Things that don't make sense

[Rdivine]

Kerbal Space Program is a rather all-rounded game. With its complex physics calculations, n-body simulations little green men, and...

oh wait! I've just uncovered a list of "features" in Kerbal Space Program that just doesn't make any sense! (No offense, squad. You've done an amazing job at this game already.)

 

1. Unable to edit subassembly descriptions.

Have you ever saved a subassembly and made a typo in the description? It's annoying to reattach the subassembly and overwrite the old one just to change the description. The worst part is, some struts and action groups may get erased.

 

2. Annoying labels sticking to the cursor.

I'm sure all of us have spent plenty of time in the SPH/VAB. Whenever we drag objects around and place them, occasionally, the labels would stick to the cursor. To remove the labels, i must exit and re-enter the SPH/VAB.

 

3. Birds and no forest?

At the space center scene, there are sharp, loud noises of birds chirping and wildlife in the background. However, there is no forests/trees nearby the space center, and a more suitable BGM would be people talking and discussing about which kerbal to kill next  chatting in the background, or sounds of vehicles moving about.

 

4. Engines with thrust vectoring magically "vector" about.

Engines with vectoring nozzles are somehow able to move about suddenly. This motion causes oscillations in SAS mode, and doesn't look great either. Before v 0.22, control surfaces used to have the jerking motion as well, but it got replaced with a smoother animation. Why didn't the engines receive a similar overhaul?

 

5. Small engines don't matter.

Seriously. When small engines fire directly at the ground, there are no particle effects. The small engines can generate exhaust able to make parts explode, yet it can't kick up a handful of dust from the ground?

 

6.  Old fuel tanks use Russian technology.

I'm just kidding, Russia. Anyway, old tanks (such as the white ones) have disturbing rings and visible rings of nails. The paint on the white tanks are also tarnished with black stains. Why don't the old parts receive a new look, similar to the new spaceplane parts so that the art styles in KSP are consistent?

 

7. Do rockets smoke?

Why do rocket engines in KSP generate so much smoke? Since there are sufficient amounts of liquid fuel for each unit of oxidiser, a clean and complete combustion should be expected, right? I understand that solid fuel boosters leave trails of smoke, but most liquid fuel engines don't.

 

8. Engine exhaust.

There are many things wrong with the engine exhaust in KSP. Firstly, it's outdated and comes from early alpha versions of KSP. Secondly, the exhaust do not resemble combustion in any way whatsoever. Third, exhausts are the same for all rocket engines, even nuclear engines. Lastly, the diagram below explains why exhaust should be different in space than on the ground.

 

9. Able to switch vessels between VAB and SPH.

Okay, i understand that this isn't something urgent, but i feel that it would make gameplay slightly better. Yes, i understand that you can move vessels about by copying and pasting the files into the respective folders, and changing type = "SPH" to "VAB", or vice versa. However, shouldn't there be a more user-friendly way to do this? 

Edit: I'm aware that the last point is already a feature in the game, and i apologize for not having checked it out :/

Common replies :

Quote

Why suggest _____ when you can install this mod here? It has the features listed in your suggestions.

There are many, many reasons why suggesting mods might not be the best idea.

-Mods take time to update whenever KSP receives a new version.

-As the suggestion list grows, the mod list also grows. Some mods may not be compatible with each other.

-Remember that this post is to ask for the features to be in the stock game, not to ask for mods with the specific features.

 

Quote

Your idea is terrible! Why would you even suggest such a thing?

Remember, my suggestions aren't necessarily perfect, and we may disagree on our viewpoints. I accept your opinion about my suggestions!

 

 

If you have any opinions about these suggestions, feel free to share them below!  

 

Again, i wish to reiterate that squad has done an amazing job at this game already, and this forum post does not aim to prove otherwise.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Rdivine

[Randazzo]

On point 2, you can resolve it by mousing over (or clicking on, sometimes) the tab that corresponds to the stuck label. That works for me, at least.

On point 9, you can actually open vessels in either. When you select "load" there will be tabs (at the top I think? Or at the bottom. One or the other.  ) that indicate VAB or SPH. Clicking on the SPH tab while in the VAB editor will open the list of SPH vehicles and let you load it in the VAB. That's a lot of acronyms.

 

Edited January 12, 2016 by Randazzo

[Evanitis]

I'm tempted to add the fact that air-intakes work underwater... but mentioning it would suggest that I mind it, or that I want to join the nitpicking. The only thing I actually slightly mind from that list is the engine gimbal speed. Since you asked nicely, I wont name the mod that fixes it (along with other minor stuff).

I particularly like the russian style tanks.

 

I wish these to be the bigest problems in KSP, or even life we ever encounter.

[SpaceplaneAddict]

I went with the engine vectoring, because that's what usually kills (DESTROYS) my spaceplanes which use only chemical engines.

[Hcube]

I like the engine exhaust in vacuum idea. I'm sure it's the kind of stuff that SQUAD plans to do but they're too busy right now.

However i think that the smoke is all right : even liquid fuelled rockets leave a big condensation/smoke trail behind them past a certain altitude (iirc)

[MKI]

There are two main decisions I feel keep things from changing. At least for now, as implementing a lot of these changes well requires time.

1.  Never thought about it, Can always delete, create a new one and change it that way. But thats just a hack. Rightclick Menu to edit the descriptions?

Not a killer game breaking thing, but defiantly something that should be changeable.

2. Unity 5 GUI update Ill be using this "excuse" a few times simply because it brings a whole new GUI. Which hopefully fixes long standing bugs.

