KSP2 Concerns

[AlamoVampire]

With early access in very close proximity i am still very concerned. You may or may not share my concerns but its these concerns that have chilled my hype.

They are: reentry particle effects, real procedural fairings (ie like the ones that were a mod by the name Procedural Fairings, as they are the gold standard to what fairings in ksp should be, my opinion and stock were horrific to me) and auto pilot like mechjeb.

1. Reentry particle effects, ksp 1 had the code built in but switched off. Afair it was never “on” for performance reasons, fine, but ksp2 is new and on logarithmically superior machines to what used ksp 1 way back when. I see no reason ( not a programmer) for us to not have it. Heck ksp2 engine plums look way better too!

2. Procedural fairings, ie like the mod, should be the thing. Why? Aside from being objectively better, ksp2 has procedural radiators so yeah.

3. Mechjeb/auto pilot. General aviation, commercial, military and all space programs have it. Even my pmdg737-700/800/900(when they launch the 900) has real world accurate autopilot. So yeah.

Aside from the radiators and engine plumes noone has mentioned or demonstrated these features for ksp2 so im concerned. Will not knowing for sure stop me from buying? No. Will not having them make me hate it? Nope. Will i complain and then wait for our lovely modders to fill the void? Yup.

033502042023

033602042023

Edited February 4, 2023 by AlamoVampire

[Truebadour]

20 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

1. Reentry particle effects, ksp 1 had the code built in but switched off. Afair it was never “on” for performance reasons, fine, but ksp2 is new and on logarithmically superior machines to what used ksp 1 way back when. I see no reason ( not a programmer) for us to not have it. Heck ksp2 engine plums look way better too!

I think they will be in the base game, it seems to me the footage we've seen of vessels falling in Jool's and Eve's atmosphere were just spawned here from the editor, so there is no deceleration from reentry.

Could also explain why the heatshield looks brand new (I personally hope we'll get to see them getting crispy).

[tstein]

1 hour ago, AlamoVampire said:

With early access in very close proximity i am still very concerned. You may or may not share my concerns but its these concerns that have chilled my hype.

They are: reentry particle effects, real procedural fairings (ie like the ones that were a mod by the name Procedural Fairings, as they are the gold standard to what fairings in ksp should be, my opinion and stock were horrific to me) and auto pilot like mechjeb.

1. Reentry particle effects, ksp 1 had the code built in but switched off. Afair it was never “on” for performance reasons, fine, but ksp2 is new and on logarithmically superior machines to what used ksp 1 way back when. I see no reason ( not a programmer) for us to not have it. Heck ksp2 engine plums look way better too!

2. Procedural fairings, ie like the mod, should be the thing. Why? Aside from being objectively better, ksp2 has procedural radiators so yeah.

3. Mechjeb/auto pilot. General aviation, commercial, military and all space programs have it. Even my pmdg737-700/800/900(when they launch the 900) has real world accurate autopilot. So yeah.

Aside from the radiators and engine plumes noone has mentioned or demonstrated these features for ksp2 so im concerned. Will not knowing for sure stop me from buying? No. Will not having them make me hate it? Nope. Will i complain and then wait for our lovely modders to fill the void? Yup.

033502042023

033602042023

A plane autopilot is not the same thing as an autopilot that  can perform orbital insertions

[Starhawk]

The preceding posts, which are off-topic for the hype train have been moved here.
KSP Forum Moderation Team

[tstein]

2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

With early access in very close proximity i am still very concerned. You may or may not share my concerns but its these concerns that have chilled my hype.

 

1. Reentry particle effects, ksp 1 had the code built in but switched off. Afair it was never “on” for performance reasons, fine, but ksp2 is new and on logarithmically superior machines to what used ksp 1 way back when. I see no reason ( not a programmer) for us to not have it. Heck ksp2 engine plums look way better too!

 

You realize how Logarithmic superior machines  means exactly that the machines are barely more capable than they were in KSP 1?

