kitoban

As Andy81le mentioned I'd not heard of anything failing on the 1.0 release so hadn't recompiled for the release as seems to be working fine, am looking into it this weekend. Time being a premium commodity for me at the moment.

I've only just managed to get v1.0, but is good to know the older version is still working, will do a recompile and get that up anyway asap.

Updates were on my local github, I'd forgotten to sync it, they are up now. Will have to have a dig around for the fineprint marker object so I can gen the retro, shouldn't be too tricky to do.

The obvious one that springs to mind would be a retrograde marker for this sort of situation then you would be able to align your craft so that your retrograde moves towards the mission marker similar to what you do during a docking maneuver. I've not played around with these types of missions yet, do you have the option to turn the marker off if you are not actively working on that mission at the time?

Enhanced navball updated to v1.3.5 due to bug on previous version with early career gameplay

It does, but if you take a look in the logs the mod is currently generating a lot of errors due to manevuer nodes not being loaded in the code under early gameplay. This should be fixed as of v1.3.5 which is now live on Curse. Thanks all for the help finding this one

Thanks for the extra information, I hadn't tested this in career as was unaware that the tracking station changed the navball setup I take it this is what you are seeing: I'll take a look into putting a fix together. Will keep you all posted.

Could you provide some more details? The Ghosting should be following the motion of travel, prograde/retrograde, Not sure which vector you are referring to. If possible a video of the issue could be helpful on this one.

Enhanced navball updated to work with 0.90: Enhanced-Navball-1-3 v1.3.4

Recompiled for 0.90 Should be working fine now, check curse for 1.3.4

Reading this I think I see where the confusion is, I was trying to provide a prompt on the button as to what it is going to do, but think with the button depressed being it's current state and the text being the state that it would be when click leads to this confusion. I'll look into clarifying this next update but aethon's instruction should resolve. as far as moving icon without the toolbar is possible, just requires messing in config file and maths

using toolbar mod allows for easy moving however without it the icon position is controllable by some manual edits to the config file: In GameData\EnhancedNavBall\Plugins\PluginData\EnhancedNavBall\config.xml This entry controls the position: <rect name="IconPos"> <xmin>184</xmin> <xmax>216</xmax> <ymin>0</ymin> <ymax>32</ymax> </rect> allow for a size of 32X32 xmin-xmax, and same on ymin-ymax and you should be able to locate this anywhere on the screen. i.e. xmin - 0, xmax - 32, ymin - 0, ymax-32 would be the top left corner. Note if file does not exist load the game once with mod installed and it should be generated.

ENB now updated for 0.25, stock parts of mod have been removed or are optionally overriddable by the mod.

Mod does sort of work, however the icons are duplicated and you will see a certain amount of overlaying. I have just finished finalising the update, was hoping to bundle some other changes with the release but those will have to wait till I have had more time to work on them. Note this is part of the 0.25 update, is actually how squad's implementation seems to work, but I have made this an option within the settings. I've also overridden the arrow within the mod with ghosting as per original mod release, although I have exposed the option to disable this within the setting screen for the mod.

Might be a few days for me to get the update together, 0.25 release came out late last night for me and I have other obligations this evening. It is on it's way

It will show a separate button outside of Blizzy's toolbar, so that should not not be a dependency. Just to sanity check you did download the plugin from curse? if all else is fine check alt f2 for any errors and let me know

General theory I had while developing the ENB was that the navball is meant as very quick reference you only want to see the essential information there. when it came to adding extra markers to act as guides adding arrows meant extra symbols to decipher. Given that you could be out of control in a flat spin heading towards a crash landing you really do not need an extra symbol on there. This is what lead to the ghosted view of the pre-existing symbol, also saved me having to add an extra game asset to be loaded in. I would suspect that I can make my existing code overwrite the new symbol with the ENB version, or simply disable the stock version and drop in ENB's version at a config option, but will have to wait till release is available to do the modifications, whatever happens it is likely going to be the longest delay for me to get a new version out, up until now I have not had to interact with new code, I fully expect 0.25 to be incompatible with the current mod release. Thanks for the link to the vid of this AndreyATGB

As BigD145 mentioned just leave the folder structure as is and copy to the GameData folder, the mod only looks within it's own folder structure for the icons, so without the files within that structure you will see a random block of memory loaded as an image instead of the icon. It is something I hope to look into, is just a bit trickier to implement and I have been looking at colour blindness support recently, although I have not had much time for coding of late. Glad you appreciate the mod, do you have a link to the video of what they have implemented I have not had a chance to see it yet. It was my hope that if it is possible to add the option to override but until the release of 0.25 I am unable to see how the new code interacts with the mod (probably not in a nice way considering they have changed this area of the game engine) I have been on hold on dev with the looming 0.25 release as anything I change at present is liable to have unforeseen interactions with the new game code that is being implemented.

I do intend on releasing whatever features are not "stockified" after 0.25 so these will still be available. They did make alot of hype around SP+ integration (whether intended or not) but then didn't even mention ENB and SM/CM. I know ENB was a concept that they had intended (as mentioned by Harv) and am sure they would have had a crew manifest in the backlog as well, but given that squad have stated that part of their decision process on which functionality they are implementing is dependant on what is being covered by mods or not, it would have been nice to at least acknowledge these as well. Is my thoughts as well, as I did consider having an arrow in place, however this would have meant another symbol on the navball and as quick understanding of the navball is critical to your control of the craft I decided to maintain the same symbol throughout so you always know what to look for. The same reasoning is why the radial and normal nodes are removed while a maneuver is in place, as if you have a maneuver you already know what you intend to do so do not need the extra nodes in assisting with that action. What a may end up doing is to retain the logic for maneuver ghosting and creating an option to switch between stock and mod functionality, but we will have to wait and see for 0.25 as to how this is setup.

I'm not a squad dev, but yeah looks like squad are taking on some of the functionality as stock. I will make whatever is not "stocked" available within the mod at that release.

The other annoying thing on curse is 0.24 went live and yet the check box on curse was not available to check 0.24 as compatible version.

Done, and up on curse

Tested against 0.24 in x64, everything looks to be working fine post update.

Max's answer should resolve this, you do just take the contents of the zip to the gamedata folder, all the internal pathing for the mod to work needs to be retained.

Jan, Any chance you can post the ship file somewhere so can see if possible to replicate. I have made sure the points are drawn on non-collidable objects, as I did see one of the dev's write an note about crashing into the ui a couple of years ago (c7 I think, can't find the article now) The calculations on the ghosts is simply to take the current prograde and retrograde positions, remove the z component and scale to position it. None of which would effect anything beyond the ghost vertex itself. Would be useful to know if anyone else is seeing issues like this as these are the first reports I have seen of anything like this.