EVA Propellent

[Andrew Hansen]

I noticed this too while performing a Hack Gravity test run on Kerbin. I was unsure if perhaps it stayed full just because the capsule was sitting the ground, but I'm glad to have some confirmation that my tests were correct.

That's a bit disappointing. But as others have said, it probably means that in 0.24 we'll truly have Kerbals using monopropellant on EVA.

[HarvesteR]

The original idea (and implementation) was indeed that the Kerbals would use the monoprop from the pods to fuel themselves.

During experimental testing however, we noticed everyone was getting frustrated with it because those tanks, being just normal mono containers, would get drained out using RCS, and when it was time to EVA there would be no more fuel left for them. It didn't work as well in practice as it did in theory, and without a total rewrite of the RCS flow logic, which we just didn't have the time for, we had to think of something else.

In the end, this feature was causing more aggravation than enjoyment.

There were other issues as well, for instance, the mono on EVA suits had to be 'hacked' to zero density, otherwise the added weight would make Kerbals unable to walk properly (just those 5 units of mono was several times heavier than they are themselves). The EVA propellant resource can have its own defined properties, so it works without having to resort to hacky fixes.

The switch to EVA prop solved all those issues without having to do a full reversal back to the old system. Now they have all the advantages of having a proper resource-based pack propellant, without the problems that arose from that fuel being the same as the one used for RCS.

I decided to leave the RCS containers on the pods however, because that did prove very useful for minimal craft designs, as you noticed as well.

Cheers

[I_Killed_Jeb]

The original idea (and implementation) was indeed that the Kerbals would use the monoprop from the pods to fuel themselves.

During experimental testing however, we noticed everyone was getting frustrated with it because those tanks, being just normal mono containers, would get drained out using RCS, and when it was time to EVA there would be no more fuel left for them. It didn't work as well in practice as it did in theory, and without a total rewrite of the RCS flow logic, which we just didn't have the time for, we had to think of something else.

In the end, this feature was causing more aggravation than enjoyment.

There were other issues as well, for instance, the mono on EVA suits had to be 'hacked' to zero density, otherwise the added weight would make Kerbals unable to walk properly (just those 5 units of mono was several times heavier than they are themselves). The EVA propellant resource can have its own defined properties, so it works without having to resort to hacky fixes.

The switch to EVA prop solved all those issues without having to do a full reversal back to the old system. Now they have all the advantages of having a proper resource-based pack propellant, without the problems that arose from that fuel being the same as the one used for RCS.

I decided to leave the RCS containers on the pods however, because that did prove very useful for minimal craft designs, as you noticed as well.

Cheers

Bro you're killing it with forum action lately, I hope the latest bruhaha isn't causing you extra stress to feel that you have to. I think the vast majority of us are happy to have you focus most of your energy in taking KSP to even awesomer places. Thanks for the sweet stuff in 0.23, 0.22, 0.21, etc...!

[Slugy]

The original idea (and implementation) was indeed that the Kerbals would use the monoprop from the pods to fuel themselves.

I decided to leave the RCS containers on the pods however, because that did prove very useful for minimal craft designs, as you noticed as well.

Cheers

I really like this, no more having to use tiny custom RCS tanks

[Tw1]

The original idea (and implementation) was indeed that the Kerbals would use the monoprop from the pods to fuel themselves.

-snip-

Ah, this makes sense!

Is the plan still that they will have limited supply eventually? Like one unit of mono propellant being equal to the five EVA fuel units, or something like that?

[Wahgineer]

I decided to leave the RCS containers on the pods however, because that did prove very useful for minimal craft designs, as you noticed as well.

Cheers

Finally, now I have a way of controlling my capsules during reentry if I'm out of power!

[Kasuha]

I decided to leave the RCS containers on the pods however, because that did prove very useful for minimal craft designs, as you noticed as well.

Thank you for that information, I however think that the game should also deal with the "get out and push" approach when we run out of fuel. So I still think that some limited EVA propellant container in the pod would be nice. For starters, Kerbal could just automatically refill his suit's container on entering the pod using whatever's left in the pod container.

[nholzric]

...In the end, this feature was causing more aggravation than enjoyment.

Dang! At the risk of being too much of a fanboy, I'm really impressed by your explanations surround the latest release. The mining/resource system and now the RCS/EVA system were both altered because a cool idea turned out to not so fun. I know I enjoy thinking up elaborate features but in the end I can only speculate if they will add to the game or not. I appreciate the team's foresight in keeping enjoyment priority #1 in KSP and I especially appreciate your behind-the-scenes explanations over the last couple of days.

[therealcrow999]

Ok, I just notice this too. Finally got around to play game and notice infinite EVA propellant.

I can just have a pod, not other parts, in VAB use tweakables to remove all 10 mono propellant from capsule, then launch. When I am on launch pad I EVA kerbal, drain as much EVA propellant I can, I go back in capsule and come out with EVA pack topped up. I can keep doing this over and over.

[purpletarget]

Merged like threads

[tavert]

During experimental testing however, we noticed everyone was getting frustrated with it because those tanks, being just normal mono containers, would get drained out using RCS, and when it was time to EVA there would be no more fuel left for them. It didn't work as well in practice as it did in theory, and without a total rewrite of the RCS flow logic, which we just didn't have the time for, we had to think of something else.

Why not start with the flow disabled on the monoprop (or EVA propellant, if it's intended to be something separate like a cold gas thruster) tanks in pods? Tweakables should make that a viable solution. Isn't Kerbal EVA refueling a separate system from RCS fuel flow anyway? I'll second the suggestion for persistent Kerbal resource tracking across getting in and out of pods.

There were other issues as well, for instance, the mono on EVA suits had to be 'hacked' to zero density, otherwise the added weight would make Kerbals unable to walk properly (just those 5 units of mono was several times heavier than they are themselves). The EVA propellant resource can have its own defined properties, so it works without having to resort to hacky fixes.

If it was only 5 units of monoprop, that's 0.02 tons, a little over 20% of the mass of a Kerbal. Why not reduce the dry mass of a Kerbal accordingly, and fix the jetpack to properly obey the rocket equation? A zero-density resource is a hacky fix.

The switch to EVA prop solved all those issues without having to do a full reversal back to the old system. Now they have all the advantages of having a proper resource-based pack propellant, without the problems that arose from that fuel being the same as the one used for RCS.

The only advantage from a gameplay perspective is being able to see jetpack fuel levels without clicking on the Kerbal now. Here's hoping you'll continue to refine the feature, as the 0.23 implementation was a very minor player-facing change and leaves a lot to be desired. Thanks for the background info though!

[khearn]

I just had Jebediah get out and push a ship back from the moon. He was in a 243km x 249km polar mapping orbit around the mun, with no fuel remaining. He positioned the ship pointing retrograde at the periapsis, then EVA'd and positioned himself against the yop of a material science section, facing aft, and fired his rocket pack, pushing the ship backwards. When he got low on EVApropellant, he came in checked and found that he'd raised the apoapsis by 5 or 6 km. Then he waited for the apo and pushed retrograde to lower the periapsis. After several repeats, he has the periapsis down to 10km, and the apoapsis up to 1Mm. A few more repeats at periapsis and he left the Mun's AOI, putting him in a 9M x 12M orbit around Kerbin. After many more pushes, he eventually got the periapsis down into the atmoshpere and landed safely.

I'd say he got out and pushed at least 30 times, and always had full EVApropellant tanks. With enough patience, you could do interplanetary voyages with just EVApropellant.