Devnote Tuesday: Experimental Improvements

[Daze]

I'm start to thinking that Squad will leave the original one and make a copy with all this posts of disappointment..

[Maximillian]

I think the Round-8 should be kept around as well. It's fuel and mass specs may be redundant with the Oscar, but not when it comes to physical size. The Round-8 allows for a shorter design with the same DeltaV spec than building with Oscars. I would however like to see a larger Xenon tank added.

[Majorjim!]

I believe they are making a mistake with this, and I don't think "put it back in yourself" is a good solution. It isn't a redundant tank at all, it's a unique part.

Totally. I am dumbfounded by the decision.. It's time Squad spoke up about this. It is clear this is not what the majority want.

[basic.syntax]

This, one thousand infinite times. I hope the fairing drawing tool can at LEAST be repurposed by a modder into a wing tool.

Here you go...

Could enterprising modders access the procedural mesh generation system to make... other things?

I see no reason why it shouldn't be possible. Just bear in mind the proc mesh code was written with fairings in mind, so it might not be ideally suited for unforeseen usages... But then again, making a system that is ideally suited for unforeseen uses would render those uses foreseen, or require time travel. (Do let me know if you have a working implementation of the latter).

[Eric S]

I point out to the "to some extent" of your sentence Yeah, the devs are to fix some issues with the RAM usage ( most likely the memory leaks ), but the real issue with RAM , that is the fact that the game loads ALL the parts at game start to RAM and DOES NOT unload them for any reason until the game exits or crashes even if you don't use 90% of the parts in the game at any moment most of the times, coupled with the fact that for some OS the game is locked to use 3,ish Gb of RAM, is not to be addressed in 1.0, if ever AFAIK.

Two things: if the test branch using DDS textures made it into experimentals, that could seriously bump up the headroom we've got, as those textures take a third of the memory that the existing textures do.

Second, dynamic loading and unloading of parts can actually make things worse in the presence of memory leaks, so dealing with the memory leaks first does actually make some sense.

[Capt Snuggler]

I believe they are making a mistake with this, and I don't think "put it back in yourself" is a good solution. It isn't a redundant tank at all, it's a unique part.

yup, totally not redundant. if anything we need MORE soft shelled, light weight fuel tanks for landers and situations where heavy rigid body tanks are not needed.

and/or like others have said, make the fuel type a tweakable option in the VAB. choose from LFO, LF, O, Xe, MP and have the texture change accordingly.

That would expose some redundant parts...

[r_rolo1]

Two things: if the test branch using DDS textures made it into experimentals, that could seriously bump up the headroom we've got, as those textures take a third of the memory that the existing textures do.

Second, dynamic loading and unloading of parts can actually make things worse in the presence of memory leaks, so dealing with the memory leaks first does actually make some sense.

I agree with you... but what I said above was just a matter of explaining of why I'm somewhat wary of the "add more parts" mantra. Yes, we might get some extra overhead with the fixes SQUAD already told about explicitly, but the main issue with RAM is still there and will still be there after 1.0. So adding RAM eaters before getting that stuff fixed completely might be a risky proposition, and TBH adding a part that is already in game but just with a different filling in that context for me is just baiting MAFs for the sake of it:/

[r4pt0r]

HOLD THE PHONE

Felipe (HarvesteR): Wow, weeks seem to be flying by now… Didn’t we write one of these a few days ago? Must be them relativistic effects again… Anyhow. My week can best be described as a mad blur in which many a bug was fixed, and many a feature got implemented in a half-dazed flurry of non-stop coding days… So much so I’m referring to the git log to see what went in between the last dev blog and now.

Here are some highlights:

Fixed a VERY ugly-looking bug concerning scenario modules and persistence, I’m amazed it went by as it did. Should fix many mysterious persistence problems, hopefully.

Went over the balance and progression of the SRBs in early games. We now have a new SRB, called the RT-5 “Flea†Booster. (Model by Bob “RoverDudeâ€Â)

Speaking of new parts, Bob and I are working on two new parts, which should be very useful now that reentry heat is a thing. More on that later.

Added a difficulty slider to turn reentry heat down (or up, or entirely off… your choice)....

The Flight UI can now be made transparent through a game setting.

Added a ‘warp to next morning’ button at the KSC toolbar.

SAS Maneuver mode automatically disengages back to stability assist as dV nears zero.

Many improvements to ambient audio in flight.

The Round8 Toroidal Fuel Tank was repurposed as a 1.25m inline Xenon Tank.

The vessel info panel in the KnowledgeBase UI now shows a craft’s max acceleration and est. time to reach 0m/s (very useful for timing rendezvous burns)

Added a system to generate and display thumbnails for craft files in the LaunchDialog and CraftBrowser screens. (thumbnails not required for sharing craft files)

Several improvements to part shaders, especially around transparent textured ones.

