The WORST thing about KSP...

[steve_v]

1 hour ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

i would be running Linux with GPU Passthrough to a Windows10 VM

Every time I think I need a windows VM for something, I seem to find out a couple of hours after setting it up that I didn't need it to begin with.

 

1 hour ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

It's a good OS; but they lost scope of who they're building it for. 

I'll have to take your word for it on the "good OS" bit, as I haven't used windoze extensively (or voluntarily) for quite some time.

From what I can see though, Windows 10 still has many of the same issues that drove me to look for something better back in '98.
Hand-holdy and obstructive UI, opaque error messages ("sad-face, please turn it off and on again or send this hex code to someone who cares" is not remotely useful), lack of bundled development and debugging tools, crippled CLI out of the box, over-reliance on (often paid) third-party applications for simple tasks, registry bloat, the fragility and general brokenness of microsoft installer/darwin (aptly named because it gets an award), install-bloat due to SXS, the inability of the OS to cleanly remove applications or police their activities, the ineffective and cumbersome shambles that is UAC, the list goes on.
It's all still there, and since 8 I can add awful pancake-flat low-contrast "metro" theming, progressive removal of access to low-level settings, distracting and impractical "tiles" and other fat-finger UI elements on touchscreen-free machines, restricted-boot (why should I sign my bootloader with an MS-provided key again?), and advertising and spyware built right into the OS. That last one makes windows 10 utterly abhorrent to me all by itself.

At least when FOSS projects do retarded things like this (I'm looking at you, GNOME) I can go grab the source and fix it to my taste or backport patches to a pre-insanity release. If things are beyond salvaging there are usually alternatives, even for core-components (systemd, you too get the stink-eye. We don't want no servicehost here.).

To return to the worst things about KSP, I'll add "persistent lack of effort on engine bugs in the *nix builds. If KSP only ran on windows I wouldn't have bought it."

Edited August 2, 2019 by steve_v

[Incarnation of Chaos]

14 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Every time I think I need a windows VM for something, I seem to find out a couple of hours after setting it up that I didn't need it to begin with.

 

I'll have to take your word for it on the "good OS" bit, as I haven't used windoze extensively (or voluntarily) for quite some time.

From what I can see though, Windows 10 still has many of the same issues that drove me to look for something better back in '98.
Hand-holdy and obstructive UI, opaque error messages ("sad-face, please turn it off and on again or send this hex code to someone who cares" is not remotely useful), lack of bundled development and debugging tools, crippled CLI out of the box, over-reliance on (often paid) third-party applications for simple tasks, registry bloat, the fragility and general brokenness of microsoft installer/darwin (aptly named because it gets an award), install-bloat due to SXS, the inability of the OS to cleanly remove applications or police their activities, the ineffective and cumbersome shambles that is UAC, the list goes on.
It's all still there, and since 8 I can add awful pancake-flat low-contrast "metro" theming, progressive removal of access to low-level settings, distracting and impractical "tiles" and other fat-finger UI elements on touchscreen-free machines, restricted-boot (why should I sign my bootloader with an MS-provided key again?), and advertising and spyware built right into the OS. That last one makes windows 10 utterly abhorrent to me all by itself.

At least when FOSS projects do retarded things like this (I'm looking at you, GNOME) I can go grab the source and fix it to my taste or backport patches to a pre-insanity release. If things are beyond salvaging there are usually alternatives, even for core-components (systemd, you too get the stink-eye. We don't want no servicehost here.).

To return to the worst things about KSP, I'll add "persistent lack of effort on engine bugs in the *nix builds. If KSP only ran on windows I wouldn't have bought it."

That's kinda why i want a windows VM xD; i rather just spin up the VM then spend hours messing with alternatives. And if it throws an error or something i can just terminate it rather than fuss around trying to fix it; as for how "Good" windows is we may have different perspectives because i'm comparing it to previous Windows OS. While you're used to others; so that's a factor. 

And back on topic i think the fact KSP is so heavily Single-Threaded is one of the worst things; they're stuck in a corner regarding it but still. I have 8 cores cranking at 3.0 Ghz and KSP uses 1-2 at most. 

[steve_v]

2 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

i'm comparing it to previous Windows OS. While you're used to others

I'm used to Gentoo GNU/Linux (daily-driver), pre-systemd Debian/Devuan (low-maintenence servers) and FreeBSD (almost as cool as Gentoo, but with more beards and a better logo). You can't not love this little guy:
If I limit myself to comparing windoze to windoze, I stand by my comments on the horrid UI, the hiding of knobs and technical bits, and the advertising/spyware.
Cortana (AKA the blatant Bungie ripoff ) in the installer is hilariously obnoxious as well. Serial-console compatible text-based installer with questions not designed for morons please, and no, I don't want to talk to it.

