What's an RPG, What's a Simulator, and why KSP2 is (or is not) one of them

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Agreed. For a coherent and constructive discussion, we need to:

1. Agree on the terminology, otherwise we will not establish a communication.
   1. KSP2 is a Indie game, by the way? What's an Indie game after all?
2. Recognise that the other side is entitled to have a opinion that perhaps needs some polishing, but is not be necessarily wrong just because you don't like it.

I agree that we should clarify terms if it seems like we're talking at cross purposes; "RPG" and "roguelike" have pretty well-established definitions, as do "sim" and "sandbox" which would be the attributes both KSPs are associated with, as do "indie" and "AAA" (and KSP2 isn't either of those either). If you like, I can point you towards definitions that are commonly used in the industry.

More importantly, I think we need to agree to actually address what the other person is saying. It's not much of a conversation if you simply ignore it. 

For example: you've repeatedly said that KSP2's radiators are "spell-like fantasy magic parts," but you're completely ignoring my counterpoints, viz:

1. KSP1 has identical radiators (the deployable thermal control systems also dissipate heat from the entire craft, placement does not matter)
2. Both KSPs have implicit electrical wiring and fuel ducting and allow crew transfers between any modules: how is this different from having implicit coolant pipes between heat-generating modules and radiators?
3. The direct gameplay/design impact of the change to the heating model is minor: if there are parts that dissipate heat only locally, they will need to be attached directly to the part you want to cool, rather than a part adjacent to it; it has no bearing on placement of TCS-like parts. (Also: at this point we don't know if KSP2 will have such parts as this has been neither confirmed nor denied; only that the new heating model does not preclude them.)
4. The secondary result of the change is major: the reduced computational cost allows more accurate simulation of heating in craft and colonies that are not within physics range. When you account for this, the new model is arguably more realistic than the old one, which did not simulate heat on unloaded craft, or simulated it extremely crudely.

You have also failed to address my question about what RPG or roguelike features you feel KSP2 has that KSP1 doesn't have?

So, unless and until you're willing to actually address these points rather than deflecting me to Google searches or digressions about terminology, I don't think we're going to be able to have a conversation about this.

And finally, for the record -- if your opinion is that KSP2 ought to have been a deeper, more realistic, more detailed simulation rather than a broader, bigger, and in some respects shallower game, then I do not think that the opinion is wrong; in fact, I think on that score our opinions may differ more in degree than in quality. 

However, if your opinion is that KSP2 is a RPG or a roguelike or completely different from KSP1 in critical respects to the point of being "not a successor," then I do believe that you're wrong, and I am willing to debate you on these questions -- but only if you demonstrate a willingness to engage with my arguments rather than ignore, dismiss, or deflect them.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Periple

[Lisias]

22 minutes ago, Periple said:

1. KSP1 has identical radiators (the deployable thermal control systems also dissipate heat from the entire craft, placement does not matter)

Definitively, absolutely, NO. This is NOT how KSP¹ works. I don't have a clue about how KSP2 will work, I'm basing my argument on what I'm reading on this (and the host) thread, but KSP¹ I KNOW HOW IT WORKS, and it's not like that.

The Radiator dissipates heat from the part it's attached, and once that part gets cooler, the hotter parts transfer heat to it by conduction. The heat flows from the hotter parts into the cooler parts across the craft. Even the WIKI's description says something similar to that. And this information is easily verifiable by simple craft on the sandbox. ALT-F11 and the Debug menu are your friends.

Unless I can trust the information you are providing, it's really hard to keep this discussion ongoing - on some things I need to trust you because I don't have any other reliable source of information to double check them, and right now I'm reticent on exercising such trust.

(the rest of the post will be evaluated after my lunch - now I need to double guess any information you provided, because I lost confidence on what you are stating)

 

22 minutes ago, Periple said:

However, if your opinion is that KSP2 is a RPG or a roguelike or completely different from KSP1 in critical respects, then I do believe that you're wrong, and I am willing to debate you on these questions -- but only if you demonstrate a willingness to engage with my arguments rather than ignore, dismiss, or deflect them.

