Top 10 Requests

[HebaruSan]

Critical bug fixes:

1. Don't explode on docking (possibly related to landing gear phantom forces)
2. Don't fall apart on switching to vessel from tracking station (also possibly related to landing gear phantom forces)
3. Make the target-relative nav ball markers stop wobbling around when you rotate the craft

Quality of life:

1. Make the parts list in VAB less wide or collapsible
2. No limits on time warp if periapsis is out of atmosphere/surface
3. Make "workspaces" less confusing
   (A fresh UX consultant should be able to give you several pages of feedback based on a few minutes of user testing.)
4. The VAB has a lot of popups and manages them poorly. Make sure the newest one opens in front, try to avoid overlapping them, make them take up less space, make them auto-hide when you're done with them, etc.
   (Maybe another task for the same UX consultant.)
5. Display time till ascending/descending node in map view
6. Interactive IVAs

Overflow in case bug fixes weren't meant to be included here:

Spoiler

New experiences:

1. Surface scanning based on what a satellite can actually see (a la the SCANsat mod)
2. Lagrange points
3. Area rule

Edited November 10, 2023 by HebaruSan

[Scarecrow71]

47 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

The old way was extremely inaccurate and I'm struggling to figure out how it could be considered better under any circumstance. Unless you were playing with very high TWRs or simple missions, it'd lose accuracy easily, and things only got awful for nuclear vessels. The system KSP 2 uses isn't just more intuitive, it's also incredibly accurate and lets you do maneuvers that would have been extremely hard to predict in KSP 1.

Yeah, saying "better" was not the right way to put it.  I certainly think it was better, but that doesn't mean everyone does.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Scarecrow71

[Bej Kerman]

19 minutes ago, Scarecrow71 said:

Yeah, saying "better" was not the right way to put it.  I certainly think it was better, but that doesn't mean everyone does.

Fair enough, though I'm still curious what you think made it better given that it doesn't account for acceleration.

[TwoCalories]

Hmm... Not in any particular order, but...

1.  Bring back the 1.875m parts! They really filled the gap between 1.25m and 2.5m.
2.  Maybe make the rocket parts a little less... shiny? Rockets in general are a little shiny sometimes, but the KSP2 ones are pretty shiny.
3. More habitat modules, so that space stations don't have to just be completely made out of Hitchhikers.
4. More command modules, to fill the gaps in progression. A Gemini-esque and/or Orion-esque pod would be nice.
5. Some surface base parts. Colonies are coming up, as we know, but something to fill the gap like NASA's X-Hab would be nice.
6. Interactive IVAs!
7. Maybe the Kerbonaut will change out of their spacesuit for a NASA-esque jumpsuit for long spaceflights, or at least take their helmet off?
8. Surface scanning! Mapping the surface is one of my favorite things to do in KSP1 (for some reason).

And... that's about everything I can think of right now.

[Vl3d]

3 hours ago, Periple said:

LS could work just fine if integrated with the resource logistics system. Just set up a recurring supply mission and warp away.

Recurring supply en route to Eeloo?

I just agree with @Nertea - consumable life support on craft generates frustration for stock gameplay. You just can't leave a mission in orbit somewhere when you're bored in order to go do something else that requires warping a long time. Believe me, I've really thought about it because I initially wanted life support in the game. But it just complicates things, breaks gameplay rhythm and punishes you for just trying to play fast and have fun. I don't want anything preventing me to time warp at any time.

Radiation and habitation are better mechanics to serve that need. They can be pass / fail by craft design and location, independent of time.

[Scarecrow71]

1 hour ago, Bej Kerman said:

Fair enough, though I'm still curious what you think made it better given that it doesn't account for acceleration.

For me, it's about muscle memory.  I still find myself firing maneuver in KSP2 in the same way, burning when the countdown timer gets to what halfway through the burn would be (burn says it will take 30 seconds, countdown timer hits 15 seconds, as an example).

[PDCWolf]

1 hour ago, HebaruSan said:

Area rule requires a whole re-abstraction (or proper simulation) of supersonic aerodynamics, plus there'd still be no way to apply it to fuselages, only wings.

[Bej Kerman]

1 hour ago, Scarecrow71 said:

For me, it's about muscle memory.  I still find myself firing maneuver in KSP2 in the same way, burning when the countdown timer gets to what halfway through the burn would be (burn says it will take 30 seconds, countdown timer hits 15 seconds, as an example).

For the record, I think the timer UI could be more specific with when the engines should fire. I sometimes wait till my vessel crosses the red prediction line instead of using the HUD.

[RocketSon4]

Not in much of an order except for number 1, 2, and 3.

!!!!!1. Metallic Hydrogen engines and necessary components. I have looked forward to this ever since I heard about it.

