Tex

Do you agree that it is a possible solution? And what this proposition is is not such a fundamental change. No orbital mechanics are being altered on either side of this warp, and physics still works here. It is not a matter of removing cars from Grand Theft Auto, it is modding a car within Grand Theft Auto to move ten times its stock maximum speed. Realistic? No, of course not. But is it still Grand theft Auto? Of course it is.

Can you explain a little further? Are you meaning to propose that once warps are done, every object instantaneously moves to the position it would be in after the warp was done? EDIT: After some deliberation, the team went ahead and moved this thread into Suggestions/Development Discussion because of its nature as a discussion.

I'm still repeatedly confused as to what the disconnect seems to be... It's not multiplayer of KSP? But this is an idea for multiplayer in KSP, specifically so. And I've stated before this is only one of many possible solutions. I do not understand how this somehow changes KSP into not being KSP. Everything about this idea is within KSP. I have agreed that yes, it is not realistic. "wormhole warping" isn't a pretty solution, which I have also agreed to. But do you agree that it is a possible solution, however unappealing? Because that is all I am trying to propose.

Do remember though, I have repeatedly said that is not the point of Non-Time Time-Warp. Yes, it is unrealistic, it is not able to be utilized by real spacecrafts, but it doesn't change the entire game. It's one aspect of it- the multiplayer. I'm not proposing completely eliminating time-warping, because time-warping is a brilliant method to overcome what would be the most boring part of spaceflight. In fact, one could reasonably propose an argument that actual time-warping in game "is not how space travel works" and should be eliminated, because, as you propose: I'm not attempting to change the game into anything else. I'm attempting to propose a solution to having multiplayer work.

I'm starting to understand the confusion here, thank you very much for this response. What I'm proposing has shifted somewhat from its less fleshed-out version that popped into my head, where I quickly wrote it down. What I'm talking about here, what I've come to see as the most reasonable conclusion, comes once again to my wormhole comparison. This Non-Time Time-Warp would not affect orbital mechanics in any way, because the vessel, during the warp, would not be affected in any undue form as a result of the warp. As a counter-example, say you have a trans-Munar injection, such as what @Blaarkies said. Instead of aiming this trajectory to get an intercept with where the Mun will be at the same time as the vessel in however many days it takes to get to the Mun, you would need to instead aim the trajectory of the orbit to where the Mun is currently positioned. Yes, it is less realistic, but the reason for this is when you engage this warp. All it does, in essence, is make the ship icon (from the map view) move along the exact same orbital path, but twice as fast or more, depending on how much warp is used. Could it be used to technically break the speed of light if warped fast enough? Well, yes. However, the important thing here is that no orbit is being changed. It's like speeding up time, putting the vessel in fast-motion, but the time flow of the game itself stays the same. When you stop warping, the vessel is then in a different position, in that same orbit, but only a few seconds or so have passed in real time. It is not a realistic solution, of course not. It wasn't meant to be. All that Non-Time Time-Warp is is a solution that A) Allows two players in the same hypothetical game server to interact because there are no time desynchronization, and B) Still provides a way that Munar landing missions and interplanetary trips can be completed. It does mean that it would make the game less realistic, yes. But it is a possible solution to the problems associated with current multiplayer models. That is all.

@Astronaut #1, the team went ahead and moved this into Add-on Development because it seemed more like a work in progress or a discussion. If you disagree PM one of us and we can work something out

I refer you to my wormhole example: In that sense, I don't see how it actually changes the orbital mechanics. In using the Portal franchise as an example again, GLADoS mentions that momentum is conserved between portals ("speedy thing goes in, speedy thing comes out"). Elaborate? I do agree, but as discussed before, the game would become immensely boring as a spaceflight simulator. I do indeed think it would make things nice and tidy, but unfortunately not many people just want to go to LKO or fly about the atmosphere (admittedly, the atmosphere is where I spend most of my time these days).

Ah, but the point was not to completely replace the mechanics of how KSP works. Of course I want to retain how the game functions. This idea affects one thing, and one thing only- Players in a multiplayer setting being able to interact with each other AND not have to wait ludicrously long amounts of time in order to do fun stuff like interplanetary missions. Perhaps something didn't make sense..? Again, I'm confused as to how this idea somehow "removes orbital mechanics" from the game.

Hey, finally made it! As of this post, exactly 1000. Think the OP could use a little editing, though.

I must say, you draw rockets excellently. Wish I had that kind of skill.

