Hyomoto

March 25, 2021

Well this was weird. I found the culprit. Digging through the files we can see the base attributes are applied by OPT_00Clean.cfg, and then OPT_B9PS.cfg is used to add the switch module using those attributes. That is really clever. I don't know if there's a way to inspect parts to see if the first patch is applied, but assuming it is then the issue lies here:

// =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  
// Create fuel module
@PART:HAS[#manufacturer[OPT*Division],#refVolume[*],~TankTag[OPTlab]]:NEEDS[B9PartSwitch,!ConfigurableContainers/Parts,!Pathfinder,!ModularFuelTanks,!RealFuels]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleB9PartSwitch
		moduleID = #$../TankTag$
		switcherDescription = OPT Tank
		switcherDescriptionPlural = Tank Selections
		switchInFlight = True
		baseVolume = #$../refVolume$
	}
}

Well, MM never calls this out so NEEDS, as far as I can tell, are being satisfied. All the other blocks that fail the test are culled. So, we're left with the HAS block. If the first config is properly applied, which its at least safe to assume it is, then all these tags are correct except for one, the manufacturer tag:

	title = #LOC_OPT_j_2m_tanks_title
	manufacturer = #LOC_OPT_manufacturerA
	description = #LOC_OPT_j_2m_tanks_desc

As far as I can tell, that won't pattern match. But, that's because if this is meant to do localization, it's not applied. Check the screenshot above. Interesting. So, what does the localization file say? That the tag is not defined. Which, leads me to believe that localization is applied before these MM does its patching, and that would explain why it's not matching. So, where is that definition? I checked legacy and it's not there, and I even went back to the original OPT which didn't have localization files at all. Checking the git history, this name wasn't in the original commit either. It was added to OPT Reconfig in October 2020, but it's not present in OPT branch so what bugged ass release did I download? Apparently the github link on the main page leads to the wrong file and that file happens to be missing this string.

This week has just been a "How does KSP work" week for me a I guess. So in short, if you do use the GitHub link, you have to go to the repository and download the latest release.

March 25, 2021

Well, this is weird. B9PartSwitch isn't working. Digging through the log, nothing from OPT_B9PS.cfg ends up being applied to the parts. It seems like the nodes do end up matching at some level, but the module itself is never added. The best I could muscle out is that HAS[#moduleID[]] is perhaps unsatisfied since I couldn't find where these module ids are applied and they didn't seem to be part of the base parts. Of course, digging through all the configs looking for it I might just have missed something. Nevertheless, the result is that none of the structural pieces or wings have tanks added to them when using B9PartSwitch. Other mods are properly apply it to their parts, so the part switcher is installed correctly, these parts just aren't having it added.

Edit: nope, tried to just brute force add the module by getting rid of the HAS and it did not work. Something else is afoot.

March 25, 2021

I think I was on an older version of Parallax and that's why I thought the experiments were still sunk. I first tried this at 1.2 but apparently missed the 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 updates and hadn't played with the experiments since then. They are still troublesome, they don't always rise properly, but it sounds like you are already on the case which is exciting. I may not have done anything useful but I guess I learned how to set Visual Studio up for KSP (the forum post is out-of-date, it says use .NET 3.5 but Kopernicus was compiled against 4.7.2, etc...).

March 24, 2021

Well, that was a waste of time . I resolved all the conflicts and was able to update and recompile the DLL. Problem is, apparently the instruments already float to the surface. I assume that is your doing because the issue ends up being that when you go to place the instruments they claim to be an on an illegal spot. However, if you walk around and spam the space bar you can usually find some location that will allow placement. Once on the ground, if you bump them they'll just rise to the surface. Neat. So the trouble is just getting them placed in the first place, otherwise it can already find the offset and makes all that work on my end pointless. Huzzah! It seems like placement is "bugged" in this case. I might take a stab at fixing that but given how useless my original efforts were, I figure it's best to ask if you have any thoughts on that first. Is this a known problem? Are they supposed to float to the surface?