[AlamoVampire]

@tstein Im not sure what point youre making. Mine is: autopilot is ubiquitous and does need to be included. 
 

065102042023

[AlamoVampire]

1 hour ago, Starhawk said:

The preceding posts, which are off-topic for the hype train have been moved here.
KSP Forum Moderation Team

Thanks for the split off! My goof for misplacing this originally. Guess thats what I get for posting at 0335 and skipping a few critical thinking steps lol. Appreciate it, really do!

072402042023

[tstein]

32 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@tstein Im not sure what point youre making. Mine is: autopilot is ubiquitous and does need to be included. 
 

065102042023

MY point is.. I don't agree.  It removes most of the game, so if added it should be  a PART, with an implicit  trade off on having it.

[The Aziz]

Actually useful https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/CH-J3_Fly-By-Wire_Avionics_Hub?

All it really needs is keep altitude, direction and speed. So you can apply it to a rover. In space tools should be, following the dev reports, already so refined that no MJ autoburn is needed.

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, AlamoVampire said:

autopilot is ubiquitous and does need to be included.

We're already getting that. You just need to do the actions you want automating manually first, so the game doesn't lose the piloting aspect.

4 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

2. Procedural fairings, ie like the mod, should be the thing. Why? Aside from being objectively better, ksp2 has procedural radiators so yeah.

Procedural fairings are already a thing. KSP 1 has them ergo KSP 2 will have them.

[AlamoVampire]

@tstein i rarely and i truly mean RARELY say this on this forum but you are objectively wrong. It adds so so much to the game. What do I mean?  Well, I for one cannot stand repeating the exact same flight profile ad infinitum. Refueling or resupplying stations? Building them? Same profile over and over. Real world equivalent: ISS. How many flights were needed to build it? How many launch sites? More than 40 launches from at least 2 launch sites. And how many of these flights did not use autopilot? 0. No space flight does not use autopilot. Artemis was FULLY AUTOMATED. SpaceX? Fully automated. 

When I was learning to fly missions here in ksp I read and watched as many tutorials as I could. I could launch and land within 2-3 flights on day 1. Rendezvous and docking? Not once. No matter what I read or watched it just did not click. Then I found mechjeb. I tweaked the rocket from a tutorial i watched (and copied) by adding 1 part. Mechjeb. It taught me in 1 SINGLE FLIGHT what watching hundreds of hours of tutorials and reading hundreds of pages of written tutorials could not. Why or rather how? It did it by showing how MY rocket flew. How MY rocket behaved. 
The number of times I have been able to have my mind blown by views and moments that are 100% IMPOSSIBLE without autopilot are beyond countless. One moment in particular came when I had mechjeb set up for docking to my station. I decided to let mj handle my rocket and jumped to the station and watched my ship come in out of the shadow into the light of the sun then close into the stations lights and dock. It was beyond beautiful to see. It covered 250 meters to docking without needing my input. Had I been making a cinematic it would have been glorious. Impossible w/out autopilot. 

Autopilot is valuable and not having it is beyond limiting. Just because YOU do not want it or care for it does not mean it should not be included. Best example? Multiplayer. I personally cannot fathom how  multiplayer is a good thing for a game that is at its core SINGLE PLAYER and personally want nothing to do with it, but others want it so its being added. Given the multiple years (likely the entire existence of ksp) of people debating this and being in 2 camps much the same as multiplayer the latter of which saw victory go to promultiplayer and its obvious inclusion. Given the fact REAL WORLD space programs CANNOT function w/out autopilot or automation not having would be a slap in the face especially (personal opinion here) given the fact multiplayer is a thing and the mod that spawned it was far less polished than mechjeb2. I fully and completely disagree with you. 
 

080402042023

080702043023

Edited February 4, 2023 by AlamoVampire

[Bej Kerman]

Just now, AlamoVampire said:

Well, I for one cannot stand repeating the exact same flight profile ad infinitum. Refueling or resupplying stations? Building them? Same profile over and over.

Automated routine missions have already been confirmed.