 

17 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

i think the fact KSP is so heavily Single-Threaded is one of the worst things; they're stuck in a corner regarding it but still.

It's better than it was, but single-vessel physics simulation is still strictly single-threaded, so the practically exponential relationship between part-count and lag remains.
Single-threaded or not, I know of several expensive things being done every frame that don't need to be, and a couple of remaining examples of gratuitous heap-thrashing. So there's room for improvement without unity/physx advances...
Assuming anyone at Squad can be bothered with such time-consuming and non-customer-snagging activities of course,  DLC seems to rate far higher on the priority scale these days.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

1 hour ago, steve_v said:

I'm used to Gentoo GNU/Linux (daily-driver), pre-systemd Debian/Devuan (low-maintenence servers) and FreeBSD (almost as cool as Gentoo, but with more beards and a better logo). You can't not love this little guy:
If I limit myself to comparing windoze to windoze, I stand by my comments on the horrid UI, the hiding of knobs and technical bits, and the advertising/spyware.
Cortana (AKA the blatant Bungie ripoff ) in the installer is hilariously obnoxious as well. Serial-console compatible text-based installer with questions not designed for morons please, and no, I don't want to talk to it.

 

It's better than it was, but single-vessel physics simulation is still strictly single-threaded, so the practically exponential relationship between part-count and lag remains.
Single-threaded or not, I know of several expensive things being done every frame that don't need to be, and a couple of remaining examples of gratuitous heap-thrashing. So there's room for improvement without unity/physx advances...
Assuming anyone at Squad can be bothered with such time-consuming and non-customer-snagging activities of course,  DLC seems to rate far higher on the priority scale these days.

 

Spoiler

I will say duplication of the UI is a massive issue in W10; i have "Settings", Control Panel, Device manager, Settings 2.0 and depending on what i'm doing i may have one setting that needs to be changed in "Settings" then 2 in "Control Panel" and then finally get done what i want. Cortana doesn't really bother me that much; i right-click and disable her and that's it. The Ads were a load of BS (Especially in a OS i paid 130 for); and no matter where you are on the "Spyware" there's no question that M$ is skimming massive amounts of user data. But it works (Mostly) and runs pretty well; using less memory than Windows 7 once you go in and nuke all the bloat (Windows Aero).

The OS installation i also really agree with you; much rather have a text based installer i can navigate with a keyboard than this GUI-lite. So navigating it is a chore; finding common settings is harder than it should be. Oh and yeah; after you plonked down a decent chunk of change we're gonna shovel ads your way. That's not to mention services randomly failing to start (Or re-starting after you disabled them) leading to insidous bugs; auto-updates randomly nuking drivers or worse.

So it's somewhat better than a pre SP1 Vista; worse than XP or Win7. And most linux distros will be far better once you get past the jank.

Tbh i wouldn't mind if Squad sold literal piles of DLC; so long as that money wen't towards these issues. But it seems the big ones will be reserved for whoever picks up the torch afterwards; especially since wheels/legs are still broken. That's another thing that really annoys me; wheels don't act like wheels. They're more similar to skates with barely any friction; which is what all of these settings (Damper, spring etc.) are supposed to correct. And that's even before alignment; alignment is make or break for wheels but no stock tools exist to assist with it.  

[steve_v]

39 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Tbh i wouldn't mind if Squad sold literal piles of DLC; so long as that money wen't towards these issues.

Likewise. I'll even buy the DLCs as soon as I see some commitment to fixing these longstanding problems with the base game.
 

41 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

wheels don't act like wheels.

Wheels act like near-zero-width adjustable-friction colliders perpendicular to the ground, with an overlaid round mesh that appears to turn... Because that's kinda what they are. Try driving over some I-beams placed closer together than the wheel diameter and watch the super-realistic physics model in action.

My gripe with wheels isn't really the friction though, it's the "new and improved" auto-adjusting perpetual-motion machine springs and the way they freak out if the wheel collider isn't perpendicular to the ground or they experience a sudden change in loading... like another craft touching a wheel or the spring reaching end-of-travel.
I really don't like my aircraft bouncing up and down on the spot for eternity or launching back into the sky like a demonic pogo-stick on touchdown, and I don't like the janky "nail it down if the brakes are on" fix for the janky friction behaviour either.

