KSP Weekly: Without labor nothing prospers

[SQUAD]

Welcome to KSP Weekly everyone. Another exciting week full of progress on all fronts, so without keeping you waiting any longer, let’s start.

Localization is looking good and we’re mainly looking at formatting and the last few string changes while we work with our grammar plugin colleagues (Lingoona) to improve some of the finer points in different languages. Correspondingly, we did a first round of performance profiling KSP without Lingoona, identifying several GarbageCollector (a form of automatic memory management .NET uses)  spikes in FixedUpdate methods. Later this information will be used together with the Lingoona integration to minimize the effects on GC related to localization.

Our Devs were also busy refactoring the Localization class to its final structure and method names which gets us another step along the road. The class and names will only change now if we find issues, which means we can bring more focus to the performance testing phase (as it shouldn’t change now). It also means we can update the API documentation we have and start testing and polishing it for the modding community, so less time is needed when adjusting mods for 1.3.

That’s not all, we’ve finished with the integration of Asteroid Day mod into the 1.2.9 pre-release and not only that, it is now localized and being tested by our dedicated QA team. That said, we would welcome any and all feedback from the Community on how balanced the Asteroid Day contracts are in a career game play-through.

We also want to give a shout out to the localization volunteers, who continue to amaze us all with their dedicated effort. There are still issues in the game that need attention besides languages, so now that has “mostly” been dealt with, bug fixing continues.

We are always on the lookout for more testers, so if you think you have what it takes to create comprehensive bug reports and can dedicate time each week to KSP testing, then please make yourself known. We always read the issues on the public bug trackers, (especially the Pre-Release) so there is your marketplace to demonstrate your skills in problem solving and research.

In other news, console testing continues with daily builds from Blitworks being put through their paces on both platforms, and now we’re more able to concentrate on the refinements in controls and general gameplay rather than outright bugs. Many long hours are being dedicated to getting all things ready for the inevitable releases of each project. An example of the testing our QA team has been busy with are the console achievements system, which took longer than what we expected due to the thoroughness of the team. A good thing is that during all this testing, we still haven’t had any save files blow up on us yet either.

Now that we’re getting closer to the release date of the console build, we’ve been also very busy preparing the communication materials. That includes updating videos and images for the respective stores of each console, among other things.

Let’s move on to the progress we’ve made with the upcoming Making History expansion. This week, the work on improving and finalising various aspects of the design has continued. Specifics for this week include focus on how Kerbals are chosen and assigned to vessels for Missions within the Mission Builder and at how specific parts of a vessel can be selected when applying constraints to a Mission.

Additionally, we have been working on some of the under the hood code, such as getting the basic and generic version of the code for part failures working. When a part fails, it has to stop doing what it does normally and we have to lock the player controls on it. Development work continues on this aspect along with many others. We also have to remember whether a part has failed when the vessel goes into stasis and when it is saved and loaded.

We have also continued polishing the expansion system integrating key signatures for the asset bundles, as well as fixing some bugs and making some improvements for our internal build processes and tools. The elements for the new UI have received some attention too and work continues on delivering the parts that the artists have been providing to be tested for gameplay options. QA then tests and provides feedback on these parts that is dealt with to improve the ingame performance of these new parts.

Finally, we encourage you to participate in our latest KSP Challenge - Build and Fly a Space Shuttle! This time around you’re challenge is to build “reusable” winged orbiters which can carry Kerbals to orbit and return safely, as well as be capable of horizontal landing. We also have an amazing badge designed by FCISuperGuy especially for those who have created a shuttle for this challenge! Check it out and share your creations!

That’s it for this week. Be sure to join us on our official forums, and don’t forget to follow us on Twitter and Facebook. Stay tuned for more exciting and upcoming news and development updates!

Happy launchings!

[Gaarst]

24 minutes ago, SQUAD said:

Additionally, we have been working on some of the under the hood code, such as getting the basic and generic version of the code for part failures working. When a part fails, it has to stop doing what it does normally and we have to lock the player controls on it. Development work continues on this aspect along with many others. We also have to remember whether a part has failed when the vessel goes into stasis and when it is saved and loaded.

Part failures? That's cool! I don't think I've ever read about it in the past KSP Weeklys (but I might just be blind). Is it a feature for a future update, the Expansion or simply a tool for modders?

[JPLRepo]

Just now, Gaarst said:

Part failures? That's cool! I don't think I've ever read about it in the past KSP Weeklys (but I might just be blind). Is it a feature for a future update, the Expansion or simply a tool for modders?

It has been mentioned previously in KSP Weekly. It is a feature of the Expansion.

[razark]

17 minutes ago, JPLRepo said:

It has been mentioned previously in KSP Weekly. It is a feature of the Expansion.

Is it something that will only be in the Mission Builder, or will it appear in other modes, as well?

[Papa_Joe]

Now, this is what I call an update... good info and insight into the process.

[regex]

Nice, thanks for the hard work!

[HafCoJoe]

Good to hear more work is being done on localization  Though I do wish there was more word on more secretive facts  Always good to read about sneak peeks

Edited April 29, 2017 by Avera9eJoe

[klgraham1013]

Sounds dandy.  Look forward to specifics on the Mission Builder and a clarification on missions themselves.

[Greenfire32]

please tell me part failure is optional...

[passinglurker]

5 minutes ago, Greenfire32 said:

please tell me part failure is optional...

It's a making history feature so it probably isn't random, but instead specifically programmed events so think more recreating apollo 13 and less RNG trolling.

[fourfa]

If it migrates into the main game it will surely be optional. I'd expect to see it in an Apollo 13 type mission scenario. 