Do I actually expect multiplayer to be implemented? Actually no, I do not. Or, at least, I doubt it will realistically happen, but the developers of the game are people that can make decisions, and when the time comes for them to say "lets do/not do this" then I would hope they would come to the forums to see solutions, because they'd have the exact same problems that have been discussed. Yes, discussion after a point is tedious, but new ideas crop up all the time. It is the discussion itself that is one of the most important parts of the development process, because ideas evolve and new problems come up and new solutions are found. I'm going to have to disagree with the negative aspects you mention, but of course I doubt that multiplayer will really be a thing that happens. This thread is just a random idea I had that I want to see opinions on. I'm really sorry, but I had trouble understanding this... If you mean that the celestial bodies must move faster to accommodate the regular vessel warping, that sounds a lot like timewarping, and that's not what the idea of Non-Time Time-Warp suggests.

Holy crap. I needed Kerbalmaps. I needed Kerbalmaps quite badly. And now it's back, mostly!

Banned for overuse of "in" in your location.

That may be true, but it is still a video game, not an accurate representation of real-world spaceflight. The orbital mechanics and physical properties, as well as aerodynamic forces, of vessels in game are pretty darn close to real life, but while Kerbin and Mun are no doubt modeled after our own planet, it in no way meant to be a scaled-down version of our system. Kerbin is Kerbin.

Oh? I do realize the cheaty-ness that insta-warping would cause from a realistic standpoint, but I would disagree that Non-Time Time-Warping would negate the concept of orbital mechanics in the game. They would very much still be there, it's essentially using wormholes (not really, but a comparable example) to get from one point to another faster than would normally be possible. If an object were to pass through a wormhole, physics wouldn't simply cease to act on that object forever, it would continue to act on one side of the wormhole as the other. It's the wormhole part that Non-Time Time-Warping can be thought of. I do think I should clarify that this concept would NOT be the same thing as, say, Hyperedit, because it's not a literal instantaneous change in positions, and because it's operated with a similar method to current time-warping, it would be possible to overshoot the warp.

Well, apart from travelling in space, but I do take your point. I did mention earlier on that it does come at the cost of realism, but KSP itself is not the most perfect possible space simulator as well, because all bodies in space act on one another, regardless of their distance to one another, even if the effects are minuscule, and while this affects real space missions, we luckily don't have to account for this in our missions. The idea for Non-Time Time-Warp is merely a possible solution to allow multiple players to co-exist within one game world and interact with one another without even messing with the concept of time and time-warping, which is getting into, like.... Doctor Who territory. Bad stuff happens with time travel.

Ah, but I mentioned that the maneuvers that must be adjusted for Non-Time Time-Warping aren't like the maneuvers we know today. The Mun would be in one place, but rather than plan an "encounter" in the traditional sense, the burn the vessel would make would instead make their orbit directly intersect the SOI of the Mun. You then warp to the Mun's SOI and come out of warp so you can then place yourself in Munar orbit.

Yeah, admittedly it would suck a bit for transfer windows, but in all honesty, people play with RSS and have to build ginormous rockets in order to make the scaled-up transfers. Getting the delta-V for transfers even without optimal windows is fairly easy. Aha, another excellent point. However, because it does sort of seem to be an instant-ish travelling from one location to another, the player would just set up an intercept when the orbit of the vessel is within the Mun's SOI, warp there, and then come out of the warp and then be sitting there in the Mun's SOI with the same velocity as the vessel would in that point in the orbit. In that sense, you would no longer plan intercepts to where the vessel and the Mun happen to be at the same place at the same time, it's more like driving a car to a location within a city. Simply drive, and you get there, the location doesn't move. Wait wha? Moving outside of the solar system? And for the second point, see my above response to @Blaarkies's reply.

Right, of course. I understand the relationships between velocity and orbit, I guess I didn't explain that like I thought I did, as usual. What I'm talking about here is that, while the apparent speed of an object increases by 2x, 4x, and so on, the actual velocity, the actual numbers counted by the game wouldn't change, so the orbits wouldn't. I know it doesn't make sense, but there is no real way for the mechanic to function AND make sense, hence my earlier Portal connection.

Two recent favorites: "Friends are like cows. If you eat them, they die." "If you build a man a fire, he'll be warmed for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warmed for the rest of his life."

Granted, the moderators are just fine. Sorry about your add-ons. I wish I could skip the rest of my week and get to next Monday.

Banned for dat grammar.

Oh, don't you worry. Their insurance will cover that. Waiter! There's an insurance agent in my soup!

Protection against both tornadoes and sharks, therefore sharknadoes as well.