Jump to content

[1.4.x] TweakScale v2.3.12(Apr-16)


pellinor

Recommended Posts

Oh sorry must have overlooked that. Scaling of the root part is not recommended because it will trigger a bug in KSP aud cause bad things. Other than that, there is no known problem with scaling of mass and attachment positions. Part clipping or models reverting scale are usually just visual bugs, so they should not interfere with physics. What you describe sounds like it comes either from a scaled root part or from a problem with your install. Exceptions can also lead to TweakScale code being skipped, which would lead to symptoms like you describe.

Well, there is no way around it for me, the part that I'm making is a ring for making stations, it's 10 meter radius by default but you can scale it from 0.1 (1 meter radius) up to 10 (100 meter radius), but i noticed when i change the scale on it, the mass is not being changes, also, i looked into the JSI, the module that I'm using has nothing special to do with nodes but it's a component enable / disable thing, at least, if the user add parts on the scale 1 and tweak nodes when it's scale 1, then he / she can change the scale of the ring to what he/she needs when the job is finished, but the mass is a problem, if the 10 meter ring is 4 tons, the 100 meter shouldn't be 4 tons !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pellinor, have you ever tried TweakScale with BDArmory? I wrote a config for it with appropriate exponents for various values and everything, but it resulted in a glitchy nightmare (parts wouldn't attach in editor, exceptions thrown, stuff like that). Just curious if anyone has had it work - could be cool to scale up one of the BDArmory bombs to make a megabomb.

I've never tried BDArmoury. TweakScale only works out of the box if the other module can live with having its variables manipulated without notice. So I'd suggest to start small and see which values can be changed without glitches.

A second way is that BDArmoury can use the TweakScale API to get notified on rescale and update their module themselves. I know that IR and MFT/realFuels successfully use method.

I've got a weird bug with this. I'm using a number of different mods, and whenever I mouse over the reactors from the Interstellar mod in the parts menu, the thumbnail starts to expand, until I can no longer see it. I did hunt around in the forum, but didn't really see anything like this. Here's a list of the mods I have installed (I use CKAN, and it didn't SAY they were incompatible):

Is this a known bug or incompatibility?

Not known for TweakScale. But I've seen this before, and I remember a comment that this symptom was fixed in some mod (don't remember which one). That was quite some time ago, so it should not affect anything CKAN distributes.

Well, there is no way around it for me, the part that I'm making is a ring for making stations, it's 10 meter radius by default but you can scale it from 0.1 (1 meter radius) up to 10 (100 meter radius), but i noticed when i change the scale on it, the mass is not being changes, also, i looked into the JSI, the module that I'm using has nothing special to do with nodes but it's a component enable / disable thing, at least, if the user add parts on the scale 1 and tweak nodes when it's scale 1, then he / she can change the scale of the ring to what he/she needs when the job is finished, but the mass is a problem, if the 10 meter ring is 4 tons, the 100 meter shouldn't be 4 tons !

As I told you, scaling of the root part is known to be buggy and not supported at the moment. Though I have some hope left that the problem will vanish next monday.

EDIT: now I also see a mass issue! Still have to see if I broke that in my dev copy or in a published version.

EDIT: found it! It seems that the stock info window does not update often enough, so it misses rescales (but probably displays the right number once it catches up). Detaching parts seems to update it. If I open a mechjeb info window mass changes as (and when) it should.

Edited by pellinor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will this work for scaling things like capsules? How could I adjust crew counts?

It will scale it in size and maybe mass and a few other ways but it will not increase the number of crew. Also do NOT adjust the number of crew. If the number of crew exceeds the number of seats in the internal then it will cause game and save breaking destruction. Well, maybe not "will" but more "almost certainly will, especially if you use addons, which you are".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi :D

With 1.53 I have the issue that the stock fuel tanks (the very first FL-T100-800 + FL RCS Tank) will scale as expected, however the tank capacity stays at the original value. Fuel tanks from i.e. SpaceY add-on scale correctly however, if that helps. I checked if the stock part cfg is present and it is and contains (of course) the stock tanks. I only noticed because I started a new career today ... you know - play it while mods still work :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never tried BDArmoury. TweakScale only works out of the box if the other module can live with having its variables manipulated without notice. So I'd suggest to start small and see which values can be changed without glitches.

