How to solve warp-problem in Multiplayer: solution

[dimmy]

Hi, last ones of devs, who still are here.

I'm very old KSP fan, i have took part in developing KSP multiplayer mod

And now i have invented the common solution, the devs can insert into the master branch of KSP.

 

We all know that the main problem of multiplayer is WARP. What to do if some player wants to make 2-years warp to the EVE and what the other players should see?

The best solution is: warp-denied-zones near the planets and disappearing of the warping ships.

 

So:

Every planet has its sphere zone (100km) for Kerbin, where no one can do warp. You can merge your stations and ships with other players in this zone, bot not in warp-allowed zone.

When you left this zone, you can click "warp" and your ship will simply disappear from all other players game world (they time isn't warped), but your ship will be like 'hyper-space', you can control it like usual and stop warp at any time. When you do this, your ship will appear somewhere in the space, and other players and ship can interact with you. There are some limitations to help KSP's physics to do it: you cann't stop warp near then 10km of some-one's ship, asteroid, or deny-warp zone of a planet and so you can't appear in the middle of someones ship or asteroid or planet.

 

How to implement this in your current branch?

In the first of all: make multiplayer without warp on network code similar to Factorio's network code.

Then add warp-denied zones and disappearing ships, then do sync when warp-ends into the multiverse users space and recreate object, synced to others. The new warp-end user's time should be the same as the other players time is. Planets, during the warp should not move like, there is no warp for them, because of other players travelling points and they places. Yep, this will add some difficulty to play with, but this is difficulty is the beauty too.

 

And this is all! All be good and looks great!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Red Iron Crown]

No timewarp on a planet is harsh. Do I really have to wait for an ISRU setup to finish filling my tanks without using timewarp? And the planets don't move while warping, how will anyone ever do an interplanetary transfer when they cannot predict where the planet will be in the future? 

To me this solution sounds strictly worse than any of the other proposed multiplayer timewarp solutions: Those ones make you choose between sync issues or waiting, this approach is unique in requiring both.

[dimmy]

>> ISRU setup to finish filling my tanks

Just set to improve they speed of filling for multiplayer for 100x of normal behaviour.

 

>>, how will anyone ever do an interplanetary transfer when they cannot predict where the planet will be in the future?

as you say

>>the planets don't move while warping

There is no problem with it as the planets movement speed is warp-1x, like there is no warp. You can simply predict where they are. Like in our life and having "hyper-space-drive", not warp-drive.

[Wjolcz]

Or don't. Multiplayer for KSP is not worth it. Better create a new game built for multiplayer and interaction from the start.

[p1t1o]

Time warp is not really compatible with multiplayer without imposing severe (as illustrated by the OP's suggestion) restrictions on players.

Given that timewarp is a significant and mandatory part of using KSP and not just a "nice-to-have"...

And given that there are few competetive or cooperative things that you can do in KSP...

I agree with Veeltch, if what you are looking for is multiplayer KSP, what you are looking for is a different game.

Try Space Engineers.

For reelz, its got many things that KSP has and plenty of scope for multiplayer. It may as well be called "KSP for multiplayer".

[tater]

IMHO, any game that requires time warp/compression is fundamentally incompatible with multiplayer.

[tater]

Add FTL drives. If you want to warp time, instead use warp drive. That's the only time compression that should exist. ISRU? It can do that while you sleep/work. Just have craft exist persistently for that.

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

I've always thought the current DMP method of working with timewarp using subspaces and syncing worked great. Why would we throw that out the window and impose a no-warp bubble around planets???

I mean sure, there are some bugs that result from it right now ("your vessel has been changed in the future"), but nothing that some devoted programmers with time couldn't fix.

[tater]

27 minutes ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

I've always thought the current DMP method of working with timewarp using subspaces and syncing worked great. Why would we throw that out the window and impose a no-warp bubble around planets???

I mean sure, there are some bugs that result from it right now ("your vessel has been changed in the future"), but nothing that some devoted programmers with time couldn't fix.

Any solution that produces results that are different at all from every craft running with the same time sync (i.e.: as they would in single player) is broken.

[Red Iron Crown]

2 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

I mean sure, there are some bugs that result from it right now ("your vessel has been changed in the future"), but nothing that some devoted programmers with time couldn't fix.

Some problems are inherent and can't be fixed, no matter how devoted the programmer. Multiplayer timewarp means either waiting or sync issues, full stop. At best a "least bad" solution can be used, as DMP does now.

