Precise maneuver node editor (suggestion)

[Kerbal Koin]

Intro/Problems with the current system

If you think about KSP, one of the main parts of the game is creating maneuver nodes and the current system in ksp2 is not just lacking in precision but also sometimes parts of the maneuver node maker is hidden behind a celestial body.

Why we need precision?

One of the reasons we need precision is when interstellar travel gets added we are going to have to be very precise in making maneuver nodes.

A solution

A way that could fix both problems is add in a system similar to the KSP 1 mod precise node or bring back the graphical node editor.

Problems with the old editor and solutions

There are some problems with the graphical node editor.

1. First is that nobody uses it and there is a reason for that, it’s not accessible enough because from what I remember you had to have your node selected and then switch to a separate tab which is very tedious and could be fixed by having the graphical editor on the UI by default or adding a button for the editor that is accessible.

2. The second problem with the old graphical editor is not being able to switch between nodes easily because if you have nodes close together they become very hard to select and zooming in becomes impossible due to the camera having to be locked onto a celestial body which can also hide some vectors of the regular editor behind the celestial body. This could be fixed by adding an arrows and/or a drop-down menu that shows your maneuver nodes and/or adding hot keys, ect. to switch between nodes.

3. The last issue I had with the old graphical editor was not being able to switch to the “next orbit” (A feature that allows you to see what you maneuver would look like if executed a certain amount of orbits in the future and let’s you execute them in that way) in the graphical editor but having to try to right click on on the node to get the option to appear. This could be easily fixed by adding the next orbit button and the previous orbit button in the graphical node editor.

Summary

To sum it up, the current maneuver node system is neither precise enough nor visible enough and it must be precise to do interstellar burns in the near future. A solution is to add a precise node like system or add back the old graphical editor with some improvements. Thanks for reading this long feature request and please add this, Devs.

[Vl3d]

Also I really need the ability to scroll instead of dragging the maneuver node.

[dansiegel30]

While I fully agree with this request (they stock KSP1 maneuver planning was by FAR superior to what we currently have in KSP2 - nearly all of your complaints can be addressed with mods such as the Maneuver Node Controller mod (might as well get Flight Plan, K2D2, LazyOrbit and MicroEngineer as well).  In fact, I started getting back into KSP2 over the weekend when 0.2 and 0.1.5 was announced and was AMAZED at the improvements in gameplay from having these mods.  In fact, when 0.1.5 dropped, and I noticed the mods were not compatible, I just went back to 0.1.4.1 and had a much better time.  BTW, the mods are now updated to support 0.1.5, however I am personally having problems with Maneuver Node Controller and MicroEngineer.  Nevertheless, these mods when working help make KSP2 BETTER than KSP1 (with the exception of wobbly rockets and <20km orbit issues with decay and landinggear/wheels), IMO.  However the fact is that I am having A LOT of fun with KSP2 now.

 

From the stock KSP2 GUI, if this is what we got on launch, I doubt the devs will EVER update it.  In their minds, failing and lack of precision is A-OK...its the KERBAL way.  Well, I prefer the NASA way.   Measure Thrice, cut once.   Anyways, the mods are about as much as you will ever need in regards to precision.  And you will certainly need them one day with KSP2 RP-1....where most engines have only 1 ignition and no throttling capability.  

 

However, in regards to manual burns, I am VERY happy with the burn timer LEDs and bleep/blops on the countdown.  That is quite a nice improvement from KSP1.  That helps me get manual burn starts down to small sub-second accuracy.  Occasionally, the 3rd LED shows up green instead of yellow, and there are no sounds on the burn stop countdown (accuracy when stopping a burn is just as important or even more important than when it was started), so I've opened bug reports on those issues.

[Kerbal Koin]

On 10/28/2023 at 7:24 AM, dansiegel30 said:

In their minds, failing and lack of precision is A-OK...its the KERBAL way

I know it does seem like something that the devs would say but when interstellar gets added, precise nodes will have to be a stock option especially when they add ksp2 it to consoles where mods are impossible or near impossible to install. but I very much agree with the sound improvements over ksp1 being amazing. The reason I don't want to install mods yet is because first of all the devs are trying to make the stock experience as good as possible but also the game has patches relatively frequently so reinstalling mods several times will be a pain and many mods can't keep up.

[Scarecrow71]

On 10/27/2023 at 8:15 AM, Vl3d said:

Also I really need the ability to scroll instead of dragging the maneuver node.

