KSP2 EA Grand Discussion Thread.

[RayneCloud]

I've had a blast today myself. Spent a few hours playing around and testing things . It's rough, and broken, and there's valid criticism and feedback to be given, but I'm hoping people remain fair and reasonable in doing so. Don't attack the team, talk to them, they'll listen. KSP 1 was a 10+ year long journey to get where it is. I imagine that KSP 2 has a long road ahead of it as well, with bumps and bad weather, but I also believe it will be worth it when we get to the finish line.  Right now, the baseline game play of building and flying rockets to places, works. That's what KSP 1 was before career / science mode showed up. Be patient, give your feedback, you're allowed your frustrations, just be polite.  

[tstein]

The main points I see after playing some more time:

 

Performance 0 out of 10  :  no   it is not because the game looks good. I have 21 FPS with  a 1060 with only the CAPSULE and looking into space. No game released in the last 10 years had a scene more barebone than that and all run far better than this game.  Even DCS renders far more content with more details and using far less hardware (and it is a game that is seen as inneficient at rendering  already) Planet performance is even worse,  but I take this is obvious even for the devs.

Sound: 9 out of 10-  Very good sound designs but I got some things to point. The decoupling create vibrations so there should be SOME sound. Also I do sometimes get parachute or wave like sounds when in space... minor bug, but just pointing there is some ironing to do here as well

Camera:  3 out of 10- Runs smooth but  it gets locked in absurd angles (seems a sort of gimbal lock) it is not easy to reset and start wandering by itself. PLease  copy  KSp 1 camera controls bit by bit...

Fairings : 2 out of 10: They   behave too strangely.. i decouple them they start moving forwards then accelerate into a random direciton in warp 9 (just like enterprise in the next generation opening)

Game state loading: 4 out of 10- The good is that loads  in reasonable time and without an absurd memory leak so an improvement. The bad.. It is unfeasible to load a save where you are landed in the mun or minumus for example, each time I reload the game the ship appear in a different place in a radius of some 100 meters.. including up and down under the ground

GUI-  4 out of 10. I  really think the new gui got too cramped and with too small fonts, specially in the navball directions. I am almost 50, I cannot read that size of font after the full day of work. I also  would like an EXACT measurement of climb rate.   I also think the removal of right click on each part was a great loss for usability. I see the part it is there, in my face, there is no reason to make me search for it in a list.

Map view: 6 out of 10, I am considering you will soon fix the lack of trajectory showing  when you get an interception planned. On overall is good. But please,  REDUCE thickness and increase length of the node planner. It is annoying to have to be so careful to select the correct one. I also think the KSP1 detailed node planner was better, far better. All those bads said, the map behaves smoothly and there is no stutter so that is good.

Kerbals-  Please give me an option to NOT render them inside the ship. I keep seeing helmets clip trough the ship and  we are wating the already problematic resources rendering something that I DO NOT CARE while in flight. Seriously it was a HORRIBLE Idea to render the kerbals inside the capsules

 

I will probably revert to KSP 1  until we get some  updates to the game, I wish you luck, but I  advise,  stop  dreaming so far,  focus on makign the basic the undeniably needed before you waste time in things like kerbals inside ships and a super detailed  track and suspension on the platform launch.

 

 

[PixelDude]

Hello you Kerbalnauts,

I also have an opinion, even though I just installed the game and got into the menu.

First of all: I got KSP1 for free from Epic last year, worked my way into it a bit and was hooked on the game, the wit and the flair. With some mods it also looked very nice and was fun. I made it to the Mun and not much further, so only scratched the surface.
With the announcement of KSP 2, the anticipation was huge, but the last 2 weeks have already shown that the (very high) expectations here can probably not be fulfilled. 

Anyway, I decided to buy the game anyway, not because I wanted to get started or because I had my own expectations, but because I wanted to support the manufacturer and thus ensure further development.

So I installed it yesterday, installed the 169th launcher and made some graphical settings myself. Looked at Trail and landed in the menu. 