As for alignment, the new wheels are actually somewhat less sensitive about it than the old "drives like it's on rails, but at least it's predictable" system. I think I'll just leave this here in case you don't mind mods, one of them should probably be stock.
 

Spoiler

4 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

services randomly failing to start (Or re-starting after you disabled them) leading to insidous bugs

Hence (one of the reasons) I resist the reimplementation of svchost on GNU/Linux. Give me human-readable shell-scripts and init-the-reaper anyday.
Clunky shell-scripts may be, but they do exactly what I expect them to do, with no integrated IPC daemons, webservers, or DNS resolvers, no binary logging, and no abusing the kernel ring-buffer "because it's there".
 

6 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

auto-updates randomly nuking drivers or worse.

I do not miss windows update, it's been a "let's interrupt what you're doing to play russian roulette with the functionality of your PC" garbage fire for as long as I can remember.

Oh, you want to turn of your box right now do you? Sucks for you, I'm busy breaking stuff. "Please wait while windows installs critical bugs".
I know you're itching to hold that power button down, go ahead, have some extra juicy half-installed bugs. We'll just play this all over again tomorrow anyway.
 

19 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

better than a pre SP1 Vista; worse than XP or Win7. And most linux distros will be far better once you get past the jank.

Agreed. If I have to use windows, it's going to be 7 or XP POSReady 2009.

IME the jank in many GNU/Linux distros boils down to: a) Missing GUI tools for system configuration or mismatching GUI representation of system configuration (+ CLI-phobic users), b) Open source developers being like cats, and just as easy to organise, c)16 ways to do the same thing, or d) People ignoring instructions and trying to get software direct from vendors or from other distros/releases rather than official repos, thus horribly and often silently borking their install.

Bonus epic fail: "My install [an unholy chimera of six different releases and two derivative distros] isn't broken. It just keeps mutating!" I gave up helping this guy with his random linking problems for obvious reasons.
In 10+ years using debian, on multiple machines, I've encountered exactly zero unexpected breakage that wasn't directly attributable to a failure in the chair-keyboard interface.

Now that I'm back in gentoo-paradise, there is indeed a little bit of jank... Usually because I modified a build script somewhere or applied user-patches and forgot about them. Such is the price of power.

 

[Incarnation of Chaos]

2 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Likewise. I'll even buy the DLCs as soon as I see some commitment to fixing these longstanding problems with the base game.
 

Wheels act like near-zero-width adjustable-friction colliders perpendicular to the ground, with an overlaid round mesh that appears to turn... Because that's kinda what they are. Try driving over some I-beams placed closer together than the wheel diameter and watch the super-realistic physics model in action.

My gripe with wheels isn't really the friction though, it's the "new and improved" auto-adjusting perpetual-motion machine springs and the way they freak out if the wheel collider isn't perpendicular to the ground or they experience a sudden change in loading... like another craft touching a wheel or the spring reaching end-of-travel.
I really don't like my aircraft bouncing up and down on the spot for eternity or launching back into the sky like a demonic pogo-stick on touchdown, and I don't like the janky "nail it down if the brakes are on" fix for the janky friction behaviour either.

As for alignment, the new wheels are actually somewhat less sensitive about it than the old "drives like it's on rails, but at least it's predictable" system. I think I'll just leave this here in case you don't mind mods, one of them should probably be stock.
 

 

I still remember one of my aircraft i was testing a long time ago; i had finally gotten the silly thing to go in a straight line and i throttled up the engines....

And for whatever reason the gear would lean left, then spring up and lean right; looking like some kind of cheesy 80's dance while screaming down the pad at 151m/s. I barely got her up before smacking into the ocean because i was laughing so hard; this game is incredible at times but that was one of the best laughs i have had in a long time. Then it ended up developing a massive, uncontrollable sideslip around mach 2 and imploding mid-spin. Which was completely my fault; not KSP's. 

But yeah the spring loading and unloading is pretty damn frustrating; real shocks bottom out or have a controlled rate of ascent. In KSP there's no such thing as bottoming out; they break or flip you into the next crater. Which i can't understand for the life of me; is it that hard to say "Don't exceed X rate of ascent/second"? In C++ it would be trival to do that; not too sure about unity (I thought it used C or C#?). Then bottoming out could just be calculated by the load, # of shocks and whatever math they use on the side. Once they exceed the magic number; mark them as busted and allow engineers to fix them instead of turning them into catapults. Then you could have a seperate number for just destroying them straight up.

