Bej Kerman

You should be happy you won't need to wait until 2029 for dV to come around, because that's the kind of standards Squad held and people happily dealt with. You fail over and over to understand the entire point of EA and claim that games that come out into EA are meant to be perfect and completely flawless. That defeats the entire point of EA. I'm sorry that you feel personally betrayed by Intercept because they didn't deliver 12 years of development in the 3 years they ultimately got, and that you feel entitled to seeing interstellar and all those WIP features in the very first release of the game.

Codeword for "our expectations were unrealistic and it is the developers' fault", I presume.

You don’t see any bugs and shortcomings in KSP2 at all, and if there are, then you don’t need to pay attention to them. If someone draws, then you immediately begin to prove that the person has fantasized everything for himself. And the fact that KSP2 has a dV calculator makes this game incredible! All evil from mods, KSP1 is a terrible game, and its developers can only develop mobile games. Did I forget anything in your settings? Oh yeah, you didn't say that, it's all an imaginary scarecrow. If you're hurt at all by my evaluation, which is evident from your ridicule, that KSP 2's bugs are forgivable for an EA game that literally just came out while Squad's decisions are not like the one to hold off for over half a decade on something as simple and basic as dV readouts, you are absolutely free and well in your rights to ignore me.

Why does it need to be added later? Furthermore, does the ability to merge stuff and copy stuff not already do this?

No, you're saving current state of the workspace. First, I'm not forcing because the game allows me to do it, second, saving the current state, be it with one vessel or ten, under the same workspace name, doesn't ruin anything. I do agree on that. But we're landing in that gray area of what's subassembly in a workspace, and what's a vessel. The game lets us put whatever we want in the VAB. No, what they call vehicles is what spawns on the launchpad/runway. The piece with green flag. The workspaces are workspaces. The only trouble is, we can't load different vehicles from KSC->launch menu, only the last saved and active one. That requires an improvement. You name changing isn't going to help anyone. Yeah you just described a workspace. A group of vessels and subassemblies in one place. You just made it more confusing than it ever was. Launch something from KSC without visiting the VAB. What the game asks for? A vehicle. One, that single one you marked active when you saved the workspace. Unfortunately, only that one from the whole workspace, but I already said it above. By your description, a vehicle loaded on the launchpad would be everything you have. To avoid confusion, because you're already talking in your own language: "To save your work you always keep the vehicle name the same and change the name of the workspace" That's what you were trying to say? Because I do the opposite and had no problems, the workspace with what I need loads every time and any changes to the vehicle, or the one next to it, saved under chosen workspace name, are still there. Workspace is what you load and save in VAB, same as craft name file in KSP1. Building something new and overwriting the old one is going to result with the loss of the old craft. Or workspace. Not a problem really if you realize what's what. Yep, same as working on new craft and saving it under the same name as old craft in the previous game. Or anything really, be it image file or document or a video. Workspace is what you're saving, Vehicle is what you're launching. You're adding yourself more work really. It's as easy as it is, which I've been explaining right there for the last 10 minutes or so as I've been typing this. Create multiple vessels under one workspace. No merging, no careful overwriting because currently the only thing that matters for safe saving is workspace name... Piece of cake. And it's the second and last thing that needs changing. You're not loading vehicles in VAB, but workspaces. But then there's a lot of UI problems that require fixing so let's not lose hope. But don't come up with ridiculous names that help nobody. That's how saving works. If you create a new vehicle that may be similar in some way to others you've already saved, then you can simply open that workspace or load->merge. Because why would you deliberately overwrite something unless you wanted it gone? What I'm gathering here is that Vl3d is trying to put multiple vehicles into one workspace, by putting two vehicles in different workspaces, then saving Vehicle B to a workspace with the same name as Vehicle A's workspace, thus overwriting it? Yeah, it really isn't that complicated, Vl3d. Just drop another part or duplicate the existing vehicle in the same workspace and build off of it.

I believe a bit much faith was put into the Discord. it's just another message overload in which useful discussions are vastly outweighed by pointless, directionless background chatter.

If I were to elaborate, it would be a wall of text with a comment (or five) pretty much on every menu, button and popup window, both in editor and in flight. At the moment the UI may be considered a placeholder at best, and devs have their hands full with more pressing issues. The UI is completely fine - I am not seeing these problems. I don't see any "walls of text". The parts manager list is the closest I can think of, but even then it's hardly a "wall of text". Then either work around the bugs you spot, or don't mess with EA titles When I work around these bugs, I find maneuvers to be good at putting me on requested orbits. I say you might be acting a bit hyperbolic. And so far I have ran 0 missions in which calculation errors amounted to anything that wasn't negligible. Even when docking, it's hardly much. You aren't getting your intercepts within a kilometer anyway unless anything less than perfection makes you anxious.

Yes. Thank you. I'm not sure why so much information had to be dropped in that cesspool to be quickly buried by rapid messages rather than here in the first place, but yeah. Thanks for the thought

You had a new workspace and gave it the same name as another, so it was overwritten. That makes complete sense to me, it's how files have generally worked since computers became a widespread thing.

Because I'm insulted by the idea I and other women can only be represented if the kerbonauts representing us are wearing eyeliner. The bottom line is this: The things she claims are men don't have to be men just because they don't wear what she's been taught is feminine attire. Ask your daughter if she remembers when she asked "why there are no female Kerbonauts?" and tell her that women don't need to look feminine if they don't want.

