dansiegel30

I read through 50k posts about Navballs in another thread.

Reported Version: v0.1.5 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win10 | CPU: Intel i7 10700 2.9GHz | GPU: NVIDIA 2060 Super | RAM: 16GB DDR4 When attempting to perform precise maneuvers, the accuracy of when the maneuver starts and stops is vital. When performing this manually, the longer the burn duration, the more accuracy can be given to the DV amount applied in the burn. This is needed, even though the LEDs and sounds for burn stop and start in an AWESOME improvement over KSP1 in this regards. Extending burn duration is even MORE important during correctional burns, when the engine being used was primarily meant for injection burns, not minute course corrections. Therefore small DV burns quite often have a 1 or <1 second burn time, which can yield a large inaccuracy when done manually. Increasing that small DV burn duration from 1 second to 30 seconds as an example can vastly improve the accuracy of the resulting burn. However, when changing the Thrust Limiter setting of the engine AFTER creating a maneuver node does not automatically adjust the duration of the burn (as indicated in the Burn.Timer window's "Stop Burn In" parameter). At this point the use, can delete the maneuver and re-create it again, or MODIFY the burn, which apparently sends an updated value of the Thrust Limiter parameter, causing a recalculation of the Stop Burn In parameter. Thus, the Stop Burn In parameter needs to be automatically updated if and whenever the Thrust Limiter parameter is changed, and an existing maneuver has already been created. Video Evidence: Desktop 2023.11.09 - 18.40.50.01Handbraked.mp4

Quite possible that it is due to the engines overlapping each other. IIRC there was a report of an issue where thrust did not even occur if the nozzles of engines overlapped. I've made several ion engine craft with several ion engines, but I make sure that the engine mount plates don't even overlap to ensure no issues, and I've had none - maybe this is causing your shake quake. I'm not saying they wont address it - no idea what their design intent is on overlapping parts. I suppose they dont care usually, as it seems that in most cases of part overlap or embedding parts within parts seems harmless, and is necessary at times for aesthetics or aerodynamics, or more simply, their lack of numerous other parts to achieve certain design goals - they dont penalize you in reagrds to fuel quantity for putting fuel tanks inside of other fuel tanks - but when it comes to parts that creates thrust, overlap can certainly cause problems, and unsure if they would want to spend the time to fix this physics violation (of overlapping parts, even though it is fully allowed in the VAB).

I don't get it - trim isn't supposed to be used on engine throttle, that makes no sense. The Left-Shift/Left-CTRL keys are in fact the trimming of the throttle with Z being Full On, and X being Full Off. I just don't see what one would expect Alt-X to doto throttle. To my understanding, trim is used and supposed to be solely use for attitude adjustments - rather than constantly hit S over and over again to keep a decent AoA on a jet aircraft (holding S down would cause a flip eventually), you can use LeftAlt-S to apply trim to that PITCH control and therefore it will provide a very small amount of CONSTANT pitch increase, which will keep your jet stable and you can nearly be hands free. Its easy for me to remember, as my first flight stick in the early 80s had trim controls, and it took me a LONG time to figure out what they were for. I never needed them until I go into more releastic flight games, that needed trim to maintain a specific attitude. The problem I have with using attitude trim, is that I have no idea how much I have applied so getting it zeroed into what I want is a pain - The best way to look at the problems with attitude trim is to try it in a solo capsule in zero-g. Apply trim step by step is immediately seen in the navball as you start to traverse, faster with each trim application - however, you have no idea what amounts of trim in total have been applied - if trimming out of control, you dont know necessarily how to stop it, or in what amounts are needed to stop it. There should be a simple "reset all trim" command so you can start your trim from scratch and use normal attitude controls to stop your out-of-control gyration.

As they should have a new tutorial for collecting and using science, one would think that they would also re-visit the re-entry tutorials with re-entry heat being introduced in 0.2. If the heat shield is missing in this tutorial when 0.2 is release, I will be convinced the devs system test nothing prior to release.

IG can start by explaining what is K.E.R.B. actually - taking a swag, its your bug reports?? Can't be a bug reporting system, as that seems to simply be done with forum posts. A definition would help too - I'm guessing "KSP2 Effortless Reported Bugs" (as the bugs with high Effort are being removed from K.E.R.B. as they cant be addressed until a major release/redesign, not in a corrective content release patch)

Yep, its just a comms issue - you should really have those panels deployed at all times, unless you are doing some docking. If aerobraking and you run outta charge due to your reaction wheels, well, that's your fault - if you have a proper heat shield on during that aerobraking, you can have a few cheap/lightweight panels on the craft as an emergency back to revive the craft for comms and to receive the order to re-deploy the larger panels. We'll really need to wait and see what the Ec/comms requirements of the science data transmissions look like - could be quite challenging in KSP1 Kerbalism, IIRC taking years to send science data if you did not rig up enough power on your probe.

