adding multiplayer

[Elway358]

This game would need to be optimized BEYOND BELIEF for multiplayer to even come close to working properly without massive frame rate lag and crashes galore. I really enjoy this game but let's be honest, It's one of the poorest running/performing games I've played in a very, very long time. I know 1.1 is supposed to improve the performance greatly but I don't see it being the miracle worker a lot of people here are expecting. I certainly don't see it optimizing the game to the point of making multiplayer a viable option at this time. Combine the horrible/frame dropping performance of this game with network latency?...yeah, NO.

I'll use farming Simulator 2015 again as an example. That game runs infinitely better than this with hundreds of parts, mods, etc, but just try to find a playable multiplayer lobby. Once you get three or 4 people in a lobby with all their parts, vehicles, mods, etc. it's just a hair above unplayable.

[MK3424]

14 minutes ago, Elway358 said:

This game would need to be optimized BEYOND BELIEF for multiplayer to even come close to working properly without massive frame rate lag and crashes galore. I really enjoy this game but let's be honest, It's one of the poorest running/performing games I've played in a very, very long time. I know 1.1 is supposed to improve the performance greatly but I don't see it being the miracle worker a lot of people here are expecting. I certainly don't see it optimizing the game to the point of making multiplayer a viable option at this time. Combine the horrible/frame dropping performance of this game with network latency?...yeah, NO.

I'll use farming Simulator 2015 again as an example. That game runs infinitely better than this with hundreds of parts, mods, etc, but just try to find a playable multiplayer lobby. Once you get three or 4 people in a lobby with all their parts, vehicles, mods, etc. it's just a hair above unplayable.

FS doesn't simulate part per part, ksp does, and the upgrade to unity will in fact improve the performance drastically, just like it did with besiege (also a unity engine based physics game): 

 

[BloodDusk]

20 minutes ago, MK3424 said:

FS doesn't simulate part per part, ksp does, and the upgrade to unity will in fact improve the performance drastically, just like it did with besiege (also a unity engine based physics game): 

 

Fairly low asset load in comparison to KSP. Not a fair comparison.

[Ogcorp Squirrel]

On 12/14/2015 at 11:59 PM, Matuchkin said:

When KSP combines with BD armory and multiplayer, it will probably be the best war game on any market. Instantly, servers will get violent, and the whole Kerbol system will be filled with 'xplosions. Largest scale combat ever seen.

OR just get a few creative people and MP and u got BOOMS FER DAYS

[Matuchkin]

14 minutes ago, Ogcorp CEO said:

OR just get a few creative people and MP and u got BOOMS FER DAYS

Well, sure, but I kind of restated my quote a while ago.

[Ogcorp Squirrel]

21 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

Well, sure, but I kind of restated my quote a while ago.

Well then thats just odd..... i need DMP

[Duxter]

I don't understand why people are debating on MP...what is planed is planed...nobody can change it MP is coming and when it will released players who want To be alone in her world have the choice to stay offline that's it and enjoy.

[sal_vager]

Discussion is a good thing though, I'd prefer it if people can talk about this stuff instead of being told it's what not to be suggested.

Hence the WNTS overhaul and the links to a major thread on each commonly suggested topic

[razark]

53 minutes ago, Duxter said:

I don't understand why people are debating on MP...what is planed is planed...nobody can change it MP is coming and when it will released players who want To be alone in her world have the choice to stay offline that's it and enjoy.

Well, I am still not sure how timewarp can be implemented in a way that makes sense.  I was hoping someone could explain exactly how I can rendezvous and dock with a station while another player five minutes in the past is smashing it to bits by crashing his ship into it.

To me, that seems enough reason to talk, rather than say "**** it!  Whatever happens, however illogical, happens!"

Edited February 16, 2016 by razark

[Just Jim]

never mind

(redacted)

Edited February 16, 2016 by Just Jim

[Matuchkin]

1 hour ago, Just Jim said:

never mind

(redacted)

What did you say to me? I wanna know.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Matuchkin

[Just Jim]

50 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

What did you say to me? I wanna know.

It was nothing against you personally, but what I had said could have opened a second can of worms, so to speak, that I had second thoughts about bringing up, so I deleted it.

[Matuchkin]

Okay then, just interested.