This is hardly making sense. It's worked exactly as I've expected in my experience; you save your workspace and change its name, it is saved separately unless you select another workspace to overwrite. If your workspace has the same name as another, trying to save it brings you to a dialog asking you if you want to overwrite the other one. The names of vehicles and the contents of the workspaces are utterly irrelevant. I've not yet seen it behave in the way you're explaining.

The vehicle holds multiple workspaces...? Well, seeing as for the past 15-20 hours of gameplay I've had, my workspaces have held vehicles inside as opposed to "vehicles with workspaces inside" (if that makes any sense), I can say that's incorrect.

"Project workspace* snapshot" is convoluted and 2/3rds of the words here are redundant. *You literally call them workspaces as well, and do so in the name you suggest to replace the name "workspace". And, of course, renaming "vehicle name" to "project name" is redundant because that's a job that's taken by "workspace", and as I said of course, vehicle names should be handled by the individual vehicles in a workspace and not the workspace itself, so there need only be one title to fill in when saving a workspace.

They can be? That's just not their main function but it can be if you find the use for it. That name serves no purpose that just saying "workspace" doesn't. That being said, vehicle names should be applied per subassembly and not through the VAB toolbar, seeing as the purpose of a workspace is to permit working on multiple vehicles.

Note how you refuse to elaborate on any of these points. Empty winging. This is just egregious. In most of my tests, maneuvers have delivered me to exactly the orbit I told them to put me on, with a minority suffering from bugs. If you could even just bother to tell me where the lie is, rather than winging about something that's likely either a bug or you doing something wrong with them...

Don't toggle the map view, and the control is fine enough already. The former is a bug, just wait for a patch. Not true These things aren't irreparable and won't need major overhauls to the UI. This is literally the first version of the game. These niche things will come sooner or later. So you want me to list everything? Well it hardly is. The game is only 3 years old, that's hardly a lot of time, and unlike Squad's attempt at a game, there aren't any super important things blatantly missing. Yes we will, but it'll require patience so I suggest a bit of that. Again, first version. At least you won't be waiting until 2029 for dV readouts, they're there and can be fixed.

+1 Happened because I wanted to dot the wings of my experimental VTOL with circular subsonic intakes rather than have the fugly radial subsonic intakes dangling fuggily off the fuselages and wings, and to do that I used these. Same result as you. Deleted and rebuilt every wing, took my craft apart to single out the perpetrator, point being this part is definitely the problem from the bit of research I did diagnosing my own craft. Maybe a tool was left on and that's what the dev-overlay looking dots are about. That's just speculation though, I just think those dots look too artificial to be a random artefact.

Average journalist rambling

i second this motion I, third

I see nothing to be disgusted about. Intercept did in 3 years what Squad didn't manage in 11 years, create a foundation that isn't missing critical features like dV, accurate maneuver nodes, <s> Kerbals that don't trip over and take 50 years to get back up </s>, a UI designer that knows how human eyes work, etc. Superficial things like re-entry effects and ISRU and go make love to themselves for now, what you're angry over is merely a foundation, one that's better than the other one we've been dealing with for a decade at that. All this - the foundation we get to play for now, multiplayer, interstellar - was done in just three years, and soon enough the bugs will die out and you'll get the nice shiny features you're so anxious for. Just be patient.

We aren't. You can disable control surfaces in the editor, and that effectively turns your wing into a static panel. That is indeed a problem. Control surfaces that are either way mirrored or rocket-x2 symmetrical like to deploy in opposite directions, causing a wing strike instead of increasing lift. A bit irritating to necessitate placing each flap without symmetry, setting the control groups individually and setting the deploy limiters in "opposite" directions in order to get them to work.

I never played KSP 1 with mods. I played hundreds of hours, and cursed a lot during them. There is a lot wrong with the original game, but the things that nagged me most were: insanely long loading times, especially switching between VAB and launch pad annoyed me every time. Weird glitches, stutters, ice-skating friction... Content never bothered me, it took me hundreds of hours until I got interested enough to visit Jool. What I hoped for in KSP 2 is a much more technical sound implementation that takes away all the small disturbances. And I see a more sound implementation. The game opens pretty much instantly as far as KSP standards go, loading to the launch pad is quick and the game isn't loading every single model, texture and little thing into RAM at once. KSP 1 could not have been retrofitted to do all that. Squad tried for a decade and KSP 1 takes longer to load than ever. Just give the devs time to work on things - they have been juggling other roadmap features as well, and dataminers can confirm. And you weren't saying this in regards to Squad CONSTANTLY? KSP 1 has some of the worst priority management I've seen in a game, full stop. You can't say anything bad about KSP 2 without having previously written a million bad things about KSP 1. This is the worst KSP 2 is going to be - it's only going to get better. The devs have not just been working on the core game you see, they've been working on roadmap features in the background as well. In three years, they've gone from a tech demo to a mostly playable product and they've got builds of the game with multiplayer and interstellar to work on as well so players don't come to winge about those things being broken. Your condescending attitude isn't going to get KSP 2 into a more presentable state any quicker. If you don't want to waste energy with EA games you don't like, then don't waste energy being here dealing with EA games you don't like, it's as simple as that.

While we're sharing videos...

Well it isn't. What were you hoping to achieve by just blindly guessing it's as bad as you hope it to be?