JoeSchmuckatelli

Grin! I never knew that trick! People will always try to beat the system - it's actually one of the fun things about games. Until it's not - I remember exploiting the stupidity of AI in FarCry... Hordes of dead bodies and stupid foes kept ignoring them to walk into the ambush. Game got kinda silly after that.

Also - RM knows the ship has fuel, but you cannot place a Maneuver Node because the ship has no fuel... Yet the engines of the ship will light and allow interplanetary transfers if you eyeball it correctly.

I agree. Very much agree. Frankly, I think I need to channel Aziz more than I do. Sanguinity is not my strong suit. But he's right. The devs have their collective eye focused on Colonies and Resource Management. To them, a ScanSat is part and parcel of RM - so it's not needed, now (or too early to implement)... but it will likely be a part of that update when that update lands. Maybe all of our frustrations with Science! will be moot after further Milestones. Adding to this - @Nertea explained somewhere that CommNet isn't going to be implemented unless they can do it right - and to do it right they'd have to do up some kind of GUI that presents players with information that makes sense. I gather that doing that at this time would take away from the development track they're working on. So while there's players like us who want CommNet and ScanSats and reasons to do Polar missions, scatter satellites and do all the fun things of KSP in KSP2... Science! isn't an endstate, just the first step along the Milestones toward presenting the game that they want to create for us to enjoy.

Okay - new info. After googling I discovered that Fuel Transfers are NOT done via Parts Manager but via Resource Manager. So I loaded up the new save and tried to do that - use Resource Manager to transfer the fuel across. RM is bugged. Hitting X to close a window / tank in one panel simply clones the tank window into the left panel. So then I loaded up the bugged save from last night (ship has no fuel). Map view will not let me create a maneuver node because ship has no fuel. Going to the Resource Manager... there's plenty of fuel. Somehow the systems are not talking to one another. RM tells me there's plenty of fuel on the craft. Game, however, thinks there is none. Parts manager shows nothing when I click on a tank (designed that way?). Color me confused.

Reported Version: v0.2.0 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Ryzen 5 5600x | GPU: 3070 | RAM: 16 Ran into the No Fuel Bug in a save game last night. Created a New Campaign to test this out and see what's going on. Top craft has zero fuel (from VAB sliders) Bottom tank is full. Went to Resource Manager to try fuel transfer and the wrong tank moved over. Hit the 'X' to close it - and you can see the result. Each time I tried to close any panel on the left or the right - a new tank was cloned into the left panel. Closing and reopening RM retains the error state. Included Attachments: .ipsImage { width: 900px !important; }

One of the things I noticed way back in March/April was that Parts Manager did not like fuel tanks: clicking on a fuel tank in Parts Manager never / rarely shows anything in the tank, despite having a carrot/pull-down menu. I've run into a fuel related bug in one of my Science! games that I tried to backtrack when it occurred by reviewing previous savegames. And I can't. Oddly, the gamestate is not entirely related to the savegame at the time it was saved. It seems to me that there are various systems within the game that all have their own state. i.e. they save things themselves w/o regard to the player's particular save. To illustrate: last night I did an Apollo style mission - used a transfer craft to bring my lander to the Mun, undocked the lander, landed, lifted off and redocked with the transfer craft. When I undocked both craft had plenty of fuel - and while I wasn't looking with any granularity (game had performed without a hitch to that point) - both craft should have had plenty of fuel when I redocked. But upon docking? No fuel bug. I left the game to post a report - and in the VAB I created a simple pod + fuel tank so I could confirm how much fuel each X200-8 tank should hold. Today, I went backward through my saves trying to backtrack when the bug occurred - and its a useless endeavor. If I go back to the save where the craft was on the launch pad (Booster, sustainer, transfer and lander all in one craft) - the fuel bug still exists. If I go in that early save from the KSC to the VAB - the little pod + fuel tank I did last night AFTER hours of play and several savegames down the line - the test Pod & tank are in the VAB. That is odd to me. I would expect the game to be in the state it was when I made the save. It's not. The VAB has its own state separate from where I left the game. In other words - despite my having 'gone back in time' with the Kerbal & ship, the VAB was on 'a different timeline' and thought it was after I had left the Mun & docked. (Or in actuality - it has its own save state that doesn't relate to the game save I made as a player). All of which is a long winded way of saying - it looks like once you break a game / have the Fuel Bug appear - the entire game is broken. I tried to go back and turn off KSP2, start a new campaign and see what changed... and Parts Manager still does not like the fuel tanks. Parts Manager in the VAB is functional - but not on the pad. Built a simple craft - pod tank and engine; no Parts Manager info on fuel at the pad. Went back to VAB and added a decoupler and repeated the steps (pod, tank and engine) placing that ship atop the other - with zero fuel in the top craft. At the pad? No way to tell that one craft has an empty tank and the other a full one. No way to transfer fuel. So either I'm missing something fundamental - or there's still some big problems under the hood w/r/t fuel. Appreciate any insights.