I could not possibly agree with you more.  The ability to scroll on node handles would make creating intercepts so much easier in stock.

[dansiegel30]

15 hours ago, Kerbal Koin said:

I know it does seem like something that the devs would say but when interstellar gets added, precise nodes will have to be a stock option especially when they add ksp2 it to consoles where mods are impossible or near impossible to install. but I very much agree with the sound improvements over ksp1 being amazing. The reason I don't want to install mods yet is because first of all the devs are trying to make the stock experience as good as possible but also the game has patches relatively frequently so reinstalling mods several times will be a pain and many mods can't keep up.

On the contrary, the DV requirements for interstellar are huge compared to intra-stellar.   For example, most stars in our galaxy have an orbit speed of over 200,000 m/s.  Therefore the burns will be HUGE in DV, and the precision tools that they have I am sure will be fine for that.  Precision is actually needed for incredibly small DV requirements - rendezvous around a small body for example...a few m/s can push your intercept distance by over 10km.  Nevertheless, I would like them to improve things, however I certainly don't see it being a priority for them.

[Scarecrow71]

9 minutes ago, dansiegel30 said:

a few m/s can push your intercept distance by over 10km.

Extrapolate that when you want to transfer from one star to the next.  A few m/s of dV difference could have you floating in the void between stars for eternity as you miss your target system altogether.  As an example, in the real world on planet Earth alone, 1 degree of difference is equivalent to approximately 69 miles of difference.  Take a look at this:

The Distance Between Degrees of Latitude and Longitude (thoughtco.com)

Granted, this is all on a spherical ball where the points of Longitude spread out near the equator and converge at the poles.  But the concept here is the same as it would be in space:  being off by even the smallest amounts of dV might turn out to be a huge difference in intercept distances.

[Periple]

I can't see how the current system of planning and executing maneuvers can work for interstellar missions. It's just nowhere near precise enough!

[Superfluous J]

The precision of the maneuver node should be no less than the precision you can get with your engines, but giving it more encourages useless fiddling with the node when you're never going to actually achieve what it shows.

I *ALWAYS* do at least 1 mid-course correction, so I've stopped trying to tweak a node once I get an encounter, even when going from Kerbin to Mun or Minmus. Maybe I'll make sure it passes the target on the correct side but I'm not going to aim for an exact Pe that's right on the equator or anything like that. I'm going to do a mid-course correction anyway due to the imprecision of my burn, so why not nail the target THEN, when I actually have the ability?

I see no reason to think interstellar will be any different. Once I have an encounter I'm not going to care. I can tweak it from "encounter the star" to "encounter the planet" halfway there, and tweak it from "encounter the planet" to "get a nice Pe" once I'm in the star's SOI.

I'm not saying everybody must play the game my way (though you should try it), but do you really need to aim to nail an exact Pe on the equator of a planet orbiting another star when you're doing your ejection burn from Kerbin, and even if you feel that need, are you ever going to actually be able to do it?

[dansiegel30]

23 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Extrapolate that when you want to transfer from one star to the next.  A few m/s of dV difference could have you floating in the void between stars for eternity as you miss your target system altogether.  As an example, in the real world on planet Earth alone, 1 degree of difference is equivalent to approximately 69 miles of difference.  Take a look at this:

The Distance Between Degrees of Latitude and Longitude (thoughtco.com)

Granted, this is all on a spherical ball where the points of Longitude spread out near the equator and converge at the poles.  But the concept here is the same as it would be in space:  being off by even the smallest amounts of dV might turn out to be a huge difference in intercept distances.

Realize, they are not opening the ENTIRE galaxy to the player.  Only ONE additional star...and after that only a second star system.  You think they are going to implement the SAME exact system they have for intra-stellar just to go to ONE destination?  No....I am pretty sure the ship will physically have to get there (meaning it will need the right amount of DV with the future tech engines), but the navigation is going to be pretty simple and straight forward.  This wont be relevant until 0.4, which is a long ways away.  I think its best to wait atleast until then before diverting resources for a feature that while may be nice to have, it lower priority than anything described in the roadmap.

[Scarecrow71]

39 minutes ago, dansiegel30 said:

Realize, they are not opening the ENTIRE galaxy to the player.  Only ONE additional star...and after that only a second star system.  You think they are going to implement the SAME exact system they have for intra-stellar just to go to ONE destination?  No....I am pretty sure the ship will physically have to get there (meaning it will need the right amount of DV with the future tech engines), but the navigation is going to be pretty simple and straight forward.  This wont be relevant until 0.4, which is a long ways away.  I think its best to wait atleast until then before diverting resources for a feature that while may be nice to have, it lower priority than anything described in the roadmap.

