MechJeb in Stock KSP2? [Split from another thread]

[Souptime]

I mean theres literally modding subforums so...

Edited July 31, 2021 by Souptime
Oh hey llok new page

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

Nauka used it to dock.

 

[The Aziz]

27 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

  Hide contents

Nauka used it to dock.

 

Because they let it do everything. With no supervision over MJ's work, you're guaranteed to fail at some point. It will overcorrect while trying to change heading hold, it will set up a simple Hohmann transfer for the Mun or rendezvous burn 40 days in the future because it's cheaper by 50m/s (ain't nobody got time for that), it will use a ton of rcs fuel to dock and it will take ages.

[herbal space program]

On 7/30/2021 at 8:33 PM, Pthigrivi said:

 And maybe I mistook your meaning but if biomes still exist we absolutely need maps of them. You should have to do the work scansat style but its actually insane that you can’t view biome map overlays  in map and flight mode in KSP1, and altitude/topo and slope maps for that matter. 

My meaning was actually exactly what you said here.  Absolutely you should have in-game resources that display all of those data, but only after you've jumped through some kind of (easy) hoops.  My only issue with KER was that it tells you all of that right off the bat without you having to do anything at all to earn it beyond going there .  I still use it though. The current stock game OTOH tells you what biome you're over when you EVA, but then it doesn't record that info and it only tells you about that one spot, making the process of mapping biomes ultra-tedious. I think it would be much better if instead after you EVA over some biome it would reveal all the places  that biome exists on a map you can subsequently pull up.  Moreover,  you'll then know where you need to EVA the next time to encounter a new biome, making the whole mapping process much less annoying. At some point in the tech tree you can also get probe sensors that will map biomes for you, perhaps initially one at a time like doing an EVA, but eventually all of them at once from a polar orbit.  I dunno, maybe you could even give the sensors some whacky, off-the-wall names like "survey camera" and "survey mapper".  And if I'm really going out on a limb, I might even suggest that the terrain detail in which you can see bodies other than Kerbin in the tracking station should be tied to these measurements! Similarly, you could tie terrain elevation data to some kind of radar sensor or even the existing gravioli detector. In my ideal version of career KSP, every single bit of novel science you do would give you either some useful knowledge about the Kerbolar system  or some progress along a specific, somehow related branch of the tech tree. It would make the whole process of acquiring science so much less pointless and  grindy! Seems like a no-brainer to me for a game that's all about space exploration.

[Brofessional]

Portions of mechjeb have already been made stock in KSP1. The SAS modes to hold prograde/etc. for example.

Putting the telemetry readouts of Mechjeb/KER into the stock game is fine as it's only information, though it needs to be drip fed through tutorials/progression for new players so they are not overwhelmed by all the information. The automated systems of Mechjeb don't belong in the stock game. It makes the game less challenging and impacts the learning curve of the game. Learning to do things manually from the start really helps teach you how and why things behave the way they do, which not only gives you real world knowledge but it also helps you understand how to improve your vehicle designs.

 

I suppose we may see some sort of automated flights that function like trade routes to move resources between colonies kind of like a strategy game, but if that happens I suspect they will be completely hands-off.  As in the ships are totally on-rails and cannot be controlled by the player.

[shdwlrd]

39 minutes ago, Brofessional said:

Putting the telemetry readouts of Mechjeb/KER into the stock game is fine as it's only information, though it needs to be drip fed through tutorials/progression for new players so they are not overwhelmed by all the information. The automated systems of Mechjeb don't belong in the stock game. It makes the game less challenging and impacts the learning curve of the game. Learning to do things manually from the start really helps teach you how and why things behave the way they do, which not only gives you real world knowledge but it also helps you understand how to improve your vehicle designs

I have to ask, in your view, does a veteran player have the ability to bypass the basics to do what they want to do right from the start? 

In KSP1 there was nothing to help the player fly their craft. Why does KSP2 have to follow that formula? Why do you think QoL and convenience functions in flight shouldn't be added? 

[The Aziz]

1 hour ago, Brofessional said:

It makes the game less challenging and impacts the learning curve of the game. Learning to do things manually from the start really helps teach you how and why things behave the way they do,

This argument keeps reappearing and I still don't see it valid.

How can I learn about reentry heating and preparation for it if I use difficulty options to lower it to minimum? Does that make the game less challenging? Yes. Does it exist in stock game? Also yes. It's a sandbox, if I want it hard, I make it hard. And that brings us to the next point: learning by observation, some people here (naysayers mostly) clearly have never heard of it. How many people have never left Kerbin because the game lacked any useful instructions? How many times have you heard "if I didn't watch Scott Manley's videos, I would never make it into orbit/Mun/rendezvous/dock/whatev" or something along these lines? They watched what he did, copied his designs and flying patterns, and boom, now they can fly. How is that different from using MJ for learning? You set it up (which isn't that easy in many specific cases), you watch what it's doing, you can try to repeat it on your own.

When I started playing seriously, there were no tutorials (or I didn't know about them) so I was doing everything manually, sometimes asking for advice on a local Minecraft forum. Back in 2014 I had an orbital station built from several modules (so I could dock) and even had few fly-by probes in interplanetary space on way to other planets. But neither of those things were easy, and next steps, landings etc were behind a learning wall which I didn't want to climb with no safety ropes. So I watched MechJeb. And guess what, I learned from it. How to be more efficient, more precise. Now I could easily play without it as I already know what I'm doing, but I don't want to, because after thousands of hours I just can't be bothered to do every single thing by hand.

Now, if there was one feature I'd really have in ksp2, and I think someone mentioned it already here, it's "execute maneuver". It's a must-have, the imprecision in manual burns is just too high. You can remove other things from Mechjeb but for the love of Kraken, leave this one be.

[Corona688]

On 7/31/2021 at 8:53 AM, The Aziz said:

Because they let it do everything. With no supervision over MJ's work, you're guaranteed to fail at some point. It will overcorrect while trying to change heading hold, it will set up a simple Hohmann transfer for the Mun or rendezvous burn 40 days in the future because it's cheaper by 50m/s (ain't nobody got time for that), it will use a ton of rcs fuel to dock and it will take ages.

why do people use mechjeb again?  things seem much simpler without it