1 minute ago, AlamoVampire said:

When I was learning to fly missions here in ksp I read and watched as many tutorials as I could. I could launch and land within 2-3 flights on day 1. Rendezvous and docking? Not once. No matter what I read or watched it just did not click. Then I found mechjeb. I tweaked the rocket from a tutorial i watched (and copied) by adding 1 part. Mechjeb. It taught me in 1 SINGLE FLIGHT what watching hundreds of hours of tutorials and reading hundreds of pages of written tutorials could not. Why or rather how? It did it by showing how MY rocket flew. How MY rocket behaved. 

KSP 2 is also getting improved tutorials, so people should also more often be able to get into the game without needing 3rd party resources.

2 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

The number of times I have been able to have my mind blown by views and moments that are 100% IMPOSSIBLE without autopilot are beyond countless. One moment in particular came when I had mechjeb set up for docking to my station. I decided to let mj handle my rocket and jumped to the station and watched my ship come in out of the shadow into the light of the sun then close into the stations lights and dock. It was beyond beautiful to see. It covered 250 meters to docking without needing my input. Had I been making a cinematic it would have been glorious. Impossible w/out autopilot. 

As long as you can dock once, routine missions can do them repeatedly.

2 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

Autopilot is valuable and not having it is beyond limiting. Just because YOU do not want it or care for it does not mean it should not be included. Best example? Multiplayer. I personally cannot fathom how  multiplayer is a good thing for a game that is at its core SINGLE PLAYER and personally want nothing to do with it, but others want it so its being added. Given the multiple years (likely the entire existence of ksp) of people debating this and being in 2 camps much the same as multiplayer the latter of which saw victory go to promultiplayer and its obvious inclusion. Given the fact REAL WORLD space programs CANNOT function w/out autopilot or automation not having would be a slap in the face especially (personal opinion here) given the fact multiplayer is a thing and the mod that spawned it was far less polished than mechjeb2. I fully and completely disagree with you. 

It is a thing

[AlamoVampire]

@Bej Kerman so i dont have to fight my phone or the forum your post at 0811 is going to be numbered 1-4 from the top down. I hope this makes my reply to it coherent for you as you read it. 
 

1. I read that certain routine missions will be handled in the background, but this does not cover ALL. Unless our definition of routine is vastly different. Routine to me is any mission that flies the exact same profile again and again. Communication networks, crew swaps and construction or renovation missions to a station, sending multiple missions to the same orbit/orbital destination. So again while some of the hyper tedious resupply missions may vanish to the background there are some missions that are the same exact profile ad infinitum. 
 

2. Will these tutorials show how a rocket YOU built flies? Will they show you exactly how you were messing up? I doubt it. I watched Scott Manley explain rendezvous and docking in ksp on nearly infinite repeat and he is above and beyond one of if not THE best teacher ive ever seen for KSP and even with his detailed videos it just did not work for me. Autopilot, mechjeb2 DID. This idea that a “good” or “better” tutorial is enough does not justify or call for not having it. 
 

3. So if I can do it once, i can do it ad infinitum? Does this mean I HAVE to? Does this mean I am OBLIGATED to? I can manually land the PMDG 737-700/800 in near 0 visibility or in 25 knot crosswinds (which is the max allowed crosswind). I can hand fly entire flights from pushback to parking and shut down at my destination. 99.99% of every flight I do in MSFS is routine, I did it once, by your logic I should never turn on my flight director or auto throttle or L/V Navs or turn on my receiver for the airports ILS gear. Just because a player CAN do something by hand is no reason to REQUIRE that they are to be DENIED the option to not let autopilot do it.

 

4. Which is a thing? Multiplayer? I know it is. I think spending dev time on it when they did was unnecessary when other things that have direct affects on the core game like weather (think thats a thing) or procedural parts or other things like parts or yes autopilot should have higher priority. Sure people playing with friends can be fun (not referring to ksp in particular, but multiplayer in like an mmo or a shooter or w/e) but if the game isnt polished or is missing things because time in dev was spent on less critical things (sorry guys but multiplayer isnt critical) instead. Id say autopilot has more criticality than multiplayer simply because autopilot adds functionality while multiplayer only adds your friends and extra complexity of tons of parts all in 1 spot all demanding physics to be dealt with.

