Devnotes Tuesday: Two sprints down, one to go!

[kiwi1960]

So..... I have a question.... 1.2 sounds like it may actually be a game breaker....

I assume that it WILL, by the very nature of what is being fixed... mean that all save games from older versions will not work in 1.2

And worse.... all planes and ships might be ...unusable... to a point in 1.2

and worse.... again, ALL mods will have to be updated.....

 

[Claw]

1 minute ago, kiwi1960 said:

mean that all save games from older versions will not work in 1.2

That's not the case. Saves will be backwards compatible. Steps are also being taken to ensure saves brought forward will be able to ease their way into the CommNet.

 

2 minutes ago, kiwi1960 said:

And worse.... all planes and ships might be ...unusable... to a point in 1.2

I'm not sure what is leading to that conclusion. As of now, the only thing that would affect the usability of an existing ship would be the SAS rework. And that will hopefully make them work better. Unless there is some unusual configuration that was contrived in order to abuse or skirt the existing SAS.

 

3 minutes ago, kiwi1960 said:

again, ALL mods will have to be updated

Some will, yes. Any mod interfacing with the SAS will definitely need to be updated. Others will likely need updating, (or maybe just a recompile).

[kiwi1960]

Thanks for the fast answer... hmmmm.....

[Hevak]

11 minutes ago, kiwi1960 said:

So..... I have a question.... 1.2 sounds like it may actually be a game breaker....

I assume that it WILL, by the very nature of what is being fixed... mean that all save games from older versions will not work in 1.2

And worse.... all planes and ships might be ...unusable... to a point in 1.2

and worse.... again, ALL mods will have to be updated.....

 

I'm hoping not, but wasn't it 1.1 that had a bit of work done so that save games wouldn't be ruined by updates? At least it was mentioned that squad wanted to avoid this as the game is considered a full release now.

honestly I don't understand too much of the technical side of what's being done, but it seems like it's not a whole  lot actual physical things changing, just a lot of the way it processes things? 

I think you're definitely right with ships and planes, maybe not unusable, but will probably need tweaking with the new fuel flow issues? 

Of course mods are their own little issue altogether though lol.

you are probably right though on all this, I'm just hoping not on the save game part.   

 

Edit: And all all appears to be answered by claw before I could type and post, lol. Good news it seems. 

Edited August 3, 2016 by Hevak

[Claw]

Just now, Hevak said:

honestly I don't understand too much of the technical side of what's being done, but it seems like it's not a whole  lot actual physical things changing, just a lot of the way it processes things?

The gist of the internal updates are that we are trying to remove as much garbage generation as possible, cleaning up code (for utility and readability), and trying to optimize code where we can.

[Raptor9]

6 hours ago, SQUAD said:

These two systems are now combined into one piece of code, and the consolidated SAS system will adjust its aggressiveness based on the ship’s design, meaning it’s a bit less jittery now.  Additionally, the Pilot steering modes include a “coasting” phase and a “stopping” phase when switching steering targets, which helps conserve resources and limits overshooting.

Yes! 

6 hours ago, SQUAD said:

After finishing up his part of the code cleaning, Nathanael (Nathankell) implemented an Advanced Tweakables settings option in Gameplay settings. This allows us to expose various advanced tweakable options (like setting tank priority, the existing actuation toggles for RCS and gimbals, the safe-deploy option for parachutes, and the like).

Regarding the RCS systems, is there going to be a way to have the RCS retain it's "Disabled" status from the editor after the fairing around it is staged? Example: A Mun lander's RCS thrusters are disabled in the VAB, and loaded inside a fairing.  When the fairing is staged, it automatically enables any RCS thrusters that were inside it, regardless if they were meant to be disabled.

Another "characteristic"; setting rotation/translation axis assignments for individual RCS thrusters/Vernors is extremely useful, but goes against the technique of using "Control From Here" on a docking port for docking maneuvers.  Example: Switching to a docking port control axis that is pointing up 90 deg from the "nose" of the spacecraft will result in different rotation/translation axes, which throws off the RCS thrusters' axis assignments.  I hope I didn't describe that in a confusing way. 

[Hevak]

1 minute ago, Claw said:

The gist of the internal updates are that we are trying to remove as much garbage generation as possible, cleaning up code (for utility and readability), and trying to optimize code where we can.

Thanks, yeah that is about all I've really understood of most of the last couple dev notes, lol, but still it's nice they get into to the technical bits some for people who know and enjoy that stuff.  And as I said in a previous post this is great, these things will benefit everyone regardless of their setups. 

Beyond the code cleanup stuff, some of the other changes like fuel flow, and other stuff brought up are just things I'm not quite sure how it's going to affect  me and my crafts. But I think since I'm not really making anything involved or crazy like some people here create, I shouldn't have much issues with anything I have. 

Once it hits I'm sure forum disussions will touch on how craft have been affected anyways, which is good enough for me.  

[Warzouz]

There will be advance tweakable on gimbal and RCS. Why not adding them to reaction wheels ?

[mattinoz]

I DevNote

Ohh... fingers crossed the new combined RCS means the pilot mode selected will stay selected if I toggle RCS off then on again or use the temporary on key?

 

[brusura]

48 minutes ago, Warzouz said:

There will be advance tweakable on gimbal and RCS. Why not adding them to reaction wheels ?

Yes please squad

[Claw]

49 minutes ago, Warzouz said:

Why not adding them to reaction wheels ?

What tweakables are you referring to here?

[Bloojay]

15 hours ago, SQUAD said:

leaving the option hidden unless Advanced Tweakables are turned on.

Finally, the advanced mode i've been wanting for the longest of times without actually mentioning the idea because i thought you guys wouldn't implement anything like that due to how it would naturally split the fanbase.