2.  Personally, I think KSP2 needs more powerful solid rocket boosters than the Clydesdale. There needs to be a Large category of boosters, not just medium. You can slap on a pair of large mammoth II engines to get more power than a pair of the most powerful solid rocket boosters in game.

3. Mining equipment for fuel.

4. Kerbal personal parachutes.

5. A better saving system in the VAB. My rockets are almost never saved without personally clicking on the save button. I liked how KSP1 just autosaved the rocket and kept it for you in the VAB until you either saved it or overrode it.

That's about all I can think about now.

Edited November 14, 2023 by RocketSon4

[Pthigrivi]

2 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Recurring supply en route to Eeloo?

Nah bruh. Mine fertilizer on the surface and turn it into snacks with a greenhouse. No way these resupplies need to come all the way from Kerbin. Check out my thread. Im talking a few tons to keep them happy for years. It wouldn’t be hard to overbuild and give yourself flexibility. Learning to think about time is exactly the point. And if not no biggie, its just a bonus.  So long as there’s no punishment its no different from mining or experiments taking time. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by Pthigrivi

[Bej Kerman]

I don't think in a very structured manner so I'll just ignore the "top" and "10" parts and just explain how I think aspects of this game can be improved. I'm also going to avoid things that are already confirmed or hidden in the game since it's a bit repetitive to request features the developers themselves want to add.

Procedural wings should have a graphical editor since a list of sliders can be hard to parse and there should be more flexibility in their shapes - players should be able to effectively replicate the outward-sloping wings of the Concorde for example.

Large lightweight landing gear like those on the Falcon 9 are also a must-have. The Wallaby gear can be too unwieldy in some cases.

Control surfaces that flap inwards and outwards like those on the SpaceX Starship, allowing vessels to make extremely high AoA maneuvers during re-entry that aren't possible with standard control surfaces, are another must-have. You could do this in KSP 1 sort of, but DLC was needed and SAS could not interface with robotics, so having something in this as a full feature like the grid fins would be well appreciated.

This one's more decorative, but since we're getting re-entry effects in FS!, the system used to generate those effects could probably also be used to create those puffs of air you see around vehicles going trans-sonic. Would also provide some lower-speed visual feedback for your velocity.

If a lot of explosions happen at the same time, like when a large launcher crashes into the ground, instead of a bunch of explosions happening that disappear within seconds, the game should recognise that a lot of explosions are happening within a tiny volume and spawn larger, longer-lasting explosion effects for dramatic effect.

The game doesn't give you much time to savour the destruction of an ill-fated vessel, immediately showing you your flight report and resetting the camera. The game should keep track of all the debris that came from the active vessel and follow the center of mass of said debris cloud rather than ditching the camera, and the flight report should wait A. a few seconds, or B. till the player hits Escape, before showing up so the player doesn't have to fight against the game to watch the fireworks. That way, you get a good view of the area your vessel is bringing down havoc, and you're not immediately being hit with snark from PAIGE while trying to recover from the emotional low of seeing your rocket crash.

More interesting things near the edge of the Kerbol system. I know the devs have turned their nose up at the idea of altering the system before, but the system in KSP 1 clearly wasn't designed for the scale and progression of KSP 2 so I don't believe it's a good idea to copy it 1:~1, and there were several planet concepts that never made it in as KSP 1 didn't have much to justify gas planets beyond Jool. I say the devs should seriously  consider adding distant Kuiper-belt objects beyond Jool that could be used for deep-space mining and colonisation, and maybe something analogous to the theoretical Planet 9, so as to help ease the transition into interstellar space. You know, rather than just having the Kerbol system end abruptly at Eeloo, which I think is a bit anti-climatic.

UI themes. I'm not on about changing the layout (but I wouldn't be against that) - rather, methinks since that a lot of people don't like the analog/early digital style of the UI, it'd only be fair to have different styles that evoke different styles and time periods. Same layout, different coat of paint. I expect this one would be more carried by the community since it'd probably be a pain in the devs' Equus asinus to redo the UI several times, but an in game choice between skeuomorphism, retro and flat UIs would probably do a lot to quell the community's ire.
Hold that thought, It also occurs to me that it'd be a boon to users with accessibility needs. Even just the option between the current UI and one with colour and typeface schemes to help with e.g. dyslexia could more than justify implementing UI switching.

Speaking of switching, fuel switching and wet wings. With the exception of hydrogen tanks which are more than justified in their existence, there's no need for methalox and methane tanks to be completely different things, and just to name one example, it's annoying that Mk2 bicouplers suffer from wasted internal space in cases where oxidizer isn't needed. Real life wings also aren't always dry and being able to store fuel inside them would give a compelling reason to bump up the thickness of wings when customising them.

