Imagining Dragons

[Periple]

18 minutes ago, Streetwind said:

Oof, yeah, that would probably take a year's worth of dev time for a dedicated sprint team just for the planner, with additional work required across teams from all areas of the game The handling of potential edge cases alone makes my head hurt.

Hehe I would've seat-of-the-pantsed it as more like six months, but it's a lot of work for sure!

It wouldn't be necessary to do it all at once though. You could start with the route planner that lets you place the maneuver nodes and compute the dV cost, and just display that in map view when associating it with a vessel, with a simple tool for manually placing maneuver nodes at the instant-impulse ones. That wouldn't be all that hard.

Then work your way up from there – add the dV cost and alarms, then automatic instant-impulse to over-time node conversion, then the intercept planner with porkchop plots, then the landing/take-off planner with TWR requirements, and so on.

[pandaman]

1 hour ago, Streetwind said:

This, unfortunately, runs straight into the problem described in the very section you quoted:

(<snip> to avoid wall of text)

That's what I was thinking, but couldn't put into words effectively enough.  Thanks.

As I've said elsewhere, the logic behind the implementation makes sense to me...  now I understand  it.

Maybe what 'could' work is...

At the point of 'zero fuel' it switches automatically to 'Plotting Mode', and tells you it's doing it by pop up message and changing colours or dotting the lines or something.   Whereby it ignores the vessel conditions and assumes zero mass and infinite available Dv...  No need for a toggle that we could forget to engage or disengage either.

[cocoscacao]

More engines? Seriously? I never got an impression that Kerbals hate Kerbin so much, that they need even more engines to escape from it. This planet really needs more love. Better add some harvesting machines, so we can grow crops, enjoy the nature, and be content. Farmville done it like... 10 years ago. Really disappointing

[Dying2PlayGames]

Yeah, not much a fan of these weekly challenges that have NOTHING to do with Space, Spaceships, Planets/Moons or anything related to the game at all. I know many people enjoy creating things other than space crafts, but considering many of us look forward to these challenges (until we have a Career Mode added, fingers crossed) as they give us a goal. Personally, not really into these types of builds. We could leave THIS type of stuff for Discord.

[TomKerbal]

15 hours ago, Meecrob said:

Maybe I'm on the wrong forum or playing the wrong game, but could we have challenges that involve space? Like the second word of this game's title?

Same thoughts here.

Edited April 22, 2023 by TomKerbal

[Vanamonde]

17 hours ago, Meecrob said:

Maybe I'm on the wrong forum or playing the wrong game, but could we have challenges that involve space? Like the second word of this game's title?

Why not make a dragon and send it to space? 

[DadJokeCinema]

MADNESS!

[Meecrob]

2 hours ago, Vanamonde said:

Why not make a dragon and send it to space? 

Fair enough, that would actually be a challenge! Maybe in the future we could have multiple challenges that cater to the different styles of players. A build challenge, a launch challenge, maybe a "how far can you go with these parts" challenge or a "do this with the least dV"? I dunno, I'm sure other people have suggestions as well.

I just feel that dragons as a theme kinda clash with modern science fiction. Same as I wouldn't ask people to make rockets in say Skyrim or something.

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

22 hours ago, Little 908 said:

Yeah i agree, theres a lot of historical rockets they could make us build, but they just want the kraken to bite us while making capybaras and dragons.

Dude. Appreciate the ideas and creativity of the developers while they iron out the wrinkles of the game and add some REALLY COOL ENGINES. WOW! Those look so fire! Im gonna miss when KSP2 eventually ends development

Edited April 22, 2023 by DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc

[s_gamer101]

10 hours ago, Dying2PlayGames said:

Yeah, not much a fan of these weekly challenges that have NOTHING to do with Space, Spaceships, Planets/Moons or anything related to the game at all. I know many people enjoy creating things other than space crafts, but considering many of us look forward to these challenges (until we have a Career Mode added, fingers crossed) as they give us a goal. Personally, not really into these types of builds. We could leave THIS type of stuff for Discord.

I'm just gonna make a space dragon, just wait for my submission and you'll see what dragons have to do with space

[Jaypeg]

16 hours ago, Meecrob said:

I'm just saying its lame. I thought challenges would be something applicable to y'know? Space?