Please enlighten me where I was dismissive or deflecting about your arguments. Without some solid examples, I'm afraid I'm unable to identify them by myself.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Lisias
Better phrasing

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Definitively, absolutely, NO. This is NOT how KSP¹ works. I don't have a clue about how KSP2 will work, I'm basing my argument on what I'm reading on this (and the host) thread, but KSP¹ I KNOW HOW IT WORKS, and it's not like that.

The Radiator dissipates heat from the part it's attached, and once that part gets cooler, the hotter parts transfer heat to it by conduction. The heat flows from the hotter parts into the cooler parts across the craft. Even the WIKI's description says something similar to that. And this information is easily verifiable by simple craft on the sandbox. ALT-F11 and the Debug menu are your friends.

Unless I can trust the information you are providing, it's really hard to keep this discussion ongoing - on some things I need to trust you because I don't have any other reliable source of information to double check them, and right now I'm reticent on exercising such trust.

The wiki says otherwise.

"The large Thermal Control System is a deployable radiator used to dissipate waste heat into space (and atmosphere), pumping it out of hot parts anywhere on the craft, consuming an amount of electric charge (30 per minute)."

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Thermal_Control_System_(large)

"Deployable Thermal Control Systems (TCS), take heat from every part of the vessel (as if plumbed in with a cooling fluid loop)."

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Radiator

Radiator panels do work as you describe -- they only cool the part to which they're attached:

"Rigid, fixed Panels, only cool the part they are directly attached to, and parts directly connected to that part."

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Radiator

"The Radiator Panel (large) is is a fixed radiator used to dissipate waste heat into space (and atmosphere), by pumping it out of nearby hot parts on the craft, when active, consuming a small amount of electric charge (1.5 per minute)."

https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Radiator_Panel_(large)

If you believe the wiki is mistaken, what's your source for that?

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Please enlighten me where I was dismissive or deflecting about your arguments. Without some solid examples, I'm afraid I'm unable to identify them by myself.

I just listed the points I have repeatedly made and you have (yet again) failed to address.

It does appear that one of us is mistaken about how TCSs work in KSP1, however, and indeed we need to determine who it is before we proceed. May I suggest an experiment? Let's build an ISRU with a bunch of Ore, and build it in two variants: one with just enough TCSs for thermal equilibrium on a fuel tank next to the ISRU, and another one with the same TCSs but placed, say, three girders away from the ISRU, with the only difference between them the placement of the TCSs. 

If you're right, the second variant should overheat whereas the first one shouldn't. If I'm right, both variants should perform the same way. I'm going to do that right away and post the results once I'm done!

Edit: all right, done. I determined by trial and error that the ISRU would overheat with 3 small TCSs but remain stable with 4 of them when attached to the tank adjacent to the ISRU. Placement made no difference, as you can see from the screenshots.

Edit 2: I also confirmed that radiator panels behave differently. This requires four of the small curved ones on the Rockomax fuel tank to remain at 1000K. If I move them to the top of the tower, the ISRU overheats as expected. Screenshots upon request, but I would prefer that you replicate the experiment and see for yourself.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Periple

[kerbiloid]

The tonguefingue _{cuz typing here, not saying}-tied me just realized, what was it trying to mean as a mean analog of the KSP RPG.

Dungeon Keeper.

Spoiler

 

The portals to hire Kerbals (there are Astronaut Complex and modded hiring facilities).
Kerbals of different types with different abilities: winged Pilots, clever Scientist in the Library, handy Engineers which repair every damaged thing.

We also need chickens for food, for joy, for vivisection scientific experiments.
(And a spell to turn a Kerbal into iirc a piglet, when BD Armory is used).

We need a training room (we have it in mods, but not visualized) to train the Kerbals (to evade from spikey iron balls and so on).

We need to summon a [censored]  [censored]  [censored] , as she is actually an important member of the crew, even if a daemoness.

