Parts and Circumstance

[Nate Simpson]

Good afternoon, Kerbonauts.

This past week has been a learning experience. My last post here received a lot of comments, many of which expressed doubt, frustration, and in some cases even anger about either the seeming lack of progress on KSP2 or the perception that I am concealing some dark reality about the state of the game. Our team has been reading your comments and asking one another if there’s some way we can do better.

In the past, every item in these forum posts has had to cross a threshold of certainty - I don’t want to announce some new feature or target date, only to experience a trust-eroding failure to follow through. I feel this burden especially keenly because in the past I have personally announced dates that turned out to be incorrect. For that reason, I have avoided talking about features in progress, bugs under investigation, or internal delivery deadlines. With a game this complex, nothing is ever assured until it has been thoroughly tested by QA. When you combine this "stay quiet until you’re absolutely sure" ethos with a more dispersed update cadence, what you get is long periods of silence.

Now, of course I haven’t gone literally silent. I still post here every week. Before each post goes out, I meet with the production and community teams to review the past week’s progress, and a great many exciting developments are discussed. They often take the form of "we’ve made great progress on x category of super annoying bug" or "this feature looks good but we haven’t had time to fully validate it yet." By my standard of "don’t talk about it until it’s truly done," neither of those scenarios yields anything that’s safe to post about. What is safe, then? Well, for the most part, content updates (new art, new parts, new graphics improvements) come along in nice, neat little parcels that are not only visually pleasing, but also unlikely to generate an unmet expectation. They’re fun and they’re safe, and artists are always creating new content. So you see lots of that.

But the other thing you see lots of is some variation on "improved stability and performance." That’s my catch-all term for that very meaningful category of progress that, because of my reluctance to write bad checks, can’t yet be talked about in detail. When I hold back on such items, I comfort myself that the less I reveal now, the more surprising the patch notes will be when we finally release them.

Still, I’m questioning my choice to withhold information about systems in progress. Yes, there’s always the chance that when we talk about a feature in development, that we’re also creating an expectation that the feature will be present in the next update. Similarly daunting is the possibility that we’ll announce that we’re working on something that the community perceives as "easy" (an especially common situation when we’re working on a feature that is already functional in the original KSP), and then take such a long time delivering that feature that people may decide we don’t know what we’re doing. In such cases, we then need to take the time to explain in technical detail why the implementation of such and such a feature is non-trivial in KSP2. Increased transparency carries costs, and those costs always have to be balanced against other feature-facing work we could be doing.

So what I’m going to try to do right now is to extend some trust to you. I’m going to talk about a few things that are not yet complete so that you can at least see some of the ropes we’re hauling on every day - some of which may prove to be long. This list is not exhaustive (there are dozens of people working on dozens of items simultaneously, and there are some features that we really do want to be surprises), but it will hopefully give you some visibility into the breadth of issues we’re tackling. Please do not assume that if a bug didn’t get mentioned in this list that it is unknown to us or not being worked on — this is a top-ten list.

Our bug prioritization is broadly guided by the following logic:

• Category A: any bug that causes loss of a vehicle in flight (physics issues, trajectory instability, decoupling instability, loss of camera focus, unexpected part breakage/RUD)
• Category B: any bug that affects the fidelity or continuity of a saved game (rigidbody degradation, save file inflation, loss of vehicle or Kerbal during instantiation or focus switching)
• Category C: any bug that negatively affects the expected performance of a vehicle (drag occlusion, staging issues, thrust asymmetry, joint wobbliness, landing leg bounciness)
• Category D: any VAB bug that prevents the player from creating the vehicle they want to make (symmetry bugs, fairing/wing editor bugs, strut instability, inconsistent root part behavior)

While there are many bugs that live outside these four categories (and in some cases, such bugs end up getting sorted out during normal feature development), the four categories above are the biggest fun killers. Until a player can envision a vehicle, create it without being impeded by VAB issues, fly it with a reasonable expectation that physical forces will be consistently applied, and save their progress at any point without worrying about the fidelity of that save, the KSP2 experience will be compromised. Obviously, now that we are layering in progression mechanics (Science gathering and transmission, missions, and R&D tech tree) in preparation for downstream Roadmap updates, the importance of addressing these issues only increases.