--> Now my problem: In the menu, where not much actually happens, my RX 6900 XT howls like mad, full wattage and that, although I have limited my FPS at 100. what??? Sorry, but that's not working at all, how should that be in the game. 

As I said, I don't want to judge any further, but here I almost can't believe that we are really talking about an EA, unfortunately it feels very much like Alpha. I'm sorry, but to present the failure due to problems in the game as a "feature" in the trailer is no longer funny.

I can only hope that the developer will now do EVERYTHING to at least give us a real EA. The multitude of problems mentioned by other users, which can be seen in videos, are quite disappointing. It feels like Cyperpunk 2077, too high expectations and then a pretty disappointing start. 

But I believe in YOU developers, work hard, you can't have wanted it that way yourselves.... 

[TheTechnobear]

Unfortunately, I have to agree... this should never have been released as EA... its just way too early..

the main issue here is 'reputation risk' , look at comments here, YouTube, and steam reviews... its a dumpster fire.
that reputation will take a lot of effort to now shake off... and you have also lost that initial launch day buzz.
for what? the developers knew its performance was bad, it had bugs... they don't need community feedback for that.

but oh well, thats their  call, I don't mine that...
but what does worry me, as a dev, is I don't really buy the "it'll be optimised later".
sure,  there is such a thing as premature optimisation, you don't overly optimise initial code,
and, yes, this would be true of an EA, and can be improved later...

BUT that does not mean you don't implement efficient code in the core from day 1.
no dev has time to completely re-write this code continuously, its only tweaked later.

if we are going to get 500+ parts craft, colonies  etc...then that core design has to already be in place now.
it has to be designed to work at this larger scale.

so, even without the final optimisation, it should be handling 100 part craft easily.... that allows headroom for larger craft later.

so unfortunately this EA signals something worrying...
either the core design is no where near complete, or its not going to reach the goals that have been set.

this is where the EA fails for me... I don't mind missing features, even some bugs, thats kind of expected.
but I would have expected/hoped performance at this scale, would have been better than KSP1.
this would have left hope KSP2 foundation was solid for its future plans.

anyway, there is always hope.. but Id say we are at least a year away from KSP2 being KSP1 performance, 
and frankly, that is when they should have released the EA

[evileye.x]

There is no game, unfortunately. I'm just going to pretend it was not released in EA. I'll check on it 1-2 years later, maybe?...

Also, there is not much to playtest, except really weird UI design decisions like huge mobile phone like HUD or annoying dot fonts EVERYWHERE. 

No right click menu for parts is abysmal design too...

Performance is not there, I have 11400F DDR4 32Gb@3600MHz + AMD Radeon 6700XT and getting like 30-40 FPS with stock plane. And for what? 

Still hoping enough hardcore fans will buy and support further development, although I simply can't do so. 

I'm really sorry for the development team who seemed to be quite passionate about game...

 

On the bright side, KSP 1 is not going to be abandoned by  modders and players though for quite a longtime.

[AlphaAsh]

Thankfully I don't need your recommendation OP, since I spent a few years enjoying the ride that was early access for KSP 1, with a dev team dedicated to providing hours and hours and hours of intelligent fun. I expect the same from the team with KSP2, which is why I just threw them £45 without reading any reviews.

39 minutes ago, TheTechnobear said:

the main issue here is 'reputation risk'

Not in this case, it seems.

Edited February 25, 2023 by AlphaAsh
Added quote.

[tstein]

9 hours ago, sjwt said:

PB or EA has been a ever growing thing,  hell loook at the full realse hell major titles are going though.

Prettry much every game Ive paid for and played in the last 10 years out side of a handfull of major AAA ones like Diablo, Doom etc have all been some PB or EA, and ive enjoyued palying them and exloring the new feteurs as they came out, things are changing, its not the 80's or 90's or even the 2010's any more. 

