Overusing MechJeb

[SuperBigD60]

If you're worried about letting Mechjeb do too much and having that detract from the fun, just realize that if you can't do something without crashing, it wouldn't be very fun, either. What you could use MJ in this case is as a tutor who could show you the least bad way to do something (like people said before, MJ isn't necessarily the best pilot, especially at docking, but it gets the job done).

Also, if you're worried that you'd look inferior to others based on your piloting skill, don't be. (Or do, I suppose, it's your life.)

After all, it's called "Kerbal Space Program", not "Kerbal Test Pilot"

[Pepper Industries]

I use Mechjeb only to missions that I've done before a couple of times. For example getting to Duna. It feels just awesome the first couple of times you succeed at it. I use it on easy tasks like Kerbin orbit or similiar things.

[Philster07]

I use mechjeb for ascending mostly, purely because I can never get my gravity turns right and either go too shallow or too steep causing me to burn up my launch, orbital insertion and finishing half way down the transfer burn so I end up with enough fuel to get to the destination.... then I loose Kerbals.

Oh I also use it for automated maneuver node execution, again cause its very precise, more than me with my x key

[Hovis]

I like Mechjeb for creating repeatable launches and such like. If I blow up a ship on a manual launch, or don't reach orbit, I don't know for sure if the ship is bad, because maybe I screwed up. With Mechjeb it might not be as efficient as a perfect manual flight (which I might managed 1/100 times) but I know it's going to give me pretty much the same result every time. So if my ship fails, it's the ship. Which is good to know.

[John.E]

if ((ability != pilot) && (mechjeb != fitted))

{

flight == crashed && (little fun)

}

else

{

flight == sweet

}

One way of looking at it

[Skyler4856]

I use it for ascent and docking

[Psycix]

I use it for ascent and docking

How much RCS do you carry for that?

[bludy]

i use it for the info..i installed it after a decent number of interplanetary missions when things became hotter, more flights, rvs, transfer windows..

finding closest approach for rvs, burning manually and let mech jeb piloting the last 50 meters is sweet,

turn on ascending in multiple launch missions,

i let him burn even when i choose the maneuver node, and alt tabbing in the meanwhile.

and i found the info quite useful, both during assembly and flight..

i found it makes you more productive rather than more lazy!

[Felsmak]

I remember when I used to "install" MechJeb in regular command pods, just so no one could tell from my screenshots that I was using it. Good times.

[dr_jt]

Actually I use MechJeb for any activity that doesn't bring me fun. This is mostly launches and rendezvous maneuvers - I've performed hundreds of them and they became boring.

BTW, IRL cosmonauts rarely pilot spacecraft at all. Automatics do it better.

Because when they do pilot them manually they crash. See MIR supply ship accident.

As a former pilot I see nothing wrong with autopilots. Besides I like realistic and nobody ever flies rockets or spaceships manually.

When I first learned the game I did everything manually. When I started to build stations and bases the boring repetition started to get to me so I loaded up Mechjeb and never regretted it. I don't use it for everything and I still on occasion do it manually but I do like MJ for lots of stuff. I just got to the point in the tech tree where MJ shows up and I'm glad because doing everything manually was getting tedious. Not to mention not having info I had gotten use to having.

I haven't docked in a while but I would recommend only using MJ for rough alignment and doing the final docking approach manually. Navyfish has a great docking instrument which helps out a lot or you can just use the navball.

Edited November 28, 2013 by dr_jt

[Seret]

When I first learned the game I did everything manually. When I started to build stations and bases the boring repetition started to get to me so I loaded up Mechjeb and never regretted it.

I can relate to that. Orbital assembly of lots of modules can get pretty tiresome, I use MJ to do the rendezvous for that too. It's just quicker, and can accurately park your payload 20m or so away from the target.

I haven't docked in a while but I would recommend only using MJ for rough alignment and doing the final docking approach manually.