If however you are claiming autopilot is an actual planned, included and confirmed feature the citation with link to the devs specifically stating this is required and requested. Until then I need to continue to be of the position that it is not confirmed/planned and may be required to be modded to fill the void.

084602042023

[Bej Kerman]

2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

1. I read that certain routine missions will be handled in the background, but this does not cover ALL. Unless our definition of routine is vastly different. Routine to me is any mission that flies the exact same profile again and again. Communication networks, crew swaps and construction or renovation missions to a station, sending multiple missions to the same orbit/orbital destination. So again while some of the hyper tedious resupply missions may vanish to the background there are some missions that are the same exact profile ad infinitum. 

Any routine mission can be repeated as far as I know. Hopefully that covers launching payloads, adding parts to space stations and refueling motherships.

2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

2. Will these tutorials show how a rocket YOU built flies? Will they show you exactly how you were messing up? I doubt it. I watched Scott Manley explain rendezvous and docking in ksp on nearly infinite repeat and he is above and beyond one of if not THE best teacher ive ever seen for KSP and even with his detailed videos it just did not work for me. Autopilot, mechjeb2 DID. This idea that a “good” or “better” tutorial is enough does not justify or call for not having it. 

I'm confused. For anything less complicated than a Buran, just turning until you see a circle around the planet in map view will work, and it's what the tutorial teaches.

2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

3. So if I can do it once, i can do it ad infinitum? Does this mean I HAVE to? Does this mean I am OBLIGATED to? I can manually land the PMDG 737-700/800 in near 0 visibility or in 25 knot crosswinds (which is the max allowed crosswind). I can hand fly entire flights from pushback to parking and shut down at my destination. 99.99% of every flight I do in MSFS is routine, I did it once, by your logic I should never turn on my flight director or auto throttle or L/V Navs or turn on my receiver for the airports ILS gear. Just because a player CAN do something by hand is no reason to REQUIRE that they are to be DENIED the option to not let autopilot do it.

As far as I can tell, yes. You need to run a mission once before you can let the game handle it. Not how it works in real life obviously, but this should also help the game figure out how much dV some profiles need for more complicated parts of flight, like atmospheric landings and takeoffs, when determining the range a routine mission can have with a specified ship. Rocket science is complicated, some things the game just won't be able to figure out without you first simulating a mission.

2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

4. Which is a thing? Multiplayer? I know it is. I think spending dev time on it when they did was unnecessary when other things that have direct affects on the core game like weather (think thats a thing) or procedural parts or other things like parts or yes autopilot should have higher priority. Sure people playing with friends can be fun (not referring to ksp in particular, but multiplayer in like an mmo or a shooter or w/e) but if the game isnt polished or is missing things because time in dev was spent on less critical things (sorry guys but multiplayer isnt critical) instead. Id say autopilot has more criticality than multiplayer simply because autopilot adds functionality while multiplayer only adds your friends and extra complexity of tons of parts all in 1 spot all demanding physics to be dealt with.

[snip] I'm not a fan of the "[thing I don't like] is a possible reason the game is unpolished - [thing I like], however, is a valid excuse for the devs to not spend time polishing other aspects of the game" fallacy. It crops up everywhere. Just because you want an autopilot doesn't mean other people consider it a critical component of the game that's worth directing development time at, nor can you blame a lack of polish on something that you don't want but other people have wanted for a very long time. Game development is far more complicated than that.

People have wanted multiplayer for nearly a decade and the KSP 1 devs had ambitions of it at some point. It happening in KSP 2. Please, vent your frustrations in a way that's heathier than making blatantly false objective assertions like "sorry guys but multiplayer isn't critical", things that need to be looked at in a subjective manner.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Starhawk
Redacted by moderator

[AlamoVampire]

@Bej Kerman like before ill number my responses from top down.

