Feelings about being able to fly without MechJeb

[Aethon]

Humblebrag is my guess.

Umm. I don't think so. I thought we used to welcome new guys with open arms and cut 'em some slack.

I personally don't know a single person who plays this game, but I do know a lot of the Steam members are Mechjeb devotees. It's K(erbal) E(ngineer)R(edux) for me though.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Aethon

[Wjolcz]

Last time I used MechJeb it completely freaked out (although I don't remember what exactly happened so don't ask). After that I thought "That's it! from now on no robot is flying my ships!"

[WWEdeadman]

Hum, that is a contradiction of terms, isn't it ?

Anyway, that is a point that people hammered to death for ages ... and besides missing the fact that people making it are assuming that all the others get their fun in the exact same way than themselves ( it is that hard to believe that people might like/want to design ships, planes and rovers without the hassle of actually piloting them ? I do not remember Werner von Braun insisting to go in the pilot seat of all of his rockets ... ), I might point out that this is Kerbal Space Program, not Kerbal Rocket, Plane and Rover Pilot Simulator. Piloting is only a part of the game and if people want to focus elsewhere in the game, who am I or you to judge them ? That is like saying that using the stock ships or downloading some from the Spacecraft exchange is cheating, because you are skiping the fun of the game , that is clearly designing a functional rocket, plane or rover ...

And yeah, as far as I remember it, MechJeb autolanding is quirky, but it is efficient if you know when and how to use it ...

That's 2 different statements. "Mechjeb is cheating" and "If you can't play the game without mechjeb, you're bad at the game". The second one is what I called a fact. If you want to call mechjeb cheating is discussable.

Also, I DO think using stock vessels and downloading other peoples crafts is also cheating. (That is an opinion again)

Both, designing the vehicle, and piloting it are the core parts of the game, and both are equaly enjoyable. If you don't LIKE doing either, and want to use mechjeb or stock vessels, OK, your opinion, and mine may differ, but if you CAN'T play without either, cause you either construct stuff that doesn't work, or have the piloting skills of a dead monkey, you're bad at the game, and cheat instead of learning how to do either.

[Claw]

Both, designing the vehicle, and piloting it are the core parts of the game, and both are equaly enjoyable. If you don't LIKE doing either, and want to use mechjeb or stock vessels, OK, your opinion, and mine may differ, but if you CAN'T play without either, cause you either construct stuff that doesn't work, or have the piloting skills of a dead monkey, you're bad at the game, and cheat instead of learning how to do either.

This is exactly the kind of thing that I will not tolerate. It can be your opinion, but you don't need to come onto the forums to tell people they have the skills of a dead monkey. It is unacceptable. Your first post has already started to derail the thread.

WWEdeadman is not the only one sliding down this path. Stay on track of discussion of what you do or don't do with MechJeb, why you don't like it or do, and whatever else you may or may not use it for. I see no need to tell people that they cheat because they do or don't use it, or to try to veil insults about their skills.

Up until this page the discussions have remained on a track that is leaps better than in the past. Keep it that way or this thread will end up like the others.

~Claw

[tater]

This is why I will never use a mod which makes the game easier* until I have landed and returned a Kerbal from every planet/moon (Other than Jool).

*Actually I wouldn't feel too bad about using FAR even though that makes things require less delta-v. I haven't used it yet because I'm currently all stock, but I might use it at some point in the future if I start using mods.

I err on the side of "realism" in most every game I play (I tend to play "sim" games). Mechjeb actually seems entirely realistic from the standpoint of a couple different styles of play. As a manger of a space program, and even as a pilot (the shuttle flew itself most of the time, for example… pilot input on what to do, then the spacecraft does that). Once I have "programmed" a node in vanilla (all I have played so far), I've actually DONE the piloting. It's harder than RL to have to keep a dot on top of a dot on top of that. Doing everything yourself is not necessarily more realistic (though right now I think it's more fun that way).

The best system would be a MechAstronaut (mechJeb, MechBob, MechDoodgun, etc). Each would have some "efficiency" based upon their intelligence (stupidity).

[Claw]

One extremely narrow example to consider as people banter about how automation is cheaty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland

Airbus is all about automation. Many airliners have crew selections for throttle settings (takeoff, cruise, land) and the computer decides how fast the engines need to run based on a variety of conditions. Airbus even forces their airplanes to pitch down during landing, so as to force the pilots to actually interact during the landing phase. Something like a Beechcraft 1900 can fly an instrument approach but can't land itself. Something like a T-38 can't fly itself during any phase of flight and requires a pilot on the controls at all times. Each aircraft has it's own challenges and kinds of people who fly them.

Seriously, it's a video game. Go enjoy your free time.