Changes for  random sake are not good. Things are changing because consumers are becoming lax and frankly, developers  nowadays are LESS PROFESSIONAL .  EA is very very valid for an indie team  and  for a large team when the game has a too large scope, BUT, some minimum performance  is expected from a large team, and  no obvious bugs like the spam of yellow signs  are expected.

Game industry has been pampered by fanboys too much,  if you show  a software with bugs like that for a investor  in ANY other field and  you  will  leave the room crying.  Nothing harms more the game industry than fanboys defending the companies when they do something wrong.. want an industry to  develop and get better?  BE DEMANDING! BE demanding of quality is good because it makes the publishers  understand they cannot push  the developers when they say it is not ready and that they need to stop demanding more features until the basics is working. Again, in no other industry you keep adding  features  that are not important at all until you have the core of a system stable.

Edited February 25, 2023 by tstein

[MarcAbaddon]

I think a lot of things are working and there are some improvement. At the same time there are things that make me really upset:

• Who thought the terrible maneuver node planner was a good idea?
• 'We have slayed the Kraken' - this was not an ok statement to make.   All the KSP physics issues are still there: bad wheels, planes veering on the runway, noodly space ships, falling through the ground, rapid unplanned disassembly... you name it. There is really very little evidence that the underlying physics model has improved at all.

[mystik]

23 hours ago, Hitori said:

What the heck happened, was the entire staff sacked, replaced and asked to remake it all with no source code from KSP1 available?
I am utterly dissapointed, i am a programmer, i know it aint easy, but this is not a early release, this is clearly a skipped early Beta test that we paying money for, at least make it possible for people to try enjoy it instead of forcing them to ask for  a refund...

I was calling this out way before it was even launched.  I advised caution and BUYER BEWARE. The Steam store page is full of complaints.

50% negative reviews. And on top of that, there is a post from the devs that addresses (COPE) the performance issues.  I mean, they never for one second said that there will be issues with the performance like these. They kept quiet and now it exploded in their face.

The ones that bought it mention all the negative bugs and how it will get better (MORE COPE). Hey, I hope they don't get refunds. I will quote one review that is quite comprehensive.

Quote

First reaction is sticker shock. There are a lot of promises made, and if those features were available right now that price would probably be worth it. At it is, in early access, $50 is asking for quite a bit when we're getting a game that could easily be done in the original game with some mods. Obviously I'm hoping for greatness, but that $50 price at early access is going to make a lot of people walk.

Second reaction is the launcher. Private Division, for some reason has a separate launcher that they clearly want us to create yet another login for. This extraneous bit of nonsense never fails to liquid me off. Guys, we're launching from Steam, your launcher can tell we launched the game from Steam.

I'm guessing that they're hoping to make this extra launcher a mod hub or something? Maybe something to do with multiplayer. Even if true it grinds my gears something fierce. Especially if they're looking to force us to log into this thing to access those features.

Third reaction is at the EULA (browse it at take2games.com/eula ). Now, I get that nobody actually reads these complete garbage cans, but I did take a peak at a few terms and WOW is this one ready to throw you to the ground and start at you without lube if you manage to break the terms. First up is all of this will be done using New York legal code, which is kind of famous for all the wrong reasons. Secondly you can expect to see arbitration, not a jury ( that we can wave a right to actual trial like this is still BS ). For those of you who don't know, arbitration is legal code for the company wins because the arbitrator is rewarded ( paid ) for favoring them because the arbitrator will get more cases if they favor the company. I don't expect any of that to actually happen, but it does go to show the prevailing mindset in the developers studio.

There is a hefty section on in game currency and purchases, so we may very well be subjected to micro-transactions or other garbage.

Modders: you will not be able to make any money from your creations. No surprise, but it goes further. Basically if you create a mod, you do not own it. At all. For those unaware, back in the day there was an RTS game called Warcraft 3. It was immensely popular. One of the reasons for this popularity was the incredible freedom that modders had to create custom maps. Eventually a collection of maps called "Defense of the Ancients" became a significant percentage of all WC3 online games. "Defense of the Ancients" would be so popular that those guys would go on to make a separate game...and LOTS of cash. There's drama and more to the story, but the important bit is that Blizzard ( the makers of WC3 ) were upset they didn't get that money and decided that any mods to their game was theirs and nobody had legal right to any of it.