If you can rotate both vehicles freely alignment isn't a biggy IMO. I used to use MJ for docking just to speed things up, but it does suction through the RCS fuel a bit excessively. If you've got reasonably well balanced craft then docking isn't arduous once you've made a nice close rendezvous.

[Ricardo.b]

on 0.21 or before I used A LOT, almost just mechjeb, now in 0.22 i decide to install later, the result: I dont need anymore.

just unistall and get used to not use. with flight engineer and FAR and dockingport alignment by Navyfish you can get used to manual controls.

I just miss the aero brake node from landing guidance, that is useful!

EDIT: before leave mechjeb I wasnt able even to dock

[wasmic]

I am currently using KER, having used MechJeb previously for the statistics. However, KER doesn't have as many stats as MechJeb, and since it uses a single window, it can be quite annoying in the flight screen. When I used MechJeb, I generally used it for information only. At some point, I began using it for all kinds of maneuvers like circularizations and Hohmann transfers, but I found that it detracted from the experience.

[Dunbaratu]

Because when they do pilot them manually they crash. See MIR supply ship accident.

As a former pilot I see nothing wrong with autopilots. Besides I like realistic and nobody ever flies rockets or spaceships manually.

I dislike mechjeb because i like things to be realistic.

While it's very realistic to have an autopilot it's NOT realistic to have one that your space agency didn't have to do any work at all to design and it just magically appeared working correctly out of the box, having been written by someone else who doesn't exist in your own universe. The amount of effort that electronics and software people put into the space program to properly control the spaceships is no less impressive than the amount of effort that rocket engineers put into it. I'd rather see something analogous to how the VAB works. You, the player, get the fun of assembling the bits into a final rocket design, without having to do all the hard engineering of how to make the parts work you still get to feel like a participant in the process when you paste the parts together into the final design. A lot of the hard work is done for you but not 100% of it. You still have to work out how to do the final assembly. I wish the autopiloting system worked THAT way. You get building blocks that do a lot of the thinking for you but not ALL of it, and you have to work out the way to put it together into the final product. I like the KOS mod because it's sort of close to that (it's not quite there yet but that's because it's still new and under development).

A space program deciding to fly everything manually is unrealistic, but SO TO is having a space program that cannot make its own mistakes in designing its autopilot software because one day the autopilot magically appeared having been designed by another species and dropped into your universe already working out of the box.

I want the opportunity for my own space program to make mistakes that lead to a bad autopilot in the same way that my own space program can make mistakes that lead to a bad rocket design.

[Bacterius]

I just don't get why everyone is apparently justifying their use of Mechjeb in this thread. I mean, really? You play the game how you want to play it, if Mechjeb can enhance your KSP gaming sessions by skipping the boring parts, or perhaps you enjoy playing mission control and roleplaying, then go for it, what's the problem? If you don't like Mechjeb because you're more into the piloting aspect of the game and prefer to calculate and perform the burns yourself, then don't use it; again, what is the problem?

Using an autopilot doesn't "take the experience" out of the game, it is what you make of it. And perhaps it is dumb from your perspective to "let the autopilot play for you", nobody knows what you play KSP for. But you know what's even dumber? Not using a mod simply because some faceless people on the internet say you shouldn't and that you should play the game this or that way. That is about as stupid as it gets, and I honestly feel sorry for people who let strangers think and act for them in this fashion.

[Traches]

I dislike mechjeb because i like things to be realistic.

While it's very realistic to have an autopilot it's NOT realistic to have one that your space agency didn't have to do any work at all to design and it just magically appeared working correctly out of the box, having been written by someone else who doesn't exist in your own universe. The amount of effort that electronics and software people put into the space program to properly control the spaceships is no less impressive than the amount of effort that rocket engineers put into it. I'd rather see something analogous to how the VAB works. You, the player, get the fun of assembling the bits into a final rocket design, without having to do all the hard engineering of how to make the parts work you still get to feel like a participant in the process when you paste the parts together into the final design. A lot of the hard work is done for you but not 100% of it. You still have to work out how to do the final assembly. I wish the autopiloting system worked THAT way. You get building blocks that do a lot of the thinking for you but not ALL of it, and you have to work out the way to put it together into the final product. I like the KOS mod because it's sort of close to that (it's not quite there yet but that's because it's still new and under development).