Cheers,

~Claw

[Sky_walker]

I err on the side of "realism" in most every game I play (I tend to play "sim" games). Mechjeb actually seems entirely realistic from the standpoint of a couple different styles of play. As a manger of a space program, and even as a pilot (the shuttle flew itself most of the time, for example… pilot input on what to do, then the spacecraft does that). Once I have "programmed" a node in vanilla (all I have played so far), I've actually DONE the piloting. It's harder than RL to have to keep a dot on top of a dot on top of that. Doing everything yourself is not necessarily more realistic (though right now I think it's more fun that way).

The best system would be a MechAstronaut (mechJeb, MechBob, MechDoodgun, etc). Each would have some "efficiency" based upon their intelligence (stupidity).

You got it all wrong.

If someone wants to have a realistic autopilot like it's used on a space craft than the closest thing to get will be this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/68089-0-24-kOS-Scriptable-Autopilot-System-v0-13-1-2014-7-18

It's still MUCH easier than a real thing, but.... that's pretty much as close as you can get with existing mods to the KSP.

MechJeb is just a toy. Feel free to play with it, but don't use words "realistic" and "MechJeb" anywhere near each other unless there's a negation in between.

[syfyguy64]

I'm still in my early learning curve, even though I've played since 13.3. I cannot get into orbit effeciently still. I never use mechjeb, but I never can learn. All I do is point up, press space, turn towards 80 at 15k meters, continue turning towards 50 by 60k, and stage when needed. I manage, but only with giant rockets, and not the three part mun landers some people make. Should I use mechjeb to master the game, or keep bugging around with rockets?

[Claw]

Should I use mechjeb to master the game, or keep bugging around with rockets?

This is sort of up to you. If you feel like you're not understanding how, then you can download MechJeb and give it a try. You can decide if you want to either let it do it for you all the time, or you can use it to learn some techniques on how to get to orbit efficiently with the Stock game. Another alternative is to browse through some youtube videos and learn from those. The nice thing about MJ is that it will fly YOUR rocket, rather than you watching someone else fly their rocket. After MJ does a few launches, you can try it again manually.

I would venture a guess that it's not only your ascent technique that's causing you problems, but perhaps how your rockets are built. Often times when people feel they need giant rockets just to get to orbit, it turns out they are trying to carry too much fuel, which needs bigger engines, which requires more fuel. And it becomes a vicious cycle.

If you truly want help, my advice would be to post a few pictures (or even craft files) to the Gameplay Questions forum. You'll likely find a lot of help there. And that still lets you decide if you want to MJ or not.

Cheers,

~Claw

[Deathsoul097]

In my opinion MechJeb is pure cheating. At least the auto pilot is. (I use KER for dV and Alarm Clock for stopping time acceleration at a manouver nodes etc.)

Siriosuly, where is the fun in having MechJeb fly everyting for you?

Please remember, some people have different playstyles. I for one will let MJ do everything or nothing depending on the situation. Nothing other than using clearly unbalanced parts or infinite fuel is cheating in this game.

Where is the challenge?

In vehicle design, mission planning, in wherever you want the challenge to be, and you cant claim anything as cheating in a SP game.

I have never used mechjeb, hell, I didn't use any mods for over 200 hours of gameplay, and still got to and landed on a lot of planets/moons. Anyone who can't play the game without the autopilot is just really bad at playing the game. And that is a fact, not an opinion. (If you use it cause you're bored of launching from Kerbin for the millionth time, or something like that, but you could do it yourself, that's fine BTW)

I have gotten quite good at the game, and use MJ for mundane tasks such as launching rockets, transfer burns, etc. I also use it so that I can get nice cinematic angles while playing, as i like my game to be pretty.

Also, especially when it comes to landing, Mechjeb is sirously effing wasteful on fuel. I don't like wasting fuel.

Meh, you have so much money that allowing for an extra 50-100 m/s wastage on a lander stage doesn't really matter. That, and MJ is incredibly reliable. While it may not be able to do things incredibly efficiently, it can typically land, or launch you to a ridiculous amount of accuracy. Something very useful to be able to do straight off, while a player will struggle to do similar tasks.

---

I hate how this kind of discussion (More like flamewar/bait) keeps on popping up everywhere. Can we not just enjoy the game, with or without any mods whatsoever? Seriously, why are some people determined to ruin or control another's game play experience?

Edited August 30, 2014 by Deathsoul097

[Clockwork_werewolf]

it turns out they are trying to carry too much fuel, which needs bigger engines, which requires more fuel.

This is a big problem but the opposite can also be true.