So. TLDR for modding: don't expect to be able to take any code or ideas you create and profit from them.

Also in the terms allows for them to spy on you and sell your data. So, you know. There's that.

Fourth: the limits of early access. A lot of players will be immensely disappointed to learn that the only game mode available is sandbox, and a limited sandbox at that. Hopefully science and campaign will come soon, but I'm not really a sandbox guy so I'll be waiting for it.

And finally, the gameplay. The tutorials were nice. graphics are better, but hopefully something that can be improved. I'm not really aware of physics engines to comment. Overall, the rocket builder worked nicely. There were a number of small UI improvements that were quite nice all through out the process. Everything was similar enough to the old KSP that adapting wasn't difficult and the improvements were overall just that: improvements.

Getting into orbit of the Mun was no trouble, and the UI changes to show where you entered the sphere of influence were great.

Two hours play conclusion...I'm really let down. I mean, the long wait time ( years ), ending in an early access release? The sticker shock? The launcher? The EULA? Especially the spying?

At present I don't recommend this game. Maybe they will actually deliver on those rather grandiose promises. Maybe. But honestly, I'm tired of paying for a product that spies on me for people to sell my personal information all over the world. I'm just, really tired of it. And people say things like "You don't have to play" or similar, but damn near every digital product has that in the EULA. Damn near every one. And what does that say about the culture of the owners? Of all of these businesses? Not good. It's just not good.

The original KSP was so wildly fun because of the freedom. I'm not entirely sure what freedom this EULA and company culture gives us.

YIKES!

Looks like they learned nothing from KSP. Especially the EULA part. You're installing spyware.

And some mentions of microtransactions. I called it in my posts earlier this week. They will sell you a $5 dollar super engine that is better than any other engine and you will buy it. KSP is now technically EA. Where EA is not Early Access, but Electronic Arts. Well, it was fun, but I will stick to KSP 1 with mods.

Publisher, please, do not refund any of the buyers. You get what you deserve!

I will not be coming back to this section of the forum, don't care, don't want to know, the EULA is a deal breaker for me, even if they make this the best game in 10 years. Your soul is not worth selling for some cheap entertainment. I care about my privacy more than about some cash grab disguised as a game. This game will lose interest in about 1 week on Twitch and then it will be relegated to the bottom of the internet where it belongs for trying to insult gamers, when it really is a spyware bug simulator that has an entry fee of 50 bucks if you wanna become a tester / test subject for the greedy company behind it.

Edited February 25, 2023 by mystik

[TheTechnobear]

8 minutes ago, mystik said:

Publisher, please, do not refund any of the buyers. You get what you flying deserve!

not sure this is their call, at least on Steam.
Steam will give you in refund 'automatically', if you have < 2 hours playtime.
thats why a quality EA is important, otherwise regardless of 'caveats', many are going to just 'give it a go', and then review/refund.

(if you look at how Valve describe an EA, you can see why they don't make allowances for them) 

this is only going to get worst, over next few days/weeks...as there will be an increasing % of new players vs loyal KSP fans.
(the latter being more forgiving, and willing to support devs for the KSP2 future etc) 

 

[The Aziz]

I find it funny how many people are actually put off by the pixelness of the interface (including Mr. @ShadowZone).

Which proves my point, the approach to bring the 1980s to a game about conquering other stars is out of place.

And some of the details are seriously hard to read. The resource readouts on the right? The deltav requirement after setting up a maneuver? They're tiny.

[Azimech]

14 minutes ago, TheTechnobear said:

this is only going to get worst, over next few days/weeks...as there will be an increasing % of new players vs loyal KSP fans.
(the latter being more forgiving, and willing to support devs for the KSP2 future etc) 

 

For me it doesn't work that way. First I want my money back. If they decrease the price with 35 then I'll reconsider.