[Arugela]

What about doing what he said but make it a bubble and stop warm when you go from the blue line to the orange line focusing around the planet? Oh NVM.

Why not have multiplery alow people to help with both their planes and the other guys vessel. Then you unwarp on the first vessel needed and do what is needed. Then start up warp till the next item auto stops warning you need to work on it.

 

This would create a game as KSP should have already worked for single player. If you get an item that needs attention you can't warp and have to do it. It creates a working que. anything in a non warp area or slow warp area or crosses a trigger point or some sort can't allow normal warp. The mutliplayer then simply adds a person to work on a second craft at the same time if multiple craft pop up in que together or help give a second hand to a single craft. Then you have a NASA/realworld que system where you work on each project as they hit their important points. And with multiplayer help doing so.

That means KSP just needs stuff to show when and where a craft needs help over warping a little better so stuff doesn't auto die. and then the ability to put a craft in a setup where it's marked as not caring. Although that system may need timers added to it or something so you can temp ignore it. Like 1 year or 1month timers until it triggers stuff again on top of an infinite ignore where you just let it go or die etc.

So, I think the game just needs a que system that simply utilizes the existing game to make single player more completely and make multiplayer doable. I think that would simply take some logic added to the existing path logic showing where it is going. some invisible or visible things showing when it may need attention. Even the ability for the player to custom make them. It could be added with the add waypoint option when you click on it. You would simply add different markers like in a video/audio editor program to say what it should do. And maybe the ability to design default ones or have a few default ones in the game if needed.

This would make multiplayer singleplayer with multiple people. And simply let them work on mutliple craft at the same time if needed. But only one warp system. Then everyone is always on the same time. obviously you would need a chat system to coordinate or they would want some other form like mic system. Which could be fun if you did an ingame mic and chat system and added things to the relay system related to it. Although obviously this could be bypassed with out of game stuff. But it's a player choice then like other in game options. this is assuming though or only viable while in kerbal control possibly though. So maybe for IVA control specifically then work out other modes as you are changing perspective in game..... I think the obviously solution is maintain in game limitation and let free change of base perspective Kerbal/ship/KSC/Satelite/etc. and the coms are always from that perspective as it should be as you change. so if you want free comms you have to back to KSC as your perspective or maintain a ship with proper coms etc.

So, in summary, I think you can absolutely do time warp as the game holds it currently and multiplayer. Just not multiplayer warping separately. One single player with multiple people in it like now. Then multiplayer is pure cooperative gameplay which is good for KSP. But it would also have the ability to change ships or control mutliple ships when not in warp simultaneously. Then let the coms and other in game systems be the limiters where and when needed as fits the game design/reasonability/necessity.

AKA, again, the game just needs a mission que using the current in game system to trigger it. And the ability for players to add/control the que system by, at minimum, mouse and the pathing system via adding a few new simple options and timed triggers etc. the game is completely compatible with mutliplayer if you look at it from those perspectives. Just needs some light coding.

It's ironically one of those things real space agencies have to deal with but is not represented in KSP. And it solves all the problems with multiplayer potentially.

the cool think about timers is that it is already repsresented physically. Meaning you can also give it the function of point and click. AKA you click where you want the trigger on the existing pathing and select it as one of the new option. Timer here! When you reach there the timer goes off and warp stops and something tells you what is in need of work. You change to craft etc. Ohhhh, look! The game has these most features like it was meant to be done this way!!! ><

You could even have a mission control rank that can be shifted around to different people that gets to control the warp along with multiple ranks with adjustable abilities(like an MMORPG) including potentially warp control. then let people save the game and pause to come back later if desired. It could be an option to have pausable games or continuous games as a challenge level. Then, again, Multiplayer is a big multiplayer mission control simulator with more control features to deal with multiple mission but is literally the same a singleplayer. If done that way you could even in essence go back and forth between single and multiplayer as it's just a matter of other people being in your game.

Edited January 21, 2017 by Arugela

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

1 hour ago, Red Iron Crown said:

Some problems are inherent and can't be fixed, no matter how devoted the programmer. Multiplayer timewarp means either waiting or sync issues, full stop. At best a "least bad" solution can be used, as DMP does now.

This is understandable, but I am curious to what kind of issues you would be referring to.

Would that be like, for example, that if you crash into the ship of someone who's in the future, they are unharmed but you get blowng up?