We have a modded view switcher (from the eyes of the Kerbal and back), but we need also a pickaxe to break through the walls and to dig into hills.

We need much gold and many chests for it, to build and fill the hidden treasuries. More or less we have it, but the  gold cannot be enough.

The most important thing is, we need the Hand, to take the Kerbals, carry them, and slap, when it's needed.

Edited November 3, 2023 by kerbiloid

[Lisias]

4 hours ago, Periple said:

Edit: all right, done. I determined by trial and error that the ISRU would overheat with 3 small TCSs but remain stable with 4 of them when attached to the tank adjacent to the ISRU. Placement made no difference, as you can see from the screenshots.

Jesus Christ, man…  Do you really BELIEVE in what you are talking?

Shove the Radiators on both extremes of the craft, deploy and retract them alternately and watch the Convection Flux, Conduction Flux and Radiation Flux values changing accordingly. THESE are the thermal simulation we are talking about.

The Core Temp from the Converter is simulated apart.

Let do another test, let's fry Valentina this time (Jeb is already dead, right Manley?):

Fire the engine, start to barbecue the Cockpit slowly (or the skin temp will reach max too fast and the thing will blow up killing Val). Heat the cockpit the most you dare without screwing it. Try to reach an equilibrium, where the skin temp stops rising, or do it slowly.

Extend the near radiator. See how the Cockpit core and skin temps starts to decrease slowly. Now retract it.

Extend the far radiator. See how the Cockpit core and skin temps starts to decrease slower than the previous one.

Now redo the tests with the PAW for all parts involved and monitor the Thermal values. Observe as the fuel is consumed, the far radiator is less efficient on cooling the Cockpit (as the thermal mass of the fuel tank between them is decreasing, screwing the conduction). The same doesn't happens with the near radiator, as we are not consuming the monopropelent.

You just don't know what you are talking about. WORST, you are unable to even do the proper tests in order to check about what you are talking about - you are COMPLETELY in the dark about this subject.

— POST EDIT — 

I stand corrected. The dude is not completely in the dark, he's misguided and gone to the wrong path due jumping into conclusions without further investigation.

Me and @PDCWolf are talking about oranges, he's talking about tangerines.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Lisias
I stand corrected.

[Guest]

Edit: Afterthoughts, always afterthoughts

@Lisias — Before we go any further, can you clarify your opinion on one simple, unambiguous point:

“Deployable Thermal Control Systems (TCS), take heat from every part of the vessel (as if plumbed in with a cooling fluid loop).” True or false?

Edited November 3, 2023 by Periple

[Lisias]

3 hours ago, Periple said:

Okay, I will try your experiment next week when I’m back at my computer… on one condition.

Demonstrate to me that placement of TCSs (not panels)  matters in actual craft design. It should be simple. Assume that I’m a bit dim and don’t understand all that stuff about fluxes and thermal values and numbers and need a simple practical demonstration of the system in action.

I had already did, se the Val Barbecue craft. No need to do it again, but I can upload the craft somewhere if you want.

 

3 hours ago, Periple said:

Build an ISRU (plus drill, if you like) where the placement of TCSs makes the difference between the devices remaining in thermal equilibrium, and not.

About the ISRU, their "Core Temperature" thing IS NOT part of the KSP's Core Heat System! It's part of the ModuleResourceConverter . AGAIN, we are not talking KSP's thermals here, this is a feature specific to ModuleResourceConverter. This PartModule must be looking for any operating radiator in the craft and then subtracting its specific "Core Temperature" thing when finds one.

The ModuleResourceHarvester used on the drills looks the same, but I'm still investigating.

In a way or another, your initial claim:

5 hours ago, Periple said:

1. KSP1 has identical radiators (the deployable thermal control systems also dissipate heat from the entire craft, placement does not matter)

is just wrong the same. The radiators absorb heat from the connected parts, exactly like I explained. What we have on ISRU and Drills are specialised PartModules that create "another kind of heat" used only by themselves, and they "withdraw" this specialised heat when they detect parts with enabled ModuleActiveRadiator or ModuleDeployableRadiator modules attached.

