KSP Pet Peeves

[StrandedonEarth]

I'll second In-Flight Waypoints, another thing that should be stock

[metl]

That probably will. I have a feeling that was just an unintended oversight.

[KerBlam]

My new favourite:

Whoever the bright spark was that decided to put the tallest mountain on Kerbin right in the way of the western approach to the KSC runway... WHY!?

edit: No actually I feel like having a bit of a rant about this.. As a learner, if you're de-orbiting a spaceplane, it's difficult enough, without this stupid mountain being right in the descent path ... If you happen to be coming in at night, it's near invisible. Whoever you are you are responsible for the death of Jebediah Kermin.

Modders: Is it possible to move the mountain? I'd like a clear descent.

editII: Sorry for the Necro, this isn't the thread I thought it was.

editIII: nevermind that lol I was looking at join dates, not post dates.

Edited January 23, 2015 by KerBlam

[Victus]

It runs like a potato.

[AlexanderB]

My new favourite:

Whoever the bright spark was that decided to put the tallest mountain on Kerbin right in the way of the western approach to the KSC runway... WHY!?

How 'low' do you have to fly to hit that thing? I apparently use a much steeper descent path, because I never hit it..

(I make a 35x100 orbit with the PE centered over KSC, it just about drops me on the runway if I follow prograde.)

[GigaG]

My new favourite:

Whoever the bright spark was that decided to put the tallest mountain on Kerbin right in the way of the western approach to the KSC runway... WHY!?

edit: No actually I feel like having a bit of a rant about this.. As a learner, if you're de-orbiting a spaceplane, it's difficult enough, without this stupid mountain being right in the descent path ... If you happen to be coming in at night, it's near invisible. Whoever you are you are responsible for the death of Jebediah Kermin.

Modders: Is it possible to move the mountain? I'd like a clear descent.

editII: Sorry for the Necro, this isn't the thread I thought it was.

editIII: nevermind that lol I was looking at join dates, not post dates.

I see how that can be an issue for jets, but KSP's general nature (atmosphere, etc.) means that it seems easier to make a steep approach. Now, if you have FAR (maybe, I really haven't tried flying an approach in FAR) or a really good glider, then that's a bit different. By the time you are in the lower atmosphere, you are being slammed by the "souposphere" and will slow down rapidly.

[razark]

As a learner, if you're de-orbiting a spaceplane, it's difficult enough, without this stupid mountain being right in the descent path ... If you happen to be coming in at night, it's near invisible.

I'd love to see some sort of Edwards AFB giant dry lakebed with runways, so that we can have a clear, huge area to test aircraft/spaceplanes, and provide a landing area.

[KerBlam]

I see how that can be an issue for jets, but KSP's general nature (atmosphere, etc.) means that it seems easier to make a steep approach. Now, if you have FAR (maybe, I really haven't tried flying an approach in FAR) or a really good glider, then that's a bit different. By the time you are in the lower atmosphere, you are being slammed by the "souposphere" and will slow down rapidly.

I am using FAR... and a very shallow, tiny bit early entry at the time when I hit it. I just think it's bad placement of either the mountain or the runway. I'd like to put a beacon on top of it, because it was a night time landing and I was flying blind just relying on instruments. I didn't see it until my plane exploded on the side of it. I hit it quite close to the top.

[Superfluous J]

Surprised this died, with how many pet peeves there are out there

My current peeve is how the stock tolbar items cover each other or simply won't show becuase something else is up. I like to leave the resources window up which means when I complete a contract, I can't click that little checkmark and get my $0.02 of feel-good-clicky-time. Instead, I have to click the resources button, which mysteriously doesn't make it close. So then I click it again, which (I think) opens it even though it's already open. Then I click it a 3rd time to make it go away, so I can finally click that completed contract checkbox. Then click the resources button which for whatever reason doesn't open it again.

Speaking of conracts, I'm going to make this a twofer peeve fest. I hate how in the stock contracts window you can't dismiss a contract once it's complete. It just sits there, mocking you.

[r_rolo1]

Well, my current pet peeve is how the survey contracts that came with 0,26 ... er, 0.90, are diferent in ( sometimes not so ) subtle ways of the ones that already were in the game in terms of UI: "in flight" does not mean that you are in a in flight situation science wise, the contract window items do not light green when you are in a position to fulfill that item of the contract, but when you already done it ( actually in those contracts you don't get any information that you are in a position to fulfill it at all ... the best you get is a dubious color text ( SQUAD, do you know how hard pale yellow writing can look when you're flying at low altitude in Kerbin daylight ? ) flash telling that you entered/left the zone for the contract item you targeted ... no intel if you are at a current altitude or not :/ ) ...