Lol

There is a Marketing Dude in all of us. Yeah - that's missing, too. Goes into my whole theme that much of the the educational promise of KSP2 is being missed

I remember there being parts (too lazy to look them up) that had to be in a polar orbit to work. There were missions and reasons for putting ships into polar orbits - which I found enormously informative and educational when learning about orbital mechanics in KSP. As far as I can see - there's nothing like this in Science! ...So does that mean doing a Polar Orbit in current KSP2 is similarly useless? Or have I missed something obvious? (which happens, tbh)

That's the one thing Science! is doing well - enabling a progression system; which to your point does act as an effective tutorial/teaching system... but it also makes it a game. It's the latter part I feel is getting short shrift; games offer players something to do that's consequential if they do or fail to do a thing. Doing the thing correctly adds to progression - failure keeps you where you are or puts you back a step. Sandbox lacks that. But I do feel its fair to critique the way they've gamified science in Science!. It should be more gamey! The thing I've learned through these pages is how differently people define what they want out of the game. Some like the progression system for the challenge it gives them to build a thing to go to the place with a limited tool set. the progression system for the challenge it gives them to build the thing to go to the place with the limited tool set in order to DO a thing once there. Science! does the first. I forget which game(s) it was - but way back in the day there were games that, on the first playthrough, you had to unlock everything and learn about it, but in subsequent playthroughs either that was already unlocked or you could choose to play with/without that element. - like in my suggestion of a Kerbilopedia, each discovery would fill-out (unlock) some piece of information about the world(s) and biomes as you did the experiment/ visited the place - but in subsequent runs you could choose/it would already be done. That kind of thing addresses Superfluous J's thing about not wanting to have to do a thing he already knows how to do so that the game knows that he knows how to do a thing he already knows how to do. I like and support that idea

The weirdest thing: After re-reloading the save file with the 'no fuel' craft - I hit 'Z' and got thrust. Still could not set a maneuver node (*no fuel*). So I eyeballed a return transfer and lowered Pe to 40km on Kerbin. Got home. ... There was a LOT wrong with that craft: the Kerbal Manager would not let me move a Kerbal from one cockpit to the other - I had to EVA him the fuel was gone from both tanks - but some part of the game allowed the engines to operate fuel tanks gave no reading on fuel in the Parts Manager the engines worked anyway. there was no way to know whether or how to move Science! from one ship to another -- which may be a feature, not a bug

I'm not actually advocating to get rid of the one thing I hoped would be done well. PDC knows this - apologies for being pedantic, but this is the interwebs; some readers might have missed this very important point.

Until @Superfluous J(or someone else upthread) mentioned tying all science to an action group, it never occurred to me that someone would do that. They appear to have copied the folks who did that with the blue button. Eye opening for me. I found the actual 'doing science' (clicking various experiments and having Kerbals get out to reset experiments) immersive and added to the depth of play. So much so that just landing something somewhere seemed pointless unless it had science on board. I have KSP memories of being mad at myself for landing a can somewhere only to realize that back when I built the craft I forgot to add a science thing. Like forgetting to put on any / the right kind of solar panel, battery or antenna - there was a cost, if in nothing more than my time, to making mistakes like that. The slow unlocking of science parts gave a reason to repeat a previous mission. Otherwise just landing a ship in yet another crater? ... Like others, I should probably hold my ire in check until we get to the next milestone release. KSP2 Science! likely blends into the whole game experience they're building around Colonies and Resource Management. Still - a year ago, a revamped science experience in KSP2 was my most anticipated feature... And frankly, for me, it's a meh.

I have a similar experience. Weird because I could find no way to 'manage science' - no way to be sure what was happening with the samples - and it appears to be that ships and Kerbals can clone samples so that they all get a full copy. ... This was a maddening few minutes, however. I apparently got samples from the Mun even before I set down on it. The Kerbal collected more and got back on the craft. Now, I can justify that in my mind because I saw the collection animated on the Kerbal and I assume ScienceJr picked up something when I pressed the blue button during the landing. Okay. But when I docked - I couldn't get Kerbal Manager to move my Kerbal from the lander to the transfer cockpit. Had to EVA him to get where I wanted him. - again with no way to transfer science. So I dragged the whole freaking mass back to Kerbin just to be sure. I need go back and look at the saves and see if my Science survived ScienceJr exploding in the atmosphere. (No Fuel Bug happened along with the No Kerbal Transfer thing - there was a lot of game breaking going on and I was tired) IIRC - you could run it, but you got a quirky 'no data' text and zero science.