A space program deciding to fly everything manually is unrealistic, but SO TO is having a space program that cannot make its own mistakes in designing its autopilot software because one day the autopilot magically appeared having been designed by another species and dropped into your universe already working out of the box.

I want the opportunity for my own space program to make mistakes that lead to a bad autopilot in the same way that my own space program can make mistakes that lead to a bad rocket design.

I'm not saying you should use MJ, but your "magically works out of the box with no effort" argument is just as valid for literally every stock part in the game. We don't plan fuel mixtures, tune engines for payload/atmospheric pressure, design communications/electronic systems, design structural wing spars in our spaceplanes, or deal with any of the other engineering hurdles that real air/spacecraft designers have to deal with.

[Guest]

I just don't get why everyone is apparently justifying their use of Mechjeb in this thread. I mean, really? You play the game how you want to play it, if Mechjeb can enhance your KSP gaming sessions by skipping the boring parts, or perhaps you enjoy playing mission control and roleplaying, then go for it, what's the problem? If you don't like Mechjeb because you're more into the piloting aspect of the game and prefer to calculate and perform the burns yourself, then don't use it; again, what is the problem?

Using an autopilot doesn't "take the experience" out of the game, it is what you make of it. And perhaps it is dumb from your perspective to "let the autopilot play for you", nobody knows what you play KSP for. But you know what's even dumber? Not using a mod simply because some faceless people on the internet say you shouldn't and that you should play the game this or that way. That is about as stupid as it gets, and I honestly feel sorry for people who let strangers think and act for them in this fashion.

That's why I don't quibble over MechJeb. I use it extensively, and don't particularly care who knows it or what their feelings are on the matter. The spacecraft still have to perform correctly regardless of who or what is controlling them. MechJeb is just another tool in the kit to me. It's no different than a screwdriver or spanner.

[sarbian]

Strange, I missed that one.

Bacterius post watch my opinion quite well so I won't add on that. And as one of the contributor on MJ my opinion may be seen as biased

But I read some outdated fact on MJ ^^

Docking : while it's still far from perfect the docking AP is better in the dev version, and It will keep getting better. And ASAS + a pilot is quite good for most ship.

Landing : Show me a design that you can land by hand and that MJ crash. The only real not working case I know are mods (FAR) and engine exhaust blocked by a part. Not saying that there is none, or that the Landing AP is perfect, but It works damn fine for me.

FAR : the way FAR works make it hard to get the required info in MJ. So far I have an half working plugin that suppress the wobble but with some ship design it change FAR flight model.

And for those who love the info but don't want the AP you can look into the VOID mod. It has all the info MJ has, with even more, and a nice overlay with the most useful info.

[John.E]

MechJeb is great. Without it neither I nor my little Kerbals would enjoy the game (read as 'would crash everything, ever flight'). With MJ we have a ball

[Jim DiGriz]

I dislike mechjeb because i like things to be realistic.

And dragging maneuver nodes around with your mouse, yanking on the different sliders to increase/decrease prograde/retrograde/etc and being ADD trying to get a perfect circularization burn setup is something that you consider to be realistic?

Or trying to figure out if its this orbit or the next orbit that you'll match up closely enough to do your transfer to intercept and dock by moving the maneuver node around and trying to line up two arrows... only to find you're not close enough yet, so you warp and try the next orbit, repeat, etc?

Not only is that not realistic, but fighting the maneuver node system gets really old after awhile.

[Schitzree]

back in Sandbox, Mechjeb taught me more about flying a rocket then anything else could have. Use it and watch what it does. Then let it calculate the maneuvers but preform them yourself. before long you should be able to do it all with Mechjeb as just an info provider.

For career mode, the fact that the modules come online gradually as you progress means you have to be able to do most of the autopilot stuff you're self before you get access to them anyway. For myself though I made it a rule that I couldn't let Mechjeb do anything I hadn't done once on my own.

