Warning that you're orbiting the wrong way on satellite contracts

[Xavven]

After reading what seems like the 100th question in the Gameplay Questions and Tutorials forum of "why can't I complete this satellite contract?" followed by a chorus of "did you check the flowing dots?", and "you're orbiting the wrong way", and "is your ascending/descending node near 180 degrees?", I think it's time Squad figured out a way to communicate this to the player in a clearer way.

One way would be arrows on the orbit path instead of dots. The moving dots are easy to miss and are unintuitive for many people.

Another way could be to warn the player with a message if their ascending or descending node is greater than 90 degrees (or less than -90 degrees. you get the picture)

[r4pt0r]

I always end up going the wrong way when I go interplanetary, Arrows or something better than dots would be nice. More so if they applied to the orbit lines of planets and moons as well. Going the against the traffic in the Jool system is a pain in the BUTT

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/75488-Orbit-direction-indicator

[Twreed87]

The problem is that the game doesn't know which contract you're going after. So let's say I've got a contract to put a satellite in a 180 degree equatorial orbit, but right now I'm trying to launch a separate probe somewhere else, and I get into a regular orbit. Now I've got some warning saying I'm going the wrong way, when I'm not even trying to do that contract.

[mattinoz]

Easy to fix by allowing us to tie contracts to craft.

Which would also help filtering down the contract window to the most relevant information.

[KSK]

Sorry to be a grouch but I completely disagree. First of all, pay attention to the game and read the darn contract. Or at least the mission summary part (have Squad updated the procedurally generated gibberish for 1.0?) After that, the fact that every other orbit on the map is just a line - apart from one with these funky moving dots - should be a clue.

Besides that - is failing one small part of a darn computer game such an ego bruising trauma that the game needs to lead players by the hand to make sure it doesn't happen?

I say - no way. We're playing a game where failure is an option, where rockets explode if they're badly designed and where missions don't always necessarily go to plan. If you muck up your first satellite contract, learn from your mistake and move on - just like you did with every other part of the game.

[Mr. Scruffy]

Hmmm, KSK, i tend to agree. But then again, there is hardly anything to be said against a better indication of orbital directions, right? Little arrows on the orbit for bodies/crafts when you mouse over them and for those intended satelite orbits when hover over any over the parameter-nodes, for example. That wont hurt anyone.

A warning message, though? No, thanks. It´s complicated to implement and really bit too much ´taking by the hand´, in my book, as well.

[KSK]

I guess.

Although watching the body/craft on the Map screen, maybe under x5 or x10 timewarp to make it a bit more obvious, works just as well. Or, for the active vessel, dropping a maneuver node and checking where the prograde marker is.

And I suppose you could swap the moving dots for moving triangles or arrows, although I still think the mere fact that they're moving is sufficient.

[Xavven]

Sorry to be a grouch but I completely disagree. First of all, pay attention to the game and read the darn contract. Or at least the mission summary part (have Squad updated the procedurally generated gibberish for 1.0?) After that, the fact that every other orbit on the map is just a line - apart from one with these funky moving dots - should be a clue.

Besides that - is failing one small part of a darn computer game such an ego bruising trauma that the game needs to lead players by the hand to make sure it doesn't happen?

I say - no way. We're playing a game where failure is an option, where rockets explode if they're badly designed and where missions don't always necessarily go to plan. If you muck up your first satellite contract, learn from your mistake and move on - just like you did with every other part of the game.

To be clear, this was never an issue for me personally since I watched .90 preview videos before the .90 launch.

My evidence for this being a necessity is the sheer number of threads in the Gameplay Questions section. If that many players actually didn't understand WHY the contract wouldn't complete then it's not a matter of "learning from your mistake" or an "ego bruising trauma". It's a matter of the player not understanding the contract at all. A good game developer isn't going to blame that on the player and proclaim "well read the actual contract, you dummy!"

I like your suggestion about turning the dots into triangles, though.

[KSK]

Apologies - my post wasn't aimed at you personally but the way my first paragraph is written, it looks like it was. Sorry about that.

And with respect, I hear what you're saying but in a game like KSP, where experimentation and learning is emphatically part of the game, I still don't see this as a developer problem. If Squad just gave you a set of orbital parameters and expected you to get on with it, then I'd somewhat agree with you but since they've also gone to the trouble of providing a very obvious visual clue within the game, then I think it's reasonable for them to expect players to at least try and figure things out on their own.

Personal anecdote - satellite contracts were when I realised that I was waaay outside of my personal understanding about spaceflight. Thanks to KSP I think I've got a reasonable qualitative understanding of basic orbital mechanics (even if I couldn't do any of the calculations to save myself) but when I took one contract to put a satellite in an inclined, eccentric orbit around the Mun, it was just an exercise in playing with the maneuver node handles until everything lined up, without any real feel for what I was doing. I got there though - and I think the current maneuver system does a fantastic job of presenting really complicated stuff in an intuitive way.

Edited April 26, 2015 by KSK

[Starwhip]

I find myself going the wrong way every once in a while even though I spend 30 seconds trying to figure out which way I'm going.

Arrows; yes, warning; no.