[StrandedonEarth]

What??? No sneak peek at more parts? I've become used to that! C'mon, @RoverDude, show us what you did this week!

But really, sounds like more great work being done. Sounds like soon I'll be able to buy KSP for my kids on the XB1. I didn't see any reason to buy the FT version. 

Has ther been any thought to what  parts can fail? Any/all of them or just certain ones? I guess there wouldn't be any catastrophic failures. 

[JPLRepo]

15 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Has ther been any thought to what  parts can fail? Any/all of them or just certain ones? I guess there wouldn't be any catastrophic failures. 

Sure has. but as usual. Can't say much more on that... yet^TM  
But why not all of them? and why wouldn't you want catastrophic failures? Isn't that what KSP is all about? Learning from catastrophic failures?

[RoverDude]

My KSP Weekly was 'RoverDude buys a house unexpectedly'

[StrandedonEarth]

1 minute ago, RoverDude said:

My KSP Weekly was 'RoverDude buys a house unexpectedly'

Nice! Not sure how that happens unexpectedly, but, Nice!

[CoreI]

14 minutes ago, JPLRepo said:

Learning from catastrophic failures?

What lessons can be taken away from catastrophic failures? How about redundancy! I often pack my ships with redundant engines, and now I suppose that will be put to use! I like adding the part failure feature to KSP, because it adds realism with being too hard.

I'm not sure how close to finished the expansion is, but (I'm not asking for a date) will 1.3 and the expansion be released at the same time, or one released after the other?

[klgraham1013]

17 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

My KSP Weekly was 'RoverDude buys a house unexpectedly'

I told you not to trust those door to door salesman.  Now look.  You own a house.  You didn't even want that house.  It's old and run down and you don't even like the color.  Sure.  You could paint it.  ...but you're a busy man and are allergic to paint.

To think, all of this could have been avoided if you would have just turned out the lights and pretended you weren't home.

Edited April 29, 2017 by klgraham1013

[Azimech]

Quote

We are always on the lookout for more testers, so if you think you have what it takes to create comprehensive bug reports and can dedicate time each week to KSP testing, then please make yourself known.

I used to be motivated to become a member of Squad one way or the other ... seen the controversy of last year, cynicism has recently kicked in and the only question that pops up in my head is "what would be in it for me".

Instead I'd rather focus on setting up hardware & software for streaming. Seems I have enough followers to pull it off.

Am I wrong and am I doing a Pinkman here?

Part two:
 

Quote

Additionally, we have been working on some of the under the hood code, such as getting the basic and generic version of the code for part failures working. When a part fails, it has to stop doing what it does normally and we have to lock the player controls on it.

Well that would be a welcome change! What's with the whole part blowing up thing anyway? Glad you guys are coming to your senses. Better late than never! For a tone ... try Saul Goodman's voice. It helps.

 

Guys. Thanks for the update. Take a grain of salt here. I admire and respect your work.

[StrandedonEarth]

23 minutes ago, JPLRepo said:

But why not all of them? and why wouldn't you want catastrophic failures? Isn't that what KSP is all about? Learning from catastrophic failures?

This sounds like you're looking for feedback on this....

I'm just trying to put it into context, and it all depends on the failure mode. Is it limited to the Mission Builder? Pre-programmed failures as part of the mission are perfectly understandable, but random failures can get annoying when there's no reason for it. A reasonable way of implementing random failures would be based on the history of the part and the flight and/or usage hours logged. A just-unlocked or experimental part would be more likely to fail. as would a part that's been in space for years. A part model that has been used on many mission before should never fail when launching a brand-new rocket on a new mission.If you just want to see your rocket blow up, add a self-destruct to the right-click menu!

Learning from catastrophic failures in KSP is learning about bad designs or piloting errors. By catastrophic failures I mean things that result in loss-of-mission and/or loss-of-crew and one would not be able to recover from it. Complete loss of the only engine on the ship would be LOM at the very least, but losing one engine in a cluster would be a pretty realistic experience, and the mission could go on. Parachute failure? Oh right, time to bail out and use those nifty new EVA 'chutes. Which reminds me, do kerbals always have EVA chutes, or would they need to be added?

[StrandedonEarth]

49 minutes ago, CoreI said:

I'm not sure how close to finished the expansion is, but (I'm not asking for a date) will 1.3 and the expansion be released at the same time, or one released after the other?

It sounds like 1.3 is nearly done, just doing some final tweaks and QA and is probably just weeks away.. MH, on the other hand, sounds like it is just finishing up design, now they have to implement it all. MH is months away, I'm sure

[050644zf]

Thank you Squad.

And I'm glad to see that @KerbalSpaceP Channel on Bilibili now has more than 500 subscribers!

[rudi1291]

7 hours ago, SQUAD said:

Additionally, we have been working on some of the under the hood code, such as getting the basic and generic version of the code for part failures working. When a part fails, it has to stop doing what it does normally and we have to lock the player controls on it.

If a part 'fails', will all of it fail or will it be possible to select specific functions of that part (i.e. Alternator for engines)?

[IllyrianTheGreat]

No pictures of new part?

[MiffedStarfish]

Ooh, part failures sound interesting. Are they going to be random and permanent, or more like wheels where they break if you use them too much at high stresses? Also, Will there be any visual cues for a failure? I think it would make them feel at lot more realistic. For example, fuel tanks could have a puff of gas similar to a RSC Thruster firing to show loss of pressure, electrical parts could spark, wheels could break like normal, engines could use the flameout effect...

[basic.syntax]

8 hours ago, Greenfire32 said:

please tell me part failure is optional...

"Failure... is not an option!"  - couldn't resist, even tho the meaning is kind of opposite