating your dv is a very simple bit of maths in a spread sheet, but it's slow and tedious to add up all the masses, especially when some parts have a listed mass but are actually weightless. There is no reason for dv to not be in the vab, especially as it's already in manoeuvre nodes.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Just have the game have a box that goes 'you have enough fuel to get to Minmus, Duna, Mun,' etc. during construction. And that box assumes perfect burns and player skill so there's plenty of room for mission ending failure, and you can have a goal to shoot for during construction so you don't end up woefully over or under fueled in a mission to Jool.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Guys, clearly the solution is to make them all machine people, with one gender: electronic  In actual useful news, the big - Add ΔV to the VAB - In-flight access to controls options - Crew-in-pods memory for the VAB, AKA "drat it, Jeb, you snuck into my rocket AGAIN  "- Radar altimeter available in places other than IVA EDIT: Added that last one Mistle fucked around with this message at 11:56 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Mistle posted:Guys, clearly the solution is to make them all machine people, with one gender: electronic Cue 'male or female power adaptor?'
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
I just remembered another long-standing bug that I really wish would be fixed: Time-warping through SOI transitions should not introduce orbit errors.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Psawhn posted:I just remembered another long-standing bug that I really wish would be fixed: This is probably not going to be fixable, if my assumptions about how time-warping works are correct (larger chunks of time per interval to keep cpu load in check, which leads to varying chunks getting skipped in the SOI change, or even missing SOI changes if you are going too fast).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
EightBit posted:This is probably not going to be fixable, if my assumptions about how time-warping works are correct (larger chunks of time per interval to keep cpu load in check, which leads to varying chunks getting skipped in the SOI change, or even missing SOI changes if you are going too fast). The way you fix the problem is to calculate the position at which the SOI transition took place, then start calculating the new orbital elements from that position. The current system uses the vessel's current position, which allows it to "penetrate" the SOI at higher time warps before the orbit is updated to use the new body. I currently use Alarm Clock to drop me out of time warp just a couple seconds before the transition to avoid these errors as much as possible, but it'd be nice to not have to do that every single time.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:And that box assumes perfect burns and player skill so there's plenty of room for mission ending failure... And that sort of fuel based failure is what some here find as unfulfilling gameplay. Also, staging and docking would often make it impossible for the computer to predict specific usage.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
I don't see what the issue with putting a dV number in the VAB would be. It's not like the entire rest of the game isn't completely incomprehensible the first time you play it. That's the point of the game, you figure out what you're doing and feel smart when you do.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I don't see what the issue with putting a dV number in the VAB would be. It's not like the entire rest of the game isn't completely incomprehensible the first time you play it. The trick is that while yes, I did go to the internet and learn about dV and other rocket science, doing the math for my rocket of many pieces of varying mass by hand is dumb and doesn't get me to the blasting my Kerbals into space faster. It's why I have a mod that adds all that extra instrumentation. The smart part of it shouldn't be having to bust out a slide rule to calculate your burns--it should be knowing what all those numbers on the instrument panel mean so that you can do more and more efficient missions. It's landing on the moon Neil Armstrong style with a couple seconds of fuel left, and taking a deep, relieved breath at engine shutdown. Then you go home and mount a rescue mission with what you learned that will (hopefully) get Jeb home again. And when going to the Mun is routine, you pick a new goalpost to shoot for.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
I have sort of a half-baked thought about the whole prestige system: I was thinking about the whole R&D system in Buzz Aldrin's Race to Space and how you had to do research to make sure poo poo didn't blow up on the launchpad. I know that Squad's said they don't want dicerolls ruining an otherwise perfect mission, so what if they wrap something similar to that to the prestige system? What if instead of "safety" you research "aesthetics?" I'd think it'd be a very sentiment to not only land on the moon, but to have a pretty rocket land on the moon. So it would create a situation where someone would have to decide whether they want a mission that will please the public but get you a net loss, or a mission no one cares about that will get you tons of money.I dunno how that would be shown visually, whether if the higher tier parts will have a higher aesthetic value or there would be new textures (flames to go faster?), but I'd think it'd be enjoyable to have in the game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Just some random small feature ideas: - Save and Exit KSP option from in-flight menu. - Load a savegame from a drop-down list on the first menu. - Scroll wheel flips through part list pages in VAB/SPH (as in the Editor Extensions mod). - Placeable text decals with the name of your craft. Maybe small ones for any crew too. - Some way to recover from falls before an impending 1600m faceslide down an alien mountain, like an RCS burst, or mash spacebar or shift when sliding to make some thrashing attempt to stop and get upright again when local gravity is less than a g. - 'View From' camera mode that allows focus on the controlled ship, but 'as viewed from' a second object/ship, a non-physics model of which is used outside 2.5km for the targetted viewing platform.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
I think the whole transparency-of-Δv thing comes down to your philosophy in playing the game. Designing a rocket to have sufficient Δv is one of the game's main challenges, up there with plotting an efficient route and actually executing it. Having that number available on-demand unquestionably makes the design easier, especially when you haven't yet figured out the rocket equation. Doubly so if the game actually told you how far that Δv could take you. It could easily boil down to just stapling on enough engines for that number on the screen to reach "can return from Duna" without ever giving the player cause to consider if there is a better way that doesn't depend so much on trial and error, which is generally what leads to the discovery of the relationship between Δv, fuel mass ratio, and specific impulse. That said, once you do know the formula, working it out becomes tedious busywork. I don't know, I tend to wing it with my ships just knowing that efficiency exponentially trumps fuel. This is really a matter for Squad to work out. It would at least be cool if you could see the stats you're already given for the parts for your ship as a whole. There's nothing lost to tell me my ship's total mass or thrust when I can already add it up.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Live docking feed of the Soyuz docking cam, pretty neat: http://www.ustream.tv/nasahdtv
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Live docking feed of the Soyuz docking cam, pretty neat: The thruster firing mist (I don't know what else to call it) in reality is much different than ever gets represented in space games. This is something I would like to see in ksp. It's one of those cool things you just don't see on earth
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
RCS Propellant, I guess? Or Nitrogen if you want to get specific 40 meter range:    25 meter range  supposedly you can see the astronaut's hand in the window here     Don't forget about the Lazor docking cam http://kerbalspaceport.com/lazor-docking-cam/ Hadlock fucked around with this message at 02:46 on May 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
ethanol posted:The thruster firing mist (I don't know what else to call it) in reality is much different than ever gets represented in space games. This is something I would like to see in ksp. It's one of those cool things you just don't see on earth I kind of enjoy the "realistic" elements in the game (like the atmospheric effects) because it kind of brings a certain element of reality to what can be quite a tongue-in-cheek activity. Yes, yes the Kerbals all toddle around and build hilariously weird contraptions, but the other half of the game learning how those contraptions interact with a far more realistic (but not totally) universe. Stylized creations in a semi-realistic universe. I get this feeling a lot with the Astronomer's Pack as well. Off through the clouds with ye!
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 16:13 |
|
|
So, does anyone have any advice on what to do next now that I've put probes and people on the Mun and Minmus? Space station? Moonbase? Designing a spaceplane? I just unlocked scads of new parts and I don't quite know what to do with all of them. I want to put an outpost on the Mun at some point and use it as a base for long-term exploration, but I'm not sure how I'd go about building it. I think I want to send the base core itself as an unmanned craft and then send a crew later in a separate vehicle; I'd also like to send along a manned rover and an orbiting satellite with SCANsat mapping sensors. Trial and error is part of the fun, but if anyone has any ideas or suggestions for designing the craft I'd use for a mission like that, it would be appreciated.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 03:53
|
|
