Craft simulator mode

[rjbvre]

It would be great to have a way to test out how craft (or individual stages) perform before a launch. As missions get longer and more complex, it's gets more frustrating when your multistage journey ends in disaster due to some design flaw you could only really guess at. A couple examples:

• Your Duna lander didn't have enough parachutes so now either it's merged with the Dunar(?) surface and created a crater, or you used too much fuel and won't be able to return to Kerbin
• Your ion powered Eeloo probe no longer has a high enough TWR to make burn times reasonable because your solar panels can't provide enough electricity at that distance
• Your space plane you finally got to Laythe just can't quite provide the lift and/or maneuverability in the thinner atmosphere and you have no chance of landing it 

In KSP1 my solution was to use the cheat menu and put whatever vehicle I wanted in orbit of its destination to test it out. I just reverted back to a previous save afterward so it didn't count as an "official" launch. I would then have "official" launches in which there was no going back; no reversions. That really upped the suspense, and made me create abort plans for most of my manned vehicles since I wanted to keep as many Kerbals alive as possible. My suggestion is to have a "simulation" mode which would accomplish the same thing, and let you test craft wherever you want, while obviously not contributing to game progress. It could even borrow some of the visuals that the tutorial missions use to make it look more like a computer program.

I wouldn't want it to spoil the experience (both visuals and the awesome new music) of getting to planets for the first time, so maybe you can only run the simulator at a destination if you've at least sent a probe there first? Maybe make the graphics much lower quality and basic and remove/change the music? It could also synergize with some of the suggestions for having telescopes and other science gathering activities reveal details about planets/moons.

I know KSP loves to embrace failures and getting better from them, but having long, complex missions fail because of design decisions you can't be sure of without a physics/engineering degree sucks the fun out of the game. And it sounds like KSP2 has the potential for even more complex missions. 

Sorry if this has been brought up before. I thought I heard something similar mentioned a couple years ago, but I've been browsing the forums the last couple weeks and haven't seen anything similar. 

[kicka55]

Aren't failures part of gameplay? I'm sure a huge portion of the thousands of hours I played KSP1 I spent rescuing somebody or making unpanned stops to wait for a tanker refill. Just remember to put docking ports on every craft so that you can refill it if needed. 

[rjbvre]

Absolutely, and everything you said would still apply. There would still be accidents and miscalculations, and rescue missions would still be a thing.

But take, for instance, the Laythe space plane example. When you design a space plane on Kerbin, you put together a prototype, launch it from the runway, and then watch it succeed, or, much more likely, fail. Then you revert to VAB, tweak the design, and launch again. Rinse and repeat. You learn from your failures and end up with a better design. For Laythe, you're dealing with a thinner atmosphere and less gravity. Your planes designed on Kerbin won't necessarily work there. Now every time you want to tweak your design and test it out, you have to run an ENTIRE mission to Laythe. That is extremely tedious and most people aren't willing to put that much time in. A "simulator" would let you design and test your plane the same way as on Kerbin, but for Laythe's unique conditions.

Failure is a great teacher when trying again is a convenient option, but when the setbacks get too large it will start to discourage players. This is game we play for fun afterall.