Jump to content

Kerbal Space Program update 1.3 Grand Discussion thread.


UomoCapra

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, gilflo said:

What are the steps to update to KSP 1.3  keeping my save games with all my ships  from 1.2.2 ?

Many thanks

If you're unmodded , just update the game.  If you're modded, you'll need to get updated versions of all your mods as well.

Edited by klgraham1013
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

If you're unmodded , just update the game.  If you're modded, you'll need to get updated versions of all your mods as well.

Thank's, I just saw there was an installer for mac OS X. i guess it's the best way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bonjour ^^

[EN] That was a very beautiful surprise to notice that the developers of KSP were finally able to implement the multilingual.... 
To a certain extent... 
That was also an immense disappointment when I understood that the French did not spank part of the new improvements of the game...
Woe is us French speakers.... Who ask since for so long this small improvement... 
Dream there. You already have the support for the multilingual, it does not stay more than has to implement our beautiful language of romantic ^^
IMAGINE, ... Imagine a kerbaunaute wearing the beret, a shirt in the colors of the French navy and a baguette has the hand ^^
Please Gods of kerbaunautes. Can feel sorry to you for us. ^^ Give to be able to him to us communicate with our next ones:)

 

 

[FR] Ça a été une très belle surprise de constater que les développeurs de KSP ont enfin pu implémenter le multilingue....
Dans une certaine mesure... 
Ca a été également une déception immense quand j'ai compris que le Français ne fessait pas partie des nouvelles améliorations du jeu...
Pauvre de nous francophones.... Qui demandons depuis si longtemps cette petite amélioration... 
Songez y . Vous avez déjà le support pour le multilingue, il ne reste plus qu'a implémenter notre belle langue de romantique ^^
IMAGINEZ ... imaginez un kerbaunaute portant le béret, un maillot aux couleurs de la marine française et une baguette a la main... ^^
S'il vous plait Dieux des kerbaunautes. Puissiez vous avoir pitié de nous. ^^ Donnez nous le pouvoir de communiquer avec nos prochains :)

Thanks ^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Menelik said:

[EN] That was a very beautiful surprise to notice that the developers of KSP were finally able to implement the multilingual.... 
To a certain extent... 
That was also an immense disappointment when I understood that the French did not spank part of the new improvements of the game..

I believe the initial round was done with the hardest languages to accommodate(Chineese, Japaneese, and Russian all have very different character sets), and the one with which Squad is most familiar(Spanish) in order to minimize code changes for additional language packs.

I would not be surprised if additional languages were released either as they are completed, by incorporating user created language packs, or with both minor and major releases, as even a badly failed language pack for an additional language should have no detrimental impact on users for other languages at this point(aka, no need to QA anything beyond the language pack itself).  They just had to make sure all their bases were covered by doing the hardest ones first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 2017. 6. 26. at 10:29 PM, Terwin said:

I believe the initial round was done with the hardest languages to accommodate(Chineese, Japaneese, and Russian all have very different character sets), and the one with which Squad is most familiar(Spanish) in order to minimize code changes for additional language packs.

As far as I know, SQUAD added support for pretty much every language so that language packs can easily be incorporated(by individual user) - Take a look at fonts. It's just that the stock install contains 5 languages, which I think is to boost up the sale by supporting the languages with large(st-ish) potential playerbase.

Edited by Reusables
Forum bug
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, I would like to say thanks for this update, I noticed many bug fixes in just the first few hours of playing the game.

Second, I would like to report a very slight new issue. After completing my Mun station in career mode, it said "You have finished construction of a new orbital station on its own orbit around the sun" (#autoLOC_7001073). It should say "You have finished construction of a new orbital station around <<1>>" (#autoLOC_7001074) with "the Mun" being 1. I don't think this has been reported anywhere else, so I just put it here so it will hopefully be fixed.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SoggyPickle said:

First, I would like to say thanks for this update, I noticed many bug fixes in just the first few hours of playing the game.