March 24, 2021

You mentioned that it would be difficult to have arbitrary shapes interact with the parallax system. However, there are some parts which probably could be included that aren't and might be expected to be: science deployables. I'm going to feel like a jerk for writing this, since I would prefer to test this myself instead of fire off a "this should work" and wander off, but I'm not set up for KSP modding. I can only prostrate myself and beg your forgiveness (for the record I gave it a shot, but the setup guide only got me to 1191 type errors and I'm fighting both VS and KSP knowledge). That said, looking over ParallaxCollision.c you have a block which tests if the vessel is a single part and if that part is a Kerbal. Thus, extending line 165 to include a test for deployables should give favorable results?

if (vessel.parts[0].isKerbalEVA() == true || vessel.parts[0].isGroundDeployable() == true)

Again, I apologize for not testing it myself. I hate to offer drive-by coding advice. I'll probably still see if I can get it set up, but I am hoping it's just that easy to add those parts.

March 22, 2021

Small update here. Did a bunch of testing, including rolling back to previous versions to see when exactly volumetric clouds stopped showing up and the answer is... they didn't work with any version. That seemed pretty suspect so I deleted settings.cfg and gave it a try again. In which case the clouds did show up again. So I went ahead and brought the game back up-to-date and again, clouds. So finally, I reinstalled all of my mods and its not working again. Dear lord. So then I start painstakingly installing one mod at a time to figure out which one is the death boi. Which, surprisingly ended up being the first mod I tried: Scatterer. Next up, try installing every mod except Scatterer and sure enough ... same problem. Alright. What the literal hell? So fiddle, fiddle, fiddle aaaaaand settings. It's definitely a setting. Resetting them back to default fixed the issue, but what the heck about them is causing this issue in the first place! I'm invested now, how can I not keep going? Reinstall scatterer, try again. Clouds are there. Hurray. Fiddled with a few graphic settings to see if I could figure out which one was the culprit but nope. So I have no idea what setting is breaking things, but it does seem to be a setting.

That's a very long-winded way of saying if your volumetric clouds aren't showing, you can try reverting your settings to default and then reenable them to see if that fixes the issue.

March 21, 2021

A modder can't live on praise alone, but it surely can't hurt! This is all stunning work. It reminds me a lot of when Scatterer first popped up, where there were a lot of issues but over time he figured most of them out. I didn't even see this until 1.2 beta, and it's crazy what you've been able to accomplish.

February 23, 2021

I'm not sure a screenshot is really necessary here? The issue is the volumetric clouds do not display, but the cloud layers are visible. That said, if it helps then here is a screen shot without volumetric clouds:

The cloud layers display, but the volumetric clouds do not. It's hard to see in this picture because they aren't there, but the clouds overhead still fade out as if the volumetric ones were being drawn but they aren't. Again, multiple texture packs, etc...

February 14, 2021

I'd like to throw my cards in the "I'm not seeing volumetric clouds" hat as well. I tried Spectra and Astronomer's pack and neither of them display volumetric clouds. It looks like Spectra doesn't have layerVolume defined, but Astronomer's does and still nothing. I also tried the original BoulderCo and ... still nothing. For clarity, as far as I can tell, all other effects are present. There are the 2d layer clouds, and when you pas near to them they fade out as if the particles are being generated, but there are no particles.

Is there an option somewhere I'm overlooking to turn them off(or more importantly on)? I'm using Scatterer.0.0723 and EVE-Redux1.11.2.1.

Edit: Probably should've done this first, but I threw out all mods except for BoulderCo and EVE and ... no volumetric clouds. So, I'm really not sure why they aren't showing but it doesn't seem to be a mod conflict. Here is the KSP.log if that helps.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/otl1vmx1kskzga1/KSP.log?dl=0

February 14, 2021

Yes, that did it. Disabling steering on the rotor blades was definitely the issue. They are still difficult to fly, but in a way that doesn't feel like something very, very wrong is happening. I'd still love to be able to fix that, but hey, I can fly a helicopter now! Thanks!

