RabidSmurf

Its unintuitive and one of those things were you sit there going "what is going on" for a couple minutes until you figure it out. I reverted flights and tried different ladder positions, sinking it deeper/pulling out further from the body, overlapping them more, etc, all of this long before I figured out I could "grab" the next section with the hotkey. I think unintuitive things like this should be minimized especially when easing new player experience is part of their stated goal, reduce finicky/unintuitive stuff as much as possible. Definitely a low priority though compared to maneuver nodes, fairings, and other gameplay and QOL issues

Reported Version: v0.2.0 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: windows 11 | CPU: AMD 5900x | GPU: rtx3080 | RAM: 32gb When a craft utilizes multiple different ladders (Either built in command pod ladders or attached ladder parts) to create one continuous ladder down the side of the of space craft, kerbals will stop at the end of each and it isn't always possible to grab onto the next ladder even when they placed overlapping or very close to each other. Kerbals should smoothly transition to the next ladder unless the ladders are very far apart (if the distance is longer than the kerbal), like they did in ksp1. .ipsImage { width: 900px !important; }

Maneuver nodes need serious work to be more usable especially when using them at interplanetary scale. It was bad in KSP1 but usable, it's worse in KSP2 which is sad. Trying to plan planetary transfers is way too frustrating. Perhaps a picture-in-picture mode of some kind where you could see the planet and orbit where your maneuver node is created at (while also zoomed way out on the map). Maybe even allow you to open multiple picture-in-picture movable windows of different bodies to see the orbital situation and results form maneuver node editing. This would allow you to fine adjust to location of the maneuver around the planet you're currently orbiting and watch it's effect in the grand scale when planning transfers to duna and beyond. Ability to create maneuver nodes on the orbit line inside the SOI of the body you are travelling to when not yet inside that SOI, allows for planning orbital insertion burn before you enter SOI. This was a basic feature in KSP1. Many bugs with consecutive nodes need to be resolved for the ability to plan complicated gravity assists. Text boxes like the AP/PE that can be pinned need to be draggable so i can move them out of the way, they often get in the way of the maneuver node. Ship icons are too big and get in the way of setting target on planetary bodies, often opening a details window that can't be closed when you click on them. The + and - buttons to move the maneuver node by entire orbits into the future. Useful for transferring to moons, or seeing how gravity assists might work out if you plan the maneuver later/earlier. Also a basic ksp1 feature so it's a regression since it's missing from ksp2. Hotkeys to fine tune each of the directions. Get rid of restrictions on maneuver node editing due to delta-v calcs (no fuel, or not enough delta v), a warning is fine but let me create it anyway. The deltav calc is too buggy currently, many cases where it thinks i have no fuel or not enough when i actually do, also maybe I am just trying to plan something out. Burn calculator is still totally out to lunch a lot of the time, or maybe it's the countdown timing, i am not sure. There should be a toggle for "Time to maneuver node" so I can do it the old fashioned way. Lets have some discussion about how else the maneuver nodes can be improved.

This should be a hotfix honestly, it's gameplay breaking. The first Jool mission to send a comm probe there is extremely difficult to achieve as the payload fairing doesn't protect the payload and you can't cheese it by mounting a heatshield ontop of the 86gm antenna.

I have run into this when I had plenty of fuel and the game just thought I had no fuel for unknown reasons, save/reload didn't fix. I ended up manually flying the maneuvers using my experience since the game wouldn't let me pre-plan them, a new player would've just been screwed. The start and end burn calculations are also borked, they were in KSP1 as well but at least in KSP1 it would just give you a time to maneuver node so you could guesstimate when to start and stop the burn yourself. I would like to see this a toggle-able setting or something. Burn calculation is difficult especially if multiple stages or fuel lines, or w/e are involved, as such it should not be designed such that it hinders gameplay when it can't complete the calculation for some reason. I should be able to make whatever maneuver nodes I want, whether or not the ship can actually fly them is my problem, perhaps a warning ("not enough deltaV") would be good. A good example, is mentioned above with RCS. I often use RCS only for smaller orbital maneuvers, and even sometimes for circularization burns, especially with smaller craft/probes.

Currently the biggest problem (in my opinion) appears to be something to do with craft state being incorrect (landed vs orbit) causing orbit/trajectory lines to disappear and vehicle velocity nullification on save reload (because of landed state when actually in orbit). Any word on the status of this bug? Unstable/decaying orbits is a close second, any comments on this?

Is there any particular reason we can't see more planets and moons in Kerbol, such as saturn, neptune, uranus analogs and their moons? Things like the high speed winds on Neptune could be a unique and interesting challenge, or the cryogenic moon of titan with liquid methane oceans could be an interesting destination or colony location. I personally would prefer to see an expansion of Kerbol over entirely new systems that will (in theory?) be easy to explore once you have the technology to reach them unless the game mechanics/economics are designed very intelligently to have an ever increasing (but not overly tedious) difficulty. The new nuclear engines would be particularly well suited for some outer planets in Kerbol, and I don't think anyone would be too mad if Eeelo was moved out to where Pluto is like "outer planets mod" from KSP1. Is this something the team has considered?