Some notes:
take it easy, do it in a way that doesn't shun newbies and stroke veterans egos,
add more. (ima make a thread specifically for some of my ideas after this)

Edited August 3, 2016 by technicalfool
L-lewd!

[brusura]

55 minutes ago, Claw said:

What tweakables are you referring to here?

Personally I am talking about Pitch, Yaw, Roll and ability to reduce the force for each

[Capt Snuggler]

can we get a screen shot of what @Porkjet is up to with the parts spruce up? PREEEZ

[RoverDude]

4 hours ago, specialopsdave said:

I hope that the Telemetry system will be a difficulty option.

Yup, it is a difficulty option, and has a lot of other dials and such to help out modders (like being able to extend ranges for things like RSS or planet packs).

4 hours ago, cfds said:

Please tell me that there will be actual ground stations all around Kerbin (with real meshes and stuff).

There will not be.

3 hours ago, Alshain said:

I was hoping for the same thing, I even made a thread on it a while back.

Sadly, it doesn't look like that will be the case.  Instead it's just going to be magic communications.  We wouldn't want you to get immersed in the game after all, or make it feel like it could actually made some sense.

I don't know, maybe its still a possibility but the way those comm lines point straight back at the center of Kerbin, I'm doubting it now.

It's no less 'magic' than not showing you the factories that make your rocket parts - unless you subscribe to the idea that Kerbals are subterranean due to the constant rain of flaming debris - in which case they'd probably protect their radio antennas as well ;))

I expect there are many other things you can get immersed in vs. a radio antenna somewhere on Kerbin that you might spend 0.001% of your total play time looking at, and then, only an initial peek out of curiosity, or because a long range surface contract happened to fly past it.  

 

[eddiew]

Great dev notes  

Is there any chance that the cleaner (faster?) code with improved intercepts/orbits might show up in a 1.14 patch, or are we now committed to 1.2 and the next Unity?

[taniwha]

4 hours ago, Supernovy said:

I warned you about the semilatus rectum, @taniwha.

Yes, well, at least it doesn't make me wonder which cord is the semi-major axis. C? G? Or maybe A.

[Majorjim!]

5 hours ago, Arsonide said:

autostruts to be a tweakable on every part,

Does this render struts pointless then?

3 hours ago, Claw said:

As of now, the only thing that would affect the usability of an existing ship would be the SAS rework.

What about complex fuel flow in crafts? Will that be affected?

[Arsonide]

11 minutes ago, Majorjim! said:

Does this render struts pointless then?

No, the orientation and configuration of a strut affects the stability of the craft. Depending on what mode you use, autostruts will always go to either the root part on the vessel, or the heaviest part on the vessel. Unlike a normal strut, you have no control over where they are going..

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Arsonide said:

No, the orientation and configuration of a strut affects the stability of the craft. Depending on what mode you use, autostruts will always go to either the root part on the vessel, or the heaviest part on the vessel. Unlike a normal strut, you have no control over where they are going..

OK I see, so, if you will indulge me, what is the point of adding it to every part? Even though it is a hidden option, the option IS there in a stock game so most people will use it. This is just a stock KJR right?

 

Edited August 3, 2016 by Majorjim!

[Arsonide]

1 minute ago, Majorjim! said:

OK I see, so, if you will indulge me, what is the point of adding it to every part? Even though it is a hidden option, the option IS there in a stock game so most people will use it. This is just a stock KJR right?

 I will be honest, the game does not need such a thing.

It is an option, one that is off by default. If you do not think the game needs it, then do not enable the option.

It also isn't very similar to Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. That stiffens joints, and adds new types of joints. Autostruts add more joints. The concept has been in the game for a while already - it is used by fairings to keep the nose of a payload from swinging around, and it is used by wheels to stabilize some instabilities in PhysX. Due to the positive response it received, we expanded it a bit, but it is still off by default in most places.

[brusura]

2 minutes ago, Arsonide said:

It is an option, one that is off by default. If you do not think the game needs it, then do not enable the option.

It also isn't very similar to Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. That stiffens joints, and adds new types of joints. Autostruts add more joints. The concept has been in the game for a while already - it is used by fairings to keep the nose of a payload from swinging around, and it is used by wheels to stabilize some instabilities in PhysX. Due to the positive response it received, we expanded it a bit, but it is still off by default in most places.

Uhm more joints does mean more processing power needed for physX/cpu? Of course if I want to enable it

Edited August 3, 2016 by brusura

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Arsonide said:

It is an option, one that is off by default. If you do not think the game needs it, then do not enable the option.

It also isn't very similar to Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. That stiffens joints, and adds new types of joints. Autostruts add more joints. The concept has been in the game for a while already - it is used by fairings to keep the nose of a payload from swinging around, and it is used by wheels to stabilize some instabilities in PhysX. Due to the positive response it received, we expanded it a bit, but it is still off by default in most places.

Yes I was going to add that I or others could just choose not to use it but the option IS there.

   I understand the need for auto-struts on the wheels and inside fairings, although with a bit of creativity the latter is not required, but I still don't see that it is needed for all parts. You got a good response on the others because it was needed on those parts.

 What kind of benefits does it bring to have it on all parts if it does not give KJR like stiffness to a craft?

And thank you Arsonide for the replies, I know you must be busy so that is my last question.

 

[klgraham1013]

7 hours ago, smjjames said:

When it's ready

Just like 1.0 and 1.1?

...

Sorry.  Had to do it.  1.2.4 is going to be awesome!

[Red Iron Crown]

I had resigned myself to thinking that SAS would never be fixed, that I'd be using mods for it forever. Immensely pleased to be wrong about that.