Therefore, here are a few of the biggest issues we’re wrangling with right now:

1. Vehicles in stable coasting orbits sometimes experience orbit instability/decay - Status: possible fix in progress
2. Trajectories change when vehicles cross SOI boundaries - Status: fix in progress (see below)
3. Certain inline parts cause aerodynamic drag numbers to spike - Status: under investigation
4. Returning to craft from VAB causes craft to go underground (possibly related to Kerbals and landed vehicles dropping through terrain while being approached) - Status: possible fix being tested
5. Decoupling events result in various issues including loss of control, incorrect controllability of decoupled subassemblies, loss of camera focus, and other issues - Status: may have many causes, but some fixes in progress (see below)
6. Save files get bigger over time (TravelLog experiencing "landed" status spam) - Status: fix being tested
7. Opening part manager causes major frame lag - Status: experiments ongoing
8. Major post-liftoff frame rate lag immediately above launchpad (associated with engine exhaust lighting) - Status: fix being tested
9. Root parts placed below decouplers cause issues with stage separation - Status: under investigation
10. Vehicle joints unusually wobbly, some part connections unusually weak - Status: under investigation

We’re tracking down some strange vehicle behaviors associated with spurious autostrut errors. As we’ve discussed here before, some radially-attached parts are reinforced by additional invisible autostruts to improve their stability. It turns out that these autostruts don’t always break cleanly during decoupling events, and may be the cause of some of our more frustrating decoupling issues (including those where detached vehicle elements appear to still affect one another’s behavior). We’re still investigating this one, but we have high hopes that its correction will result in a reduction of mission-killing errors.

Finally, we have zeroed in on the cause of some of the trajectory errors we’ve been seeing - especially the situation in which a trajectory changes spontaneously when crossing an SOI boundary. This one is deep in the code and its correction may end up fixing a few other downstream issues. This is a complicated problem, however, and we may not solve it in time for the June update. We should know more about this one soon.

I’ve provided the list above as a stopgap. We have been discussing internally how best to improve bug status visibility so that you have a better idea of what we’re working on. We’re looking at a lot of options right now, and I’ll update you when we’ve settled on something. We recognize the need for this transparency and we’ll come to a solution soon.

ANYWAY... we have some nice content news! Update v0.1.3.0 will be the first KSP2 update to contain not only bug fixes, but a few new parts. Right now, we can confirm the arrival of the following:

• A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E
• Clamp-O-Tron shielded docking port
• Clamp-O-Tron Inline Docking Port
• MK2 Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port
• Cornet Methalox Engine (new small extensible-nozzle orbital engine)
• Trumpet Methalox Engine (new medium extensible-nozzle orbital engine)
• Tuba Methalox Engine (new large extensible-nozzle orbital engine)
• S3-28800 Large Inline Methalox tank (longer version of large methalox tanks)

Here’s some video of those new engines in action. The Tuba has individually-swiveling mini-nozzles that might be one of part designer Chris Adderley’s coolest ideas yet (final parts built by Pablo Ollervides, Jonathan Cooper, and Alexander Martin):

We are still testing the new grid fins. Because these parts require some special part module support, engineering work is ongoing. Due to the complexity of this work, we don’t believe grid fins will make it into the v0.1.3.0 update.

Last week’s challenge produced a few spiffy designs. Check out this rocket, with which user Well braved the Kraken and managed to deposit a lander at the bottom of the Mohole:

Gotta respect the ingenuity of using antennae for landing legs:

Thanks to those who participated!