[Buster Charlie]

I've tried to do a a search to see if this has been mentioned, I saw some similar suggestions but nothing exactly like this so I figured I'd throw it out.

 

The biggest roadblock seems to be how to handle time warp sync? I've seen suggestions about time lines that sync up, but there are issues about interactions,  I've seen talk of a master time warp, im sure a thousand other ideas.

 

This got me to think about defcon, which had consensus warping between players, the game ran at the fastest warp of the slowest player requested warp.

 

Then I started thinking about requesting the tracking station could sort flights by maneuver node.

 

So what I suggest for single player, and by extension multiplayer, is the tracking station/map view have a time line running along the bottom,  it has a user selectable time scale,  and can be scrubbed back and forth  (and maybe double click recenters it) to view past and future events. There would be a filter function to keep it from being too cluttered.

 

 it would record mission data (liftoff, stage seperation, recovery, failure) like the flight recorder window currently  in game, obviously filterable.

More importantly it would visually represent  future maneuver nodes and events. Stuff that kerbal alarm clock can make a maneuver node off of is represented with an icon.

 

So SOI changes, atmospheric entry, closest approach,  ap, pe, an, dn, etc. Pretty  much any on rails eventhe for the selected craft could be visualized on the timeline.

So basic functionally is you could click and drag on the future time line to select a block of time you want to warp through, or like KAC I guess you could do manual data entry. But as a bonus you could just select a marker or any point on the timeline and add an alarm marker.

 

So far we just have a pretty interface to view events and alarms but I think you know where I'm going with this.

So in a hypothetical  multiplayer game, the issue of how to handle time warps with two or more players.

 

I'd start with when a player creates a warp selection on the timeline, the other player (s) would see this as a different colored warp selection on their timeline, and they could select it to approve it, when the time comes it would warp, with maybe a countdown warning so players could abort it for emergency. 

 

But the best part would be, if two players selected overlapping warp selections, it would automatically authorize warp, since both players have consented ahead of time. 

As far as using the hockey warp, I suppose that could automatically place a block of warp time on the timeline, say 1 minute real-time at whatever warp speed is selected, so the other player could consent simply by also tapping their hot key.

 

That's the basic idea, I know it involves  a new function,  but at least it rolls up maneuver node planning, alarm clock functions into it as well.

 

Thoughts? 

[sal_vager]

It's certainly an idea, though could still leave players waiting for others to enable warp.

I believe the current plan is to allow players to go out of sync with each other, and later when you want to catch up you would click a button to sync up your time to the player furthest in the future.

That way everyone gets to play, no one is left waiting, and you can all sync up later when you're ready.

[razark]

1 hour ago, sal_vager said:

I believe the current plan is to allow players to go out of sync with each other, and later when you want to catch up you would click a button to sync up your time to the player furthest in the future.

But how does such a system handle mutually exclusive events?

Player A timewarps a day ahead on the timeline of Player B.  A launches a ship, rendezvous with and docks to a space station.  The player is now docked to the station on day 2.

Ten minutes in real time later, B launches a ship on day 1, rendezvous and docks to the station, on the same docking port.  B then syncs their clock with player A. 

The clock is now set to Day 2 for both players, and who is docked to the station?  What happens to the other player?

Or, before B syncs, A deorbits the station.  What happens to B's ship when the sync occurs?

 

It just seems to me that to avoid logical inconsistencies, all players would need to be within the same timeframe.

[sal_vager]

When they release multiplayer I'll tell you

[Buster Charlie]

How about real  life ksp space race? A two player coop,  maybe even a land game within a family? Each of you have your own career and space center, and you both try to out space race each other. Purposely depriving skylab or mir onto the opponents space center will result with ano asteroid being deorbited. ...

 

Or how about you have a kernel clone,  or hell  another solar system, so the game is actually about sending interstellar  probes and maybe Co colonizing outer planets together. You don't have to invade and subjugate the inferior red or blue kerbals....

So besides the fun of sending a nuclear tipped ground hugging cruise missile powered by a open cycle nuclear ram jet into the other players base, I can think of tons of fun that I could have with just one or two other players with voice chat. Doing multi-player space  missions, someone drives the rover, the other person runs supplies, someone man's the base or whatever.

 

 

[Guest]

On 2/15/2016 at 10:03 AM, Elway358 said:

This game would need to be optimized BEYOND BELIEF for multiplayer to even come close to working

DarkMultiPlayer worked.