Added PorkJet’s awesome new Mk3 wing sections.

There’s also been several other minor fixes and tweaks, from proper detection and placement of splashdown effects at very high speeds (now that that’s possible) to making pressure and temperature experiment modules able to function in space… It was an intense week, most assuredly.

All this was done after experimentals had already started. So is that work for the update after 1.0, or are they adding it to 1.0 itself? I ask specifically because

Speaking of new parts, Bob and I are working on two new parts, which should be very useful now that reentry heat is a thing. More on that later.

I need to know if these(presumably heatshields) will be in 1.0

[regex]

I need to know if these(presumably heatshields) will be in 1.0

I'm guessing aero-braking heatshields. Maybe you could use them with fairings to make an aeroshell, how cool would that be?

[basic.syntax]

I think they would have said, if work on 1.0 had stopped and these words were about starting work on v1.1.

The Mk3 wing sections specifically were intended for v1.0; all of this seems intended for 1.0. Yes, after the experimental testing phase has begun, new stuff...

[lajoswinkler]

rest in peace, little toroidal tank ._.

I was hoping someone would add body inclination info in the map view or mission control.

Good for the reentry heat slider. I'm gonna crank mine to the top.

[r4pt0r]

I'm guessing aero-braking heatshields. Maybe you could use them with fairings to make an aeroshell, how cool would that be?

That would most cool!

[Destroyer713]

I'm start to thinking that Squad will leave the original one and make a copy with all this posts of disappointment..

Just like how they're making the next update 0.95 rather than 1.0, right?

[Superfluous J]

Just like how they're making the next update 0.95 rather than 1.0, right?

No, more like how they decided not to give ship more Isp when you had an engineer on board.

[NovaSilisko]

No, more like how they decided not to give ship more Isp when you had an engineer on board.

Don't even joke about that, man...

[kmMango]

Looking at the ROUND8's stats, it was redundant with the Oscar-Tank, except in terms of design. We needed an inline Xenon tank much more than we needed another low-capacity LFO tank for probes.

You are, of course, free to mod it back to its original specs if you want to, or create another cfg to have both variants.

Cheers

I am willing to tolerate a lot from Squad, but this is silly. "Mod it yourself" is not, never has been, or never will be an acceptable solution! More than 200 people have voted to keep the old tank. How long would it take to change its CFG and recolor it?

I'm sorry, but this is a mistake. The ROUND8 is one of the only low profile LFO tank we have. Just make another part!

You are always talking about how the community is a huge part of the development. Listen to us!

Mods, feel free to sack me if I am breaking any rules-I don't think I am.

Edited April 16, 2015 by kmMango

[White Owl]

It would be nice if we can watch some video from experimental test :-)

I second this motion. (maintining proper respect for Newton's Third Law)

It would be like a video of sausage being made. Trust me, it's better to wait for the finished product.

[basic.syntax]

Early Access itself, has put people in the sausage factory. Disclaimers are posted. Doesn't stop complaints about the mess, tho

[nightingale]

One more voice for keeping the ROUND-8 as a LFO tank. Oh, and I say it with contracts: Contract Pack: Save the ROUND-8.

[ShadowZone]

think its worth pointing out good a post from Spartwo.

if squad are worried about the total part count of KSP why have so many wing segments? (while adding more...)

the 'fairing draw tool' is on the way for v1.0 why not add a 'wing drawing tool' as well?

the procedural part cat is out of the bag now anyway...

Agreed!

And I applaud your choice of avatar! LFO + Xenon Donut in harmony! Save the Round 8 !

[KerbMav]

Now that we have a stock part sorting feature, it should be easy to make (almost) every tank available for every fuel type by adding a part config for every fuel type to every tank part? Maybe adding extra labels the same way the game adds the player's flag to certain parts to make them visually different yet not increase RAM usage by much?

One more voice for keeping the ROUND-8 as a LFO tank. Oh, and I say it with contracts: Contract Pack: Save the ROUND-8.

[Pigbear]

All the fact that they are replacing the tank completely says is "We have time to model new parts that are probably heatshields, But you want us to clone a part and use another texture which is less than half the work of these two other parts? Screw you"

[Wallygator]

I'm both confused and perplexed by the wide range of additive features being introduced during experimentals.

I am assuming that experimentals is focused on bug squashing, since while in QA there were already new features and balancing going on.

If what is happening is true, then it appears that either experimentals and QA are one and the same, OR the management team does not have adequate controls in place regarding the development methodology OR both.

Oh, and I propose a xenon boycott till the R8 receives a repreave.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

Join the revolution!

Get the avatar!

SAVE THE ROUND-8!!!

[monstah]

I'm start to thinking that Squad will leave the original one and make a copy with all this posts of disappointment..

We're not talking about the same SQUAD, are we?