[Majorjim!]

2 minutes ago, Azimech said:

For me it doesn't work that way. First I want my money back. If they decrease the price with 35 then I'll reconsider.

Hello matey! 
  Agreed. The price for me is a kick in the teeth. If they want me to pay full price give me a full price product. 

[mattihase]

18 hours ago, p331083 said:

So you like paying for the privilege of being unpaid quality assurance?

Implying I'm not already writing up my invoice for service.

[Majorjim!]

You know what all these bugs and poor performance issues are making me want to do? Play OG KSP. 
 No matter how messed up KSP 2 is KSP is like a warm blanket. That is all. 

[tstein]

14 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

I find it funny how many people are actually put off by the pixelness of the interface (including Mr. @ShadowZone).

Which proves my point, the approach to bring the 1980s to a game about conquering other stars is out of place.

And some of the details are seriously hard to read. The resource readouts on the right? The deltav requirement after setting up a maneuver? They're tiny.

Well there is a reason these fonts are not used nowadays anymore...  because they are bad.

[tstein]

32 minutes ago, TheTechnobear said:

not sure this is their call, at least on Steam.
Steam will give you in refund 'automatically', if you have < 2 hours playtime.
thats why a quality EA is important, otherwise regardless of 'caveats', many are going to just 'give it a go', and then review/refund.

(if you look at how Valve describe an EA, you can see why they don't make allowances for them) 

this is only going to get worst, over next few days/weeks...as there will be an increasing % of new players vs loyal KSP fans.
(the latter being more forgiving, and willing to support devs for the KSP2 future etc) 

 

Depending on the country  is way longer than 2h. In several countries steam is mandated to  accept refunds for 48  h.

[Majorjim!]

3 hours ago, GoldForest said:

So, I've confirmed time does move while you're in the VAB.

Also, omg! We can copy entire crafts now?! 

This is a bad thing… it causes inconsistent lighting when building and will cause you to miss launch windows. I hope they include an option to turn this off.

[RCgothic]

So I managed to land on the Mün! Generally gameplay so far has been good on my below-minimum spec laptop.

Specs are i7-6820HK, GTX980M, 32GB ram, and installed on non-system HDD, getting about 6FPS on the surface of Kerbin, which is enough.

Couple of bugs encountered so far:

- An engine placed in a payload bay works as an oversize engine skirt, and it flies correctly, but the DV calculations don't work.

- This text shouldn't be allowed to fill the whole screen, it's excessive. There's a critical altitude where this is persistent and it just completely obscures the craft. Happens with game paused/unpaused as well.

- Patched conics disappeared from the map screen after loading a save. I had to eyeball the trans-kerbin injection burn to return from the Mün.

Edit: Also discovered a bug I'd initially assumed was my fault: when reloading a save it displaced my lander's engine off-centre within the payload bay. This made the return flight a bit unstable. I thought I'd just placed it badly, but checking the craft in the VAB it was placed correctly, it's the game that moved it some time after the VAB.

Edited February 25, 2023 by RCgothic

[机械主教71号]

优点：

• +好听的音乐，VAB中的零件更容易找到了。
• +VAB三视图模式好评，有助于精确调整部件位置，希望以后能加上更细的刻度和网格。
• +画面进步，模型贴图精细。
• +自定义机翼好评！改变参数真的会影响气动力，不只是外观变化，实际体验下来比B9更好，控制手感比1代有一定进步。但全动翼面需要加大气动阻尼，现在纵向容易进入振荡状态，阻尼太小了。安定面需要加强舵效。
• +任务规划工具好评，不用去查dV图了。