Second, I would like to report a very slight new issue. After completing my Mun station in career mode, it said "You have finished construction of a new orbital station on its own orbit around the sun" (#autoLOC_7001073). It should say "You have finished construction of a new orbital station around <<1>>" (#autoLOC_7001074) with "the Mun" being 1. I don't think this has been reported anywhere else, so I just put it here so it will hopefully be fixed.

Thanks.

all bug reports should go on http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/projects/ksp/issues in order to actually get noticed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Hey Squad.

  Before I begin, I just want you to know that I find your simulator to be quite an achievement, and I get much enjoyment out of it. im not sorry that I purchased this product from you, and am looking forward to what you have in store next. the leap to multi lingual is a huge step, and as a result, I feel that you will increase your customer base greatly. however, I must be forced to place a huge, and as of currently, un addressed issue with your software, which I am hoping that you finally see that it should be made top priority before any further development of content is continued.

RAM USAGE.

  I am sorry, but there it is. Unity's use of the RAM cache is simply terrible. it continues, to this day, to absolutely refuse to release RAM it has no more need for, and this continues to pluage us gamers as the game gobbles up more and more until it actually kills itself, crashing your game right to the desktop. this situation has become intolerable, and I for one am hoping that you will prioritize fixing this huge and glaring issue before deciding to make more content for the game. a game should be stable to play, not make us watch our usage like hawks to log off before it dies from starvation, causing us to lose our work within the environment.

  Please, fix this. whatever this problem is, I know you and your team can find it and fix it. my version has become unplayable due to this issue. i have tried everything. Full Stock, Crash. With Mods, Crash. Updated, Crash.  Rolled back, Crash. this cant be allowed to continue. I beg you, don't fallow the example of other developers, and place content before stability.

  again, your game, with this only exception, is a wonderful one. I want to continue to play it in the future. please make that possible.

  thank you.

  Yours,

  A Fellow Kerbalnaut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/21/2017 at 5:55 PM, Kamiyosha said:

RAM USAGE.

  I am sorry, but there it is. Unity's use of the RAM cache is simply terrible. it continues, to this day, to absolutely refuse to release RAM it has no more need for, and this continues to pluage us gamers as the game gobbles up more and more until it actually kills itself, crashing your game right to the desktop. this situation has become intolerable, and I for one am hoping that you will prioritize fixing this huge and glaring issue before deciding to make more content for the game. a game should be stable to play, not make us watch our usage like hawks to log off before it dies from starvation, causing us to lose our work within the environment.

Are you using the 64bit version?

Do you have any mods?

How much ram does your system have?

Generally using a lot of mods in the 32bit version is bad for stability, visualization mods in particular tend to take a lot of memory.

If you have less than 4gb of ram, it may still be a good idea to avoid visualization mods in the 64bit version as well, just because you do not have large amounts of memory available.

 

While memory usage was a problem in the 32bit version, it has become a much less common problem in the 64bit version, and Garbage collection has had a lot of focus in recent versions as well(this relates to reclaiming memory that is no longer needed) so making sure you are on 1.3 is a good idea as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2017 at 0:27 PM, Terwin said:

Are you using the 64bit version?

Do you have any mods?

How much ram does your system have?

Generally using a lot of mods in the 32bit version is bad for stability, visualization mods in particular tend to take a lot of memory.

If you have less than 4gb of ram, it may still be a good idea to avoid visualization mods in the 64bit version as well, just because you do not have large amounts of memory available.