[farelinho]

These are some (eventually) simple things I'd like to have which the roadmap doesn't clearly promise:

1. Comets and asteroids
2. IVA and first person view
3. Kerbal parachutes and headlight
4. Robotics and programming
5. EVA construction / repair
6. Make my own Kerbal!
7. Life Support
8. Mission planner tools like transfer window calculator, alarm clock and atmospheric landing trajectories
9. Full TWR/dV per stage and by celestial body in the VAB
10. Scanning and mapping for celestial bodies (including telescopes)

[Dakota]

Think it would be good to spin off discussions about potential features into their own threads.

[Periple]

5 hours ago, Vl3d said:

Recurring supply en route to Eeloo?

If you run out en route you’ve already done it wrong! You will need some alarms of course!

[mcwaffles2003]

1. An archive of collected scientific data/in game wiki
2. That data is easily accessible from the map mode and helps in decision making for aerobraking, colony placement, etc
3. Multiple map types (2D/3D/Contour/Resource/Biome/etc..)
4. Multiple sets of resolutions for the data allowing a progression curve as scientific instruments and and methods improve to get more accuracy increasing resolution
5. Space telescopes
6. SCANsat
7. Kerbalism style data collection
    

   3 hours ago, Dakota said:

   Think it would be good to spin off discussions about potential features into their own threads.

   Already have.

   Just want this game to show off how science is useful and fun, not simply gamified Also, the polls I have put up around these proposals have come out with pretty high approval from the community so far:
   Spoiler

   

   96%of responses want more telescopes

   

   69% (nice) want kerbalism esque science with usable data

   

   Smaller sample size but only 1 in 9 want click button get instant science as we have had
    

    

    

   good summary:

    

8. VR building in the VAB so I can build lego rockets with my hands and work in a 3D plane instead of mapping a 2D one on 3D space.
9. VR IVA
10. Smoke trails behind SRBs last longer

Edited November 11, 2023 by mcwaffles2003

[Vl3d]

4 hours ago, Periple said:

If you run out en route you’ve already done it wrong! You will need some alarms of course!

This is my last comment about any specific feature in this thread. Think it through - you pack up LS provisions, send the kerbals to Eeloo. While doing this you have to also send a supply vehicle to create a route, otherwise you get penalized if you have to wait in Eeloo orbit for years for the next transfer window. It interrupts your gameplay flow - that's why I'm arguing for a mechanism to do a mission and then be able to go back in time to execute another mission in parallel.

Edited November 11, 2023 by Vl3d

[Sea_Kerman]

One thing I think should be looked at is the parts manager. Improvements I can immediately think of are
1. reduce the whitespace. Currently you can chop the vertical height of the thing in half  without cutting anything off, because there's so much space between entries
2. Currently you can't look at 2 different parts of your craft that don't happen to be directly next to each other in the parts manager. Perhaps allow opening up several windows or breaking out specific parts into their own windows a la the old PAWs.

3. Remove fuel tanks from it if all their actual functions are in the resource manager

[didkodidko]

Give us integrated Mech JEB !

No one taught us more for orbits, transfers and dV than MJ. 

Long live!

[dsplaisted]

1. Robotics

2. Colony and ship life support (Have snacks water and air or else kerbals go unconscious)

3. Finding new star systems with telescope

4. Science with probes first then when you get a probe orbiting you get your first command pod (plane are available from start though)

5 Cities on Kerbin

6. 1.85 meter parts

7. Transfer widow planner

Edited November 11, 2023 by dsplaisted

[Walker]

I won’t be original, but I would like to express strong support for some of already posted ideas:

1. parts from the Making History expansion - I really can’t live without those 1.875m parts!
2. all those cool features from Breaking Ground Expansion - surface features, robotics parts, surface science parts,
3. other features that were in KSP 1, and which are still missing in KSP 2: comets, asteroids, IVA, Astronaut Center...
4. And besides stock KSP 1 features, there were some essential mods, that made the game complete (like SCANsat, Outer Planets or life suport mods) – I’d love to see features like ScanSat or OPM in KSP 2. This or making KSP 2 fully modable – let modders mod :) 

[dansiegel30]

6 hours ago, Vl3d said:

This is my last comment about any specific feature in this thread. Think it through - you pack up LS provisions, send the kerbals to Eeloo. While doing this you have to also send a supply vehicle to create a route, otherwise you get penalized if you have to wait in Eeloo orbit for years for the next transfer window. It interrupts your gameplay flow - that's why I'm arguing for a mechanism to do a mission and then be able to go back in time to execute another mission in parallel.