Next up, at the suggestion of @RyanHamer42 on Twitter, we’re building space stations! Your mission, should you choose to accept it:

• Primary goal: build a station by docking at least two Wayfarer habitat modules together in orbit above Kerbin
• Secondary goal: add a deployable solar panel truss and a fuel depot tank to your station
• Jeb-level goal: dock a transfer tug to your station and place the station in orbit above another planet
• Val-level goal: send a lander to your station that can be reused for down-and-up flights to the surface of the planet below

Thanks for the suggestion, Ryan! Good luck, everyone!

[Dakota]

Just highlighting this line:

Quote

We have been discussing internally how best to improve bug status visibility so that you have a better idea of what we’re working on. We’re looking at a lot of options right now, and I’ll update you when we’ve settled on something. We recognize the need for this transparency and we’ll come to a solution soon.

This is a big priority for us and we hope to have more details to share soon to ensure y'all are stayed up-to-date and are providing us the information we need to get bugs fixed. Happy Friday

[Strawberry]

Super cool stuff! Definitely the best dev update we've gotten so far. I dont think you can have all dev updates be this open like this (just because I dont think theres that much to share every week), but itll certainly be nice to have dev updates of this caliber once every 3 weeks or so. Generally speaking, when you phrase things like "We hope we can do x but we are uncertain as of this point", people will give you a lot more leniance, I honestly doubt youll get much complaint if some of this stuff doesnt come to fruition 

Edited May 26, 2023 by Strawberry

[Tazooka]

Finally! Thank you, this is news we want to hear

[whatsEJstandfor]

Thank you for being this candid! It's very much something I (and I think those who have been critical of recent posts) have been craving. Personally, I'd much rather have this sort of transparency even if the targets end up being off, because it gives me something I can tangibly look forward to. If you're detailed about some bug being worked on, I'm far more interested in the fact that it's being worked on at all than I am in when exactly it's coming. If you tell me it's coming next week, and then it gets pushed back to next month, and then 2 months from now, but tell me the candid reasons why that date is slipping, I'm way more than satisfied. What I love most about a dev blog is when I can feel like I'm a part of the team. I get to see the problems you guys encounter in real time and get to see how you solved it. THAT's the interesting stuff.

Anyway, you're the best, Nate, and I hope that you, the community managers, and the devs know that any criticism I have ever had comes from a place of optimism, knowing that this game is going to continue getting better!

[Spicat]

Love the bug breakdown! Keep it up

It's also nice we'll now have new things to play with.

[ahmed4363]

I think just saying that you are looking into things is mostly enough. You gotta always remember that not everyone will be satisfied, but you can always try to make those the minority. Great Job guys!

[AtomicTech]

16 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

ANYWAY... we have some nice content news! Update v0.1.3.0 will be the first KSP2 update to contain not only bug fixes, but a few new parts. Right now, we can confirm the arrival of the following:

• A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E
• Clamp-O-Tron shielded docking port
• Clamp-O-Tron Inline Docking Port
• MK2 Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port
• Cornet Methalox Engine (new small extensible-nozzle orbital engine)
• Trumpet Methalox Engine (new medium extensible-nozzle orbital engine)
• Tuba Methalox Engine (new large extensible-nozzle orbital engine)
• S3-28800 Large Inline Methalox tank (longer version of large methalox tanks)

OH HELL YEAH

Edited May 26, 2023 by AtomicTech

[Kerbart]

Thank you! Preferably things get fixed with the next update, but knowing that certain bugs do have the attention of the devs is way better than "yay, grid fins!"

One request — if certain fixes don't make it into the patch, mention those too. "We're working on bug X but's it's causing ships to explode sometimes and we haven't figured out why yet" may not look good but it gives way more confidence that things are getting fixed than "we're just pretending this is not an issue"

[Vl3d]

10 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

So what I’m going to try to do right now is to extend some trust to you. I’m going to talk about a few things that are not yet complete so that you can at least see some of the ropes we’re hauling on every day - some of which may prove to be long.