Because if you put that kind of thing aside (seems kind of minor in the grand scheme of things), from my experience with DMP...

if you disabled reverting and quickloadng (It is difficult to comprehend the number of crashed planes people leave on the island runway by using this), and figured out a way to get rid of the "vessel changed in future" bug that likes to suddenly happen while you're landing a plane... Those are the main problems that seem to plague us in multiplayer (other than the crashes and "my parts in the menu disappeared" and similar things that are probably unrelated to the inherent nature of subspaces).

Or is the "vessel changed in future" bug something that probably can't be fixed? Or are there some things I don't see as problems that others do? I'd be happy to learn!

[Red Iron Crown]

25 minutes ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

This is understandable, but I am curious to what kind of issues you would be referring to.

Would that be like, for example, that if you crash into the ship of someone who's in the future, they are unharmed but you get blowng up?

Because if you put that kind of thing aside (seems kind of minor in the grand scheme of things), from my experience with DMP...

if you disabled reverting and quickloadng (It is difficult to comprehend the number of crashed planes people leave on the island runway by using this), and figured out a way to get rid of the "vessel changed in future" bug that likes to suddenly happen while you're landing a plane... Those are the main problems that seem to plague us in multiplayer (other than the crashes and "my parts in the menu disappeared" and similar things that are probably unrelated to the inherent nature of subspaces).

Or is the "vessel changed in future" bug something that probably can't be fixed? Or are there some things I don't see as problems that others do? I'd be happy to learn!

I'll recycle a couple of example scenarios from the last time I was discussing this topic:

Imagine two players decide to race to catch a particular asteroid. Player 1 quickly plots a modestly fast intercept, burns, and cranks up the warp. Player 2 more carefully plots a faster intercept, burns, but warps less aggressively. In game time terms, Player 2's intercept happens sooner, but Player 1 arrives sooner in real time due to more aggressive timewarping, then claws and moves the asteroid. Under DMP's timewarp scheme, the asteroid will not be there when Player 2 gets there, because Player 1 has already interacted with it and Player 2 will need to sync up with that subspace. So, even though Player 2 plotted the better intercept and would have gotten there faster in game time terms, Player 1 wins the race through more aggressive timewarping which allowed him to get there faster in real time.

and

It doesn't have to be an explicit race, either. Imagine this scenario:

Player 1 and Player 2 are playing with spaceplanes supported by an orbiting fuel depot. Player 1 quickly ascends to orbit and decides to do a Mun flyby (using timewarp), and when returning to Kerbin docks with the depot and drains the fuel from it. Player 2 plays around sightseeing in the atmosphere before ascending to orbit, taking more real time but less game time than Player 1's flyby and docking. He then attempts to dock to the propellant depot. Is fuel available for Player 2 there? Should there be?

These sorts of issues are inherent to asynchronous warp, there's not a technical solution for it. Synchronous warp means waiting, most of the time. So we're back to my statement: Sync issues or waiting, pick one.

[Arugela]

I think my que system idea fixes that(coorperative design with the ability to be uncooperative like). You just unwarp on who is first as you hit areas needed to make changes. Make it simply single player with mutliple people. then add some logic to unwarp on certain things and let players designate unwarp points as added options to the current mouse system on the pathing system. You can physically add waypoint but it is an unwarp waypoint. There could also be some logical ways for it to auto do this without adding waypoints manually. It makes multiplayer a KSC mission control cooperative thing. You can still do non cooperative things with the system though. But whoever gets to destination unwarps first and does stuff then sets warp back on etc. The race would be latticed naturally as it progresses. Could add some drama to it actually.

It would allow control of seperate craft while unwarped so people can do more than one thing at once. Should cover most of what is needed for multiplayer. And anything else can be added most likely simply to the existing game fucntions like add "stopwarpwaypoint" on the trajectory and whatnot.

when both people are done it warps if they are both going. Or you give one guy control for cooperative. Those are both simple things to add and can be done via a sytem like in MMORPGs where you have ranks. You only need two things. The system for one person(mission control leader) and an option for multiple people to need to check in to continue. both of which may need to be working simultaneously for complex missions so people can go afk for long periods of time and mark their mission as done for the time being. Pause would be needed if one person is away and the other person doesnt' ake over their mission stuff. and of course they should both be able to work on the same craft at the same time if desired so it's true cooperative play.