1. Again, this sounds like background vs foreground. Supply missions vs construction. I dont see how they can take delivering, installing, removing sections of a station or crew swaps or high precision (as an example) geostationary or multinode comm networks as a background thing.

2. Ill just quote myself from earlier: 

3 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

When I was learning to fly missions here in ksp I read and watched as many tutorials as I could. I could launch and land within 2-3 flights on day 1. Rendezvous and docking? Not once. No matter what I read or watched it just did not click. Then I found mechjeb. I tweaked the rocket from a tutorial i watched (and copied) by adding 1 part. Mechjeb. It taught me in 1 SINGLE FLIGHT what watching hundreds of hours of tutorials and reading hundreds of pages of written tutorials could not. Why or rather how? It did it by showing how MY rocket flew. How MY rocket behaved. 

Sorry but no tutorial written or video could do what mechjeb did.

3. And for those of us who do not do certain aspects w/out automation even the first time? I for one have not played ksp ONCE in more than 2-3 YEARS because of various reasons that both personal and private and am going to hurt badly from rust when ksp2 comes. Should a player in my situation who relied on mechjeb to learn and then deal with tedium be punished? Because thats the vibe im getting here. “It can be do e by hand so autopilot is useless. Buck up, do it, dont complain.” Thats the vibe im getting.

4. 

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

thing I don't like] is a possible reason the game is unpolished - [thing I like], however, is a valid excuse for the devs to not spend time polishing other aspects of the game" fallacy.

[snip] Oh and btw the debate about making mechjeb stock precedes by a small margin the make dark multiplayer stock by a bit. Its just that the fans of that mod got what they wanted while those of us who have been vocal in the past about mechjeb still have not been given the same deference and respect. We seem to be dismissed or ignored. Now, lets correct this fallacy idea. Lets be clear here. I have no interest in multiplayer. The fact is it is NOT CRITICAL to making the game function. Period. By extension ap is not full critical but objectively is a higher priority than mp as Autopilot adds functionality to the core game and its mechanics where multiplayer objectively does NOT. 
Let me be absolutely clear: my assertion that multiplayer isnt critical isnt false. Its fact. I could extend your own logic and flip it and still not be wrong. A feature that adds functionality like say making engineer redux to stock is OBJECTIVELY adding function. A feature that adds a set of parts to make a space telescope adds functionality and mission options is again OBJECTIVELY adding function.  Im absolutely done with this.

103002042023

Edited February 4, 2023 by Starhawk
Redacted by moderator

[tstein]

2 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@tstein i rarely and i truly mean RARELY say this on this forum but you are objectively wrong. It adds so so much to the game. What do I mean?  Well, I for one cannot stand repeating the exact same flight profile ad infinitum. Refueling or resupplying stations? Building them? Same profile over and over. Real world equivalent: ISS. How many flights were needed to build it? How many launch sites? More than 40 launches from at least 2 launch sites. And how many of these flights did not use autopilot? 0. No space flight does not use autopilot. Artemis was FULLY AUTOMATED. SpaceX? Fully automated. 

When I was learning to fly missions here in ksp I read and watched as many tutorials as I could. I could launch and land within 2-3 flights on day 1. Rendezvous and docking? Not once. No matter what I read or watched it just did not click. Then I found mechjeb. I tweaked the rocket from a tutorial i watched (and copied) by adding 1 part. Mechjeb. It taught me in 1 SINGLE FLIGHT what watching hundreds of hours of tutorials and reading hundreds of pages of written tutorials could not. Why or rather how? It did it by showing how MY rocket flew. How MY rocket behaved. 
The number of times I have been able to have my mind blown by views and moments that are 100% IMPOSSIBLE without autopilot are beyond countless. One moment in particular came when I had mechjeb set up for docking to my station. I decided to let mj handle my rocket and jumped to the station and watched my ship come in out of the shadow into the light of the sun then close into the stations lights and dock. It was beyond beautiful to see. It covered 250 meters to docking without needing my input. Had I been making a cinematic it would have been glorious. Impossible w/out autopilot. 