Well, its certainly up to the devs, and I think it would be AWESOME for zero music while rovering around, and the music begins to swell as you drive up to the discoverable - however they do have plans for the animation/story when you do find a discoverable for the first time - as far as resources, I imagine there will be resource scanners (introduced in 0.4 with the resources and converters) that should detect them FAR before music would ever be applicable.

So, I found a few more bugs. First of all, yeah with a mass of 31t for the greenghouse, ok, that is quite a trade off for infinite food. Good enough for now. So, definitely some water only and oxy only storage modules are needed, maybe even only water....I mean plants do create oxygen right, so perhaps oxygen should be partially or fully replenished by greenhouses (IIRC, Kerbalism greenhouses generated twice as much oxy as food, so it was much easier to have inifinite oxy, much harder to have infinite food). I'm assuming you are not wanting infinite water/oxy because you foresee harvesting of water on distant bodies and easy production of oxy from that? (EDIT - while researching info for below bugs, learned ISS originally was designed to reclaim 80% of water from urine, but it was lowered to 70% because of very high amounts of calcium in the urine due to zero-g bone loss - is this where you are getting your 70% reclamation efficiency from?) So, the bugs: 1) while experimenting with the greenhouse, I discovered an issue where the planner goes haywire in the VAB. First of all, I have all of the major QoL mods, and Even Better Timewarp. To reproduce it everytime, follow these exact steps: a) place a Mk3 Wanderer module (works on anything really) b) pull up the planner c) add 3 more Kerbals d) Set Wanderer Conversion rate to 100% and Enable Converter e) Add a Green House f) Set Conversion Rate to 100% g) Set GreenHouse from Unfertilized to Fertilized h) Now toggle Converter on the Wanderer module, and then toggle it back - note that Water/Oxy doesn't change anymore - its borked now, now mater what you do, you can't get the Resource Converter toggle to change oxy/water resources - the only way to recover is start a new vehicle - it all goes to hell once you set the GreenHouse from Unfertilized to Fertilized. 2) I was pretty sure while I was figuring out bug #1, I recalled seeing infinite oxy/water - which if I understand you correctly, you never want to happen - the only time you should see infinite, is when there are NO Kerbals on board. However, I was able to reproduce this in the VAB fairly easily. It's involved with having extra unmanned modules using excessive Converters. The good news is that it is NOT creating infinite water and oxy, only falsely shows it on the planner: a) create Mk1 capsule with 1 kerbal b) turn converter to 100% and enable converter c) now add an additional Mk1 capsule d) enable 2nd converter - you will see water/oxy duration increase e) turn converter efficiency to 100% on 2nd capsule - you will see water/oxy duration go to infinite 3) While testing issue #2 in space, I noticed that if water/oxy runs out, the Kerbal doesn't seem to die. However, this may be all working out, as I then did an EVA with the Kerbal and discovered issue #4. I did retest again, and the Kerbal did die some time after it ran out resources, like 1-2 hours?? Is this intended? Funny how they dont die right away, but if they just EVA, poof, they have 7 days of life left. 4) Kerbals on EVA carry 7 DAYS worth of oxy, food, and water - Whaaaaa?? That's insane - maybe 2 hours worth (Astronauts on ISS can carry 1/3day of oxygen) - this would mean light rovers should carry some life support as well, if they plan for long range excursions away from the base. Now I suggest as well, that the resources be actually subtracted from those in the craft, else someone can just EVA, go back in, EVA, go back in, etc. Not sure how many decimals of accuracy you have available on the food tonnage, which of course would be incredibly small for 2 hours of food, but considering you can count down to minutes of food remaining, I assume it viable to add/subtract very small amounts of food. *** NOTE - while writing all of this up, the Kerbal that EVAed with 7 days of resources, actually died on me, within several minutes. It still showed they had 7 days of resources. So, I did the test yet again, near exhaustion of all resources, do an EVA to try to cheese 7 days of survival. The resources on the craft continued to decline (and if zero, then the Kerbal would die shortly after) - however the EVA resources on the Kerbal started at 7 days and began to reduce in quantity. So, this all needs to be cleaned up to be accurate - the resources need to work properly - what if a Kerbal nearly out of resources does an EVA, and then tries to get inside a rescue craft that has no time to properly dock - who knows what will happen (maybe Kerbal still dies because original craft was controlling and slowly reducing lifesupport). Not sure what can be done, but it certainly doesnt appear correctly working. 5) In all space tests, with converters on, I NEVER saw wastewaterand CO2 being reduced, i.e. converted back to water - the water duration was extended and water consumption did indeed slow...however the wastewaster was fully present - basically if you have the converter on, and stay in space until you die, you will have 0 water and 0 oxygen, however your storage tanks are FULL of wastewater and CO2.