You took the behaviour of two PartModules and generalised them (incorrectly) to the whole game.

— — POST EDIT — — 

The radiator efficiency is different when it takes light from the Sun, and when they are on the shadows - just forgot to mention.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Lisias
yeah. moar tyops!!

[Guest]

That’s very interesting!

What other use cases for the TCSs do you have, apart from ISRUs and drills?

Edit: to clarify, actual gameplay use cases, not silly contrived Val barbecues.

Edited November 3, 2023 by Periple

[Lisias]

3 minutes ago, Periple said:

That’s very interesting!

What other use cases for the TCSs do you have, apart from ISRUs and drills?

Removing waste heat. Waste heat is vastly unexplored by Stock KSP, but some mods make good use of it, and I created a few parts for myself that creates huge amounts of heat and, so, should be used sparingly or a adequate radiator must be placed on the craft - without any parts with low conduction between then, or that part will ended up exploding.

Additionally, if you are near a heat source (like orbiting the Sun near enough), you will need radiators (placed on the shadows of the craft for better efficiency) to prevent it from eventually overheating and explode by themselves. I suppose this trick would be useful on EVE too, as long you keep the radiators on a shadow (this one I never tried - yet).

[Kerbart]

18 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

Removing things that aren't necessary - or would actually make the game worse - is not "watering down."

I would have agreed with that statement a year ago. They are completely revaming the game structure and they will have something else in place that make Experience less relevant

But seeing what has been delivered so far, and what we've pieced together from Science at this point, revamped is really just tweaked. Of all the gameplay elements we have—tech tree, contracts, science—experience and traits worked the best, giving useful boosts where needed and adding the challenge of do I add a noob to my team with a long term payoff.

If anything the implementation was too simple—you can send a bus with twelf rookies and an experienced pilot on a tour around the Kerbin system and they miraculously come back as three-star experts—but scrapping the whole thing isn't the right way to solve that.

I agree that removing things isn't watering down by definition, but pretty much any change we've seen so far is watering down.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Removing waste heat. Waste heat is vastly unexplored by Stock KSP, but some mods make good use of it, and I created a few parts for myself that creates huge amounts of heat and, so, should be used sparingly or a adequate radiator must be placed on the craft - without any parts with low conduction between then, or that part will ended up exploding.

In other words, no use cases in stock KSP.

See, this is where we part ways. I don’t much care about the internals of the sim (although I think it’s a little silly that there are two entirely separate systems for heat, with radiators that magically behave one way for one kind of heat and another way for the other kind of heat). I care about effects on gameplay. 

And after all this noise and a fair bit of rudeness from you, we still haven’t established that the changes to the heating system have a material effect on gameplay. 

I do concede that I was half-wrong about TCSs — they only behave like I thought they did for one of the heat flavors KSP so scientifically accurately simulates, not both.

And with that, I’m out of patience with this discussion. 

 

[Lisias]

On 11/3/2023 at 5:46 PM, Periple said:

In other words, no use cases in stock KSP.

Nope. Underused use cases on Stock KSP.

Before continuing, let me answer a question that I let pass trough:

On 11/3/2023 at 2:08 PM, Periple said:

Edit: Afterthoughts, always afterthoughts

@Lisias — Before we go any further, can you clarify your opinion on one simple, unambiguous point:

“Deployable Thermal Control Systems (TCS), take heat from every part of the vessel (as if plumbed in with a cooling fluid loop).” True or false?

False (or at least I didn't found a use case where this is true until nowadays).  Parts with ModuleResourceConverter and/or ModuleResourceHarvester does that when they find a part with ModuleActiveRadiator or ModuleDeployableRadiator on the craft, but only using that kind of heat they produces internally themselves. So, in the end, the Radiators are not able to dissipate heat from any part of the craft, only from themselves, after absolving heat by conduction from the parts they are attached to - some parts dissipates they own specialised heat from themselves when they find a Radiator on the craft.

