Bej Kerman

Orbital mechanics works pretty much the same for all vessels, so I don't get where you're coming from. Any other newbie could have just let MechJeb do everything and never learn how to rendezvous themselves. Besides that, KSP 2 will be improving the tutorials, so learning how to rendezvous should not be an issue. MechJeb can be a good mod, it just doesn't work in stock where everything is supposed to be hands on. Kerbin's gravity is the same as Earth. Everything in the Kerbol system is 1/10th real scale, but to counteract that, everything is much denser.

Same for anything else in KSP including orbital mechanics, difference is that people haven't been practising barge landings in KSP since 2011. If you practice as much as you do orbital manoeuvres, then it'll become easier. You could apply the 'it's effing difficult' argument to anything and claim that it should have an accompanying autopilot module, but that just culls away the challenge and fun of doing such things. You could theoretically argue that the entirety of MechJeb should be in KSP because everything is effing difficult. Overall, if you find barge landings difficult, good because you'll have a lot of fun landing boosters until you get really good at barge landings. It could be a part of the auto-milkrun system, but landing boosters is way more fun than shipping resources to a colony. This ties into MechJeb discouraging actually getting good at flying. The point of KSP is, as I've said may times over, to develop an intuition for spaceflight, and saying that MechJeb should be in the game because booster landings are difficult / driving rovers is boring / flying is boring and difficult is not a case of automation, it's a case of getting better at these things. Booster landings difficult? Practice. Good thing about KSP is that Kerbin has no laws so you could aim for a larger continent instead of aiming for a tiny barge - unless you like that challenge. Driving rovers is boring? Get better at precision landings. Flying boring and difficult? Set challenges for yourself and push the capabilities of your rockets. Full automation has become a go-to subject for those who are either getting bored of the core gameplay (in which case you're not doing enough exciting things, ), or frustrated with having to figure out their landing/maneuvering skills. The solution isn't MechJeb, it's what you do with the game. The only issue is repeated milk runs that subject you to the same thing over and over again, and that's been fixed leaving more time for fun and challenging things like booster landings and precision landings.

KSP 2 won't go the KSP route of loading everything at startup, so that should not be a problem.

To add to your statement, you also still have to do a milk run once, so it's not like MechJeb where you learn squat.

Yes. Rules? What rules? @WeedmasterP, cmon

Not familiar with KSP? Kinda goes against the base of the game, fly a rocket and get from A to B while doing cool stuff.

KSP 2 is introducing automated milk runs that happen in the background for transporting lots of resources. The best thing is that there's no autopilot; newbies can't sidestep having to develop an intuition for spaceflight in order to be good at flying. Mechjeb has no place in a game where to objective is to get good at flying through space without having to use training wheels You can do all that but you won't actually be developing an intuition for orbital mechanics; you're not flying rockets, just building them and not leaning how to space.

Yes, and I can imagine how awkward aligning every satellite would be just to reach a little further to a distant vessel. Again, this idea just overcomplicates trivial things that do not need to be overcomplicated. If it isn't broken, don't fix it.

I just hope KSP 2 wasn't dumbed down too much for these outdated consoles.

Overcomplicating a trivial part of the game. Pass.

I made a space station fly trough it, even landed in the mobile and made a small base I remember back in 2019 when I did it, I think it was a challenge on one of the subs this discussion isn't gonna get us anywhere, all I want is a better career mode and mission editor lmao Have you made a rollercoaster ride that takes a vehicle down through the Dres canyon and back up again utilizing the weird physics of resting unloaded vessels on top of one another? No? Point being it's naive to say that you've done everything in Sandbox. In reality you're just lacking in creativity or motivation.

you played ksp since 2013 on early access so what? There's nothing you can do to do everything in sandbox. You're lacking in creativity or motivation if you think you've done everything. It's not like there's a checklist somewhere. Have you built a base on top of the Mun Arch yet?

ok, I guess I can trow away my 1000+ hours of gameplay You've got a thousand hours of playtime, so what? There's still a ton you can do, just furthers my point.

Which is something few are close to doing. Just look at the channel you named yourself after, Stratzenblitz has done plenty like 100% electric vehicles and reusable interplanetary missions, if you think you've done anything it's because you're lacking in creativity.

What? KSC recovers parts, money comes back. I've no idea where you got 'it makes the next rocket free' from. Besides that, you're just adding overcomplication to simple QOL features. Why don't we put our efforts somewhere less worthless?

what

I wonder. How about it costing something to recover, but on the next build, those costs can THEN be recovered? This of course would not happen to pieces returning straight to a launchpad. Such as K-rocket 3 launches, ditched stages (simple beginning design) pay X amount to recover, on the next build the Y amount of the value of the recovered pieces is put towards the current build. It's a more detailed twist to the "farther away from KSC" percentage of KSP1 and if you limit the building recovery reward to applying only to the planetary body the craft is being built on, then recovering Craft on Kerbin would have no effect of building a craft on Duna. Too complex? Or just percentage? This would just be adding unnecessary complication to what's supposed to be a simple convenient reward for not being wasteful. I would not consider it an idea worthy of consideration as it's purely based on spite for putting focus on detail where necessary rather than random, minor QOL things like recovery.

Because we all know Elon ditched the Falcon rockets in favour of non-reusable rockets that save money by not recovering their boosters. Point being, if there's any sense to be had in your comment, I'm not gonna be the one to see it.

Why don't we have linear hand-written missions instead? People like procedural generation because everything's "unique" and keeps you playing for however long, but that's completely false. Procedural generation, especially in the context of KSP missions, is utterly boring and only occasionally generates things worth looking at. Look at Outer Wilds. Sure, you can't keep playing it for thousands of hours, but it's at least not boring. At least it's not garbage made by a computer that doesn't understand intricacy and context. Point being that hand-made missions have a lot more potential than generated ones.

8/10 I've seen you plenty of times before

It's like believing KSP 2 should be cancelled because it won't be coming to your old 90s commodore. The minority that wants KSP 2 to come to outdated consoles should absolutely not be listened to.

It's not. It really is. Anything past 60fps is just a placebo.

You build the foundation then the VAB.

1. That would the sytem(s) boring and would only serve to waste the players' time. 2. There will be other reasons to consider the risks and benefits of sending colonies. This is a non-problem.

50ms can be huge when you're not having to take things slow. Runway landings can be especially tedious with low reaction times.