Some times it feels like the faster you go the faster you will get to orbit and the less time you will be fighting gravity. This isn't really true on Kerbin. In a stock game the atmosphere is so thick that you can easily burn a LOT of fuel fighting against it with little reward. I got about 50% better fuel use when I learned the correct speeds. That's a lot of fuel and stages. You want to be going 110m/s at 1k up (boosters are good for early high acceleration) then about 120m/s at 2k, 160 at 5k, 270 at 10k. If you are going faster than this then you are just wasting fuel pushing against the atmosphere. The terminal velocities are stored here http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Kerbin

[Red Iron Crown]

This is a big problem but the opposite can also be true.

Some times it feels like the faster you go the faster you will get to orbit and the less time you will be fighting gravity. This isn't really true on Kerbin. In a stock game the atmosphere is so thick that you can easily burn a LOT of fuel fighting against it with little reward. I got about 50% better fuel use when I learned the correct speeds. That's a lot of fuel and stages. You want to be going 110m/s at 1k up (boosters are good for early high acceleration) then about 120m/s at 2k, 160 at 5k, 270 at 10k. If you are going faster than this then you are just wasting fuel pushing against the atmosphere. The terminal velocities are stored here http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Kerbin

Aaand here would be a good place to point to MechJeb's "Limit to Terminal Velocity" feature, which manages the throttle to avoid this.

Also, 50% better fuel use? You must have been screaming through the lower atmo.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Red Iron Crown

[TimePeriod]

Its not cheating if its Single Player. You have no competition to cheat on, the only one you are cheating - is yourself.

[tater]

You got it all wrong.

If someone wants to have a realistic autopilot like it's used on a space craft than the closest thing to get will be this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/68089-0-24-kOS-Scriptable-Autopilot-System-v0-13-1-2014-7-18

It's still MUCH easier than a real thing, but.... that's pretty much as close as you can get with existing mods to the KSP.

MechJeb is just a toy. Feel free to play with it, but don't use words "realistic" and "MechJeb" anywhere near each other unless there's a negation in between.

You know more about these mods than I do (never used any yet). So I will grant you about using the autopilot script mod when I play as the actual pilot.

I was referring to the use of the Kerbals AS the pilots, however. If someone's style of play is to manage a space program, and work on "the big picture" without micro-managing every docking exercise by doing it themselves, it's entirely realistic to have them set the mission outline ("launch to this alt, circularize, transfer burn here to Mun, circularize and match with station there, deposit module") then have their employees, the astronauts, execute their mission.

Realism can be about outcomes, too. If it models outcomes realistically, it can be realistic. People think that "full manual" in Silent Hunter is "realistic," and it is not at all (auto stinks in SH, don't get me wrong). Realism would require the player, who is the skipper, have his junior officers to the work that junior officers actually DO. The captain would not plot the target on the map. He would not even record the bearing, he'd call "mark," and a Lt. would read it off to another at the map (and another at the TDC would record it there, as well). Realism is not always doing everything yourself (alone in the cockpit, it might be, obviously ).

In a 2 kerbal lander, for example, I'd expect the one not flying to keep me appraised of the altitude, for example.

So some version of the astronauts doing routine things on their own doesn't bug me, and is not "unrealistic," IMHO. You can certainly argue that particular app is not what I am suggesting, I have no idea

Edited August 30, 2014 by tater

[Sky_walker]

I was referring to the use of the Kerbals AS the pilots, however.

I was referring to that part: "Mechjeb actually seems entirely realistic".

And yes - I wouldn't mind seeing an "autopilot" build in a principle that Kerbals are piloting - but that implies "kerbal factor" in, which means: each time you let them handle something - you might expect random explosions occurring.

I'm against 100% reliable and ideal autopilot unless it's in a form similar to the kOS. That at least gives you some very slight idea of what challenges are involved into getting an automated ship do what you want it to do (though again - kOS in itself is very, very "easy-mode").

[Laie]

I'm against 100% reliable and ideal autopilot

Things going boom without good reason would be even worse. I see no value in sitting through a five-minute burn myself. An autopilot that has to be watched over would be the worst solution ever.

Just imagine if the game came with a delta-V calculator made to those standards.

unless it's in a form similar to the kOS. That at least gives you some very slight idea of what challenges are involved

No, no, no. Apart from the obvious problems kOS has (finding out which way you're facing is quite non-trivial, for example), it's not a solution for everyone or even a majority of players.

Coming to think of it, anyone who uses KER is a cheater, too. If you want a delta-V table, you have to type it into excel yourself. That at least gives you an idea yadda yadda yadda.

[magnemoe]

You got it all wrong.

If someone wants to have a realistic autopilot like it's used on a space craft than the closest thing to get will be this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/68089-0-24-kOS-Scriptable-Autopilot-System-v0-13-1-2014-7-18

It's still MUCH easier than a real thing, but.... that's pretty much as close as you can get with existing mods to the KSP.