Now, bear with me: even if we would be talking ducts and coolant here, if you have a very, very hot part between the radiator and some other part on the other part of the subtree, this would behave more or less the same because that very, very hot part would overload the coolant as it passes by it, and from this point the coolant would be perverted into heating that poor part on the other side of the oven.

As an example, if we have a NERVA between the radiator and the cockpit, the cockpit should be a sauna due the coolant, not besides it.

 

On 11/3/2023 at 5:46 PM, Periple said:

See, this is where we part ways. I don’t much care about the internals of the sim (although I think it’s a little silly that there are two entirely separate systems for heat, with radiators that magically behave one way for one kind of heat and another way for the other kind of heat). I care about effects on gameplay. 

More over, we care differently about different aspects of the gameplay.

 

On 11/3/2023 at 5:46 PM, Periple said:

And after all this noise and a fair bit of rudeness from you, we still haven’t established that the changes to the heating system have a material effect on gameplay. 

I beg to disagree in both instances.  I reserve cordiality to people being cordial to me - on the other "use cases", I go direct to the point without mincing words. (My) rudeness is a large step ahead, I concede being grumpy.

Edited November 6, 2023 by Lisias
Forum's paste is weird - fixing formatting.

[Meecrob]

I know I'm walking in late, but I'm not sure I get this discussion. I'll be the first to admit that KSP is no Reentry (https://store.steampowered.com/app/882140/Reentry__An_Orbital_Simulator/), but RPG? Nah, this is pedantic semantics. Nobody is putting KSP on the list of RPGs like Diablo2 or ChronoTrigger.

Maaaaybe you can stretch it to mean "KSP took some really weak RPG elements as a crutch to prop up the rest of the game", but its not an RPG no matter how much you dissect the "magic/hand-wavey" part of the underlying systems. MSFlightSim is technically an RPG if you use the logic in this thread. I am not an actual 747 pilot, I am "role playing" as one...but its still in a simulation.

Seriously, go post a poll "Does KSP give you the same experience as Baldurs Gate?" C'mon, you know the answer.

Maybe we should flip this; is Baldurs gate a simulation of an RPG? its a digital facsimile of an adaption of the core ideas of D&D...so is it "simulating" the table top game?

Edited November 3, 2023 by Meecrob

[Nuke]

im still waiting for my new power supply so i can play the damn thing.

anyway i like games you can hack just by playing them, ksp falls into that, so does minecraft. you can break the game just by building stuff. its a far cry from the super mario world exploit where you can inject arbitrary machine code by placing shells in a certain order. 

Edited November 4, 2023 by Nuke

[Lisias]

5 hours ago, Meecrob said:

Maaaaybe you can stretch it to mean "KSP took some really weak RPG elements as a crutch to prop up the rest of the game", but its not an RPG no matter how much you dissect the "magic/hand-wavey" part of the underlying systems. MSFlightSim is technically an RPG if you use the logic in this thread. I am not an actual 747 pilot, I am "role playing" as one...but its still in a simulation.

Given new information (for me at least) given on this very thread, I need to agree with you that KSP2 can't even be a half-baked Roguelike anymore, what to say a RPG.

But the idea is not mine at all:

From the unavoidable Wikipedia, "A role-playing game (sometimes spelled roleplaying game, RPG) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making regarding character development. Actions taken within many games succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.".

All the basic elements for turning KSP into a RPG are (were) there since KSP¹ (see the numerous mission reports on this very Forum). We had even a prototypical character development, and even traits - that unfortunately were never really explored on the main game but were on some add'ons. But the game never developed into that direction, granted.

However, with the most interesting parts of the game being watered down, I agree that (ab)using KSP2 as an RPG will be less compelling.

— — POST EDIT — — 

As a matter of fact.. I'm wondering what it would take to create an Add'On that would turn KSP¹ in a somewhat clumsy but still de jure et de facto RPG… 

Edited November 4, 2023 by Lisias
POST EDIT

[kerbiloid]

So, they are going to add Housewife and Plumber roles for Kerbals...