A second way is that BDArmoury can use the TweakScale API to get notified on rescale and update their module themselves. I know that IR and MFT/realFuels successfully use method.

Not known for TweakScale. But I've seen this before, and I remember a comment that this symptom was fixed in some mod (don't remember which one). That was quite some time ago, so it should not affect anything CKAN distributes.

As I told you, scaling of the root part is known to be buggy and not supported at the moment. Though I have some hope left that the problem will vanish next monday.

EDIT: now I also see a mass issue! Still have to see if I broke that in my dev copy or in a published version.

EDIT: found it! It seems that the stock info window does not update often enough, so it misses rescales (but probably displays the right number once it catches up). Detaching parts seems to update it. If I open a mechjeb info window mass changes as (and when) it should.

i would just like to say about the "root part is known to be buggy"

i have not been using the mod since the scaling issues started showing up, and its not JUST the root part for me. ANY scaled part on ALL crafts i make will be reverted to stock size on any means of loading. quicksave, trasferring, flying from ksc. sorry that i cant post any screenshots, as i have moved on to a new career since uninstalling as most ships had tweaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So my strategy for KSP 1.0 will be to get the plugin running as soon as I can and publish a dev version for 1.0. Then I'll take a few days for discussing feedback and deciding on the new scaling behavior.

The main point where I need more feedback is mass/thrust of engines. My understanding is that 2 would be a physically reasonable exponent for thrust, and lead to engines that are useful in the game.

The old setting is exponent 2.5 for both, probably because my predecessor wanted to avoid part-specific mass exponents. Going as low as 2.5 already messes up the mass fraction of fuel tanks enough. So my guess is that the mass exponent was chosen as a compromise and the thrust exponent was chosen to preserve TWR.

At the moment the dev version uses exponent 2 for engine thrust and weight. So a 2.5m engine is equivalent to four 1.25m engines. In this scaling, a (KSP 0.90) 48-7s is reasonably close to a downscaled skipper (both thrust and bell size are a bit bigger for the 0.625m skipper).

So what do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for keeping at it pellinor! :D

If its roughly the same performance, all is fine. We scale for the look of our crafts anyway ... not for performance :-)

I mean... we speak of a game where you can adjust any part parameter quickly in a clear-text config/script file. *cough*

So, anyone who is not happy can adjust it, right?

Edited by DaniDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a weird bug with this. I'm using a number of different mods, and whenever I mouse over the reactors from the Interstellar mod in the parts menu, the thumbnail starts to expand, until I can no longer see it. I did hunt around in the forum, but didn't really see anything like this. Here's a list of the mods I have installed (I use CKAN, and it didn't SAY they were incompatible):

Interstellar

B9 pack

remotetech

realchute

mechjeb (and mechjueb and engineer for all)

engineer redux

Is this a known bug or incompatibility?

I have never been able to nail this problem to a single issue but to my understanding these problems can develop when something isn't installed correctly or is outdated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you tried clicking the scale itself inbetween the buttons? You should be able to drag the value inside freely.

Right. Just set freeScale=true and the space between the scaling buttons should become a slider. In an earlier version there were buttons for small and large intervals, but those became obsolete when I wrote my own tweakable for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. Just set freeScale=true and the space between the scaling buttons should become a slider. In an earlier version there were buttons for small and large intervals, but those became obsolete when I wrote my own tweakable for this.

Yes, it's great, when you actioly know it's there. I didn't know about this feature until I accidentally clicked the middle. That's why I ask you to someohow show those buttons, then people will know there is something between the sizes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for keeping at it pellinor! :D

If its roughly the same performance, all is fine. We scale for the look of our crafts anyway ... not for performance :-)

I mean... we speak of a game where you can adjust any part parameter quickly in a clear-text config/script file. *cough*

So, anyone who is not happy can adjust it, right?

The more I think of it the more I tend to keeping an exponent >2. I actually scale for performance, and remember that for tiny things the best engine for the job often was smaller than what would look best. And at the moment the weight exponent for engines is not that easy to adjust, this is why I am thinking about writing a TWEAKSCALEBEHAVIOR for them too.

