Jump to content

Devnote Tuesday: We’re back!


SQUAD

Recommended Posts

Wercome back Sqad, and looking forward to 1.1.3
As long as the orbit fuzzyness is fixed  + CTD improved it would be playable in my book.

As for 1.2 ( yes i can see why thats a larger feature :) )
Wheels are just "Werid"..
the wheel logic of determining direction has been improved significantly in 1.1, so thats already a big improvement from 1.05 ( no more spending an hour to inverse steering and motor on random wheels)
but the actual physics are just... a mess... and where in 1.05 as well for that matter.
Practically no ground friction, arbitrary stress calculation, wheel differences larger than what can be read by the numbers, random EVA explosion surprises etc.
Though thats not really a game breaker for me at this point.. i can build bases just fine as long as i 'stop the craft and save' every few minutes or so to prevent random "wheel based,freak physics" accidents.

Edited by Lennartos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I`ve gone old school and put some structural parts as landing legs or just land on my engines.

It works but it isn`t pretty. It also is exactly how the `lego style` people wish to play, well now you don`t have landing legs which should be more fun for you...

Landing legs that don`t explode is just cheating anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, John FX said:

Landing legs that don`t explode is just cheating anyway.

I have used 8 on a 60t horizontal lander, each one has a strut attached to it. If I land flat and at around 1-2m/s they do not explode. Do anything else and boom, they pop. Looking forward to a fix Squad. Again, welcome back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2016 at 7:59 PM, Tiberius K said:

Priority bug for me is the CTD when building in the VAB or SPH.  Building craft for my career is the real joy of the game for me after a long day of work.  It is tinged with an uncomfortable feeling that a crash is imminent these days.

Wonder why you crash in the VAB/SPH.  I've never crashed there.  You really may want to look at your mods; I doubt it is is a base game error.  In the VAB/SPH, my only mod is EEX.  Never crashed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Not to sound like Groucho Marx's doctor or anything, but have you tried not touching the landing gear while on EVA?

I don't think anybody (least of all NathanKell) is arguing that that's expected, normal, or even acceptable. What's being argued is that it is in fact possible to play the game and use landing gear, if you just exercise a little care.

Your comment makes perfect sense if this were an early access title, but this is a released product now.  Unless the devs want to go back on that, I'm going to treat this much as I would treat the settlers exploding when a warrior walks into them in Civilization 6.  Sure, it's avoidable, but that doesn't mean it should be in a released product.

5 hours ago, NoMrBond said:

Is there any chance of sneaking angle snap as a docking port tweakable into 1.1.3 because

(a) that would be awesome

and

(b) watching EJ do the angry gibbon about it would be capital h Hilarious

Mostly (b), what can I say.

Yes, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Apollo13 said:

Wonder why you crash in the VAB/SPH.  I've never crashed there.  You really may want to look at your mods; I doubt it is is a base game error.  In the VAB/SPH, my only mod is EEX.  Never crashed.

We know it's stock and not affecting all players. Just because you don't experience the issue doesn't mean it's not there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Not to sound like Groucho Marx's doctor or anything, but have you tried not touching the landing gear while on EVA?

I don't think anybody (least of all NathanKell) is arguing that that's expected, normal, or even acceptable. What's being argued is that it is in fact possible to play the game and use landing gear, if you just exercise a little care.

I never use landing gear (aircraft) for anything, ever, so they are not a problem. Landing legs I use all the time. 

A little care? That would be great if walking kerbals on places like Minmus wasn't so twitchy. They always move a step, they have momentum, so trying to approach a ladder where a half a step destroys something is rather more care than I feel like taking. Trying to get to a stair can result in a bump, using RCS can result in an error. On orbit, the same applies. The current work around is to quick save pretty much constantly on EVA (and I never use quick save except for kraken/crashes).

As far as I could tell from lurking the pre-release forum/bugtracker, this issue existed before "release." 

At least I don't have any CTD issues, and I can pile on mods in a way that was impossible before... which would be nice if I could make bases again without blowing them up.