Autopilot is valuable and not having it is beyond limiting. Just because YOU do not want it or care for it does not mean it should not be included. Best example? Multiplayer. I personally cannot fathom how  multiplayer is a good thing for a game that is at its core SINGLE PLAYER and personally want nothing to do with it, but others want it so its being added. Given the multiple years (likely the entire existence of ksp) of people debating this and being in 2 camps much the same as multiplayer the latter of which saw victory go to promultiplayer and its obvious inclusion. Given the fact REAL WORLD space programs CANNOT function w/out autopilot or automation not having would be a slap in the face especially (personal opinion here) given the fact multiplayer is a thing and the mod that spawned it was far less polished than mechjeb2. I fully and completely disagree with you. 
 

080402042023

080702043023

There is a huge difference between an AUTO repeat AP and mechjeb that does everything for you from the start. And THAT is already  in the game (when  colonies come in)

[AlamoVampire]

@Bej Kerman ive plenty of woes believe me. The fact ksp2 will have a feature ill never use aint one of em. Being ignored decidedly IS one. Autopilot is beyond useful whether its in single or multiplayer. Its a feature that is objectively adding to core mechanics. Being able to play with another player does nothing to add to game core functionality and i absolutely cannot fathom how my repeated statements that i just dont care (im pulling from this thread and every thread ive ever said it in) if its in. I DO care that they prioritized dev time for it over other things early into development, which makes me fear other key things will or did suffer. 
 

im also sick of being derided for wanting autopilot and standing with those of us who for as long as i can remember have asked for mechjeb to be stock. Im sick of this divide im seeing where because the multiplayer fans got their request honored (which be 100% clear here im HAPPY YOU GOT IT) those of use who want and ask for the same consideration for autopilot (mechjeb) to be given the same treatment are at best ignored or at worst made to feel like burdens or should be ashamed. 
 

110302042023

[TheLoneOne]

7 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

With early access in very close proximity i am still very concerned. You may or may not share my concerns but its these concerns that have chilled my hype.

They are: reentry particle effects, real procedural fairings (ie like the ones that were a mod by the name Procedural Fairings, as they are the gold standard to what fairings in ksp should be, my opinion and stock were horrific to me) and auto pilot like mechjeb.

1. Reentry particle effects, ksp 1 had the code built in but switched off. Afair it was never “on” for performance reasons, fine, but ksp2 is new and on logarithmically superior machines to what used ksp 1 way back when. I see no reason ( not a programmer) for us to not have it. Heck ksp2 engine plums look way better too!

2. Procedural fairings, ie like the mod, should be the thing. Why? Aside from being objectively better, ksp2 has procedural radiators so yeah.

3. Mechjeb/auto pilot. General aviation, commercial, military and all space programs have it. Even my pmdg737-700/800/900(when they launch the 900) has real world accurate autopilot. So yeah.

Aside from the radiators and engine plumes noone has mentioned or demonstrated these features for ksp2 so im concerned. Will not knowing for sure stop me from buying? No. Will not having them make me hate it? Nope. Will i complain and then wait for our lovely modders to fill the void? Yup.

033502042023

033602042023

Mechjeb should not be in the base game, just no. if you want something to fly it for you it should need to be downloaded. I get that it's vital for you in ksp 1 but, adding it to the game would take away the difficulty that makes the stock game fun for like half the players. 

[AlamoVampire]

12 minutes ago, TheLoneOne said:

Mechjeb should not be in the base game, just no. if you want something to fly it for you it should need to be downloaded. I get that it's vital for you in ksp 1 but, adding it to the game would take away the difficulty that makes the stock game fun for like half the players. 

