KER vs MechJeb?

[cwalrus]

Hi - didn't know if this is the right forum to post this in.

Which is better? Should I use both? I've only used Mechjeb, and honestly I don't know how the game can be played without it!

Edited June 20, 2015 by cwalrus

[Voidryder]

Hi cwalrus,

Which is better is not the right question. Which one is better for your playing style is what you should be asking yourself. Both give you good useful info while building a rocket. MechJeb can take the tediousness out of doing the same thing a 100 times. But the choice is yours.

[MaverickSawyer]

Each has it's own particular strengths and weaknesses, although MechJeb's dV readings have been getting a heck of a lot more accurate as of late.

I've used both, and I PERSONALLY prefer MechJeb.

[cwalrus]

I guess I should be asking, what are the pros and cons. Sounds like people don't use both at the same time?

[Mic_n]

I haven't used KER (though I'm thinking it's something I should grab to eliminate some of the guesswork in my designs, though I kinda enjoy some degree of trial-and-error).. but AFAIK, it's more about information.. presenting you with all the various stats of your craft so you can better predict how it will work, but without the autopilot-type features of mechjeb.

[Arkalius]

KER seems to be a bit better about displaying the info it displays. But, KER is purely informational. MechJeb offers fancy autopilots. If all you need is data and info, I would go with KER but some people are used to MechJeb and would stick to it even if not using the autopilots.

[AlexinTokyo]

Caveat Lector: I have never used MechJeb, so my understandings may not be accurate.

The biggest difference between MJ and KER is that MJ has its autopilot functions, while KER is purely informational

Both provide informational readouts of various data regarding your ship, from basics like ÃŽâ€v, TWR, mass, acceleration, etc. to more esoteric data like the longitude of ascending node and argument of periapsis.

Both have highly configurable UIs, allowing you to choose what data is displayed where, and when. I personally prefer the KER UI, which includes fully transparent, togglable HUDs.

KER has the capability to display certain calculated fields, like time to suicide burn, suicide burn altitude, etc.; I don't know if MJ has equivalent displays.

MJ has a built-in interplanetary transfer planner (wth pork-chop plot) that KER certainly does not have.

MJ is integrated into the tech tree in career mode, with more advanced functions requiring higher nodes to be unlocked. These modules must be added to your ships in order to use their functionality.

KER has no tech tree integration, but requires either an engineer Kerbal, a small part, or the tier-3 tracking center to function in career. It is fully partless in sandbox.

As a result, KER can provide information for EVA Kerbals, which I don't think MJ can.

KER doesn't consume any resources, such as EC, while my understanding is that (at least some) MJ modules do.

MJ's autopilot functions include Smart A.S.S, which is a (much better, I believe) version of stock SAS, with more options and better algorithms; interplanetary transfer assistance, automatic precision landing, and automatic rendezvous and docking.

I personally prefer KER, because I think its UI is cleaner, and because I don't need the autopilot functions (I prefer to fly myself, and I don't often start projects that require the same thing to be done over and over again). Also because I discovered it before I knew about MJ and it's what I'm used to.

There is a good argument for MJ as a teaching tool (watch MJ do something and then try to duplicate it), and if you're trying to build a massive station that requires 10 or 20 launches, I can imagine it would be invaluable.

[Geschosskopf]

I guess I should be asking, what are the pros and cons. Sounds like people don't use both at the same time?

Both KER and MJ do the same things in terms of showing you dV and TWR at different planets while you're buiding your ship. These days, MJ is pretty much identical to KER, and I get the impression they use a lot of the same code there.

But MJ has a lot of features KER lacks. These features allow you to learn how to do things for yourself, or allow you to automate many repetitive (how many tiomes have you already circularized an orbit?) or very boring (10-minute burns, for example) tasks while you go get another beer. And many other things besides.

Some folks say MJ is a "cheat", but it's just realistic. Except in dire emergencies, real rockets don't fly on manual control, and the days of having a room full of guys with slide rules doing the calculations are ancient history. There's a reason we don't do stuff like that anymore. But even if going old-school is your thing, you still have to know what you're supposed to be doing by hand, and MJ is an excellent teaching tool for that.

[Xannari Ferrows]

I find KER to be a more informal setup, and MechJeb to be a more interactive setup. I use KER for readouts, and MechJeb for interactive functions, like the stability control of highly maneuverable rovers.

[Jason Patterson]

I've used both, and I personally prefer to stick with KER and skip MechJeb. I like having the additional information when building/flying ships, but I don't like giving control of my ship to the computer, even if it's something I've done a thousand times.

[Signo]

I am a MJ user but I tried KER too and in my opinion KER got a better way to show you the infos, the HUD is great.

What you get in the VAB is basically the same. MJ needs just a small part attached to your vessel and as far as I know at the moment it does not consume any energy. It lacks the EVA infos, as stated above.

MJ, on the other hand, was my first teacher and he is now my petty officer.

There are things that are more boring than others that he can handle perfectly. (Yarr you cursed pegleg freebooter get my ship circularized now! And get me some good grog.)

Just do not trust him too much: he is just a D grade pilot (sometimes I suspect he is driving under the influence too), he does not know how to handle several kind of designs without a proper setup and there are maneuvers his famed fancy autopilot will never be able to do.

And be careful for what you ask him, he is pretty dumb and he does not know anything about Kerbol system apart from its math. He will always need your expertise, petty navigation excluded. 50% of the times he does not know anything about your rocket too.