Just because they only allow 1 system (at first) doesn't mean you are going to hit that system precisely every time you try to go there.  You can still miss.

[GluttonyReaper]

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Just because they only allow 1 system (at first) doesn't mean you are going to hit that system precisely every time you try to go there.  You can still miss.

Slightly off-topic perhaps, but I am curious how interstellar travel will actually work UI-wise - I'm not entirely convinced it makes sense to use the standard patched conics system when you're out in interstellar space, given that you're not really 'orbiting' anything in the traditional sense. Plus to get anywhere in a reasonable time frame, you're going to be moving at relativistic speeds towards effectively stationary targets... definitely a bit outside the scope that KSP usually has to deal with.

[Scarecrow71]

59 minutes ago, GluttonyReaper said:

Slightly off-topic perhaps, but I am curious how interstellar travel will actually work UI-wise - I'm not entirely convinced it makes sense to use the standard patched conics system when you're out in interstellar space, given that you're not really 'orbiting' anything in the traditional sense. Plus to get anywhere in a reasonable time frame, you're going to be moving at relativistic speeds towards effectively stationary targets... definitely a bit outside the scope that KSP usually has to deal with.

Well, in real life, our solar system is actually orbiting the center of our galaxy (which is a supermassive black hole, but that's an entirely different topic).  Keep in mind that:

• Earth's orbital speed around the sun is ~107,000 kph
• The Sun's  orbital speed around the center of the galaxy is ~720,000 kph
• The Milky Way is hurtling through the cosmic void at ~2.1 million kph

Regardless of where you are in the galaxy, you are still technically orbiting the center of the galaxy.  It's only when you go intergalactic that you aren't (as far as we know with our currently limited knowledge and technology) orbiting a specific body.  And targets are not going to be stationary.  If anything, it will be infinitely harder to hit an interstellar system than it will be to hit a specific location on a given body in the Kerbolar system while blindfolded.  You are still making towards a moving object, one that is moving much faster than you are traveling.

[Lowi_Sace]

I made a topic a while ago with a few suggestions about this. I included a image of my suggestion with explanation below

On the left (In green and red) are the delete and warp to maneuver buttons like they are now. Personally liked just being able to delete a maneuver or warp to maneuver without going to map view.

On the top we have a sensitivity slider. Very sensitive to easy make large changes and unsensitive to finetune maneuver. The yellow thing shows which setting you are on.

On the right is where you can drag to plot your maneuver. No more need to always having the node in eyesight (which is very handy if focused on target body or zoomed out a lot). This one is also in 2D which makes all directions easy plottable (does not hide behind node like it does now).

On the right bottom is a feature I think will be very handy with colonies and that is a maneuver mode for landing. This mode should also show at which point you make contact with surface (taking planet rotation into account) and at which speed you hit surface or which height you come to a stop. I do not know exactly how such a planner should look like/function, but I think that some people on the forum have some good ideas.

In the bottom middle there is a mode to select on which percentage of throttle the engine should run for performing the maneuver. For small deltaV burns doing maneuver at 100% can make you overshoot the planned maneuver easy. Also some engines might be more efficient at lower throttle levels.

In the bottom left is a button that makes the game automatically execute the maneuver. When button is clicked the craft will orient itself in the right direction and start burning at start and stop burning at and of planned maneuver. A other cool way is to maybe have a craft execute a set of maneuvers automatically. Maybe even on background while you do another mission (like setting up relay satellites, pre-sending tankers etc.)

I am curios what the rest thinks about the current planner and the features/UI changes I suggested. So let me know. A lot of players probably want a way to just add values instead of dragging. Did not add it in the current design, any ideas how that can be implemented in the UI?.

[Vl3d]

44 minutes ago, Lowi_Sace said:

I made a topic a while ago with a few suggestions about this. I included a image of my suggestion with explanation below

On the left (In green and red) are the delete and warp to maneuver buttons like they are now. Personally liked just being able to delete a maneuver or warp to maneuver without going to map view.

On the top we have a sensitivity slider. Very sensitive to easy make large changes and unsensitive to finetune maneuver. The yellow thing shows which setting you are on.

On the right is where you can drag to plot your maneuver. No more need to always having the node in eyesight (which is very handy if focused on target body or zoomed out a lot). This one is also in 2D which makes all directions easy plottable (does not hide behind node like it does now).

