shdwlrd

See below...

Neither am I, so I understand the want for an autopilot. If the information for your crafts situation was easily viewable, you would have much better time landing. It won't be any easier of a task, but with knowing what the craft is doing will take some of that mental strain off and make landing a little less stressful. In career mode, there is a radius around the KSC with how much you would be reimbursed for your surviving craft upon recovery. So if you land in the immediate area around the KSC, you'll recovery the most funds from the parts. TCA is Throttle Controlled Avionics by allisa. The only mod I've found that can land you within 100m every time. But it also has a bunch of cool features to play around with.

It's quite possible if you're good enough, but mods do help with that type of extreme precision. MJ can't do it, but TCA can. But we are talking about stock, so anything that mods can do isn't helpful. More than likely there will be a radius that will be considered a valid landing for colonies, very similar to KSP1. The only real reason for that type of extreme precision is when your bases are small enough not to be considered colonies. The closer you land to the base, the quicker and easier you can transfer the resources and personnel between the base and craft. The time savings alone is worth being able to "easily" within a couple hundred meters of a base.

@MADV That is a very well thought out approach to money in the game. Nate did say something that would throw a wrench into your plan though. There will be no failure states do to the lack of money, resources, and life support. So the time warp issue comes up again. (Personally I'm not against players abusing time warp for money and resources, but there are others who are.) So the devs have different ideas about resources in the game. Too bad they have been tight lipped about the adventure mode.

If landing was as simple and intuitive as you claim, everyone will be landing safely first time, every time. I have to reload several times before I land safely, EVERY... SINGLE... TIME!!! So we have completely different experiences with landing. Now as I said, I'm NOT requesting or advocating for an autoland feature to be added to the stock game. What I'm wanting is meaningful information about your situation to be CLEARLY visible when you land. An example would be separate velocity measurements for your X, Y, and Z axis. The bearing of the prograde marker separate from the actual bearing you're facing. The actual degrees of roll you are compared to the ground. (For landing planes.)

I already knew about the tutorials. They are great for providing information about a concept and general how-to. So for something like orbital mechanics, Hoffmann transfers, gravity turns they are great. For something where you have to keep track of multiple variables at the same time with no time to stop and analyze your situation, something more is needed. Landing is one of those times where you don't have the time to analyze what is happening until you're done. You try analyzing during landing, you will mess something up and either crash out right or struggle to recover and luckily not crash.

I know. It just frustrates me to no end. I put examples of situations and possible solutions. And all I get is either learn to do it or useless advise, not other views or options to help the player with that situation. Hence my rant. Well said. This is the clearest explanation of the idea I've been trying to convey. @Mahagon You are correct, there needs to be tools that help with planning your decent and with landing. Whether it's from orbit or within the atmosphere, these type of tools will help. @Master39 I've known your position on automation for awhile. But it’s was never automation that I was suggesting. What I was suggesting was, as SciMan said, more information about your situation being given to you. And as Mahagon said, the tools to help plan, and guide you with your decent and landing your craft.

I never use IVA because without mods, the instrumentation is mostly useless, the sight lines are terrible. I can see the reasons for a stock implementation for MDS and HUD. (Nothing complicated, just navball and resources.) It would make it easier to design custom screens. (Stock framework would be place, but empty.) Not have to worry much about it breaking with updates. (Plus no need for custom assets and messing with the IVA model.) Interactive buttons already in the model, they just need to be assigned to a function. I like the idea, but we'll have to see if the IVA's are even usable first. (Sight lines dominates all other needs.)

I'm getting tired of the narrow view and outright resistance to anything that directly helps the player in game with very difficult tasks like landing. Why can't hand holding type guides be implemented into the game? Why can't anything beyond a tutorial video be added to help the player? Why can't the player have immediate in-situ feedback while doing a difficulty task to help see and correct their errors before it becomes a disaster? These types of player aids have been in flight sims for years. Why can't they be added to KSP?

It's landing in a small target area. An example would be landing on the VAB or launch pad from orbit.

@Master39 we have danced around this landing issue before. We both agree that tutorials and better tools/information will help. But all the tutorial videos out there won't help when the person doing the task can't see what they are doing wrong. Having a nice marker showing where you're going to land is helpful, but it doesn't show how to keep the marker on your target. Real time how to land property is more important than real time where you're going to land. Once you have the how to land down, then where you land is relevant. You can compare docking and landing for the amount of required precision. The difference between the two is that with docking you can stop and access the situation where with landing you can't. Once you start landing, you must complete the operation or fail trying. You either land safely or you crash, there is no other outcomes. So when you crash multiple times before you land safely every time you land. You're not getting how to do the task properly, you're just getting lucky.

I really hate the answer "it's easy, it just takes practice." It's not easy, and if there is nothing to tell you what you're doing wrong, (except crashing) how will you learn how to do it right? I really do hope that KSP2 will add the tools and/or info to help with precision landings.

But it’s no fun waiting 15 min for KSP to load.

Or for high mass vehicles or cargo, or low gravity moons. (OK, not Gilly. You can trip and fall off Gilly.)

What is sackboy? What is the premise behind little big planet? Why do exclusives when a game is going to be mod friendly? Why can't it be added as optional suit that anyone can use? It's not a bad design, it would fit the Kerbals very well with minor changes to the hands and feet.

Solution in development Research break Drop the main sails!!! Capsules... they're not boats Burn baby burn. Don't say that during reentry!!! And don't sing Ring of Fire during reentry either

And the politics is king. So your funding raises and falls from time to time for no good reason. That's a game mode to really slow your progression to a crawl.

Nate said that they didn't want the new planets and star systems spoiled on day one of the release. So the general assumption is you will have to discover them to see any information on them. So basically it seems if there is any type if linear progress, it will have to do with the parts available, not so much the new star systems. But in a reply to a post, Nate did say he would love to see what people do with less than ideal technology. So technology progression may not be linear but, be based on what you research. Basically, answer not clear at the moment.

Money is one of those mechanics in KSP where it may not be necessary, but it can have its uses. In the early game I can see the use of money, but as the game progresses, the need will definitely drop. Boom events can work for bonuses, but a good steady source of money is contracts/missions. Contracts isn't necessarily a bad thing, but there needs to be a better variety of objectives and durations for them. Of course a background source of money wouldn't hurt either.

You can count the number of times on one hand?

Good to see a release period. But a fiscal year for T2 is April 2022 - March 2023. So we have as little couple months to another year before release. Looking at the definitions for the categories, the delays make sense now. We know KSP2's scope has grown, but T2 is lumping it with GTA and RDR for the amount of playable content (play time?) it will have. Little KSP1 has a ton of things to do. KSP2 is going to be a monster compared to it.

The best place to learn to fly is Kerbin. The sooner you are exposed to flying, the more time you have to practice. I'm going to answer this with a quote from The Aziz. We don't know how science or progression will work. There maybe little or no progression available on Kerbin. Maybe Kerbin is going to be your learning/testing grounds and the real progression will come from visiting other bodies in the system. We just don't know.

Specifically unlocking plane, rover, and possibly boat parts, they will need to be unlocked much sooner in the progression. You will need to learn how to use them prior to leaving the star system. Yes, they have limited use in the Kerbol system, but they are still quite useful. If you're transferring resources between surface bases/colonies surface vehicles or aircraft maybe the more efficient option.

True LS hasn't be confirmed but I'm thinking of a space efficient storage of Kerbals for the long interstellar missions. I'm figuring that you will need a decent number of Kerbals to start a new colony. It would be easier to put the Kerbals you don't need "asleep" in one or two parts than having to build the extra space on the ship for them.