My understanding is the fuel flow issue is caused by the landing legs, and attaching them to radial decouplers instead of directly to the fuel tank resolves it, although I have not tried it. The resource manager is opened from the far right button on the app bar (the row of buttons just left of the staging/launch button).

Interesting bit on the fuel flow and landing legs, I ran into that as well. With my 3rd stage drawing from the lander descent stage despite being separated by a decoupler with fuel crossfeed OFF. I used the awesome new resource manager to transfer fuel back before I jettisoned my upper stage that still some fuel remaining, and didn't think much of it besides that it was kind of odd. It sounds like there are some general fuel flow and fuel prioritization bugs as I read in another thread that asparagus staging does not work. So that's possibly related, and hopefully will get resolved quickly. For the undocking issue I do not think it's the struts, although that was my first thought. I removed them all manually via the save file and still had the same problem. Unfortunately due to another bug, my Mun mission crashed into the surface due to some mysterious orbital decay (it was a stable orbit at 32km when I left it). I believe it was caused by some kind of continuity bug where activating engines on a completely separate craft on kerbin somehow activated the engines on the craft orbiting Mun, so I'll need to refly that mission, but I am going to wait for the first round of bug fixes I think. I've hit just about every bug listed in the forums, which I suppose is a good sign as they are easy to reproduce and thus should be easy to fix.

I think a simulator mode is a neat idea. I like to play campaign/career on hard without revert, or kerbal respawn. In the past I would do basic design validation in another save set to sandbox mode, then fly it "For real" in my career mode once I thought I was ready, accepting whatever consequences or designing rescue missions as needed. I even had a kerbal memorial at the KSC with a flag planted for every kerbal that died in the program, planting flags became tedious, but one or two kerbals survived the entire program somehow. This meant I had to transfer craft files between saves manually, not a huge problem but would be nice to have a built in mechanism, for me that could be as simple as the ability to move crafts between saves. Ideally a mode (simulator mode) where you can launch your craft with revert enabled, but you don't get any rewards, progression or persistence if you leave the flight.

Have a vessel in a stable orbit around Mun, go back to KSC, go to VAB build a plane, fly, crash revert to VAB. Suddenly Mun music in the VAB. Try to load plane on runway again, game locks up and crashes. Reload, Mun music in VAB again, go to KSC/tracking center check Mun mission, previously stable orbit now shows a collision course with Mun, take control, see the fuel tank is empty, was the engine firing while I was testing my plane?

My quite simple Mun lander and Mun command module (apollo style where I stack separated them, turned 180 degrees and docked while in transit to Mun) are now unable to undock without exploding randomly. Note the lander is a two stage vessel with descent and ascent (like the real apollo lander). If I first jettison the descent stage I am then able to undock them, but then ofc there is no landing legs or enough deltaV to land. I initially thought it was some of the struts from inside my jettisoned fairing, that had bugged/flipped around and attached themselves to the docked lander, so I tried deleting all struts from the save file, but this did not fix the problem. I submitted the quicksave to a PD support ticket #47551 it should be easy to reproduce.

I have reproduced this several times before realizing it was the launch tower causing it. Notice the camera is drifting weirdly to. I believe there is actually broken parts or something and the camera is now focused on some invisible broken part flying off.

I'll just start by saying I am a total newb at this mod, only just beginning to figure out how to use everything and my biggest problem is figuring out applications for various engines and Isru's and what not, it's pretty overwhelming, but that's part of why I like the idea so much. I am using it to power a Jool ship that can fit about 12 kerbals, has on board lab and life support, can bring landers and other things with it. It's mostly a modular design that I've been using for manned Jool exploration. Up until now it's used the solid core nuclear and liquid core nuclear engine. The NSW came in for me as a pre-fusion upgrade to the liquid core nuclear engine (better isp), it also just looks freakin cool and after I read about the general concept of how it works I wanted to try it. I had to turn the thrust down as the thing is just too insane for most ships, for some reason thrust limiter only available in VAB (not sure if that's intentional). Also due to the limited options of tank types for nuclear fuels I am using the fabricator to convert liquid water to nuclear salt water. This allows me to use radial spherical tanks for the bulk of the fuel storage so I can condense the engine stage length significantly. What I initially wanted to do was store the fuel as iiquid hydrogen and oxygen and then use ISRU to convert to liquid water, but that process was not available. The drawback of the design is I only have about 1800 dV at a time, (about 18k total with no landers attached) so I am not sure if it's really practical for what I am doing, but damn does it look nice. https://imgur.com/a/fduN6jl Note that KER cannot calculate the dV accurately at all.

Seems to be fixed for NSW engine. I noticed the magneto plasma dynamic thruster has the same problem in the latest version (and previous versions), as well as some big differences in deltaV calcs between VAB and in-situ, which I am now thinking probably has something to do with the reactors (pebble bed) assumed state in VAB vs running in space. Also I just want to say in general I absolutely love this mod, thank-you for your efforts!