 

While memory usage was a problem in the 32bit version, it has become a much less common problem in the 64bit version, and Garbage collection has had a lot of focus in recent versions as well(this relates to reclaiming memory that is no longer needed) so making sure you are on 1.3 is a good idea as well.

sadly, im stuck with 32 bits. i cant afford to go to 64 yet, as that means a new computer altogether, and even cheap ones are out of the question at this time. my current pc is maxed out at 4 gigs, with 3 available to KSP. i run no visual mods at all, and my part mods are less then ten now. there was a time when i could run more then fifty. 

overall, im lucky to get one and a half hours of play before i crash to desktop. but 64 bit has this issue as well. ive read posts of people with 30 gigs, on 64, running few mods, getting CTD'd within 3 hours. 

now, my current version is 1.2.2. i went to 1.3 and i found that it was more hoggy then 1.2.2 was, and reverted, to no avail now. i may as well go back to 1.3, because before i did the update, 1.2.2 ran really well. now its just as bad memory wise as 1.3. for this pc anyway. im hoping patch 1.4 will bring much less resource hogging features and the GC issue will be largely resolved. 

ive deactivated ram hungry windows processes such as superfetch, to help free a little more. but, it seems for now that i am stuck with the problem until squad changes the way the game is loaded and handled, or i can afford to upgrade my pc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2017 at 6:06 PM, Kamiyosha said:

sadly, im stuck with 32 bits. i cant afford to go to 64 yet, as that means a new computer altogether, and even cheap ones are out of the question at this time. my current pc is maxed out at 4 gigs, with 3 available to KSP. i run no visual mods at all, and my part mods are less then ten now. there was a time when i could run more then fifty. 

overall, im lucky to get one and a half hours of play before i crash to desktop. but 64 bit has this issue as well. ive read posts of people with 30 gigs, on 64, running few mods, getting CTD'd within 3 hours. 

now, my current version is 1.2.2. i went to 1.3 and i found that it was more hoggy then 1.2.2 was, and reverted, to no avail now. i may as well go back to 1.3, because before i did the update, 1.2.2 ran really well. now its just as bad memory wise as 1.3. for this pc anyway. im hoping patch 1.4 will bring much less resource hogging features and the GC issue will be largely resolved. 

ive deactivated ram hungry windows processes such as superfetch, to help free a little more. but, it seems for now that i am stuck with the problem until squad changes the way the game is loaded and handled, or i can afford to upgrade my pc. 

When you upgraded to 1.3 was that a case of a fresh install where you copied over your save game and installed updated versions of your mods, or did you just plot 1.3 on top of 1.22 and hope it would work?

Same for the downgrade, was it a fresh install, or might you still have artifacts from 1.3?

Artifacts seem like the likeliest reason for your 1.2.2 install not working the way it did before.  Also be sure you have the right versions of your mods, as incompatible mods can cause problems as well.

The big change for 1.3 is localization, and I could see how that could take an additional chunk of memory, it could also put a bunch of stiff inyour KSP folder that would not be over-written if you just tried to install 1.2.2 on top of it.

If you only have 10 mods, might I ask what they are?  Perhaps one or more of those are more resource intensive than it would seem.

An additional option is try out a fresh 1.3 or 1.2.2 install in a new location on your Hard drive and see if it has the same issues as your current save game.  It is possible that something about your computer changed around the time you switched from 1.2.2 to 1.3 and that is the source of your problems.(settings changes, malware, etc). 

Note:

Recommended System Specs:
* 2.0Ghz Dual Core CPU or higher (preferably higher)
* 4GB RAM
* 512MB Video Card, Shader Model 3.0
* 4GB Free HD space
* Windows Vista, 7, 8 or 10
* An Intel-based Mac running Mac OS X 10.8 or higher
* A Debian based Linux distro
* Chromebooks are NOT SUPPORTED

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Terwin said:

When you upgraded to 1.3 was that a case of a fresh install where you copied over your save game and installed updated versions of your mods, or did you just plot 1.3 on top of 1.22 and hope it would work?

Same for the downgrade, was it a fresh install, or might you still have artifacts from 1.3?

Artifacts seem like the likeliest reason for your 1.2.2 install not working the way it did before.  Also be sure you have the right versions of your mods, as incompatible mods can cause problems as well.

The big change for 1.3 is localization, and I could see how that could take an additional chunk of memory, it could also put a bunch of stiff inyour KSP folder that would not be over-written if you just tried to install 1.2.2 on top of it.