[steve_v]

28 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

they break or flip you into the next crater.

Breaking if abused I can dig, extreme forces if looked at funny not so much.
This kind of thing (not mine, random examples) is still happening, 3 years after the wheel upgrade. It's better to be sure, but it's not fixed. Band-aids. Rushed patches. Autostruts. More adjustment sliders. Not fixed.
Why has this been seen more often on the fixed gear than anything else? Shorter travel, that's why.

Not that it's confined to only short-travel suspension or older versions of the game mind, the last few times I tried to do a Mun landing in 1.7.3 my landing legs did much the same thing, bouncing up and down and swaying from side-to side with no energy input whatsoever. Is it slower, sure. Is it gone, hell no.

You know what the fix for this suspension-related SNAFU was? Not fixing the landing gear, oh no, it was disabling collisions between EVA kerbals and gear. Care to guess what happens with something that isn't a kerbal?*
*Gear are now nearly indestructible, so they no longer explode. They still react with ludicrous violence though.
 

28 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

C#

Yeah, C# + modified mono/.NET 3.5 runtime IIRC.

Edited August 2, 2019 by steve_v

[Incarnation of Chaos]

Just now, steve_v said:

Breaking if abused I can dig, extreme forces if looked at funny not so much.
This kind of thing (not mine, random examples) is still happening, 3 years after the wheel upgrade. It's better to be sure, but it's not fixed. Band-aids. Rushed patches. Autostruts. More adjustment sliders. Not fixed.
Why has this been seen more often on the fixed gear than anything else? Shorter travel, that's why.

Not that it's confined to only short-travel suspension or older versions of the game mind, the last few times I tried to do a Mun landing in 1.7.3 my landing legs did much the same thing, bouncing up and down and swaying from side-to side with no energy input whatsoever. Is it slower, sure. Is it gone, hell no.
 

Yeah, C# + modified mono/.NET 3.5 runtime IIRC.

I'm on 1.6.1 and there's not a single interaction between a wheel/leg and the ground that isn't making me nervous; 300 ton landers flipping end over end because of these blasted things isn't a rare occurence. It's literally the reality; meaning i have to kill speed (1.8m/s ideally) and massively overengineer my landers. And quicksave constantly; even with a slow approach and plenty of legs it's still a very good possiblity that my lander will magically rocket upwards at 30m/s after coming to a standstill and flip. Landing gear isn't always as bad; but between the jank collision and the still present possiblity of {INSERT SEVERAL HUNDRED METRIC FRIGGING TON AIRCRAFT} flipping end-over-end on load for absolutely no reason makes it extremely difficult to design aircraft. Which is a shame because between FAR and Mouse Aim i was really enjoying planes in KSP.

Like i'm not asking for shocks and struts made out of adamantium; i get i need to match the load to the right # of legs and the right sizes of them. But these things literally unleash the kracken the moment they're used; and it makes a gameplay experience that should be exciting, thrilling and awesome into a stress-inducing countdown that is likely what i would nominate as the WORST thing about KSP.  And making your landers lighter doesn't help; iv'e had 30 ton landers do the same dance as 300-1000 ton motherships. 

But if they wanted to add beefy Lander Legs (Stock Falcon legs plox) more wheels and even some Tank tracks (Which make more sense to me tbh) and tease out all of these issues; that is a DLC i would buy without hesitation. 

 

[steve_v]

10 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

I'm on 1.6.1 and there's not a single interaction between a wheel/leg and the ground that isn't making me nervous

I hear you, I have a 1.5.1 and a 1.7.3 install here and they're equally infuriating when it comes to touching the ground in any way.
Landing legs? Prepare to play hopscotch with a slinky, hope you packed plenty of reaction wheels. No landing legs? Slip 'n slide and spin on the spot time...
 

Just now, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Which is a shame because between FAR and Mouse Aim i was really enjoying planes in KSP.

Likewise. FAR exacerbates the problems due to the lower (read: more realistic) lift values and consequently higher landing speeds.
 

2 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

i get i need to match the load to the right # of legs and the right sizes of them.

Thing is you don't really have to any more, the legs are pretty much indestructible and the spring model tries to adjust to the load... then fails epically to behave like a spring, whether you did things right or not.
 

6 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

if they wanted to add beefy Lander Legs (Stock Falcon legs plox) more wheels and even some Tank tracks (Which make more sense to me tbh) and tease out all of these issues; that is a DLC i would buy without hesitation. 