[Dunbaratu]

I'm not saying you should use MJ, but your "magically works out of the box with no effort" argument is just as valid for literally every stock part in the game. We don't plan fuel mixtures, tune engines for payload/atmospheric pressure, design communications/electronic systems, design structural wing spars in our spaceplanes, or deal with any of the other engineering hurdles that real air/spacecraft designers have to deal with.

I've heard that argument before but if you read what I wrote, I already anticipated it and raised the counterargument to it. I mentioned how in the VAB, you still have to assemble the final craft out of the the parts so the player is involved in some way, and still has the chance to make some mistakes in the design. There's still some player agency involved. Mechjeb is not analogous to the way the VAB gives you perfectly working parts of a craft to assemble. It's more analogous to going into the VAB and finding that there's only one rocket there, and it's been pre-assembled already, and you don't have player agency in deciding how it works, and you don't have the opportunity to put it together wrong (and therefore there's no pride in getting it right). While it's true that most of the ugly details are deliberately glossed over when putting a rocket together in the VAB the fact that there's still some player agency in the final assembly means you can feel a bit of pride and accomplishment in making a good working design because at least you had *something* to do with it. There's no sense of pride in making a good landing or a good docking with mechjeb because it doesn't feel like you had anything to do with it. It feels like somebody else's accomplishment instead of your own.

So if you don't enjoy the piloting and want someone else to do it for you, that's fine. Enjoy the game your way. But don't claim it's the same thing as the parts in the VAB. It's not. The VAB leaves more room open for player agency than Mehcjeb's autopilot does.

All of which I already mentioned. You can disagree with it but when you pretend I didn't say it you're just arguing against a strawman.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Steven Mading

[Dunbaratu]

And dragging maneuver nodes around with your mouse, yanking on the different sliders to increase/decrease prograde/retrograde/etc and being ADD trying to get a perfect circularization burn setup is something that you consider to be realistic?

Of course I don't think it is, which you would know if you read my post in which I specifically said autopilots are realistic. What I called unrealistic was the fact that something as complex as the autopilot software, which is just as complex as the entire physical rocket design, contains no ability for the player to make mistakes in putting it together.

[Jim DiGriz]

Of course I don't think it is, which you would know if you read my post in which I specifically said autopilots are realistic. What I called unrealistic was the fact that something as complex as the autopilot software, which is just as complex as the entire physical rocket design, contains no ability for the player to make mistakes in putting it together.

Your use of "realism" there still makes no sense to me. It also isn't realistic that the o-rings in our tanks also don't freeze and cause our rockets to randomly explode and we don't have to hold kerbal senate hearings to manage getting to the bottom of the parts exploding -- because its a video game and senate hearings are the opposite of fun. So you had nothing to do with the quality control of your parts as well.

You said something in your previous post that emphasized a "sense of pride and accomplishment" in putting together rockets, docking, etc. I can agree with that more, but its necessarily subjective. Once you understand circularizing orbits and doing burns, it can get tedious and the "sense of pride and accomplishment" can easily be replaced by "endlessly fiddling with maneuver nodes".

[Traches]

I've heard that argument before but if you read what I wrote, I already anticipated it and raised the counterargument to it. I mentioned how in (...)

If you were to preface something like this IRL everyone in the room would want to smack you, even if they agreed with you. Don't take yourself so seriously

Anyway, you've succesfully explained all the reasons that many people, including me, choose not to let MJ fly for them. It's too easy, there's no sense of accomplishment, you don't have any opportunity to screw up, ETC. (not to mention that it's not that hard to do a better job through human judgement and generally more efficient piloting.) And as you noted, those are also many of the same reasons that people build their own rockets rather than download someone else's.

But you argued that it's unrealistic because it "just works", and my point is that everything else also "just works". I'm not saying that MJ is no different from the other parts in the game, I'm saying your realism argument is just as applicable to them. The sound arguments against MJ are gameplay based, not realism based.