Cooperative play design should make the whole multiplayer work out nearly effortlessly in concept. Make it so single player can be turned into multiplayer also. Make them the same thing but the only difference is do you have marked for more than one person. And let people change that if they want to go to multiplayer from single or vice versa. the only problem I can see is making sure you can block off single player completely if desired so no openings in network security occur in single player or something odd like that.

If needed let the mission control guy give temp warp control to a player or change over the the vehicle or kerbal on the mission and control the warp together to finish a long ground mission or something. Multiple options would help there. Then wether they are working together, if everyone else is done with their mission stuff and checked as done at the time the other guys can warp as needed to finish and others can come help if they want to to enjoy the mission per say. with the mission warp stops in place it will auto unwarp and warn another mission needs attention and someone can go do it. No issues. And you get a more real world que system to do multiple and complex missions. You cuold also add more waypoints for takeoff times and stuff too so you can catch your ride back etc.

You could also have a screen somehwhere like the one to pick a vehicle to change to but it shows the time listing of when the next warp stop will occur so you know what mission is next and see the ETA's to those mission needs etc.

I recommend being able to change how many people can join in the game and not before. Then a single game can go from single to multi and back and all multiplayer options changeable in game for maximum flexability. When you open it to multiplayer it can go up on a KSP game finder(or other things of your choice) There could be hosted server space if desired or player hosted only. Hopefully not an issue as it should nto take up more processing power in multiplayer than single as one person could/should only process what they are doing in full. Could be wrong on that though.

Edited January 21, 2017 by Arugela

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

35 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

I'll recycle a couple of example scenarios from the last time I was discussing this topic:

<snip>

Ah yes those would be problematic situations. I understand that

I guess I don't encounter them as much since I've avoided space missions in DMP for a while now (I've had enough of disappearing motherships leaving me stranded on Eeloo and space stations exploding as if they had impacted some invisible space wall lol.

Even when I do go to space though, I'd rather have these kind of problems than ones that force you to cooperate with someone else's mission, or to go to space if you want to warp.

Edited January 21, 2017 by EpicSpaceTroll139

[razark]

4 hours ago, tater said:

Any solution that produces results that are different at all from every craft running with the same time sync (i.e.: as they would in single player) is broken.

This.  If a system allows other players to see things that won't be there when they see them, it's bad. 

The way I've seen this handled is by giving each player a "desired warp level" that they can set, and using the lowest one.  If A want s to warp at 10x, B wants 100x, and C wants 2x, everyone gets 2x, and everyone's clock stays synched.

I also don't see this working for more than 3 or 4 players at a time, which is probably fine for a LAN game among family or friends.  KSP should never be a MMOG.

[Arugela]

The answer is one warp period. You wait for checks and have a guy with overall power as default(but with changeable settings.). it's what I called cooperative multiplayer orientation. It's literally a system to act like a real NASA control center waiting on mission with predetermined stops to do things. A que! Make the que flexible enough to do anything else you want. all needed system can be added to pre-existing ones to get the desired affects for 95% of the game play. you could have as many people in game as desired this way. Just have to play mission control on top of pilot etc. Only limits are the computer systems.

You start a mission and inputed stops or natural stops occur(you would add more to the game potentially). You warp to the next stop(unless you wish to start a new mission via a launch in between etc. Which you could add as a stop to know when to launch.) you go to the next thing and do whatever. If you have multiple things you do them as needed with people switching freely(assuming mission commander sets it up this way) and do what is needed then warp to the next thing. You can have people do seperate vehicles simultaneously or one vehicle together or any combo. But use one warp. You already have one KSC why not have one command structure. Albeit a changeable one to allow different playstyles.

This type of system should have been in game logically already. So it's not a stretch to make it the center of multiplayer. Just give it the options to make it flexible from this central core and it covers all other gameplay types if and when desired.

BTW, stops are literally like waypoints with a different function. Although you could do more with them. Waypoints would be the simplest way given the current game. And you could add auto stops on nearing planets etc. This would allow players to put in needed new waypoints if they haven't. and as I stated in an earlier post add things like ignore infinitely to ignore until manually changing to vessel or ignore for 1year,1month or any other given time period(which is the same as a waypoint, and or removing it from the que.) so it stops you when you get to the needed time.

The control system to give permissions to functions could literally work like any MMORPG guild system but with unique checks for the game.