EDIT: More fiddling and ... I dunno. It seems like helicopters are broken. Not completely but there are definitely some odd interactions. It seems that particular issue I was having was localized to the rotor I was using. Using the dual rotor, things control mostly as I would expect, so much so it's even possible to control it without SAS! However, constantly I'll be flying straight with no issues and BAM, suddenly the helicopter will become unstable. Sometimes it's a minor nuisance, I lose a bunch of speed and press on, but other times the helicopter will just start violently swaying as I enter tiny corrections. It's never too far between these problems, but it does seem random how often it happens which almost makes it worse. It's like, it is flyable, and sometimes it's even pretty fun, but it feels really buggy.

February 14, 2021

Are they just impossible to control without SAS? The reason I wasn't using it is because you get stuck trying to face whatever direction it was enabled at. So do you have to continually reset the SAS while flying? I mean, I can fly planes without SAS. You just have to build them well. In this case, that doesn't seem to be an option then?

Turning it on seems to HELP, but it still seems utterly uncontrollable. Like, tilt forwards shouldn't be illegal, but I press forwards and I start to lean right. Again, I stress this isn't a "I don't know how to touch controls." situation. If it was as easy as "be gentle" I'd have circumnavigated the planet. It literally feels like it's completely broken to the point I'm fighting the controls. Based on your response that doesn't seem like the intended outcome, but I'm wondering what could be the problem then.

EDIT: You know that gave me an idea, so I just switched to the keyboard and yes, pressing forwards leans right and pressing backwards leans left. That can't be correct. I swapped off steering on the rotor and that seems to have helped. I think I'm seeing the issue, it is completely uncontrollable and there are phantom inputs, but it's definitely firespitter.

February 14, 2021

That reminds me, last question I hope, and I feel I have to ask: do the firespitter helicopter blades work? I see you have that V22 design, which I'll assume flies. In my case, I set the props directly over the center of mass but it behaves like there are phantom forces. If I tip to the left, the helicopter shouldn't swing back to the right... maybe? Like, if I touch nothing, it will be out of control. If I touch anything to try and correct it, it ends up even more out of control. They feel completely uncontrollable. Could just be my design of course, but you solved my cargo conundrum, perhaps you can explain why the helicopter parts seem to behave insane or perhaps I just have a bad something? This is the craft:

February 14, 2021

I can certainly appreciate that but if I may ask a question, why not just make an offset that doesn't require doubling them up? I appreciate the "because it's more work than zero" reasoning, but it might be a nice part to have even outside of this particular niche (it's just this niche certainly adds to it's desirability).

Amusingly the first thing I tried was that offset thinking maybe it had an alternate version. I was not clever enough to consider just stacking it.

February 14, 2021

7 minutes ago, blackheart612 said:

It's not just you, actually. I've always attributed to it that the minimum exit space should be a little more than half of the standard smallest Aircraft 1.25m Fuselage in KSP. I don't perfectly recall but the colliders don't really clip. There's no basis to it and I don't exactly know how it works but I think the Kerbals require a certain amount of space to exit, even if it's part the same craft. That's why my sample crafts actually never have the passenger door alone:

In that first plane it appears you are using a smaller spacer, do you recall what the name of that part is? Also, thank you for the feedback. I tried moving some stuff around and deleting parts, but it seems like the space is too tight. I'll have to give LGG's topic a try at some point, but if it's as simple as adding a spacer I'm not going to be upset.

Edit: And yeah, adding a cargo tube seems to have added the necessary space. Apparently that part by itself is just a wee bit too small. If it's possible to tweak it, that would be awesome, but I'm glad it's functional nonetheless.