Thank you for the work, team! I really care a great deal about seeing innovative ideas making their way into the game. We all know the wish lists are long, but transparency about the vision for the long term vision for the game is the thing that made me wait all these years and be very excited for KSP2, @Nate Simpson. I really believe in the vision you presented in the trailers and in the long-term potential of KSP 1->2->beyond. Humanity is starting to wield the power of Artificial Intelligence and increase productivity, the things we will see in the next few years will be amazing and scary. You as a team have an incredible opportunity to make KSP a game that can inspire human and AI players alike, that can open minds to the wonders of space exploration. KSP can show us the way for the future - believe that and build that! Thank you!

[AtomicTech]

Just now, Dakota said:

This is a big priority for us and we hope to have more details to share soon to ensure y'all are stayed up-to-date and are providing us the information we need to get bugs fixed. Happy Friday

Consider my faith restored

[LunarMetis]

Now I'm really looking forward to this next update. Thanks Nate for letting us know you guys are working on the big game-breaking bugs! This dev post was a huge breath of fresh air.

Edited May 27, 2023 by LunarMetis

[Clayel]

I like the info that stuff is being done and addressed about current bugs, but what about problems that have persisted for a very long time, even before release? I've heard repeatedly from very qualified people (aka GotMachine, who had to dig into ksp 1 for his mods) that some of the critical systems that were said to be changed in KSP 2 were similar or exactly the same as KSP 1. Are new implementations of these systems being addressed, and why weren't they dealt with before being implemented originally?

Edited May 26, 2023 by Clayel

[memphis_mg]

To be perfectly honest. I was after the first weeks also more than disillusioned and that the dev updates were always smaller has me (like some) others certainly also surprised or better said DISTURBED!

Therefore, first of all, right up front THANK YOU for the HONEST insights and open words! I and certainly some others appreciate it very much!

Yes the start of ksp2 was as everyone can think through others more or less coerced and the "gameplay" experience rather in the lower third. The good and beautiful is you work your way up CONTINUOUSLY and that is something for me as an old veteran reassuring to see!

Therefore, for you and your team first a lot of power and hopefully also from the "publisher" many more years of trust that ksp 2 and I believe quite !firmly! still to a worthy and beyond better successor to ksp 1.

For this I press my fingers and every other finger.

so keep your head up and I think the mixture in the dev updates from THE COMES <> here we are quite far and we can tell you that already should arrive overall significantly better than "here's the next there's nothing more" and that's it.

[Kavaeric]

I posted this on the Discord to Dakota, but I figure I'd mirror this here in case for some reason it gets lost in the chaos:

Send my regards to Nate. Haven't finished reading but as someone who has had to handle PR fires this takes guts honestly, especially given the track record of being attacked. I couldn't do it.

The possible change in policy I think worth commending as well; I hope it's a decision you (collectively) don't feel like you need to rescind. Not that I think you'll disappoint; tbh, while I don't play KSP2 yet, it's not like I've been disappointed at all from what I've heard.

Happy weekend!

Congrats. Looking forward to playing the update...or, well, watching others play the update, I suppose.

[Strawberry]

31 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

Finally, we have zeroed in on the cause of some of the trajectory errors we’ve been seeing - especially the situation in which a trajectory changes spontaneously when crossing an SOI boundary. This one is deep in the code and its correction may end up fixing a few other downstream issues. This is a complicated problem, however, and we may not solve it in time for the June update. We should know more about this one soon.

Just for clarification, do you currently think this is related (at least partially) to the wobbly orbits bug? Or was the breakthrough you mentioned last week unrelated

Edited May 26, 2023 by Strawberry

[Nicrose]

This is great, thank you so much for listening to us. Tbh I almost didn’t even look for an update today and was planning on waiting a few months but low and behold, the KSP Twitter showed up in my feed to a nice surprise! This definitely rekindled my hope. 