For someone that values UI consistency like me, it really grates the nerves

Edited February 13, 2015 by r_rolo1

[BudgetHedgehog]

I can't fully express how much I hate the manoeuvre nodes. They're sometimes so finicky to add and once you finally can place them, you can't move it (circle turns red and it deletes). And if what you're doing isn't working out right, you can't reset them to 0 easily, you have to manually remove each component until you reach 0. Either that or delete it and try to place them again. And I hate that when you add anti/normal components, it adds it to your original orbit, not the orbit shown, even though the node rotates with the shown orbit. It's adding velocity to one reference frame using input from another reference frame, resulting in a very annoying and unintuitive system. Also, I hate that the scroll wheel input for them isn't configurable or consistent. Also, I hate that for interplanetary transfers, I have to zoom out to see what the orbit's doing, but then zoom right in to move it round a tiny fraction, zoom right out to see if it's an improvement.. Basically, I hate there's no digital input for them, like PreciseNode or MechJebs Node Editor. Also, I hate that clicking the tiny button to move it to the next orbit sometimes closes the node if you click it too fast. Yeah.. I don't like the manoeuvre nodes.

Also, I hate how many bugs there are with the game and things that should be optimised, but they're only noticeable when they're triggered by mods. For example, how opening a window with many entries slows down FPS:

You can see the same thing with something like B9 Procedural Wings and all it's tweakables or having a contract with lots of prerequisites. These bog the game down but they're not the ones doing it, the game just isn't running well there. It's like hiring someone who doesn't work well under stress. Give them an easy job and they're fine, they do it great. Start giving them actual work to do that needs to be done quickly and correctly and they start messing up. Do you blame the workload and say 'well, don't give them so much work to do, they work fine when they have an easy job'? No, you hire a better person. Now granted, I don't kow much if anything about coding so I guess it's not like hiring staff in the slightest, but I just don't like it when people blame mods for problems with the stock game that are triggered by mods (the editor infinizoom parts bug is one such bug).

And I don't like having to choose between either part wobble and 100 struts all over the place. I also don't like that there been 1 beta release and there's no mini-release to bugtest a final release or check balance before we go straight to 1.0, but that's for a different thread. For now, I'm sticking with how much manoeuvre nodes suck.

EDIT: Also, another of my pet peeves are that kerbals can't jump while running forward without ragdolling and that the animation for getting back after said ragdolling takes foooorrreveeeeeerrrr... going anywhere on foot is torture in KSP due to these annoyances.

Edited February 13, 2015 by ObsessedWithKSP

[The Yellow Dart]

I just wish they would add more parts in general, mainly the stuff that is in any of the several great Stock-a-like expansion mods. I'd rather they had a bunch of parts to the point that people say things like "does anybody even use this weird part?". The devs need to take a look at those mods and get an idea of how many holes they've left in their part catalog. I use MRS because it has great adapters and engine mounts and more tank sizes, but I am a person who wants to be able to play stock, but it just feels so incomplete.

[cantab]

I'd love to see some sort of Edwards AFB giant dry lakebed with runways, so that we can have a clear, huge area to test aircraft/spaceplanes, and provide a landing area.

That at least exists - the polar ice caps! Unless you're flying solar planes I suppose.

[MoridinUK]

That no one ever posts on my mission reports.... I'm lonely! I wanted to run a blog where people could offer advice and opinions.. people read it (unsure why!) but no one comments...

[Sidereus]

My biggest petpeeve is when you click on a button or other part of the interface, particularly in the VAB/SPH (although it also happens in the other interfaces), you also click on whatever is BELOW that button. Very annoying when it makes you take parts off or change their placement when all you wanted to do was change the staging or rename your craft.

Also, the maneuver nodes are a pain to work with sometimes. Clicking off it causes it to collapse, which means you often have to zoom back in on it to click on it (since it doesn't scale quite the same as the rest of the map). This makes changing perspectives to try and refine the maneuver more difficult than it should be.

- - - Updated - - -

2. Starting with 50% throttle.

.

50% throttle on Launch... What's it for?

The 50% throttle I think came about for new players who don't know it's there. I know when I first started playing, I got my craft assembled, sent it out to the launch pad, hit the space bar....and then wondered why nothing happened. I had to go online to figure out I needed to throttle up.

At least with it starting at 50%, SOMETHING will happen...

[Xavven]

My pet peeve is not with the game KSP, but with the typo "trust" in place of "thrust" on these forums. Example: Make sure your rocket has enough trust to get through the atmosphere on Eve.

Damnit, rockets don't accelerate on trust!

[harald705]

My pet peeve is the subassemblies. I just get so frustrated every time i build a capsule and then i have to add another one because otherwise it's all red.

[cwfilson]

​Kerbals not hanging on to ladders. Just annoying.