If you only have 10 mods, might I ask what they are?  Perhaps one or more of those are more resource intensive than it would seem.

An additional option is try out a fresh 1.3 or 1.2.2 install in a new location on your Hard drive and see if it has the same issues as your current save game.  It is possible that something about your computer changed around the time you switched from 1.2.2 to 1.3 and that is the source of your problems.(settings changes, malware, etc). 

Note:

Recommended System Specs:
* 2.0Ghz Dual Core CPU or higher (preferably higher)
* 4GB RAM
* 512MB Video Card, Shader Model 3.0
* 4GB Free HD space
* Windows Vista, 7, 8 or 10
* An Intel-based Mac running Mac OS X 10.8 or higher
* A Debian based Linux distro
* Chromebooks are NOT SUPPORTED

Thanks for your reply. 

So far as i can see, both upgrade and downgrade were fresh. However, as recently i had to perform a system restore, and as a result corrupted some file paths, im now going through and deleting all instances of ksp i can find. Then i will be trying 1.3 again and see if i can trim it to be playable. 

As far as mods go, the only large mod i have installed is the USI Suite, which is all the mods for USI. All the others are quality of life mods that use less then 30 Kbs. 

My system also meets all req's as well. Ive even turned down the visual setting to save ram usage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Kamiyosha said:

Thanks for your reply. 

So far as i can see, both upgrade and downgrade were fresh. However, as recently i had to perform a system restore, and as a result corrupted some file paths, im now going through and deleting all instances of ksp i can find. Then i will be trying 1.3 again and see if i can trim it to be playable. 

As far as mods go, the only large mod i have installed is the USI Suite, which is all the mods for USI. All the others are quality of life mods that use less then 30 Kbs. 

My system also meets all req's as well. Ive even turned down the visual setting to save ram usage. 

I too am a fan of RoverDude's USI suite, but if you have multiple vessels with MKS parts in logistics range(150m to 2km) I believe that is currently causing a slow-down due to the extra background processing for local logistics, especially if you have drills running.

Also, a mod need not be large to have a major impact on the amount of processing required per tick of the game clock(Even having several unattached docking ports can slow down play due to them each checking to see if any other docking ports are in range when that vessel is loaded)

 

Chatterer is probably the only QOL mod I am familiar with which I would be comfortable saying is unlikely to have a negative impact on game speed.(KER is *probably* ok as is primarily reads pre-calculated values but I am not 100% sure)

Any other mod with a .dll file could be responsible for your slow-down(or possibly a combination of two or more of them).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Terwin said:

I too am a fan of RoverDude's USI suite, but if you have multiple vessels with MKS parts in logistics range(150m to 2km) I believe that is currently causing a slow-down due to the extra background processing for local logistics, especially if you have drills running.

Also, a mod need not be large to have a major impact on the amount of processing required per tick of the game clock(Even having several unattached docking ports can slow down play due to them each checking to see if any other docking ports are in range when that vessel is loaded)

 

Chatterer is probably the only QOL mod I am familiar with which I would be comfortable saying is unlikely to have a negative impact on game speed.(KER is *probably* ok as is primarily reads pre-calculated values but I am not 100% sure)

Any other mod with a .dll file could be responsible for your slow-down(or possibly a combination of two or more of them).

ah ok. well, I have pretty much decided that im gonna uninstall, and leave it that way until I can afford to go to a 64 bit computer, with a massive ram cache onboard. like, more then 100 Gb's.

its expensive, but, as others in this thread would say, KSP is computer torture. minimum req's be darned, this program only wants extreme gaming machines. serious players only club. lol.

anyway, thanks for helping out. I hope that I can return to the stars later on. until then, see ya'll later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3.9.2017 at 1:06 AM, Kamiyosha said:

sadly, im stuck with 32 bits. i cant afford to go to 64 yet, as that means a new computer altogether,

The first 64 bit consumer processors came out in 2003. If your hardware was older than that you would be pretty much unable to play the game at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Harry Rhodan said:

The first 64 bit consumer processors came out in 2003. If your hardware was older than that you would be pretty much unable to play the game at all.

consider this. the PC im working with right now is 15 years old. it cost me exactly $6,439.65 to build from scratch. that was when I had a really good paying job, and didn't have the medical issues I have now. so, this pc is still a powerhouse 15 years later. however, nowadays, you young whips have the luxury of motherboards that can fit 7 different kinds of processors,  rams stick that can reach 4 gigs on one stick, Solid State drives, and other fun toys of the age. my board was designed to fit one. a Pentium Quad Pro. these were the days when 64 bit was still experimental.

let me put it in even better perspective. do you know what an 8088 is? an IBM 386? these were my teen years computers. I had a brand new, BRAND NEW, Commodore 64/128 when I was 6. from that history I built this machine, that can STILL play a game like KSP 15 years after its construction. my ONLY limiting factor is the chipset, which needs a new board to install in, which means new compatible RAM, and a new compatible power supply. $1,500 bucks piece meal minimum to get minimum performance requirements, and thats if I can reuse this case. an expense I can ill afford these days.

so, in reply, your right, I can barely play the game at all. right now its only possible running it at the lowest possible graphics settings, even though my current video card (the only thing on the system that I could continue to upgrade) is capable of a lot more. but, any higher, and it suffers a memory shortage crash even before its loading screen is done. its a huge achievement for this machine to be capable of running it at all after 15 years of solid service as a gaming machine. and lets just say, if I can get the money to build another, my next parts list on newegg right now would shame the best Alienwares available currently.

forgive the rant. *sigh* I have such a list of stuff I want to have and play that is now out of reach because of a bit limit. lol. I find it very frustrating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had to remove some posts.  Let's keep it friendly, folks.

Name-calling and personal criticism is never okay.  If someone says something that makes you angry, then your anger is your problem, not anyone else's, and the onus is on you to stay civil.  (Unless you think that the other person said something that was so inappropriate and flame-worthy that it's actually breaking forum rules.  In which case, please report the post and let the moderators handle it, instead of responding to the post yourself.  That's what we're for.)

Thank you for your understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kamiyosha said:

 my ONLY limiting factor is the chipset, which needs a new board to install in, which means new compatible RAM, and a new compatible power supply. $1,500 bucks piece meal minimum to get minimum performance requirements, and thats if I can reuse this case. an expense I can ill afford these days.

If you are willing to go with used parts, you can probably get a reasonable upgrade for a fairly small expenditure(Goodwill computers may be a good option to look at if you have one you can access, but other used computer stores can also be pretty inexpensive, especially just buying bits and pieces, perhaps under $100 if you can either reuse your power supply or get a cheap adapter).

It really sucks when real-life gets in the way of the things we like to do, but it is still important to realize that KSP is only a game, and things like Food/Rent/Medical Bills take precedence, no matter how much we might wish otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Terwin said:

If you are willing to go with used parts, you can probably get a reasonable upgrade for a fairly small expenditure(Goodwill computers may be a good option to look at if you have one you can access, but other used computer stores can also be pretty inexpensive, especially just buying bits and pieces, perhaps under $100 if you can either reuse your power supply or get a cheap adapter).

It really sucks when real-life gets in the way of the things we like to do, but it is still important to realize that KSP is only a game, and things like Food/Rent/Medical Bills take precedence, no matter how much we might wish otherwise.

Agreed. After the new year, i will have to look into those options. Until then, im stuck for now. I do prefer buying new, most of us do. But expenses will dictate the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also worth noting that there are other threads available for discussing hardware (e.g. what works well with KSP, how much it costs, etc.).  So... perhaps best to continue any conversation about that over there?

(This thread's about "KSP 1.3".  Talking about issues around KSP 1.3 itself is fine, including performance specifically about 1.3... but discussions of this-hardware-vs-that-hardware, or performance of KSP in general, aren't really about 1.3 per se, so would be better served elsewhere.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...