New Maneuver Node Editing Tool

[Alshain]

[quote name='m4ti140']In my opinion the tool should rotate with the map, it would make it more intuitive as you would add delta v by moving the marker in the direction you want to burn into on the map.[/QUOTE]

It makes it less intuitive because it is inconsistent. The whole idea is to not have to be looking at the node to use it. If I'm around Duna, trying to find tune a node at Kerbin for my encounter I really don't care what orientation the map is. It needs to remain consistent throughout or it might as well not be done at all. Edited November 17, 2015 by Alshain

[wreckreation]

How about keyboard controls? A rough analogue of the maneuver directions (prograde, retro.. etc.) are the intuitive directions forward, backward, up, down, left right. We already have keys that map to those: the rcs translation keys I,J,K,L,H,N.

I think it would be intuitive to use them to adjust the maneuver node. I propose Alt+[L, J, I, K, H, N].

prograde: Alt+L
retrograde: Alt+J
normal: Alt+I
anti-normal: Alt+K
radial: Alt+H
anti-radial: Alt+N

[theJesuit]

An amazing concept. I would hope that putting values in similar to precise node would be part of the concept or at the very least expressing a numerical value on the display to show how much. The additional info could be a drop down from the toolbar button.

I'm keen on the idea that the Centre across the main display clear too.

Peace.

[CatmanFS]

Yeah, I mean at least some kind of manual control over the directional DV, radial, normal, prograde numbers should be typable. Kind of tired of trying to massage the click and drag mechanic especially when my mouse likes to occasionally "let go" when I'm holding the button down.

[jf0]

Something that has always bugged me is that the vectors of the node are relative to the new predicted orbit, not the current orbit. for prograde/retrograde maneuvers it doe not matter. But if you drag the normal vectors, this will change the inclination of the new orbit, but also rotates the maneuver node vectors too! the node vectors would be more intuitive if they did not rotate as the predicted orbit changed.

[Alshain]

[quote name='theJesuit']An amazing concept. I would hope that putting values in similar to precise node would be part of the concept or at the very least expressing a numerical value on the display to show how much. The additional info could be a drop down from the toolbar button.

I'm keen on the idea that the Centre across the main display clear too.

Peace.[/QUOTE]

The whole idea is to keep it stock alike but more accessible, so no, that is not in this plan.

[COLOR="silver"][SIZE=1]- - - Updated - - -[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[quote name='jf0']Something that has always bugged me is that the vectors of the node are relative to the new predicted orbit, not the current orbit. for prograde/retrograde maneuvers it doe not matter. But if you drag the normal vectors, this will change the inclination of the new orbit, but also rotates the maneuver node vectors too! the node vectors would be more intuitive if they did not rotate as the predicted orbit changed.[/QUOTE]

Yes, that is part of the "no rotation" idea in this suggestion. It should only rotate during/after a burn. Otherwise it shouldn't rotate.

[herbal space program]

This would definitely be a big improvement. The only things I can think to add would be 1) to have 3 explicit coarse/fine settings, where one mouse wheel click equals 0.1, 1, or 10m/s, which are shown somewhere on the display and can be changed with hotkeys like timewarp, and 2) to have some description of where the node being edited is (e.g. "orbiting Kerbin") as part of the display, so that you don't get confused about what's what.

[Biejoo]

Very good idea! I hope this gets picked up by Squad, because it would really smoothen one of the roughest bits of gameplay.

If this is too much work, I would propose something else as a stopgap:
I think the biggest issue (playing the focus game to be able to grab your node the way you want it) could be fixed by a very simple solution: being able to focus on a Node.

[egoego]

This idea looks like it could really improve manouver node handling. And you wouldn't even need to change manouver nodes itself, just add a new GUI element. I like this idea.

[CorBlimey]

yes, this would be very useful.

I would also like it to have small numbers next to the markers showing how much dV in each vector (not edited via numbers, simply a teeny tiny yellow number - hope that is not too un-stockalike ;p) Edited November 26, 2015 by CorBlimey

[Robje]

You have my support too.

[Nemeko]

I'm totally support this, is necessary for interplanetary tranfers and i support the precision improvement, but not the imput with numbers there is a mod for that, also i hope this fix the problem of taking the wrong icon (prograde, retrograde, etc) in some situations (becose of the camera angle)

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

I completely support this.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

I want this now.

[CorBlimey]

shameless bump

[John FX]

For me, the ability to enter numbers for prograde, normal, and radial burn Dv and time of burn would greatly improve maneuver node editing.

If combined with not having to click on an orbit line to make a node it would solve the majority of the issues I have with making a node.

[Jenyaza]

Amasing! Download now... *where is download link, i miss it?