1 hour ago, Majorjim said:

I have used 8 on a 60t horizontal lander, each one has a strut attached to it. If I land flat and at around 1-2m/s they do not explode. Do anything else and boom, they pop. Looking forward to a fix Squad. Again, welcome back.

Interesting. Mine explode with kerbals touching them, but not landing (I aim for 1-2 m/s, but I have landed at 3-4 with no explosions).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Enceos said:

@tater Stock bug fixes by Claw and the Landing Gear patches by @GoSlash27 eliminate 99% of the problems people had with KSP 1.1.2

The people on fire are either the ones who didn't install these fixes or they're Linux players.

 

 

and that fixes the Crashes to Desktop how exactly?

 

99% ...yeah right. As others (and multiple combined troubleshooting/log-gathering threads have suggested) this may be a Unity bug, not a KSP bug.

Edited by sackfalte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Apollo13 said:

Wonder why you crash in the VAB/SPH.  I've never crashed there.  You really may want to look at your mods; I doubt it is is a base game error.  In the VAB/SPH, my only mod is EEX.  Never crashed.

Mods don't cause crashes, at most they can exacerbate a bug in KSP and make it crash more often. A modder would have to go out of his way to write code in C# that could cause a crash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tater said:

 

Interesting. Mine explode with kerbals touching them, but not landing (I aim for 1-2 m/s, but I have landed at 3-4 with no explosions).

Yeah even with a strut they pop if a kerbal goes near them. Oddly wheeled craft seem to ghost through them..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

Yeah even with a strut they pop if a kerbal goes near them. Oddly wheeled craft seem to ghost through them..

That could be a very useful observation for working out what the underlying problem is.  Is it present in any of the bug tracker issues?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Padishar said:

That could be a very useful observation for working out what the underlying problem is.  Is it present in any of the bug tracker issues?

No more reports are needed for wheels and legs man. I posted the first bug report about the phantom forces and related issues and Squad are now well aware of the problem and how to fix it (Unity update). I would wait for them to update unity and see what issues still remain, then post more bug reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Majorjim said:

No more reports are needed for wheels and legs man. I posted the first bug report about the phantom forces and related issues and Squad are now well aware of the problem and how to fix it (Unity update). I would wait for them to update unity and see what issues still remain, then post more bug reports.

There are several, obviously different, issues with wheels and landing legs and I suspect some of them are are probably caused or, at least, exacerbated, by issues in Squad's code rather than in Unity.  If a clue such as this allows them to easily workaround a really annoying issue in 1.1.3 rather than having to leave it until 1.2 then do you really think that would be a bad thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Padishar said:

There are several, obviously different, issues with wheels and landing legs and I suspect some of them are are probably caused or, at least, exacerbated, by issues in Squad's code rather than in Unity.  If a clue such as this allows them to easily workaround a really annoying issue in 1.1.3 rather than having to leave it until 1.2 then do you really think that would be a bad thing?

You are free to do what you like man. Post away. I was just giving some advice as I have been in close contact with the guy trying to fix the wheels. And legs are wheels in KSP, confusingly.

 The wheels code is a third party physics plug-in for Unity. The currently used version of Unity has issues with the wheels, that are also legs, that is fixed in a newer version of Unity. That will come with the 1.2 update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Majorjim said:

as I have been in close contact with the guy trying to fix the wheels

If that is the case then surely your observation has already come up in conversation...  (and no, I'm not calling you Shirley :wink:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Padishar said:

If that is the case then surely your observation has already come up in conversation...  (and no, I'm not calling you Shirley :wink:)

The ghosting through of wheeled vehicles? It's almost certainly tied to the same issues that are known. I was sharing it as more of just a curiosity than a serious unknown issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tater said:
4 hours ago, Majorjim said:

I have used 8 on a 60t horizontal lander, each one has a strut attached to it. If I land flat and at around 1-2m/s they do not explode. Do anything else and boom, they pop. Looking forward to a fix Squad. Again, welcome back.

Interesting. Mine explode with kerbals touching them, but not landing (I aim for 1-2 m/s, but I have landed at 3-4 with no explosions).