For mass/thrustExponent=2, the height of the fuel stack that an engine can lift is preserved. If a 2.5m engine can barely lift two orange tanks, its 1.25m version will lift the same height worth of 1.25m tanks. The typical 0.625m craft will be much smaller than that, so those crafts will typically call for a smaller/lighter engine.

For exponent 3, the stack an engine can lift will also scale linearly in length. This might be a bit much.

For exponent 2.5, the stack grows with sqrt(scale) in height. This is the old setting, which I kept for boosters (i.e. engines with a tank attached). So when a booster is scaled, the twr scales with exponent -0.5, and the burn time with +0.5. This is also how TWR and burn time scales with length for the (0.90) stock boosters. This might actually be a good middle ground. I'll have to build a few tiny (and large) things to see how well it fits.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, it's great, when you actioly know it's there. I didn't know about this feature until I accidentally clicked the middle. That's why I ask you to someohow show those buttons, then people will know there is something between the sizes.

They do not exist in the new tweakable (which was already pulled into KspApiExtensions), and there is nothing useful for them to do. Since both modes take their intervals from the scaleFactors, there are no small intervals anymore. and the slider increment is too small, you'd usually need 25 or more clicks to get to the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think for engines mass should scale with 3 and thrust with 2. This is both realistic and encourages people to use natively bigger engines at some point and not just a 48-7s scaled up for almost everything. The range of scaling down should be limited though as engines will get ridiculously high TWR as they scale down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think for engines mass should scale with 3 and thrust with 2. This is both realistic and encourages people to use natively bigger engines at some point and not just a 48-7s scaled up for almost everything. The range of scaling down should be limited though as engines will get ridiculously high TWR as they scale down.

If an upscaled engine is strictly worse than several regular ones, why would you ever want to use it instead of plastering the rocket with small engines? If you want to forbid one direction and nerf the other to death, it would be a better choice to just not provide engine scaling (which is a perfectly fine way of playing and can be done with a single MM patch).

My opinion is the larger parts could have some slight advantage, so it makes sense to use the largest part that will do the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

does tweakscale work on KSP 1.0 or does it need a update?

It needs a recompile, and an official update of the dependency KspApiExtensions. On my dev install all it looks fine, so that should not take too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi for some reason this makes my tier 1 gimbaling engine (the swivel one) shoot flames out the side and not be attachable which basically breaks the game right now, anyone else getting this or know why it might be happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi for some reason this makes my tier 1 gimbaling engine (the swivel one) shoot flames out the side and not be attachable which basically breaks the game right now, anyone else getting this or know why it might be happening?

Because it doesn't work with 1.0. Wait for an update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sooo I backed up my 0.90 game before installing 1.0, went to go play it for a while after testing out 1.0 and all my parts on all my ships have just chosen completely random scales, it has sorta broken all my crafts and I am really not impressed, anyone know of any way to fix this / change scaling without having to decomission everything and put it back up? really would rather not use hyperedit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi for some reason this makes my tier 1 gimbaling engine (the swivel one) shoot flames out the side and not be attachable which basically breaks the game right now, anyone else getting this or know why it might be happening?

Yep, there's a typo in the SQUAD default patch config which breaks the engine.

efOVS0n.png

By changing sauqre into square you can fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sooo I backed up my 0.90 game before installing 1.0, went to go play it for a while after testing out 1.0 and all my parts on all my ships have just chosen completely random scales, it has sorta broken all my crafts and I am really not impressed, anyone know of any way to fix this / change scaling without having to decomission everything and put it back up? really would rather not use hyperedit

Try the first page and/or the thread´s title for hints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would just like to say about the "root part is known to be buggy"

i have not been using the mod since the scaling issues started showing up, and its not JUST the root part for me. ANY scaled part on ALL crafts i make will be reverted to stock size on any means of loading. quicksave, trasferring, flying from ksc. sorry that i cant post any screenshots, as i have moved on to a new career since uninstalling as most ships had tweaks.

i managed to find some older craft files, and tried replicating my multiple part scaling with your dev version. and was unable. so... yay :) ty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try the first page and/or the thread´s title for hints.

If you read it properly you may note that I said that it was my 0.90 backup that it errored on, I only put mods on 1.0 that say clearly that they are working in 1.0, so I don't quite know what information I am supposed to be taking from the threads title.

Edited by Squiggsy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...