MechJeb is just a toy. Feel free to play with it, but don't use words "realistic" and "MechJeb" anywhere near each other unless there's a negation in between.

Most space operations in RW is planned from ground control, the pilot only override if something goes wrong or is likely to. Yes they don't have KSP information real time either.

The pilot also execute pre planned burns who is programmed into an computer but he need orbital data from the ground control who also calculate the burn.

Remember that Kerbal end game is 2100-2200, you goes from suborbital to moon flyby in one day, Moon landing a 2-3 days later.

Then you can buy fuel at an gas station in mars orbit I guess you have better autopilots for space use.

[magnemoe]

Things going boom without good reason would be even worse. I see no value in sitting through a five-minute burn myself. An autopilot that has to be watched over would be the worst solution ever.

Just imagine if the game came with a delta-V calculator made to those standards.

No, no, no. Apart from the obvious problems kOS has (finding out which way you're facing is quite non-trivial, for example), it's not a solution for everyone or even a majority of players.

Coming to think of it, anyone who uses KER is a cheater, too. If you want a delta-V table, you have to type it into excel yourself. That at least gives you an idea yadda yadda yadda.

This any autopilot will have an secondary system warning if anything goes wrong with the ship, Note that putting Pe at -100 meter is an user error, trusting computer simulation from deep space calculations of Pe over 3 days later is also an user error is too,

[lajoswinkler]

KSP already uses autopilot. It's called SAS and employs reaction wheels and wing surfaces. Try flying with all that disabled and you'll soon realize that vanilla flying is actually very easy.

I think it's stupid if a newbie immediatelly starts using MechJeb. It takes away so much from the game experience so I'd never recommend it to new players.

On the other hand, if you need to do repetitive launches, it spares you some time.

[Hodo]

I know some other KSP players on various social networks, and it always feels weird when they act like my being able to fly a rocket manually is freakish.

I get people who use MechJeb because they'd rather focus on ship design than flying.

I don't get people who act like you must be some sort of savant in order to fly manually.

This is refreshing. How .21 of you to bring up a hot topic from last year. Before everyone started jumping down anyones throat who uses FAR or NEAR, or those who don't.

I used to hate MJ, but now I have it and I actually come to love it for a lot of things.

[NathanKell]

Sky_walker: MJ comes *closest* to replicating the experience of "flight controller"--you tell your staff what you want to do (200km parking orbit, fast transfer to the Moon, whatever), you tell the ops folks to do the burn, and there you go. You don't really think these days (or ever) that mission controllers do the programming, right? And now, the workflow of "get maneuver" (either by you or by using MJ to create a node), "execute maneuver" is quite close to how uncrewed stuff works.

TheClaw has already seriously addressed the issues arising in this thread, but I want to add a bit of levity. I believe I am fairly well known as the maestro of KSP Hardmode. And yet somehow I'm a cheaty cheater.

[NoPanShabuShabu]

So, KSP is a sandbox game. That's why we love it, I think. But you know what that means? That means people get to play in their own sandboxes, and other people shouldn't come by and kick the sand.

I both fly my aircraft with a full-on HOTAS setup (and get up to some crazy hijinks, believe you me) and automate most of my spaceflight, because that's how I fun.

So feel free to talk about what's good or bad for you about any given addon, but please don't tell others how to have their fun.

You need to read the OP's question again. It and the comments to date had nothing whatsoever to do with saying "MechJeb is cheating", so why you brought out that old knee-jerk reaction to any questioning of MechJeb is a mystery.

[NathanKell]

And yet, five posts up from the post you cite, there's a post...telling others when they should and should not use Mechjeb. It's not a full-on "cheatz0rs!" post, which is great, but it's still problematic for exactly the reason I cite.

And it's not like things kept on the straight and narrow after; TheClaw (a third moderator) had to step in, rather more explicitly than I did, when the full-on MJ=CHEATZ started. Right now this thread is thankfully back on an even keel (and I hope, and suggest, it stays that way), but I think you might see the point now.

[ferram4]

Nope, no one calling MJ cheating in here. And no one calling something that does less than MJ cheating would imply that MJ is cheating. It's totally not like anyone has said that in their opinion MJ is cheating at all in this thread.

Yeah, it's been called cheating in this thread. Always happens, no way around it, because that's the way these threads go.

[ThreeMartiniLaunch]

Coming to think of it, anyone who uses KER is a cheater, too. If you want a delta-V table, you have to type it into excel yourself. That at least gives you an idea yadda yadda yadda.

Since KSP does not come with a spreadsheet stock, using Excel to calculate your delta-V would be cheating. Using a calculator would be cheating. The jury is still out on pencil and paper.