With exception of the force of Kerbals touching legs seeming to be out of proportion (I've seen the explosions,) I think legs currently have low tolerance for lateral forces. I think it feels right that they should snap if bent the wrong way, but there does seem room for more tolerance. Majorjim's test case of arranging legs on two sides of a cylinder laying on its side (imagine the legs on a sawhorse) may expose legs to more off-axis lateral forces, than legs around the circumference of a cylinder (a regular rocket, which I'm sure gets a lot more testing) because the leg's springs would be dampening forces only along one axis. (Also a problem with rotator alignment difference between the LT-05 micro strut, vs the LT-1 and LT-2 makes it difficult to align the LT-1 and LT-2 perfectly perpendicular to horizontal objects.) Adding legs to each end of the sawhorse metaphor (a rocket tank on its side) "should" help dampen shocks on the other axis, but landing perfectly on all of the legs at once can be a problem, depending on the terrain.  

TL;DR: I think legs need to absorb off-axis shocks a bit better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be perfectly fine with legs requiring impact in the Apollo "doghouse" regime, or face damage. The probability of damage due to an astronaut interaction should be zero, however (aside from a collision at orbital velocity, lol)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sackfalte said:

and that fixes the Crashes to Desktop how exactly?

You're doing something wrong. Mostly Linux players have crashes. I see people play 8 hours straight on streams without problems. Any crash I experienced was mod related.

And this thread might help you or you can help this thread:

 

Edited by Enceos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(attribution removed because this is really for everyone)

Quote

Sorry, I agree with @Alshain. Make the current version stable and feature complete before trying to add new stuff. 

How do you make something feature-complete without adding new stuff?

Anyway, on a more helpful note: the whole point of 1.1.3 is to improve stability (and other playability factors) as much as we can without changing the underlying engine. Changing the underlying engine, even just a minor version update, is quite contrary to not adding new stuff.

I, too, have suffered from exploding legs, disabled wheels, KSP crashing, orbit wonkiness, etc etc. But at the same time, I have progressed my 1.1 career save to where I have a few 500 point science nodes unlocked and I'm preparing a mission to Duna. And all this on Linux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Enceos said:

You're doing something wrong. Mostly Linux players have crashes. I see people play 8 hours straight on streams without problems. Any crash I experienced was mod related.

And this thread might help you or you can help this thread:

First off, I'm not on Linux. Second this issue is not mod-related

The thread you linked is the proof there is nothing to do wrong. Crashes don't happen for you, good; crashes happen for you, too bad. There is no solution and no one knows what causes it, best we have is hints.

Please stop trying to deny the problem by blaming individual users (this last remark is not directed at you personally but at a lot of people).

Edited by Gaarst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, taniwha said:

How do you make something feature-complete without adding new stuff?

You complete the features that are already existing, rather than half-assing something in "for later completion".

Granted, this is not the usual definition of "feature complete", but is what people have been talking about here.

Edited by razark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2016 at 9:16 AM, Alshain said:

That would be fine if this intermediate release were to make the game playable, but the wheels are one of the biggest issues.  So we get to sit around and wait for them to release 1.1.3, then sit around some more, wait for 1.2, then sit around some more and wait for 1.2.1, 1.2.2, and 1.2.3 to fix all the new wonderful bugs... assuming they don't decide fix those in 1.3.

Can I like this post more than once?

This game may be more or less playable for more or less people, but it is UNFATHOMABLE that this is a long released title experiencing these issues. What we're talking about here is a scale of updates which are on the scale of years, which is an unbelievable proposition IM[worthless]O. How many years is it going to take to fix the bugs? People want to play this game now..? is that not okay? Are we supposed to pass down this game to our firstborns so that they can enjoy it on our behalf?

I can't think of another release title that ever took years to fix problems, or wasn't just abandoned. Just my thoughts. I can bring to mind many titles that were seriously messed up at launch, with patches within a few days/weeks, but there's literally another 6 months of waiting for proper fixes to a finished released game ... wat. and yes i know unity bla bla bla, so why not just keep the pre-release available for all users while the state of EA/instability carries on for the rest of 2016?

There should at least be a stable release somewhere that people can rely on.

Edited by Violent Jeb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...