 

It is. The point is to make something that is very aerodynamically unstable, then fly it to another planet without destroying it. The other half of ksp is the creating not just cool-looking planets.

[Little 908]

1 hour ago, DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc said:

Dude. Appreciate the ideas and creativity of the developers while they iron out the wrinkles of the game and add some REALLY COOL ENGINES. WOW! Those look so fire! Im gonna miss when KSP2 eventually ends development

I do, but I was simply stating that the game is literally about an alien species in the Kerbolar system. A simple yet intriguing franchise. And we simply do not have the correct parts to make something like this without pushing the boundaries of what this sandbox is about. Sure we can make them, but that doesn't always mean its a part of the game, and probably means its going to be part heavy. I personally don't want to judge the things anyone builds in the game, as building, e.g. a dragon, is very impressive with the parts provided by the game. But I do think they should be sticking to the kerbal space program related stuff, like the Apollo missions. Thus being said, I still think challenges like this should still be a option along side another challenge, or something.

[Redneck]

:yawn: Multiplayer done yet?

13 hours ago, Dying2PlayGames said:

Yeah, not much a fan of these weekly challenges that have NOTHING to do with Space, Spaceships, Planets/Moons or anything related to the game at all. I know many people enjoy creating things other than space crafts, but considering many of us look forward to these challenges (until we have a Career Mode added, fingers crossed) as they give us a goal. Personally, not really into these types of builds. We could leave THIS type of stuff for Discord.

this is what they do when they try to divert attention away . They double down on PR stuff nobody cares about

[Scarecrow71]

I'll start by pointing out that we do in fact have references to dragons in space and astrology. 

The constellation Draco

The Azure Dragon

Now with that out of the way....yeah, these challenges have nothing to do with Kerbal Space Program, rockets, space, or anything to do with the game.  And considering the state of the game, I'm curious as to why they keep coming out with this stuff when we have issues just dealing with normal rockets.

[leopardenthusiast]

4 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

And considering the state of the game, I'm curious as to why they keep coming out with this stuff when we have issues just dealing with normal rockets.

My (rather pessimistic) guess is that the challenges are meant to get player numbers up, which helps justify Take Two continuing to fund the game's development.  But they don't want to encourage people to do anything complicated, because that would lead to even more negative posts here and on social media about the game's issues, so...  irrelevant fluff challenges it is.

[LoSBoL]

1 hour ago, leopardenthusiast said:

My (rather pessimistic) guess is that the challenges are meant to get player numbers up, which helps justify Take Two continuing to fund the game's development.  But they don't want to encourage people to do anything complicated, because that would lead to even more negative posts here and on social media about the game's issues, so...  irrelevant fluff challenges it is.

That might be a bit of a wild guess if you look into Jeb or Val level challenges;

Jeb Level: Land a vehicle at as high an altitude as you can on Eve (your screenshot should show the altimeter set to Sea Level mode)

Val Level: Land a crewed vehicle on Eve and return that crew safely to Kerbin

[LoSBoL]

Disney employees took the challenge a tad to serious... 

https://youtube.com/shorts/SgZAAPKM-5w?feature=share

[JIKL04]

I understand the reasoning behind the maneuver node restriction a bit more now. But it definetly needs more work anyway.

Are there any plans for automatiic execution of the planned maneuver? Since the current maneuver shows the required burn time at max thrust it is quite unlikely anyone will stop at the exact right time, and even if some kind of lowering the throttle is implemented in the maneuver plan itself it fails on the same manual execution issue. So to solve the manual execution issue the manuever would need to automaticaly dethrottle the engine at a specific point to allow for minimal divergence from the planned path. (accounting for the current maneuver window that shows only remaining time and not dynamic remaining dV) = why not automate the rest then anyway.
 