缺点：

• -汉语UI有海量bug，相比较而言英语UI的bug少很多，建议现阶段用英语UI玩。
• -在VAB中看不到各天体表面和不同海拔高度推重比，右侧分级中不显示当前推重比。
• -帧数不稳定，有丢帧问题，总体还算流畅。
• -dV计算bug，飞船解体bug，VAB中如果没有氧化剂飞机dV显示为0。
• -轨道bug，例如从追踪站选择飞船进行控制，有一定概率环绕轨道会变成再入或者逃逸轨道。
• -轨道机动规划节点操作手感稀巴烂。
• -机动节点点火指示器提示的时间是到达机动节点后再点火，这样就会导致实际轨道与规划轨道偏离较大。
• -没有找到加速到第二天早上。

Merits:

• +Good music, parts in VAB are easier to find.
• +The VAB three-view mode is well received and helps to precisely adjust the position of the part, hopefully adding finer scales and grids in the future
• +The graphics are progressing and the model textures are fine.
• +Procedual wings are amazing! Changing parameters will really affect the aerodynamics, not only the appearance changes, the actual experience is better than B9, the control is a certain improvement than the KSP1. But the full-moving wing surface needs to increase aerodynamic damping, now it is easy to enter the oscillation state longitudinally, for the damping is too small now. And the stabilizer needs to strengthen the rudder effect.
• +The task planning tool is good to use, no need to check the dV diagram.

Shortcomings:

• -Chinese UI has a large number of bugs.
• -TheTWR of each celestial surface and different altitudes is not visible in the VAB, and the current TWR is not displayed in the stage panel.
• -The frame rate is unstable.
• -dV calculation bug, spaceship disintegration bug. If there is no oxidizer in a plane using jet, the dV is displayed as 0.
• -Orbit bugs. Occasionally the surround orbit becomes a re-entry or escape orbit
• -Maneuver node is totally a DISASTER!
• -The time indicated by the ignition indicator of the maneuver node is to ignite after reaching the node, which will cause the actual orbit to deviate greatly from the planned orbit.
• -Didn't find 'go to the next morning'.

Edited February 25, 2023 by 机械主教71号

[GoldForest]

26 minutes ago, Majorjim! said:

This is a bad thing… it causes inconsistent lighting when building and will cause you to miss launch windows. I hope they include an option to turn this off.

You won't be able to turn it off. It's a multiplayer feature. 

[Bej Kerman]

12 hours ago, LHACK4142 said:

As a fellow extreme-KSP-1-bug-experiencer-and-hater who hasn't gotten the time to play KSP2, is it in fact better than KSP1 in terms of bugs, @Bej Kerman?

(Assuming you've tried KSP2)

Game doesn't take ages to load and so far the VAB has been kinder in regards to performance with very large vessels. Not yet built my planned high part-count mission but I'll report in when that's done and flying.

[Bej Kerman]

In regards to the bugs now that I reread and properly parse your message, so far the worst I've had is that occasionally the GO button stops working and sometimes the vessel loader only loads half my vessel, and when this happens, I have to repeatedly click "ok" when asking the game to delete the half-vessel it made - this deletes the vessel chunk by chunk, as well. That's the worst I've had so far, and it was fixed with a very quick game restart, where if it had happened in KSP 1 the wait times probably would have led to a rage quit from me.

A common minor bug that happens sometimes is that nearby debris accelerates with me when I timewarp under thrust. I'll be doing a Mun transfer burn, and as I see my own orbit rise I see the orbit of some debris 50km away accelerate from a suborbit to an escape trajectory from Kerbin. But this really is minor and hardly affects whatever I care about.

Really, it isn't souring my experience much. I'm still having fun pushing the limits of the maneuver creator - with enough ion engines, you could probably get close to doing a brachistochrone Jool intercept. A modestly sized ion vessel can already spend a fair chunk of a Kerbol orbit on the acceleration phase. When I do perform these kinds of intercepts, high time warp levels seem to cause my resources to fluctuate somewhat, and approaching 100,000x acceleration the craft repeatedly runs out of electricity. Not that it seems to impact the average acceleration much, I was still able to capture into a Jool orbit, just with the "out of resources" sound effect blasting my headphones

12 hours ago, saxappeal89129 said:

12 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

When you buy a game that is early access, you waive any reasonable right to be surprised that things are broken

To be honest, I think "early access" has become way too synonymous with "games that are 150% complete with things that the devs didn't even anticipate would be in release but the lead isn't feeling 100% confident on a release", but you know, this game though is a proper early access. Whatever reality-breaking bugs you come across, that's just the game not being complete 

LMAO #1 Hot Take of all time. That's not what Early Access means. Early Access means they're polishing it and getting it ready for launch.