February 13, 2021

So, this isn't a phenomenal picture, but last time I played you couldn't do this. Any of this. Well, flags have been around for quite a bit, but it's crazy how many things that used to be mods are now stock in one way or another.

February 13, 2021

Just now, Gargamel said:

Well, @Hyomoto, I have good news for you, I think. The ~ key will return focus to your craft after using tab to view various bodies. (I'm using a modded install, but I believe that's a stock command).

Oh, you are a dear sir indeed. Yes, that worked quite fine! Good news indeed. I will gladly share my snacks in thanks!

February 13, 2021

Color me surprised, but I get to necro my own thread because it seems nearly ... seven years later I have the same question. Tab now doesn't select anything but celesital bodies, backspace still does nothing and clicking anywhere near a planet still focuses on that planet. Look, if it's a mod that fixes this behavior (despite being a tad shocked this problem is still a problem) then that's fine, but my brain won't let me believe there isn't a better option than reloading the scene to get the map to refocus on your vessel. So, for the second time: is there a simple, vanilla, built-in way to focus on YOUR ship in map mode other than reloading the scene, and if not could you point me in the direction of the most current mod the cool kids are using? I feel like there used to be a mod for this, it helped you set your nodes as well. Precision Node? Something like that.

As an aside, Googling this issue brought me back to my own thread so maybe I'm literally the only person with this issue?

February 13, 2021

I tried searching through the topic, and I don't see anything. Perhaps this is related to the 1.11 update (sorry, haven't been playing for a few years so it's all new to me), but the passenger door Mk1 doesn't seem to work. I have it set up as indicated, but I get the "Hatch is obstructed, can't exit" error. I'm not entirely surprised, I imagine this is a tight fit, but I definitely like the idea and if I can get it working I'd really like to.

March 7, 2018

I had no idea this was coming, I knew the DLC was but this feels a little like a gift since I had no idea. Thanks!

March 7, 2018

Really?

GTAV is a massively popular cash cow for Take Two. The mods they attacked were direct competitors that threatened their bottom line. Whether or not I respect them, and I don't, for going after the modders is irrelevant (and not for reverence of modders either, but in the corporation v user I tend to vote user). Kerbal Space Program is not a billion selling cash cow fueled by in-game sales. Not last I checked. Now, according to Steam Spy it is a decent seller, pushing quite a few more copies in the last three months than I would have guessed. So my question is who exactly are you trying to strong arm? Any fan of the game should be fully aware of it's troubled development, mismanagement and wholly unexpected ability to continue to be developed. I don't keep up on this, so it may have changed, but last I knew Squad was woefully understaffed.

It's like watching someone attack a small dog because it barked at them. Who is your grand villain? The Squad people think of as it concerns KSP is a small group, not some large evil corporation. And KSP has been both fan and mod friendly, having one of the more robust and dedicated communities I've ever seen. Flipping out over a EULA that has been there for a while now is expected to some degree but I always ask this question: when does a developer get a little leeway from people like you? EA is one of the most hated publishers in the world, and has been instrumental in the slow degradation of quality in AAA games as well as a huge advocate for pushing additional revenue models. KSP has been on the market for many years and is Squad's only game funded entirely by new sales. Maybe I just don't know how to function but they aren't exactly fitting the bad guy mold.

December 26, 2017

Well, I got a crash. When I open up the data manager on my probe core, then toggle the map, the game crashes. Using 64-bit KSP, Windows 10, 16gb. I wanted to see if this also happened in 32-bit but ... well, KSP won't even load my save. So, I can't seem to pin down if it's 64-bit related or not. The output_log.txt and error.log.

EDIT: I would love if there was a disable WYSWYG view, this forum software drives me nuts. Anyways, I tried again and well ... it appears that wasn't the issue. The issue was TRANSMITTING science and going to map mode. I suppose I'll keep dabbling with it to see what happens.

EDIT2: As far as I can tell, when the science transmission is in-progress it crashes. Otherwise it works fine, the windows opens normally and the map is unaffected.