His navigation skills are just slightly better than his piloting - some of the nodes he sets are "daring" at the least - but the alexmoon porkchop d/v map integration is great.

MJ can display aerobrake nodes too.

Edited June 19, 2015 by Signo

[kerbiloid]

MechJeb can be used without a special part if use the ModuleManager patch.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94686-Mechjeb-on-all-command-probes

[Old Foxboy]

As for Spaceplanes, the Mechjeb Autopilot is VERY useful to say the least.

Also, the advanced planetary transfer porkchop selection is very useful with Mechjeb.

Besides these two things, KER is sleeker and has less bugs.

[Corw]

Some folks say MJ is a "cheat", but it's just realistic. Except in dire emergencies, real rockets don't fly on manual control, and the days of having a room full of guys with slide rules doing the calculations are ancient history. There's a reason we don't do stuff like that anymore. But even if going old-school is your thing, you still have to know what you're supposed to be doing by hand, and MJ is an excellent teaching tool for that.

Heh, the "real life"/"realistic" argument over and over again. In real life they wouldn't let you past the visitors area of the space centre and even for that you would have to pay. In real life you lack qualifications to run a space program, let alone fly something (RC model planes included). This is a game about managing, building and flying stuff sprinkled with occasional explosions. You don't feel like flying it manually? OK, fine, but don't pull those "real life" excuses.

[tutike2000]

I use both.

KER to show info, especially in the VAB but also in flight (atmo efficiency, altitude above terrain, apoapsis, periapsis) - the UI is much cleaner and prettier (once you configure it to your liking)

MJ to create maneuver nodes, and for its improved, non-wobbly SAS, and much much more. I just hate the UI of MJ though, so much clutter.

[Warzouz]

MJ has a bit more data on aerodynamics.

KER has a bit more data on landing.

I use both. Depending on what I do.

[cicatrix]

What regards the displaying of information the difference between them is purely cosmetic. You can arrange some HUDs with KER what MJ cannot. Anything else (including the panel appearances) are highly customizable in both addons so there's really no difference. Still, I find dV readings from KER in VAB are arranged somewhat better than on MJ but when I'm in flight I use MJ's panel for dV.

As it's been said, MJ has much more additional functionality when you need some precision in tweaking of maneuver nodes or an autopilot. Of course, MJ also have an awesome probe core part which nobody uses for some reason

You can safely use both of them and take the benefits of both.

[scola_p]

I use KER as it means I don't have to have my delta v calculator spread sheet open, and it makes my suicide burns less suicidal. The best thing is the amount you can customise the displays.

Also, I have just installed mechjeb as I am moving into orbital assembly in my career game.

However, at my tech level, none of the things I wanted were available. So that is something to watch out for!

[Jouni]

MechJeb is the Swiss Army knife of mods. It does a lot of things, but the experience isn't always as smooth as with more specialized tools.

As information mods, MechJeb and KER are mostly equivalent. The differences between them are mostly aesthetic.

MechJeb also has a lot of maneuver planning and autopilot functions. There are separate mods for some of them, but KER itself doesn't do it.

Because KER is simpler, it is usually more stable. The first MechJeb release after a new KSP version often has more or less serious issues, and you have to use the dev builds for a while to avoid them.

[WeirdCulture]

I've used both, and I personally prefer to stick with KER and skip MechJeb. I like having the additional information when building/flying ships, but I don't like giving control of my ship to the computer, even if it's something I've done a thousand times.

only with self scripted scripts like kOS

[goldenpsp]

Heh, the "real life"/"realistic" argument over and over again. In real life they wouldn't let you past the visitors area of the space centre and even for that you would have to pay. In real life you lack qualifications to run a space program, let alone fly something (RC model planes included). This is a game about managing, building and flying stuff sprinkled with occasional explosions. You don't feel like flying it manually? OK, fine, but don't pull those "real life" excuses.

Tell you what. People will stop using the "real life"/"realistic" argument for MJ just as a defense as soon as the opposite side of the fence stops saying a play style in a single player game that allows for some autopiloting of tasks deemed repetive is "cheating".

[Orbital Vagabond]

I use KER. IMO, the data provided KER is needed to intelligently play the game. KER provides this information, and does nothing else. Which is perfect. I prefer minimalism.

From what I've seen, MJ provides the data and then does tons of other stuff as well. IMO, all the extra stuff in MJ is extraneous.

I also think MJ is too 'cheaty' for my playstyle. It automates too much.

[goldenpsp]

I use KER. IMO, the data provided KER is needed to intelligently play the game. KER provides this information, and does nothing else. Which is perfect. I prefer minimalism.

From what I've seen, MJ provides the data and then does tons of other stuff as well. IMO, all the extra stuff in MJ is extraneous.

I also think MJ is too 'cheaty' for my playstyle. It automates too much.

Wow, and point made one post after mine. The beauty is that you don't have to use any of the automation features on MJ if you don't want. Or you can just use pieces. For example I often use MJ to make my node for a circularization burn just because it is less tedious than making one manually, even though I will do the actual burn myself.

[Harry Rhodan]

There's also VOID.

[Red Iron Crown]

I use both.

I like KER's presentation of the data and customizable HUDs, it is literally the first mod I install when setting up a new KSP game.

MechJeb I use mostly for SmartASS and some of the other utilities, like being able to use RCS for translation and reaction wheels for attitude without toggling. I rarely use the autopilot and maneuver planner features much, not because I think they are cheating but because I enjoy doing those things manually. Sometimes I'll have it auto-execute a long burn or control an ascent for repeatability in testing, though.