NOPE - I went to the Minmus Discoverable and the music was pretty dead AFTER I touched down - I guess maybe my altitude triggered the music on Laythe - well, it would have been a good idea....finding an easteregg or discoverable is much more monmental than landing a craft.

So, we all know the devs have done work on ALL facets of the game - colonies, resources, interstellar - they have even played multiplayer on an extremely limited build. So, I think it might be fair to say they already know where ALL discoverables and resource plots will be located. I noticed something with the music while flying a methane aircraft around Laythe, looking for interesting sites, to see if I can find anything special prior to 0.2. Whenever I fly over the ocean, the music is bland - its fine, but it that score's filler verses for sure. When I go over land, the music switches to its chorus - as I approach some different looking terrain in the rocky/hilly areas, the music begins to swell, and swell - and when I fly over particular spots which look like there might be minerals embedded in the rock, the music reaches the crescendo. I flew all around other places, and crescendos seem to happen in the same spots. I have feeling one way to help you that you are getting closer to something important, is not only visuals, or some scanner - but also the music, which I think is brilliant. I'm gonna try to find the moon arch and minmus Kerbal GemHair monument to see if its the same thing - every vid I've seen of people exploring that, had the music turned off. For some, I guess it gets old, but I love it, and it might be a reason for everyone to keep the music on in KSP2.

Nate did say that he would be very disappointed if the next roadmap update took as long as the 0.2 release. My problem with that statement is that over the last few years, I quite believe he has become quite used to and numb to "disappointment".

Well, a lot of the speculation of the details of the tech tree is a waste of time IMO. The tech tree is designed for the parts they have at 0.2 launch. Notice there does not seem to be any place holders for colonies, resource harvesting, orbital construction, and interstellar tech/parts. So, the tech tree will certainly change, IMO, quite drastically in 0.3 and 0.4.

Well, it just seemed weird when I noticed it, but after all I had spent several minutes playing with all the resource allocation possibilities to be sure of the issue, so when I did see it, it seemed "off"....however, it certainly grabbed my attention which is its intent. Maybe replace it with "KERBAL DEATH", lol.

Also I just found another bug - the Life-Support planner does not update if you adjust the amounts of food, water, or oxygen. Its stays as if it is maximum. The mass however does adjust fine (I had to test food and oxy with the medium storage as their mass is too small on the small storage). That is however until you set that resource to ZERO, only then the planner will update (btw, if there zero left, it shows "00m00s /!\" - suppose those characters are intentional?)

I'd also like to suggest that the Life-Support Storage containers simply have a max volume, and you can put whatever in there you want. For example, if I recycle wastewaster and CO2, the oxygen and water can last several times longer than the food. Now, yes, I understand you have the green house, but at 10Ec/sec, there will be plenty of situations where I can't afford to have a greenhouse and I just need to pack more food. Or if I want to have a large food storage at a station, to easily feed several crew for a long duration - greenhouses can help extend that, but I am sure that I would need a lot of greenhouses (and a LOT of Ec generation) to keep the crew indefinitely fed. In the case that KSP2 doesnt allow for variable maximums of a resource, then I think you would need to provide a food only storage, a water only storage, an oxygen only storage, etc. Also make some radially attached storage units rather than only center lined, that would be helpful and can help reduce craft length. Right now it is still extremely limited to what I could do with KSP1 Kerbalism, But its a great start! EDIT - oh, I didnt read in your synopsis that greenhouses can feed 4 Kerbals, indefinitely I suppose - that is a bit far fetched. IIRC in Kerbalism, 2 greenhouses were required to feed 1 Kerbal indefinitely - it made indefinite food generation nearly impossible or let's say impractical, however a few greenhouses where you could spare the mass and connections, etc , did help to extend the duration of food supplies. Colonies of course should easily have the ability to crank out spare food to help spacecraft re-stock their food supplies.

