Combined feedback on KSP2

[Pacifyer]

I want to say that For Science update was a real blast and it really made me interested to play KSP2 since it's pretty much failed launch. I had so much fun I even changed my feedback on Steam to positive.

I have played KSP2 for a while and here are my main issues I had during playthrough. These are not bugs, but my personal experience or obviously missing features. Hope this list can help you prioritize some of them:

• The main difficuly for me was fiddling with maneuver plans when you plan interplanetary transfers. There was a feature like "precision planning" or something which made the arrows actually available near the navball in KSP1. So I instinctively just click the SAS corresponding buttons for this purpose (and obviously fail). Clicking the plan in real space is a big issue and dragging the arrows is nearly impossible at some angles if you focus on the target which is most likely what you want. Second part of it is impossibility to move the node along the orbit without focusing and zooming into the source planet which is, again, impossible when you want to see target results.
• The second most annoying issue is that you can't click on the part of the orbit that is displayed on a focused encounter planet (in most cases, seems to work occasionally), but you can do it on the effected part in a real world. So the simple task of planning a maneuver node at the periapsis of your target encounter can only be planned when entering the SOI which is very inconvenient.
• Definitely missing those +N orbits indicators when planning encounters/randevouz.
• I do not like the way your time warp is limited based of your distance from bodies. I did find myself switching to KSC so many times to perform waits while being in a really safe orbits. I do propose this to be changed based on what you FOCUS (on the map) as opposed to the distance of your controlled vehicle from bodies. The only exception that I see might be being in an atmosphere which has a real unpredictable impact on your trajectory. Just to let you know - from my personal experince I have lost a real ton of time and excessive clicks namely on this.
• I had an issue multiple times where you can misclick your trajectory for the second part (changed after encounter). I am not sure how to solve it, but it is a bummer resulting in the requirement to reload the save.
• Saving crafts in VAB is a pain resulting in multiple copies of the same crafts, and the overall confusion between workspace and craft names. I think you should really get rid of one of them.
• I am pretty sure that it would be best to bind craft name to a control module which would really allow you name parts of your complex crafts before they separate or dock/undock. It is really inconvenint to see all those "Default name-2" stuff all around.
• The craft won't stage if you are on any time acceleration, and it does not indicate the problem accordingly. I had the issue multiple times when I was on a very low time warp (like x2) which does not let you to easily visually determine it, and I just missed the staging resulting in reloads/catastrophes.
• Yet again, default settings for landing legs make crafts bounce like mad, fall over etc. 
• Fairrings should default to a much more force (like half or max) as on default settings it barely moves. It seems not to have collision so it was never really an issue for me, but visually it is a disaster unless you manually change it to max.
• I would appreciate if SAS in vertical position would not automatically turn off when touching down for stabilization purposes. It generally lets your craft fall over when it is crucial to stabilize.
• Merging subassemblies in VAB results in a pretty chaotic staging plan. It would be cool if they could be  more natural like consequential or something.
• I do not understand why you can't plan maneuvers during game pause. Is this a decision? I do respect some realism but I do not think it adds any positive experience. So my personal vote goes for allowing it or at least making it a part of a possible future difficulty setting.
• It seems KSP2 went a different route for the maneuver burn duration - it is planned to start exactly at the planned point as opposed to KSP1 making it extend equally both ways, so we are getting a lot more unpredicted orbital changes. I am not sure if it is a good idea, but it is up to you devs to decide. But the best example would be like periapsis burn with a weak engine - would result is a nice AP change in KSP1 but in KSP2 it will also result in a slight ellipse rotation. This is not a really big issue, just a remark, as the game provides you with actual results on your maneuvre nicely.
• There is a feature which was never in KSP1 so this one is an idea. When planning gravity assists on say Jool moons, you can't predict their positions so you blindly fiddle with your maneuver waiting if you will get a pretty random encounter. It would be cool if you could see the ghosts of planets when you hover over any point of your trajectory, seeing their positions when you reach said point on the trajectory. It would be absolutely awesome for planning encounters.
• In the tracking station when looking at planets there is a load of info on them, however they all miss the height of the atmosphere used for planning atmos experiments so you can enter said atmo and not burn.
• In research tree you are given XL fuel tanks as a root node in Tier 4 but you do not get any engines/engine plates up until the farthest node. I do not see this remotely balanced.
• I did not like that you get miniaturized versions of the same experiments which makes no sense. You might provide dirrerent form factors but they should have their ups and downs.
• The long range (parabolical) antennae do not snap to connection points like noses etc and only have freeform placement. I think they should be able to snap.
• All of the "delete" options should be highlighted red. Especially those for deleting savegames or whole playthroughs. Save with deleting crafts. Btw it was really hard to find option to delete the craft in tracking station. You get the easy option for obvious debris, but for working crafts it is really hard to find