List of mods:

----- 12/14/2017 14:07 B9PartSwitchd----- 11/18/2017 12:41 BoulderCo
da---- 12/10/2017 16:09 Chatterer
d----- 12/14/2017 14:07 CommunityResourcePack
d----- 12/26/2017 14:30 Dynamic Controls
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 DynamicBatteryStorage
d----- 11/18/2017 16:53 EditorExtensionsRedux
d----- 11/18/2017 12:41 EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements
d----- 11/18/2017 16:51 Hyomoto
d----- 11/18/2017 12:41 KAS
d----- 12/26/2017 17:19 KerbalEngineer
d----- 11/18/2017 12:41 Kerbalism
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFutureConstruction
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFutureElectrical
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFutureLaunchVehicles
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFutureProps
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFuturePropulsion
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFutureSolar
d----- 11/18/2017 16:52 NearFutureSpacecraft
d----- 12/26/2017 14:40 Pilot Assistant
d----- 11/18/2017 13:34 RealChute
d----- 11/18/2017 12:59 Squad
d----- 11/18/2017 12:42 TextureReplacerReplaced
-a---- 12/14/2017 14:07 78336 ModuleManager.2.8.1.dll
-a---- 12/26/2017 15:22 3331566 ModuleManager.ConfigCache
-a---- 12/26/2017 15:22 170101 ModuleManager.ConfigSHA
-a---- 12/26/2017 15:22 8882 ModuleManager.Physics
-a---- 12/26/2017 15:22 28994 ModuleManager.TechTree

EDIT: I hate the new forums. They've been around for a while, but I would love if there was a disable WYSWYG view. Anyways, I tried again and well ... it appears that wasn't the issue. The issue was TRANSMITTING science and going to map mode. I suppose I'll keep dabbling with it to see what happens.

November 19, 2017

4 minutes ago, lordcirth said:

There's a small supply tank which can be switched to provide hydrogen, oxygen and others one tier before. If you're playing in 1.3.1, you need this small patch to make Kerbalism parts show up in the VAB:

https://github.com/ShotgunNinja/Kerbalism/issues/162#issuecomment-338810899

That will probably fix most of your issues. Kerbalism has not been officially released for 1.3.1; Shotgunninja seems to be away.

While you can do a manned Mun landing with Kerbalism in 30 parts, it's going to be harder. I waited for the upgrade, personally. As for difficulty, well it's a life support mod so it's intended to make things more challenging. If there's something in particular you're still having trouble with after patching, post here again and we'll try to help.

Hah, well that fixes that issue! I hadn't tried Kerbalism before so it's impossible to tell what's missing or not at a glance. Real Chutes has the same issue apparently, but that was a bit more obvious since missing parachutes is ... quite obvious. Thank you for the help. Then if I may ask another question, does Kerbalism also disable the 'toggle batteries off to put probe to sleep' behavior? I saw I can change signal behavior to limited which apparently should mimic the base game, but it still wouldn't let me toggle the batteries back on. I haven't played since 1.1 or so, if there was a major change like that I'd have missed it.

November 19, 2017

So I was giving the mod a try and it seems to me that it isn't quite ... balanced. At least not for career mode. I just realized that the Fuel Cell requires hydrogen and oxygen ... one of which isn't currently available as far as I can tell. The description still says that it takes fuel and oxidizer, even though the module says hydrogen and oxygen. There are some other things like this, seemingly owing to not touching the tech tree as far as I can tell. Is there a good primer to read on this or some 'mandatory' mods people are including? Even something as "simple" as getting to the Mun seems near-impossible now given that in the 30 part limit there isn't enough electricity to make the journey, the fuel cell isn't available because there's no hydrogen, and solar panels need more science to be unlocked.