Sooner or later it had to happen.

[Lisias]

11 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

So, they are going to add Housewife and Plumber roles for Kerbals...

Sooner or later it had to happen.

And probably trash collectors and dustmans too. Someone has to get rid of all the features KSP2 is lefting behind.

Edited November 4, 2023 by Lisias
Kraken damned auto-correctors!

[kerbiloid]

A pool. The Kerbals have a pool next to the Astronaut Spawner. Somebody should clean it, and do secondary missions.

[Nazalassa]

It looks like radiators were unable to cool down this discussion, due to some unknown issue in ModuleArgumentThread. Actually, I think the thread produced too much heat, which overflowed the radiators. iirc ModuleArgumentThread is supposed to get rid of excess heat if a radiator is present on the thread, but it looks like there's a bug in some internal pathfinding routine. Yet one more thing to fix if we get the source.

[magnemoe]

On 11/3/2023 at 4:42 PM, kerbiloid said:

The tonguefingue _{cuz typing here, not saying}-tied me just realized, what was it trying to mean as a mean analog of the KSP RPG.

Dungeon Keeper.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The portals to hire Kerbals (there are Astronaut Complex and modded hiring facilities).
Kerbals of different types with different abilities: winged Pilots, clever Scientist in the Library, handy Engineers which repair every damaged thing.

We also need chickens for food, for joy, for vivisection scientific experiments.
(And a spell to turn a Kerbal into iirc a piglet, when BD Armory is used).

We need a training room (we have it in mods, but not visualized) to train the Kerbals (to evade from spikey iron balls and so on).

We need to summon a [censored]  [censored]  [censored] , as she is actually an important member of the crew, even if a daemoness.

We have a modded view switcher (from the eyes of the Kerbal and back), but we need also a pickaxe to break through the walls and to dig into hills.

We need much gold and many chests for it, to build and fill the hidden treasuries. More or less we have it, but the  gold cannot be enough.

The most important thing is, we need the Hand, to take the Kerbals, carry them, and slap, when it's needed.

Here I agree, I hated the buying kerbals who got more expensive who more you needed hard, yes it made game play sense for the workers in dungon keepers as they was your main production unit. 
For KSP 1 I would rater used salaries and  increased cost for more experienced kerbals and ramping up cost for very long missions. Also an penalty for killing them bought in credit and reputation. 
For one it would crew rotation makes sense outside of lvl 5 kerbals. 

[magnemoe]

On 11/3/2023 at 9:17 PM, Lisias said:

Removing waste heat. Waste heat is vastly unexplored by Stock KSP, but some mods make good use of it, and I created a few parts for myself that creates huge amounts of heat and, so, should be used sparingly or a adequate radiator must be placed on the craft - without any parts with low conduction between then, or that part will ended up exploding.

Additionally, if you are near a heat source (like orbiting the Sun near enough), you will need radiators (placed on the shadows of the craft for better efficiency) to prevent it from eventually overheating and explode by themselves. I suppose this trick would be useful on EVE too, as long you keep the radiators on a shadow (this one I never tried - yet).

Now radiators  and heat in KSP 1 was very buggy, 
Fun excample, doing an survey east of my Minmus fleet base one scientist used the dedicated light utility lander and did the science and returned. On load the base detonated. 
Issue was that leaving base physical range and returning less than an hour later in game time dumped all the heat at once. Returning to KSC and back to lander and it was no issue. 
Time warp was also messed up in many ways, how close can you fly to the sun, depend on time warp more than anything. 

[Lisias]

11 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Now radiators  and heat in KSP 1 was very buggy, 

Frankly? I think they are way under documented - some people  just don't get the grasp on it without some help.

You can't use the same heat management on a base in the Laythe's night on a base on EVE's midday! The game simulates even the Sun's flux!