Early Access means precisely what it says on the tin.

[Bej Kerman]

3 hours ago, tstein said:

13 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

Yeah. Let's not forget how barebones KSP 1 was (and still is). I'd honestly say there's a lot of bias around here in favour of KSP 1 despite it missing some very important things like persistent thrust, which let's face it, is required for a good handful of thrusters - I'd say I'm rather baffled Squad added ion engines for 0.18 and over the course of a decade never looked at fixing KSP 1's stinginess with timewarp and acceleration.

That would be valid if the persistent thrust was working in KSP2.

And it is working. It's slightly bugged, exactly as I expected for an Early Access title, but it's there. The devs didn't just add ion engines and leave it at that without thinking about the critical features needed for them to be practical. Resource flow is obviously bugged but it beats 4x max warp. You can do beelines through the Kerbol system in stock now, unlike in KSP 1 where it was extremely impractical to do so.

I guess this is the bias I was talking about; X was completely gone from KSP 1 and its absence hurt the experience, but because it's somewhat bugged in KSP 2 it's not a valid comparison.

[MechBFP]

13 hours ago, LHACK4142 said:

As a fellow extreme-KSP-1-bug-experiencer-and-hater who hasn't gotten the time to play KSP2, is it in fact better than KSP1 in terms of bugs, @Bej Kerman?

(Assuming you've tried KSP2)

I got it yesterday and I gave up trying to get to the Mun and back in one piece because of various game breaking bugs and other tedious things that I encountered in the 10 or so attempts I made. 

Attempt 1: Boosters shook themselves apart in standard KSP1 fashion. Cause was probably putting strut connection points too close to each other, or not enough struts were used. 

Attempt 2: Inability to slide boosters all the way up or down a radial decoupler in the VAB caused them to detach in such a way during staging that  they fell into and broke the lower half of the ship. (The remaining half of the ship also glitched out at that point and became unusable because of other bugs.) Solution was needing to use the sub assembly to build the booster with the decoupler were I wanted it, then setting the decouplers as the root, and then attaching it. 

Attempt 3: While about to land on the Mun a bug with SAS and timewarp decided to put the craft into an uncontrollable spin which could not be recovered before crashing.

Attempt 4: Landed on the Mun and Jeb planted a flag and then proceeded to become uncontrollable. After switching to the tracking station and back a couple times I was able to regain control, but then he could no longer enter the craft as the “B” button to board did nothing. 

Attempt 6: Reloading the game from attempt 5 just causes Jeb and the craft to fall through the ground to their doom.

Attempt 7: While on route to the moon time warping caused the craft to get ripped in half

Attempt 8: Same as attempt 7

Attempt 9: Same as attempt 7 but this time I figured out the cause was having SAS on  when time warping.

Attempt 10: After crashing into the Mun and loading a quick save the ship stayed in some sort of spaghettified shape with random bits floating everywhere and the stabilizers on the bottom of the rocket looking like they were crumpled up tin foil. It was as if it still though the ship had crashed. This also completely messed up the center of mass so I could no longer burn at greater than 30% thrust  

Attempt 11: The parachutes wouldn’t stage using spacebar while returning to Kerbin and I subsequently crashed into the ground. 

In all attempts the fuel cross feeding was also broken and as a result the upper stage always had to have fuel manually transferred into it once I noticed the bug. 
Saving and loading after every decouple event prevents the problem though (other than on initial take off it seems). 
In all cases I was using  a ship made with 2.5m parts/engines/landing legs. 

Edited February 25, 2023 by MechBFP