So, sure, to overcome this I just need to grind out a half million to upgrade both the pad and the VAB. But what's the point of having the fuel cell if the requirements aren't met yet? Given the integration into the tech tree, it's obvious that consideration was taken to integrate it but I guess what it comes down to is I feel like there's some help file I should be reading, or that some of this stuff is out of place. Or just that people are using a mod that solves this.

EDIT: Been a while since I played, I remembered you can turn OFF a probe and do it that way. Comment still stands but I did find the workaround I need.

September 13, 2017

For all the people who bought before April 2013: if Squad makes good on that promise then that's cool. But I do think it's fair to say: wow, really? 2013 was 4 years ago, which means those of you who bought it before that time frame have been playing this game for five years. During that time there have been at least two major updates since launch, and obviously all the work that went into getting to 1.0 which included quite a few major updates. I have no idea what they'll charge for this expansion but it is it fair to say that FOUR YEARS is a completely acceptable time to commit to free development before launching a new paid content release? Granted it will be up to you to decide if the content is worth it, but man: asking out loud really comes off as: I PAID FOR THIS YEARS AGO, DON'T YOU DARE SUGGEST I OWE YOU A DIME. I BELIEVED IN YOU FIRST, WHATEVER YOU CREATE SHOULD BE MINE!!! This was back when DLC was being discussed before the game launched and people were worried it would become what games like ARK and PLUNKBAT have become. At this point, and I say THIS point, I'd be glad to support the developers again. Given what has surfaced about how the studio has been managed and handled over the years, I'm surprised the game still has active development let alone developers.

It's stupid I feel compelled to add this bit to the end which is that I certainly do not hope that KSP becomes a DLC-fueled reflection of the modern gaming world, but the argument that paying developers for their ongoing commitment is appropriate in some contexts even if it has been damaged by people who trumpet large publishers, who are clearly taking advantage of them, as victims. When KSP gets cosmetic DLC, loot boxes or in-game currencies I'll be a bit more skeptical, but even as mismanaged as they've been: Squad has had a pretty fair attitude towards the consumer on the actual sale of their product even if internally it appears they've been worse than other major publishers. And whether or not I bought before April 2013, I won't be terribly offended to pay for the expansion.

October 15, 2016

7 hours ago, Waz said:

The cost of layerVolumes was truly exorbitant. I have some numbers on my desk where the rendering cost for a ship in Kerbin orbit was 8ms for plain EVE, 12ms for SVE, ...... and 1.7ms with neither...... and nearly *all* of that was layerVolume rendering. For 100 particles you only see occasionally, this is insane.

The performance fix I did was just something I could do quickly so I didn't have to recommend against using volumetric clouds: because I think they give amazing immersion (I swear I still hear noise in my head that was never there when I think about a dust storm I drove through on Duna with KSPRC).

I'll look at a proper fix once 1.2 settles.

I'm not completely surprised. My guess, and I'm not a 3d guy, is probably that EVE is doing a lot of unnecessary work. (Woah, poignant observation, I know). Either way, it's good to know you are on the case. Of all the mods I use, which there are not many, EVE is the one that adds the most atmosphere (no pun intended). Scatterer is nice, but without clouds the worlds just seem bland and lifeless. And thanks to SVE, we can get a pretty damn fine version of both.

When stuff like this happens I can't help but think the best part of the KSP modding community is thanks to having source available, people can help out and pick up a mod. Compare that to the Bethesda scene where mods are treated like personal treasures and if a modder gets bored and quits, their work may very well end up lost in limbo. Then again, maybe KSP gets away with that because (as I like to think), it attracts a fairly similar group of people whereas something like Skyrim has a far wider appeal. I don't think there's a loverslab for KSP, and if there is I really do not want to know about it. I'll take that ignorance to the grave, please. I digress, my point is simply when you compare the extremes in mod topics, KSP draws from a much tighter pool and I think it works out to it's advantage because we can enjoy open source modding.

Profiles

Forums

Developer Articles

KSP2 Release Notes

Bug Reports

Posts posted by Hyomoto