 

11 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Fun excample, doing an survey east of my Minmus fleet base one scientist used the dedicated light utility lander and did the science and returned. On load the base detonated. 

This is not a heat problem, this is nasty bug on initialising internal data. It only happened to affect. heat on you, but it also affected mass in the past.

There're many external factors that could lead the heat system to misbehave, don't misunderstand the effect with the cause!

You will find a good example of this here: https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/KSP-Recall/issues/25 - I had screwed a little tiny detail on ChillingOut (a hack to fix exactly the problem you are describing, when related to some old parts).

 

11 hours ago, magnemoe said:

For KSP 1 I would rater used salaries and  increased cost for more experienced kerbals and ramping up cost for very long missions. Also an penalty for killing them bought in credit and reputation. 

I agree. "Buying" astronauts, additionally, leaves me with a bad taste on my mouth.

 

11 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Issue was that leaving base physical range and returning less than an hour later in game time dumped all the heat at once. Returning to KSC and back to lander and it was no issue. 

You diagnosed the problem yourself. The Rails-In, Rails-Out code is buggy, not the heat system. Switching scenarios is a full load of the whole scene, not only the craft. Had you reported this bug? It may explain a lot os misbehaviours, it's pretty probably that this rotten code on Rails-In/Rails-Out would be screwing more things.

Since what KSP version you detected this problem?

 

11 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Time warp was also messed up in many ways, how close can you fly to the sun, depend on time warp more than anything. 

This is a problem on the simulation - it happens something similar if you use timewarp with the craft on an atmosphere - the quantum of the simulation is too big to proper simulate the heat transfer. It's the reason the timewarp is handicapped when you are inside the atmosphere.

Dumbing down the heat system due a flaw on the timewarp is similar to remove atmospheric flight due it.

-- POST EDIT --

On a second thought,  this time warp problem can be even related to using floats. On a larger quantum, the values involved get bigger or smaller enough  to start to be rounded,  and one of these rounding eventually happens on the worst possible way. Not different from what happens on recovering Funds from crafts with really, really, REALLY expensive parts  (only possible with mods) that I had also worked around on KSP-Recall.

In time², remembered this other borkage of mine about the loading problem I mentioned above. Hell of a hack, but it worked (almost) very well! https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/KSP-Recall/issues/26

Edited November 5, 2023 by Lisias
Post edit

[Lisias]

Apparently the watering down tendency is not specific to KSP2. Some Cities:Skylibes die hard fans are also complaining a lot about this on reddit:

Let's see what happens.

From my point of view, I don't have the slightest problem on easy modes on games - just let the hard mode available for whoever wants to brag about playing on it. The best of both worlds.

Edited November 6, 2023 by Lisias
The autocomplete is screwing with me!

[Hotel26]

On 11/3/2023 at 7:54 AM, Lisias said:

Every game, by itself, is a simulacrum.

Monopoly, for instance, yes.  Chess, Go, Poker, lots of puzzles: no.  (Predictably someone will seize upon the notion that chess has 'knights' and 'bishops'.  No, it has fanciful mnemonic names .)

What is common about all games is that they have rules.  Those rules are set by the creator.  They can be entirely abstract, imaginary, creative.

Or restricted, in certain genres, to some simulacrum.  This is a useful term ( @Lisias ) because it does somewhat differentiate 'simulator' which commonly connotes some rule subset from reality (for a hopefully fun activity at home).

As Jack Handy once mused: "Space is not only 'hard'.  It is also not 'fun'.  Get an aerospace job.  See what I mean."

 

Edited November 6, 2023 by Hotel26

[Lisias]

5 hours ago, Hotel26 said:

Monopoly, for instance, yes.  Chess, Go, Poker, lots of puzzles: no.  (Predictably someone will seize upon the notion that chess has 'knights' and 'bishops'.  No, it has fanciful mnemonic names .)

Well. being nitpicker, chess computer game is a simulacrum. The real life chess game is a "virtual".  (unrelated to "virtual reality" as the term is being used).