I dont get it.  Isn't it feasible to state that you need to bring enough LS on board for the trip, and the amount of time it takes to WAIT for the next window when a supply vehicle appears?  That supply vehicle must have enough supplies to last that particular crew until the NEXT window when yet another re-supply is performed.  And as far as doing trips in parallel, again I see no problem with this.  You can send your Kerbal crew on its craft with enough LS supplies to last the voyage with say a 10% fudge factor.  Once you execute the ejection burn, there is nothing to do with that craft for years, while you wait for your course correctional burn.  Just switch over to a supply vessel in LKO and setup it's burn to Eeloo - you can certainly afford missing the most perfect optimal window and burn on the next Kerbin orbit, or even the next Kerbin day - the amount of DV difference is not that much.  Course correctio burns of course are pretty much time independent, so there is no issue there.  And there is a good chance even that your resupply vehicle may in fact reach Eeloo prior to your crewed vessel - it all depends on how accurate you make your burns.  You however certainly need to ensure that the do no arrive at the same EXACT time, which is easy to do when doing the correction burns (well, maybe still bugged atm because Pe time doesn't appear until you hit SOI, didnt have this problem in KSP1 and I have seen a bug report on this).

 

Not wanting to do the above technique and have the devs spend resources on a "go back in time" feature?  That would be REVERT madness!! lol  - While playing Kerbalism in KSP1, I often had things happening at the same time (only observable from dedicated use of the alarm clock for EVERYTHING, so we need an alarmclock desperately).  So, I have to wait for another orbit, or make an orbit for one craft non-ideal to have then happen minutes apart rather than simultaneously.  Haven't we had enough time travel from MCU movies to last a lifetime??

[Urus28]

1 - Colonies

2 - Life support

3 - SCANSAT

4 - Robotic

5 - Cities on Kerbin , please give some life to this universe...

6 - Give us a story to discover with exploration, not only easter eggs but a real motivation to explore

7 - Weather both on planets and in space

8 - Better wheel mechanic and simulation for rovers, rovers are fun for me =D

9 - Some way to automate flies, I want to make a interplanetary travel company

10 - Mission planner

[Geredis]

1. Propellers (and not as as jerry-rigged wings on robotic spinners)

2. Proper rover/crewed ground vehicle fuselage/structure parts

3. Robotics

4. Long-term scanning.

5. Life Support

6. Full Mission Planning (Being able to plan a mission from with the VAB, and then based on your maneuver nodes, tied to specific dates/celestial alignments, be able to see the actual delta-V budget required for the mission as envisioned). So you can say: I want to launch a mission on Day 273 of Year 2: see the e cexpected celestial alignment, as well as locations of all launched vehicles at that date), then use the predictive maneuver node system to be able to preplan the entire mission before you even build the ship.

7. Alarm Clocks that activate in any and every mode that passes time, so you'll get a ping whether you're driving on Mun, staring at the orbits in the tracing station, or just absently idling on the KSC overview screen with time passing.

8. Structural stability for landing sites (the surface material of your landing site should impact how and what you land)

9. Kerbals have proper careers/professional progression. A rookie pilot should be less capable than an expert who has spent 6 months flying an orbiter. But that same orbiter-flyer shouldn't necessarily be able to effortlessly fly an atmospheric aircraft if he's only done spaceflight.

10. Stat tracking for each crewmember. Tell us how many missions they've flown. Their furthest celestial body, a tally of all bodies, and the number of visits they've made to each, their longest mission, total days in space, or on solar bodies. How many crashes they've survived, or the number of times they had to change a burst tire, etc.

Edited November 13, 2023 by Geredis

[Kaerbanogue]

 

1. SCANSAT
2. IVA
3. Comets & Asteroids
4. Ascent, RDV & Landing autopilot
5. Parachutes and headlights for Kerbals
6. Kerbal customization (facial features, different spacesuits and maybe choosing between chutes and gliders)
7. Propeller engines as parts
8. Procedural tanks
9. More command modules

Things I think people want but would be detrimental for the game (at least for the forseeable future):

1. Life support (it's just maluses on a timer, cool idea on paper but I'm sure most people would turn maluses off after a while)
2. Malfunctions & wear (same idea than life support it's just maluses on a timer and doesnt need cool parts like life support would)
3. Robotics (the game is already clunky enough and, imho, robotic parts were used as palliatives for parts like propeller engines, cranes, better landing gears etc... and i think i'd be better if they add those as proper parts)

[Bej Kerman]

7 minutes ago, Kaerbanogue said:

Robotics (the game is already clunky enough and, imho, robotic parts were used as palliatives for parts like propeller engines, cranes, better landing gears etc... and i think i'd be better if they add those as proper parts)

How are they clunky? I mean, how would they negatively affect gameplay for you? Just don't use them if you don't like them, for everyone else they're incredibly useful (plus real spacecraft rely a lot on robotics)