I'd buy a DLC that had no new parts at all, one that just fixed the stuff we have so isn't a constant source of aggravation and save-scumming. I'd buy it in a heartbeat... If and only if it also fixed the year-old completely idiotic borkage of the input stack in the GNU/Linux build of course.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

2 minutes ago, steve_v said:

 

Likewise. FAR exacerbates the problems due to the lower (read: more realistic) lift values and consequently higher landing speeds.
 

 

I was seeing something about that the other day; apperently the value KSP uses is squared or something? Where as IRL it's not? Meaning KSP craft are able to generate far more lift in less area and FAR corrects this sending the scaling kinda out of whack (For stock).

[steve_v]

12 minutes ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

I was seeing something about that the other day; apperently the value KSP uses is squared or something? Where as IRL it's not? Meaning KSP craft are able to generate far more lift in less area and FAR corrects this sending the scaling kinda out of whack (For stock).

Parts in KSP are unrealistically dense to make getting to orbit harder on a 1/10 scale planet, so aircraft tend to be heavier. In typical Squad fashion the fix for overweight aircraft was to just up the values on lifting parts.
FAR uses a different calculation for lift, one based on shape (chord, sweep, etc.) rather than arbitrary "lift value" numbers, and hence throws off the balance.
Things could probably be brought more in-line with stock, but then there's the expected (and correct IMO) pushback that FAR is actually doing things properly.

Ed. For an alternate solution, there's a mod that fixes the depleted-uranium fuel-tanks

Edited August 2, 2019 by steve_v

[Xurkitree]

The worst part about KSP is lag. Complete, mindnumbing lag. I've gotten used to it so much.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

7 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Parts in KSP are unrealistically dense to make getting to orbit harder on a 1/10 scale planet, so aircraft tend to be heavier. In typical Squad fashion the fix for overweight aircraft was to just up the values on lifting parts.
FAR uses a different calculation for lift, one based on shape (chord, sweep, etc.) rather than arbitrary "lift value" numbers, and hence throws off the balance.
Things could probably be brought more in-line with stock, but then there's the expected (and correct IMO) pushback that FAR is actually doing things properly.

Ed. For an alternate solution, there's a mod that fixes the depleted-uranium fuel-tanks

Already have that one because i was really tired of bolting on additional fuel mass; kinda feels cheaty though in the stock system. But it's not completely absurd either; idk it's weird.

 

6 minutes ago, Xurkitree said:

The worst part about KSP is lag. Complete, mindnumbing lag. I've gotten used to it so much.

Thankfully my rig is so powerful i only lag when i do stupid stuff (Single launch of 1 megaton motherships, docking 200+ part vessels into one massive ship etc.)

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, steve_v said:

This kind of thing (not mine, random examples) is still happening, 3 years after the wheel upgrade.

It's because it was a Unity change and Squad has chosen the #BlameUnity approach.  I get that it might be a hard problem.  I understand Squad might have to shell out for the source license for Unity.  The simple fact I have tried to state over and over in this community:  Consumer's should not, and need not, care how the product is made.  Only whether the product works as expected.  To much of KSP must be learned outside of KSP.  Who is really going to mess with the wheel sliders after building their first plane in career?  A plane resembling the one in the linked video.  If anything, Squad should have guaranteed such early career planes were the ones to work with the wheels out of the box.  No tinkering required.  Yet, here we are.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

2 minutes ago, klgraham1013 said:

It's because it was a Unity change and Squad has chosen the #BlameUnity approach.  I get that it might be a hard problem.  I understand Squad might have to shell out for the source license for Unity.  The simple fact I have tried to state over and over in this community:  Consumer's should not, and need not, care how the product is made.  Only whether the product works as expected.  To much of KSP must be learned outside of KSP.  Who is really going to mess with the wheel sliders after building their first plane in career?  A plane resembling the one in the linked video.  If anything, Squad should have guaranteed such early career planes were the ones to work with the wheels out of the box.  No tinkering required.  Yet, here we are.

And even if you tinker with the sliders it's not out of the question that the behavior depicted will continue; just somewhat slower. Or you get a "Dancing" plane like i had once; the sliders don't fix what's broken. And it's really, really irritating; i waste more time trying to troubleshoot these damned wheels than actually flying the aircraft.