3. Deliberate design decision throwing trees in around the KSC would make rockets have to fight for GPU and CPU time because theres a bunch of trees lying around for looks. Maybe the birds are just on the KSC chilling? Theres no wildlife in this game, I thought the bird noises were just to make it so I don't hear nothing.

4. Add this in, Ive found it annoying when your on SAS or having your ship controller (Kerbal or Probe) aim at a direction and it seems like they are REALLY twitchy.

5. I assume deliberate design decision Small engines kicking up dirt is meh compared to big rockets making plumes. CPU/GPU time can be spent elsewhere instead of trying to impress me with some flying dirt.

6. Upcoming changes to Rocket parts to make them fit with the new SP parts I remember reading that they will be working on the texture/models of the rocket parts to make them look better.

7. Probably will be changed in time. They have been working on the jets latly, but I feel they will be working on particle effects once the migration to Unity 5 is complete.

8. Nuclear is unknown technology lol..... Same as above, everyone is on GUI, Unity 5 will probably change a few things.

9. Can't you already do this?

I've always been promoting that the whole GUI to choosing crafts needs updating. Need labeled folders and searches, since its such a key feature of the game. I could of swore that it creates its own version automatically once you load the craft in the other building.

[mattinoz]

Question - if the control systems, like engine gimble took longer to react and had more of an ease-in ease-out movement to them would that mean the SAS hold system would work with out the over correct death wobbles?

 

[AlphaMensae]

8 hours ago, Randazzo said:

On point 2, you can resolve it by mousing over (or clicking on, sometimes) the tab that corresponds to the stuck label. That works for me, at least.

That works for me as well.  Still annoying though.

I went with editing subassembly descriptions.

May I add one more to this list?  Loading quicksaves (Alt F9) gives you a nice list box to choose from.  Saving a named quicksave (Alt F5) though does not. 

[Sovek]

on #2, easily fixable, though I agree its an annoying bug.

on #6, Ven's Stock Revamp fixes this.

on #7, Real Plume can fix this, SmokeScreen can deff fix this.

#8, Again, Real Plume.

[pincushionman]

Why is there a poll here?

[Ten Key]

8 hours ago, Rdivine said:

Anyway, old tanks (such as the white ones) have disturbing rings and visible rings of nails. The paint on the white tanks are also tarnished with black stains. Why don't the old parts receive a new look, similar to the new spaceplane parts so that the art styles in KSP are consistent?

 

Those aren't nails, they're rivets. While the textures could use a clean up, I don't mind the general aesthetic. It fits well with early rocket designs. 

Spoiler

 

 

[Rdivine]

5 hours ago, Hcube said:

I like the engine exhaust in vacuum idea. I'm sure it's the kind of stuff that SQUAD plans to do but they're too busy right now.

However i think that the smoke is all right : even liquid fuelled rockets leave a big condensation/smoke trail behind them past a certain altitude (iirc)

I don't think rockets leave any trails as they ascend through the atmosphere. Condensation is a possibility, but it only occurs in a certain altitude. Once the rocket is below/above that altitude, there is no smoke.

 

 

1 hour ago, mattinoz said:

Question - if the control systems, like engine gimble took longer to react and had more of an ease-in ease-out movement to them would that mean the SAS hold system would work with out the over correct death wobbles?

 

It is a possibility.

 

30 minutes ago, Sovek said:

on #2, easily fixable, though I agree its an annoying bug.

on #6, Ven's Stock Revamp fixes this.

on #7, Real Plume can fix this, SmokeScreen can deff fix this.

#8, Again, Real Plume.

Sorry, i did bring up the point that one should not suggest mods here. I agree that mods fix things temporarily, but i'm asking for the features to be in the stock game  

 

26 minutes ago, pincushionman said:

Why is there a poll here?

It's to see which points get agreed on most.

[Rdivine]

12 minutes ago, Ten Key said:

Those aren't nails, they're rivets. While the textures could use a clean up, I don't mind the general aesthetic. It fits well with early rocket designs. 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

I agree that the rivets could stay, but I feel that someone should wash/paint the tanks once in a while 

Additionally, the art style in KSP should be more consistent so parts will not look out of place with one another.

[DV-13]

On point 6.

If you read recent devblog, you'll know, that rocket parts overhaul is planned for 1.2. (Maybe 1.3)

[r_rolo1]

On 7) :

Rockets do not leave smoke behind. They leave a trail of rapidly condensing water vapour at best  And I think you are being decieved by the scale of things ( the RL rocket in your pic is far bigger than the KSP example you brought ) and by the fact that in the RL pic the vapour plume is blending visually with the clouds and the scattering in the backround ( if you look at it well, you will see that the plume continues to the ground ... ), something that you don't have in stock KSP and even if it did, you would not see it in the oblique angle the KSP pic has.

What is diferent between the KSP pic and the RL is that the vapour cloud in the KSP pic does not attenuate as fast as RL one, but TBH I think that is a farly minor issue and that the KSP plume matches pretty well with reality .

[Alshain]

1. Grab the assembly from the list and drop it back on top of the same list entry.  As long as you don't change the name, you can change the description.  (You can change the name too but you will have to delete the old one)

2. Unity 5 might fix this.  It's within that realm of possibility anyway, we will just have to wait and see.

3. Meh, never really bothered me.

4. That's because you are using a keyboard, they don't do that with my flight stick.  Slowed animations would feel unresponsive to my flight stick.  It's trying to mimic a native analog movement with a discrete input which is always going to be on or off.

5. Again, Meh.

6. Wait for it, it's coming. (PorkJet will be overhauling the textures in time)

7. Wait for it, it's coming.... maybe. (Supposedly a visual enhancement patch sometime in the future)

8. See #7

Edited January 14, 2016 by Alshain