Edited January 21, 2017 by Arugela

[Wjolcz]

1 hour ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

Ah yes those would be problematic situations. I understand that

I guess I don't encounter them as much since I've avoided space missions in DMP for a while now (I've had enough of disappearing motherships leaving me stranded on Eeloo and space stations exploding as if they had impacted some invisible space wall lol.

Even when I do go to space though, I'd rather have these kind of problems than ones that force you to cooperate with someone else's mission, or to go to space if you want to warp.

Can't argue with that logic. Fair points and everything. You could have just said "Oh, but I want them to work on this feature. Who cares if it will be playable or not? I don't. Like it's my problem".

Seriously. I feel like people request things because they feel entitled to do so for some odd reason. And I guess someone could point their finger at me and say I'm a hypocrite because I keep whining about career mode and a new kerbal flight game (which would be much more well suited for multiplayer than KSP and it's a fact and you all know it). Fair enough. The problem is though, career was meant to be implemented since the dawn of KSP and they did a really poor job and now the game is in it's "released" state. Career was meant to be a part of it since forever. Multiplayer wasn't. People requested it so many times SQUAD probably went all "Jeez, we've gotta promise them this MP thing and get other things done or they'll feel ignored and get angry, or something".

And now we're being flooded with all these pseudo-solutions for time paradoxes. MP will never work in KSP. By saying that you'd rather have these paradoxes than deal with actual cooperation you only prove that there's no way to deal with this problem and you don't care much about it, so why not play some different space game with multiplayer instead, hm?

Edited January 21, 2017 by Veeltch

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

15 hours ago, Veeltch said:

<snip>

And now we're being flooded with all these pseudo-solutions for time paradoxes. MP will never work in KSP. By saying that you'd rather have these paradoxes than deal with actual cooperation you only prove that there's no way to deal with this problem and you don't care much about it, so why not play some different space game with multiplayer instead, hm?

I understand that KSP will never work well with multiplayer (I would know from all my time playing DMP, yet somehow I still have fun), and I will understand it perfectly if Squad never comes out with multiplayer for KSP. I just hope that if it does, people aren't forced to go to space to warp or to only warp when everyone else wants to.

[Arugela]

4 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

I understand that KSP will never work well with multiplayer (I would know from all my time playing DMP, yet somehow I still have fun), and I will understand it perfectly if Squad never comes out with multiplayer for KSP. I just hope that if it does, people aren't forced to go to space to warp or to only warp when everyone else wants to.

 

Do you people read anything anyone posts. It can work easily with multiplayer. It basically already is mutliplayer. They just need to implement it and stop whining about having seperate warps... There is no reason for it. You don't need it to even get the same general effect. Having one warp there would be zero differences in how you play the game from having separate warp besides it working. you have to warp regardless. the only thing you need to do is maintain proper controls over who/how warps are controlled(this already exist in every MMORPG in existance let alone other software.) and kick people if they become annoying and won't let warp go. Or go play together and enjoy finishing the mission. There is no end to how you can set that up. It will be exactly the same as multiwarp in practice. the control layout like in MMORPGs can be made to allow any desired playstyle easily. Including being 99% like the multiwarp concept. And it wouldn't even take that many options to basically let it do everything. You would already want that kind of versatility anyway regardless of mission type.

As I said, it is already a missing part of the current game. Mission ques!! That is multiplayer! This is a NASA simulator for god's sake. It's that simple. One KSC everyone joins the game creator. They can move about freely unless restricted by the owner somehow. They all help each other. Cooperative base game system with the ability to give permissions!

Unless there is some problem with people being in different ships simultaneously there should be no issue. The warp is the easiest part to manage. The game already has the infrastructure for it. Just need some minor conveniences like a visible warp/mission que and a new type of waypoint or two(Maybe some auto features for stopping warp and ignore flags with optional timers) minimum for making the game tell you when stuff needs to be done and stopping warps. Anything else is just extra nice features. Which would be nice obviously.

As far as warp control giving a NASA headquarters style mission control structure is a beginning point. One guy has lead and can give out roles/permissions. But a simple full layout of options/permitions also is needed for other playstyles(likely looser ones). This can be done with the normal guild permission system.

It would be fun to be able too switch around different vehicles/kerbals and help each other on missions. You could get alot more done that way. One guys can get his lander going to refuel and whatnot and the other guys could be driving the rover/aircraft to destinations. When the base work in done the free warp to speed it up. Or wait for everyone else to be done to do missions while warping a little. that or generally make vehicles that go fast to destination. It would add some more design elements to missions.