[Jockel]

Trust is a strong thing. I held onto this for all my life (referred to trust in "Gaming Companies"), but over the years many statements by various companies and their broken promises and misleading statements brought me to near collapse of all my trust and hope.
But not my beloved  Kerbal Space Program (2), which release was constantly delayed along the words "we won't  release a broken product ... we will take our time" and the troubled development overall .... only to have this shattered by this release.
I no longer have any trust in what you (Companies) say. I am sure you are all kind and motivated people, but i will only look at what i got. And what i got so far after 3 months is still not much. Yes i know its hard, but it shouldn't never have come to this.
Yeah we are the testers, but MANY bugs didn't need testing and were obviously game breaking.
I will see what the next patch brings and if its worth my time and will i have fun with it or do i need more time in circumventing bugs than i can play the game. I will see. The trust is just gone.
 

[morellius]

Great news, keep up to good work  its great reading your news blogs, i really love seeing how ksp 2 evolves :)

[Nicrose]

11 minutes ago, Clayel said:

I like the info that stuff is being done and addressed about current bugs, but what about problems that have persisted for a very long time, even before release? I've heard repeatedly from very qualified people (aka GotMachine, who had to dig into ksp 1 for his mods) that some of the critical systems that were said to be changed in KSP 2 were similar or exactly the same as KSP 1. Are new implementations of these systems being addressed, and why weren't they dealt with before being implemented originally?

I do believe he said these aren’t ALL the bugs, just too 10. Tbh I feel like this was totally adequate and for things like you mentioned, it might just have to be something we wait on. I’ve been pretty upset with the devs up until today as well but this update did a lot more for me and it sounds like everyone else than any of the other updates and I think, especially this time, we should take what we got and be happy with it. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion but I think it’s important to remember that nothing will ever be perfect for you, but could be good for all

[Dying2PlayGames]

GREATLY appreciated Sir!!! And a lovely challenge once again... Keep up the amazing work you guys are doing over there... Please, Coffee and Snacks for EVERYONE in the office!!! (on you, but credited to me of course, but hey... The thought is what matters, right?)

[Nicrose]

23 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

One request — if certain fixes don't make it into the patch, mention those too. "We're working on bug X but's it's causing ships to explode sometimes and we haven't figured out why yet" may not look good but it gives way more confidence that things are getting fixed than "we're just pretending this is not an issue"

This!! I totally agree. I do understand there will be those who clip that statement and say “they’ve been working on it for x time and it’s still not done” but I truly believe that’s a minority AND it’s possible that they could be right and maybe it’s time to find a new person to tackle the issue or a new work around. But regardless, I only see positives for going this route as a whole. 

[Acid_Burn9]

I like the news system where you share the status report of a bug being worked on instead of "will be fixed in X update". Gives a good enough idea about how the development is actually going on, without either setting up unnecessary expectations or keeping us in the dark. Would be nice if you could extend the same "status report" system to features too, not just bugs only.

Seems like a big step forward it terms of transparency. Keep it up!

[TheTennesseeFireman]

Appreciate the long list and overall transparency. This is just generally a very tough period of waiting, when the bug list is long, the updates less frequent than hoped for, important systems incomplete or undergoing an overhaul, and the features still far behind KSP1. It’s hard for us on the other side of the screen to see the vision for the final release that you do, so just knowing that you’re working on the same problems that we see, even if you can’t promise an immediate fix, is a good way to keep us on the same page. Lots of games have fallen at this hurdle, so I’m hoping these next couple updates are a strong enough foundation to start layering in more new features and rebuild some of the community excitement.

[The Space Peacock]

Hey Nate (and  team), just wanted to say i really appreciate you going out of your way to try to appease to the entire community, including those who might have thrown doubts and distrust your way. Your continued quest to be both transparent and realistic is something that really shows how much you, just like us, care about this game.  I'm sure you'll figure out a balance eventually that works for both you and the community. Keep up the good work, keep up the great devblogs and most importantly; keep being awesome  have a great weekend team!

Edited May 26, 2023 by The Space Peacock