I went back to the save before I separated the craft to confirm fuel existed and amounts. Then I went back to the save before docking - and the transfer craft had no fuel. It was repeatable from the standpoint of turning off the game and restarting + loading the save. In another 'weird' development - despite having no fuel and not being able to set a maneuver node (because of it)... I was able to activate the engines. Eyeballed a return, got a Kerbin intercept and dropped pe to 40km and let gravity plus drag do the rest. Kerbal survived - but it was just plain weird.

I had something similar. Left a transfer craft in orbit of Mun. Plenty of fuel (4k delta v). Undocked and separated a lander - ran the landing mission, lifted off and docked with the transfer craft in orbit. No fuel - not even what was left in the lander prior to docking.

I left a transfer craft in orbit with plenty of fuel. Undocked a Mun lander and successfully landed, intercepted and docked with the transfer craft. On docking - the whole ship has no fuel Anyone else seeing this?

Fair enough - and thanks for that. Will have to ponder this.

Reported Version: v0.2.0 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Ryzen 5 5600x | GPU: 3070 | RAM: 16 I left a 'return ship' in orbit with 2 X200-8 tanks attached and plenty of fuel in them with a landing craft that separated with a full X200-8. It landed, the Kerbal 'did science' and lifted off to rendezvous with the return ship. Using only fuel on the 'lander craft' to complete the docking... I now cannot get the Kerbal home. Can't set maneuver node because "No Fuel" The combined craft is empty? Reloading a save - the combined ship has 1697 Delta v remaining. The lander has a full tank of fuel - confirmed by visiting VAB and pulling up the part (0.8 tons of Methane, 3.2 tons of LOX). I undocked and EVA'd the Kerbal to the lander ship - full tank. Switching back to the Return Ship - it's got 1.53 tons of Methane, 6.12 tons of LOX. It now reads that it has 4k delta v. So... Why after docking the two ships does the game think that the combined craft has no fuel? Included Attachments: BurningDaylight.json Dockingshennanigans.json

I've just docked my Lander Can to my Return Craft and cannot get Kerbal Manager to let me transfer crew from one pod to the other. Shouldn't I be able to do this? I'm not afraid to EVA the Kerbal from the Mun Lander to the Return Lander - but... shouldn't this work?

First docking attempt since For Science! (and maybe KSP2) came out. I got my crafts close, hit DEL for docking mode, and tried to use the RCS thrusters to bring the crafts together. However, with RCS enabled and my engine disabled - I can't get forward thrust. From what 'muscle memory' tells me of the long ago time I played KSP - in Docking Mode the Shift and CNTRL keys should give me forward and rearward puffs. Nothing. I ended up having to restart the engine and turn down thrust a lot to give me closing speed. Clearly I'm missing something; shouldn't KSP2 give me RCS control in Docking mode via WASD + CNTRL & Shift? This damn docking, FWIW, was both successful and played out in real time; took me 45 minutes from when I got the craft w/in 75m of each other.

I'm struggling to distil down what the 'sides' of the argument might be. Let me know if I'm moving in the right direction. I see three themes being expressed here: Players like me who want a more immersive 'science' experience from KSP2, where the 'science' that the Kerbals / Probes do is reasonably related to real science and advances gameplay in a meaningful way Players who like the progression system, but don't care about the 'fake science' of the game and are okay with a simplified interface to acquire science points to unlock progression steps Players who dislike the way that science is tied to the progression system, and who don't like having to do any of it, but will put up with a simple system if that's what the devs have given us. What am I missing?

+1 Adding purpose and meaning and tying in 'doing science' to gameplay progression! (Sandbox for those who don't want to mess with it)

Which could show the player something like this: Curiosity Data Reveals Changes Martian Atmosphere (scitechdaily.com) Likely not fun for the 'build wacky craft' crew - but for immersiveness / education?

Again - nothing exists in a vacuum... and I've tried to link to the context of where this is coming from. Many of us wanted to see a revamped science system - with purpose. My 'Kerbilopedia' idea; where the player's actions expand knowledge of what's going on throughout the system was just one of them. Most people did not want a reprise of the KSP Science system - they wanted an improvement that would have meaningful relationships to gameplay. Many of us also wanted to tie that into 'inspiring a new generation' of scientists potential with the launch of 2. My observation - what I've said about Science, what nertea said about CommNet and other things that are important to some players just apparently isn't part of the current gameplay direction. I'm acknowledging that they're building the game they want - and Colonies / Resource Management is apparently gonna be the KSP2 'Killer App'. The 'stuff I want' may actually be a DLC at some point; much of it was in 1. For that we need to wait for the full game. shrug - and grouse.