My mistake - I had recalled at one point perhaps I only saw MP resources, maybe I was playing no mods to test something or I do know that I was not running your latest version for a few days. Sorry for the mistake.

In a small way I am disappointed that there is no mapping or devices which seem to be very complex, however I feel that there is an up side to this. In KSP1, with Kerbalism and RO, you can get 3/4 of the tech tree done without leaving the home body and its Moon(s). I was all focused on space stations and easy Minmus mining, but in several hundred hours of KSP1, I never sent a Kerbal past Duna. With fewer science devices, I think you wont be able to farm science just from those bodies anymore, hitting every single biome on those bodies. It will force ALL players to EXPAND - explore the entire system, eventually with Kerbals. I believe this goes hand in hand with resources and colonies. They dont want you putting colonies on the Mun and then just call it a day - I think and hope these advanced resources will be on Duna and the moons of Jool. Maybe only water to turn into hydrogen will be on Minmus and the Mun, but I hope resources for interstellar are only located around Jool. And to get there you will need to get science from far beyond Minmus. However, this comes at a caveat. In-game resources to do interplanetary travel in stock KSP1 were abysmal - the tools they introduced at the end of KSP1 were pathetic compared to the mods that had been out for years. I never would have gotten to Duna if it wasn't for youtube tutorials and mods - yes, you can get there without all of that but only if you are a very seasoned player and you already understood orbital mechanics, or watched videos of someone showing you how to do it. I'm excited to see if they will VASTLY improve interplanetary travel tools and introduce P.A.I.G.E. tutorials on how to use them to get to far away planets. Mods will certainly add more science devices, expand the tech tree, making the game take longer and feel more realistic. I'm excited for that too - I just dont want to play a campaign for 100 hours and still be working on the Mun and Minmus - I hope in KSP2 we will be forced to go, boldly, where none of us have gone before.

Yeah, I am pretty sure all I see in Monopropellant during EVA.

Are there plans to have resource consumption while on EVA? It would be nice that a Kerbal just can't sit outside the capsule with unlimited oxy and subsistence.

Use the resource manager, located in the small app box in the bottom right of the screen. Select the tanks involved, they move to the right. Then you have an option to select IN or OUT for each of the selected tanks. Pretty simply, just in a completely different location than KSP1. It was another idea to simplify the options for each part in part manager. I do like this implementation, but I still hate the new KSP2 Parts Manager - its just WAY too big and provides no ability to look at the status of multiple parts. There is another app there as well, to transfer kerbals from one habitable part to another.

Just like other QoL features that KSP1 mods brought to KSP1, and even those features that the KSP1 devs brought to the final releases of KSP1, I see that this will first be addressed as a mod in KSP2, and eventually will come to KSP2 from the devs as a QoL enhancement...maybe as far out as v1.1. If modders can do it, I'd rather modders do it and the dev team continue to focus on base KSP2 features promised in the 1.0 content - features that modders cant really do (or so extremely complex, will slow KSP2 down to a crawl).

This will certainly come as a mod, however KSP1 and its utility weight mod proved how useful it was - and if KSP2 wants to show its superior to KSP1 in every way, they should eventually do this. Using a fuel tank is simply a work around and a pain because first you have to figure out it's standalone drymass and then figure out how much additional mass in terms of how much fuel you have in it, and then continue to add the two figures. Its a QoL part, and certainly I would rather have 0.2 or any other future release appear a few days earlier than have this QoL feature, but come on, how many hours would it take for the parts guy to develop this trivial feature and put it in the game. If they want to reserve it for a QoL update (many many other QoL features are needed and would be nice), that's fine with me.

Realize, they are not opening the ENTIRE galaxy to the player. Only ONE additional star...and after that only a second star system. You think they are going to implement the SAME exact system they have for intra-stellar just to go to ONE destination? No....I am pretty sure the ship will physically have to get there (meaning it will need the right amount of DV with the future tech engines), but the navigation is going to be pretty simple and straight forward. This wont be relevant until 0.4, which is a long ways away. I think its best to wait atleast until then before diverting resources for a feature that while may be nice to have, it lower priority than anything described in the roadmap.

On the contrary, the DV requirements for interstellar are huge compared to intra-stellar. For example, most stars in our galaxy have an orbit speed of over 200,000 m/s. Therefore the burns will be HUGE in DV, and the precision tools that they have I am sure will be fine for that. Precision is actually needed for incredibly small DV requirements - rendezvous around a small body for example...a few m/s can push your intercept distance by over 10km. Nevertheless, I would like them to improve things, however I certainly don't see it being a priority for them.