Edited January 22, 2017 by Arugela

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

1 hour ago, Arugela said:

 

Do you people read anything anyone posts. It can work easily with multiplayer. It basically already is mutliplayer. They just need to implement it and stop whining about having seperate warps... There is no reason for it. You don't need it to even get the same general effect. Having one warp there would be zero differences in how you play the game from having separate warp besides it working. you have to warp regardless. the only thing you need to do is maintain proper controls over who warps and kick people if they become annoying and won't let warp go. Or go play together and enjoy finishing the mission. There is no end to how you can set that up. It will be exactly the same as multiwarp in practice.

As I said, it is already a missing part of the current game. Mission ques!! That is multiplayer! This is a NASA simulator for god's sake. It's that simple.

<snip>

I did in fact read what you posted. I simply disagree with the idea that people should have to consult other people before warping and/or follow some mission que. I think people should be able to do whatever they want whenever they want.

Take a look at an example of a typical session on a DMP server:

Player 1 is landing his first rocket on the Mun. Players 2 and 3 are designing turboshaft helicopters. Player 4 is learning how to build a plane from Players 5, Players 7 and 8 are building a base on Duna.

In my humble opinion this is a nice way to have things, even with the occasional paradoxes. Maybe I am getting confused and missing your ideas completely (that might just be it, to be honest some parts are a little confusing to me), but what I'm reading in yours is that everybody will be in the same timeframe.

Thus, taking the example above, Players 7, 8, and 1 would get annoyed at having to wait until players 2, 3, and possibly even 4 and 5 land so that they can warp. Likely it would end up with the helicopter/airplane people being made to leave or change over to flying rockets so the others can get on with their flights. Or maybe the other way around, but more likely the former, considering it's called Kerbal Space Program.

Your multiplayer idea has here worked well at avoiding paradoxes. It has however herded players towards doing activities that require or at least allow significant amounts of warp. It's cooperative, but not necessarily by choice. In my opinion, this means it has not worked great overall.

I'll admit DMP's system is not fantastic. There are paradoxes that can occur as mentioned before. However, it allows players to do whatever they want, whenever they want.

Also: Sure it's a "NASA simulator." That hasn't stopped people from making helicopters, propeller planes, boats, submarines, blenders, fighter jets, cars, cannons... the list goes on.

 

Anyways, I guess we just have different ideas of how things should work if it becomes an official thing. And that's ok!

I hope we're not dragging this thing too off topic.

Edited January 22, 2017 by EpicSpaceTroll139
OCD

[Red Iron Crown]

1 hour ago, Arugela said:

Having one warp there would be zero differences in how you play the game from having separate warp besides it working. you have to warp regardless. the only thing you need to do is maintain proper controls over who/how warps are controlled(this already exist in every MMORPG in existance let alone other software.) and kick people if they become annoying and won't let warp go.

Sync Issues [ ] Waiting [x]

"None of you can warp for the next 20 minutes while I do this reentry and landing. Have fun."

[Wjolcz]

5 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

I understand that KSP will never work well with multiplayer (I would know from all my time playing DMP, yet somehow I still have fun), and I will understand it perfectly if Squad never comes out with multiplayer for KSP. I just hope that if it does, people aren't forced to go to space to warp or to only warp when everyone else wants to.

Then all you want is KSP with online chat.

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

1 hour ago, Veeltch said:

Then all you want is KSP with online chat.

Nice strawman argument. Have you even tried DMP? It gives the freedom to have different groups of people doing different things. You can have 2 people flying planes while 2 people build a space station and send it to Duna, and yes, one person can do his/her own thing if s/he so chooses. And it's far more than an online chat (even if it may seem like it at times due to lag-induced teleporting bugs getting in the way lol).  I fail to see what's wrong with that. Many multiplayer games allow people in the gameworld to do different things.

Edited January 22, 2017 by EpicSpaceTroll139

[Wjolcz]

51 minutes ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

Have you even tried DMP?

Yep. And it felt like singleplayer game with a chat. We tried to do something creative so we performed a rendez-vous and got bored because of how many bugs and problems were involved during that one simple thing. I'd much rather have multiplayer in a form of Telemachus/Houston mod where one is the pilot and one is the mission control. And frankly, I fear it would be the only sensible and enjoyable "multiplayer" KSP could have.