Objectively wrong. You dont want to use it? Dont load the part on your ship. Simple. I cant stand the inflatable heatshield so i do not use it. Your operating on a fallacy of you dont want/it hate so others must download it. By your logic ill use multiplayer: i hate it, it takes away from a game that was meant as single player, you want multiplayer down load the mod for it. Sounds a bit off huh? 
111102042023

a quick add before this gets locked: @TheLoneOne by your logic as a proponent and heavy user of mechjeb i should not be entitled to enjoy ksp2 in full glory on 2-24-23 and as what clearly looks as if that makes me a second-class citizen must wait a month or more for modders to catch up.

not making a second reply so uh look up? Mechjeb is not a cheat. If it is tell: NASA, JAXA, ESA, ROSCOSMOS, spacex they are cheating in real life. I get it, you have 0 respect for mechjeb but its not cheating. If it was it would be in the cheat menu and its not. Sorry. Oh also: by your logic real pilots and sim pilots using the FMC to program the autopilot for a FULLY AUTOMATED landing is cheating too?

111802042023

112002042023

Edited February 4, 2023 by AlamoVampire

[TheLoneOne]

1 minute ago, AlamoVampire said:

Objectively wrong. You dont want to use it? Dont load the part on your ship. Simple. I cant stand the inflatable heatshield so i do not use it. Your operating on a fallacy of you dont want/it hate so others must download it. By your logic ill use multiplayer: i hate it, it takes away from a game that was meant as single player, you want multiplayer down load the mod for it. Sounds a bit off huh? 
111102042023

Comparing an inflatable heat shield to a cheat button that flies a rocket for you is not a good comparison. I get why its usefull, but also, a big part of ksp is about flying stuff they build for a lot of people, adding this vastly diminishes that sense of achievement. 

Edited February 4, 2023 by TheLoneOne

[tstein]

2 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

Objectively wrong. You dont want to use it? Dont load the part on your ship. Simple. I cant stand the inflatable heatshield so i do not use it. Your operating on a fallacy of you dont want/it hate so others must download it. By your logic ill use multiplayer: i hate it, it takes away from a game that was meant as single player, you want multiplayer down load the mod for it. Sounds a bit off huh? 
111102042023

Not necessarily.. seriously think for a second.  You never layed the game.. someone shows you the game and  what you get is.. "I stack this capsule in front of this engine  then I press lnunch  and the autopilot does eveything" it can damage the sales of the game, seriously, people tend to find things borign when they  see not much for them to do, so it must be made in a form that does not look like the standard intended gameplay.  If it is something with a tradeoff (as for example a non negligible electric charge consumption or demanding  kerb net contact..  and specially in science mode.. being unlocked.. then I think  it is completely safe. 

[AlamoVampire]

Having the ability to use autopilot/automation does not hurt. Not having the freedom to choose to does. Mechjeb kept me from quitting in version 0.21. Id wager new players regardless of how good the tutorials are may face the same barrier as i did way back when. [snip]

112302042023

Edited February 4, 2023 by Starhawk
Redacted by moderator

[Bej Kerman]

22 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Bej Kerman ive plenty of woes believe me. The fact ksp2 will have a feature ill never use aint one of em. Being ignored decidedly IS one. Autopilot is beyond useful whether its in single or multiplayer. Its a feature that is objectively adding to core mechanics. Being able to play with another player does nothing to add to game core functionality and i absolutely cannot fathom how my repeated statements that i just dont care (im pulling from this thread and every thread ive ever said it in) if its in. I DO care that they prioritized dev time for it over other things early into development, which makes me fear other key things will or did suffer. 

They have to prioritize something, they can't make everyone happy. You aren't being ignored.

22 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

im also sick of being derided for wanting autopilot and standing with those of us who for as long as i can remember have asked for mechjeb to be stock. Im sick of this divide im seeing where because the multiplayer fans got their request honored (which be 100% clear here im HAPPY YOU GOT IT) those of use who want and ask for the same consideration for autopilot (mechjeb) to be given the same treatment are at best ignored or at worst made to feel like burdens or should be ashamed. 

[snip] You can't just accept there isn't a stock autopilot?

Edited February 4, 2023 by Starhawk
Redacted by moderator

[Starhawk]

Thread locked by OP request.