Bugs that made issues for me:

• The most annoying one was issues after savegame load. Had some vehicle parts be randomly shifted on the vehicle (at least visually cause the craft seemed to hold like they are there), but sometimes still resulting in catastrophic events like kraken or something else.
• SAS even with the help of RCS provides a lot of wobbliness and sometimes turns a vehicle in a "curve" (if you let it draw a line on the compass) leading to very long turns and bad stabilization. Maybe it's me and the actual placement of said wheens and RCS thrusters, but I do not think it is convenient in any form. It also often did impact my trajectory, so again, seems pospositioned but it should be explained better I guess.
• When fiddling with symmetry boosters the game breaks fuel lines/struts attached from said boosters to the main body.
• Fairring stays in Staging plan even after it was deployed

That's it for now, wanna sleep. Sorry for the big list I just have no time to search if all of this points were mentioned somewhere already.

 

Edited March 14, 2024 by Pacifyer

[Presto200]

I love all of these points, I think its full of all the big ticket items as well as some of the smaller things that really make a game a game. I just wanted to highlight my favorites and maybe give some of my thoughts too!

 

4 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

I am pretty sure that it would be best to bind craft name to a control module which would really allow you name parts of your complex crafts before they separate or dock/undock. It is really inconvenint to see all those "Default name-2" stuff all around.

This was the biggest "small" feature that I think you brought up. I have never even thought about this but it is very annoying seeing "combined 1", "combined 2", ….. "combined 45". Giving your space plane/rocket a name puts a bit more personality into the game. This is my favorite from this list.

4 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

I would appreciate if SAS in vertical position would not automatically turn off when touching down for stabilization purposes. It generally lets your craft fall over when it is crucial to stabilize.

This is definitely a big frustration especially for beginner or inexperienced players who rely on SAS for landings and other things that are trivial to veteran players. I think this could be solved just by letting it stay on for an extra 5 seconds after landing. Sometimes when landing I end  up hopping more than landing, so if the SAS had to wait until I am on the ground for at least 5 seconds then it would save me a lot of quick-saves.  

4 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

I do not understand why you can't plan maneuvers during game pause. Is this a decision? I do respect some realism but I do not think it adds any positive experience. So my personal vote goes for allowing it or at least making it a part of a possible future difficulty setting.

I agree, pausing the game is super helpful with fuel transfers and working through the parts manager, I don't see why maneuverer nodes are any different than these two actions. Going back again to making it easier for beginner players, I bet they would love to have all the time they needed to mess with their maneuvers. 

4 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

In the tracking station when looking at planets there is a load of info on them, however they all miss the height of the atmosphere used for planning atmos experiments so you can enter said atmo and not burn.

I always have to look online to find where the atmospheres start on each planet because many don't have them memorized. It would be helpful just to have that information in the game, maybe also transfer windows in the information of each planet?

4 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

I did not like that you get miniaturized versions of the same experiments which makes no sense. You might provide dirrerent form factors but they should have their ups and downs.

I do wish that the similar science parts had something unique about them, I don't like that once you have both of the science parts that do the same thing, the other becomes obsolete and you never pick it up again.

4 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

The most annoying one was issues after savegame load. Had some vehicle parts be randomly shifted on the vehicle (at least visually cause the craft seemed to hold like they are there), but sometimes still resulting in catastrophic events like kraken or something else.

Finally I wanted to bring this one up because it definitely takes me out of the game with my limited amount of time I get to play. I can't tell if it effects the aerodynamics of the vessel or if its just visual but it is still annoying and never welcomed.

 

 

Hopefully these are things that will get attention in the updates between now and the colonies. Obviously most important being the maneuver node maker and map view; however, I think the small things are what make the gaming experience smooth and fun. My personal big hopes are that after the big bugs/features are addressed we can also get IVA camera and collisions on scattered rock/tree by the Colonies Update.

[steveman0]

11 hours ago, Pacifyer said:

I am pretty sure that it would be best to bind craft name to a control module which would really allow you name parts of your complex crafts before they separate or dock/undock. It is really inconvenint to see all those "Default name-2" stuff all around.

I too am going to highlight this for more attention.  I have always been annoyed by the name changes but didn't have a good suggestion on how to solve the handling of it.  Binding the name to the control module is the perfect solution!