On the right bottom is a feature I think will be very handy with colonies and that is a maneuver mode for landing. This mode should also show at which point you make contact with surface (taking planet rotation into account) and at which speed you hit surface or which height you come to a stop. I do not know exactly how such a planner should look like/function, but I think that some people on the forum have some good ideas.

In the bottom middle there is a mode to select on which percentage of throttle the engine should run for performing the maneuver. For small deltaV burns doing maneuver at 100% can make you overshoot the planned maneuver easy. Also some engines might be more efficient at lower throttle levels.

In the bottom left is a button that makes the game automatically execute the maneuver. When button is clicked the craft will orient itself in the right direction and start burning at start and stop burning at and of planned maneuver. A other cool way is to maybe have a craft execute a set of maneuvers automatically. Maybe even on background while you do another mission (like setting up relay satellites, pre-sending tankers etc.)

I am curios what the rest thinks about the current planner and the features/UI changes I suggested. So let me know. A lot of players probably want a way to just add values instead of dragging. Did not add it in the current design, any ideas how that can be implemented in the UI?.

It's ok, although i see you want to slip autopilot in sneakily (that should be a separate subject). Problem is that this is just like the old KSP1 system, with the manual sensitivity. It's a chore & finicky. Can you find a way to innovate?

Why can't we pull on or scroll on the existing SAS direction icons instead?

And clicking >>> again should warp to 5 second before maneuver burn time.

Edited November 2, 2023 by Vl3d

[GluttonyReaper]

20 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Well, in real life, our solar system is actually orbiting the center of our galaxy (which is a supermassive black hole, but that's an entirely different topic).

As I understand it, this is only sort of true - everything 'orbits' the centre of the galaxy, but unlike a solar system, you don't have the same overwhelmingly large mass in the middle that makes the point source approximation (and Keplarian orbits) reasonable. Instead, there's a fair amount of mass everywhere, exerting gravitational pull all over the place. You still end up with a vaguely circular orbit, but you also get weird effects like stars bobbing in and out of the galactic plane, and some intense precession.

20 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

 You are still making towards a moving object, one that is moving much faster than you are traveling.

I don't think this is necessarily true. To get anywhere in a reasonable timeframe on interstellar scales, you need to be moving at some fraction of the speed of light - to get to a system 1 light year away in 100 years, you need to be moving at 0.01c... which is about 3,000,000 m/s, or 10,000,000 kph. It's still moving, but you'd be going a lot faster than your actual destination, compared to what we're used to an interplanetary scales. You can't really do Hohmann transfers when going interstellar in the same way. To be clear, I don't disagree that it'll be harder than going interplanetary (can you even do meaningful correction burns at those speeds?), but I think it's also going to be fundamentally very different.

Edited November 2, 2023 by GluttonyReaper

[Superluminaut]

Must have, very frustrating without. Especially maneuver node location repositioning.

[FirroSeranel]

This should definitely be a stock feature. The node gizmo is awful and always has been. It's way too easy to grab the wrong handle, to grab a handle when trying to move the node, etc.

I understand that it's meant to be intuitive for people just learning about orbital mechanics, but once you know what you're doing, it's terrible, and something like Precise Maneuver is practically mandatory. The amount of faff it eliminates when planning a mission to anything further away than Minmus (even then, it's helpful), or anything more precise than a planetary body, is incredible.

 

KSP made some... shall we say "errors in judgment" over the years. This is one that even the original dev team eventually recognized was just that, as evidenced by the fact that they "fixed" it. Not very well, really, but at least they tried.

 

I imagine the main point against having this feature in the stock game is that any advanced features like "circularize orbit", "move to Ap/Pe/An/Dn", or even just "rotate orbit CW/CCW" could be considered 'cheaty' for a new player (although frankly if a new player doesn't understand that to circularize you just burn prograde near Ap, they need to just re-read a sentence, not degrade the playability of the game for literally everybody else, and even for themselves for 99% of their play time).

If so... make it an unlockable feature via tech, or tech tiers, like maybe make precise editing overall a Tier 2 feature, and the full suite of ease-of-use/QoL improvements including porkchop plots and transfer planning at Tier 3 feature.

[Capt. Hunt]

Absolutely.  At the vary least, the AP and PE nodes of the planned orbit should show their altitudes automatically.  Right now, plotting a precise orbit involves a lot of back and forth because you have to mouse over the node to see the number.

I know you should be able to pin the popup on screen, while you're doing it, but I haven't been able to get that to work reliably.