I don't want to complicate it further - In essence the maneuver planner in KSP 1 allowed players to do the burn as they wanted with the remaining dV information + possibly fix the inaccuracies caused by another far shorter maneuver/burn . In KSP 2 the maneuver planner is supposed to be much more precise but it does that by displaying the burn time at max thrust only - this means that after planning maneuver the player only needs to press "Z" at specific time and then press "X" a bit later and I am not sure how many people like to have to press these buttons when it could be automated while adding even more precision to the execution. Again, especially without the remaining dV info

- This is not criticism, just a point to think about/ maybe comment on/discuss for other people. I think planning the maneuver is the more interesting part and the execution just requires few button pushes that I could do without if offered the possibility .
(And as a secondary note I am currently spending most time in KSP 1 and will start investing time into KSP 2 once the science mode comes in/ would love the resources as well but that is far off. Since I am more driven by the progression aspect in games rather than exploration. Hence if there are some inaccuracies to my understanding of KSP 2 systems, sorry for those)

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

15 hours ago, Little 908 said:

I do, but I was simply stating that the game is literally about an alien species in the Kerbolar system. A simple yet intriguing franchise. And we simply do not have the correct parts to make something like this without pushing the boundaries of what this sandbox is about. Sure we can make them, but that doesn't always mean its a part of the game, and probably means its going to be part heavy. I personally don't want to judge the things anyone builds in the game, as building, e.g. a dragon, is very impressive with the parts provided by the game. But I do think they should be sticking to the kerbal space program related stuff, like the Apollo missions. Thus being said, I still think challenges like this should still be a option along side another challenge, or something.

I don't remember any Kerbals sitting atop a Saturn V, nor the space shuttle. Isn't KSP supposed to mix real science with science fiction?

Edited April 23, 2023 by DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc

[mattinoz]

On 4/22/2023 at 5:42 PM, Streetwind said:

Oof, yeah, that would probably take a year's worth of dev time for a dedicated sprint team just for the planner, with additional work required across teams from all areas of the game The handling of potential edge cases alone makes my head hurt.

But it would be cool. No question there.

 

Would it be easier if it worked reverse. Instead predicting a mass left on particular trajectory. Let use set the mass we want at a location then play with different options of getting it there see both the path and the Delta-v needed. 

Pull that into the VAB for to use to predict a stage and how much "pilot error" that design might cope with.

[BowlerHatGuy3]

On 4/22/2023 at 8:51 AM, Dying2PlayGames said:

Yeah, not much a fan of these weekly challenges that have NOTHING to do with Space, Spaceships, Planets/Moons or anything related to the game at all. I know many people enjoy creating things other than space crafts, but considering many of us look forward to these challenges (until we have a Career Mode added, fingers crossed) as they give us a goal. Personally, not really into these types of builds. We could leave THIS type of stuff for Discord.

I'm pretty sure that most, if not all of the other challenges are related to space. If you're really that upset about it you could just create your own challenges.

[Wetzelrad]

13 hours ago, JIKL04 said:

In KSP 2 the maneuver planner is supposed to be much more precise but it does that by displaying the burn time at max thrust only 

Worth noting the manuever planner does take the engine thrust sliders into account. If you need a slower burn, you can adjust your engines to 50% thrust and touch the manuever to update it. 

I do think the manuever planner needs a lot of work. The precision issue should be fixed first and foremost by showing the player the real numerical dV difference between their current trajectory and the planned trajectory. Preferably with precision to the tenth of a m/s. 

Personally I dislike automation because I prefer playing the game. Piloting is fun. Still, autopilot would be a good career goal unlock.

[Gargamel]

Some content has been removed.     Just because you don’t agree with something, doesn’t give you the right to get personal.    

[Scorpu]

On 4/21/2023 at 10:55 PM, Nate Simpson said:

Right now, we’re full steam ahead on new feature development for the upcoming Science update (timing TBD), as well as continuing work on performance, stability, and thermal systems. We’re also working on a few new parts, which we expect to release prior to the Science update. Chris Adderley (AKA Nertea) has cooked up some lovely vacuum-optimized engines with extensible nozzles to help fill out the upper end of the methalox progression. Here’s a sneak peek at one of them, built by artist Pablo Ollervides:

The transition between the fixed nozzle section and the nozzle extension doesn't look very realistic. Look how seamless it is on the RL10B-2, which this in game engine seems to be based on.

[Tiypo]

On 4/21/2023 at 4:40 PM, Meecrob said:

Maybe I'm on the wrong forum or playing the wrong game, but could we have challenges that involve space? Like the second word of this game's title?

As a part of Early Access doing nonsensical tasks is a good thing. A detailed dragon is going to have lots of parts that are interacting in novel ways, there are bound to be bugs that pop up as a result that players wouldn't see in normal gameplay.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Tiypo