[Gaarst]

1 minute ago, Jenyaza said:

Amasing! Download now... *where is download link, i miss it?

This is not a mod, just a suggestion for changes in the stock game. I don't think anyone has made a mod out of this.

[capran]

Someone implement this in a mod. Stat.

[michelcolman]

Excellent idea. My main problems with the current maneuver nodes are:

- Moving a node along the orbit is very hard to do because you often grab one of the handles instead. You have to zoom in (losing sight of the new orbit) and possibly change the camera angle just to be able to hover the mouse over just the right spot so the node circle is illuminated and not one of the handles. Often requires pixel perfect mouse alignment, and the thing is not even standing still so you end up clicking on the wrong part anyway as the handle lit up a fraction of a second before you click.

- It's hard to find a camera angle where you can adjust the node and also see the resulting orbit. For example, to plan a Mun capture, you need to have the Mun and the node in view at the same time, so it's impossible to precisely change the location of the node. A one pixel change gives a totally different result. So you need to zoom in, make an adjustment, zoom out again, etc...

However, I can think of one alternative that might be even more useful and versatile: split screen so you can have two seperate views. Focus one on the intercept, and the other view on the maneuver node. This would have many other uses, and would make changes to the maneuver node system unnecessary.

[Evanitis]

It would be lovely. The main reason I cheat use MJ instead of KER is that it can make some perfect nodes in certain situations. That's infinitely better than than nudging the stock gizmo until it fits.

Edited January 24, 2016 by Evanitis

[CloudlessEchoes]

This would definitely make things better than stock. However, I'd probably still use Precisenode or MJ because I want fine control. The biggests issues I have with stock (besides what this concept will fix):

-Inability for real fine control

-No way to know how much of each vector you have input, or to zero out any of them

-No way to lock to apo, peri, dn, etc (VERY important for efficient orbits and corrections)

I kind of like the idea of being able to change the reference frame of the nodes too, but it would definitely be an advanced option.

[superstrijder15]

I dont know if it's already been said, but maybe allow for target mode? So I could plan moving compared to target in advance. mainly useful with slow turners when you want to skip trough part of the orbit, during which the vectors change.

[Morse]

Hi, author of the Precise Maneuver mod here.

I'm about to update my mod for 1.1, and to overhaul it a little in the process. I want to do it modular, and I'm thinking about adding this kind of gizmo as one of the modules. I imagine it to look something like this (a rough mockup, icons are not shown, but they'll be there):

All the modules should be optional (i.e. node selector module, orbit mode module and so on) so in the extreme case you'll be able to disable all the modules except the one, and have a window very close in the functionality and look to the proposed in this thread. I'm still not sure about the details, and what kind of visual effects should show the usage of the controls (the hover-on glow is a no brainer obviously, but when you click and drag, should it be a stretch, or an increasing glow, or both, or what).

Suggestions are welcome. I intend to start coding during the weekend, hopefully it'll be ready for 1.1 release.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Morse

[michelcolman]

I'll give a couple of suggestions:

- Maybe add the maneuver direction icons (prograde, normal, radial) to make it clear which one you're adjusting.

- "Orbit mode:" would probably be better named "Conics mode:" since escape trajectories are not technically orbits.

- Not sure what the "+orbits" and "-orbits" buttons do, does that change CONIC_PATCH_LIMIT? In that case it's certainly a good idea to include it, but it might be confused with the +/- buttons on the standard maneuver nodes which go to the next and previous orbits. Since it's changing a setting just like the "orbit mode" buttons that are directly above, it's probably better to add a label "Number of conics" for better visual consistency, or even better "Display 3 conics" with "+"/"-" buttons behind it that change the number. 

- Can you also display the three individual delta-v components instead of just the total delta-v? And maybe to a higher than 0.1 m/s precision. With atomic engines, I often make really tiny adjustments by pressing shift and immediately X again. Nice if you want to leave a gravity assist trajectory exactly in the orbital plane, for example. Doesn't matter much when you're just going to the Mun, but makes a huge difference when pingponging in the Jool system.

- Stock maneuver nodes are relative to the new path for some reason. When you add a normal burn, the node axes twist around so that the normal vector is really applying some unwanted retrograde. It would often be useful to define the node relative to the old path. I understand it may take a lot of work to convert between the two, but if it's at all possible, it would be a great addition if users could switch between "relative to old" and "relative to new". (The actual node will probably always be relative to the new path, but your window could display and manipulate a converted set of values)

- An "execute maneuver" button like the one in Mechjeb would be nice, too. But try to make it more precise, Mechjeb's execution only has about a 0.1 m/s accuracy, so I usually have to do the last bit of the burn by hand to get exactly the path I want.

That's all, should only take you 5 minutes or so ;-)

Thanks!

Michel