It's made me incredibly furious to make a plane, meticiously balance fuel/thrust, get the critical mach right where i wanted it and then spend 4 hours just figuring out the WHEELS! Oh and then literally minutes into the flight there's some issue that i would've only seen with flight testing that causes a RUD; that i could have seen literally HOURS ago if the wheels hadn't been so buggy. Iv'e walked away from this game more than i would like just because all of this made me want to damage hardware (No monitors have been harmed)

Also duh; i get it's an issue with the way unity handles colliders. Guess what; plenty of amazing games develop their own solutions for things the basic engine can't handle correctly. The framework Unity provides isn't supposed nor intended to be a final solution; especially when you're a game like KSP and doing something literally no engine is built to handle. This is why Unity allows you to plug in custom code/modules; because they KNOW the functionallity they provide doesn't cover 100% of potential use cases. If they need a license for the source then i'm sure they could haggle with Unity for a discount; that's basically standard practice in the industry. But honestly i doubt they couldn't do a reasonable job with some custom Scripting; they'll never know until they try.

And if they don't have the programmers then i'm sure they could throw a posting or two out there; there's plenty of them looking for jobs. 

 

[eddiew]

My own personal inability to start a career that will finish before I burn out.

I always go for enormous planet packs and dozens of mods, and I end up getting half way through, and then reality interrupts for a couple of weeks and... I never quite manage to pick it up again until half a year has passed. And then when I come back, it's a new version, and either I have to go back to a now-old version, or start a whole new game 

[VoidSquid]

Two annoying issues for me, equally weighted:

Seeing several white flecks on my monitor, and, not knowing, are these stars? dust? Trying to wipe them away, succeeding only 50% of the time  

Plus that since 1.7.x, the frame rate drops to maybe 1 fps when I go to my landed vessels (like Mun harvester base) with even medium part count

[Fraston]

The fact that while loading, my poor Mac’s storage is immediately tanked by 4 gigabytes, and the memory deficit persists until I close the game.

And also the fact that, the game’s framerate models the framerate of everything else in it’s image, which, judging that the space center screen is usually 20-25 FPS, is not a good thing, no matter how you look at it.

 

[Guest]

The way thrust limiter sliders go in 0.5 increments but the bar is shorter than the number of pixels onscreen that would be needed to allow all 200 positions to be set, so I can't set my takeoff TWR perfectly.

[Lithobrake]

The fact that I have over 300 hours, and there is still so much left undone! I wish I could play this game more!

[wumpus]

Used to be the rocket-building interface.  The struts still seem to be irrepairably broken, but between autostrut and rigid parts (which I think are stock, I haven't updated those mods in multiple revisions) struts no longer seem critical.  Mostly now it is just the way career mode encourages grind.

The rocket-building interface (especially if struts are required) has been really *bad* over the years.  I felt betrayed when Havester "rewrote the UI" and it turned out to be the inflight UI and not the rocket building one.  Not that the inflight improvement wasn't needed and helpful, but it wasn't the UI that I felt was really needed.

[Lisias]

On 8/17/2019 at 5:48 PM, Lithobrake said:

The fact that I have over 300 hours, and there is still so much left undone! I wish I could play this game more!

I have about 1.500 hours of registered hourson Steam, at least the same on unregistered hours, and I still borking on my Mün landings.

The worst thing on KSP, as it appears, is me.  

[Lisias]

On 8/2/2019 at 9:00 AM, klgraham1013 said:

It's because it was a Unity change and Squad has chosen the #BlameUnity approach.  

#BlameUnity is an explanation, not a fix for the problem.

They are right in blaming Unity. The problem is not workarounding the problem (assuming it's not a fixable one)

-- post edit --

That said... I'm not having so much issues with wheels as I see here. I'm even getting good results on scaling them (using TS beta), and this is solving a good part of my wheels and landing struts problems. Keep the wheel stress below 0.5 or 0.4 at rest, and below 1.0 on rolling and even the tendency for running off the runway is minimised (over stressed steering wheels pops and trembles, with the same results as on a real vehicle - the thing drifts from the intended course).

I think that the worse thing about them is being unable to anticipate, on SPH/VAB , how the wheels will behave with the current settings.

Edited August 19, 2019 by Lisias
Post edit

[Tw1]

That just as you (I) finish remaking my old favorite vehicles, thinking them future proof, they go an announce a whole new game

[Superfluous J]

39 minutes ago, Tw1 said:

That just as you (I) finish remaking my old favorite vehicles, thinking them future proof, they go an announce a whole new game

That's the best part!

I wouldn't play KSP anymore if it didn't involve building and rebuilding craft essentially forever.