KerbalMultiPlayer worked.

KerbalLiveFeed worked.

My framerate only dropped as much as it would have, had I installed any other mods.

Edited February 19, 2016 by spink00
typo

[Duxter]

Everything in the futur must ne in transparence  and matetialised when we sync.

[Duxter]

1 hour ago, razark said:

But how does such a system handle mutually exclusive events?

Player A timewarps a day ahead on the timeline of Player B.  A launches a ship, rendezvous with and docks to a space station.  The player is now docked to the station on day 2.

Ten minutes in real time later, B launches a ship on day 1, rendezvous and docks to the station, on the same docking port.  B then syncs their clock with player A. 

The clock is now set to Day 2 for both players, and who is docked to the station?  What happens to the other player?

Or, before B syncs, A deorbits the station.  What happens to B's ship when the sync occurs?

 

It just seems to me that to avoid logical inconsistencies, all players would need to be within the same timeframe.

Everything in the futur must ne in transparence  and matetialised when we sync. 

[razark]

But if the station is in the future, it must have gotten there by being somewhere in the past.

[LorenLuke]

There's a glaring oversight that everyone here is seeming to miss (or at least not mentioning): asymmetric multiplayer.

People have stated concern about mods or time warp or combat and collaboration, but that all is governed under the assumption that everyone is going to have their own little spaceship with their own little space program. So I propose the following modes: mission control multiplayer and single Kerbal multiplayer. Now these are by no means exclusive of multiple ships, but they're also avenues of differing play. 

For multiple players on the same ship, each has a designated pilot (or pilots) controlling (perhaps some or all controls for multiple people) the vehicle. Options to switch seats to a pilot seat can be done via an IVA menu, where it drops a request with the current occupant that they can accept or deny. In the IVA, a particular coloration or aura (say, blue) would denote Kerbals that are being currently player controlled. Any player may return to the tracking station to control another uncontrolled ship/Kerbal. This can allow for docking, tandem spacewalks, data handoff, etc. and is meant to be largely cooperative. Time warp may still be an issue, but less so (outside of grief) as most active players would likely be all on the same affected vessel.

 

Mission control allows one (or as above more) player(s) to undertake the role of crew, using action groups, so on and so forth, effectively identical to a single player game. Other players make up the ground control, which can view the craft from the flight control room as a sort of 'naked eye' view (good for launch and landing), an orbital view that's identical to the orbital view in SP, complete with the ability to make and edit maneuver nodes and view patched conics), a telemetric view which displays a comprehensive parts list, that includes all active data loggers (e.g. thermometer, barometer, accelerometer, spectro-fluid variometer, gravitometer), all science parts with status and experiment name, if stored ('unused', 'holding data', 'requires reset'; 'Materials analysis in high orbit over Eve'), all stored resources (oxidizer, monopropellant, fuel, xenon, etc.), engine statuses (on/off, wet/dry, throttle percent), lights, etc. and interactable options for most/all right-click menus (do experiment remotely). In addition to the above, it will also have readouts of current mass, remaining Delta-V, TWR, ground track, and other engineering information, and finally (maybe have the above with some sort of power/antenna dependence) a speech or text API enabling communication from one craft to ground control (or others).

I know the following is a bit out of this thread's scope, but piggybacking off of the ground control ideas, having the following for ground control features of the ground control could include mission preplanning mode: which allows the creation of maneuver nodes for a mission in advance, setting a launch window, and stimulating the mission via a time parameter slider (the celestial bodies move with the hypothetical time, and the location of the craft is also represented along the maneuver curve, allowing you to tweak how much each node should be moved). Additionally, having craft construction be done by ground control could also be a thing. This enables one to not necessarily be slaved to the other and allows each player to have a specialisation (pilot, rocket engineer, flight controller, mission planner, EVA specialist, etc.).

Just my two cents...

[Nich]

 My big problem is cheating Anyone can make an instant death laser mod or modify their craft files so the Juno gives 5 mega newtons of thrust.

[FishInferno]

12 hours ago, Nich said:

 My big problem is cheating Anyone can make an instant death laser mod or modify their craft files so the Juno gives 5 mega newtons of thrust.

I don't know if this will be much of an issue, as I've always seen multiplayer KSP as being played with a few friends rather than a large, open server.