Whats wrong with my shrouds?

[AngrybobH]

Take a look. These things have been doing this randomly since I started playing (a short while before comm nets) so it is not a version thing. I also seem to remember this happening before I installed any mods. It has just finally annoyed me me enough to look around to see if there was a permanent fix. I didn't see anything on the subject. Anyone got anything? Quick save/load works about 80% of the time but interplanetary ships usually loose their shrouds no matter what.

[Superfluous J]

Happens to me all the time too. Doesn't bug me enough to put the time into finding out if it's a stock issue or a mod.

[AVaughan]

It also happens to me, and I saw it in stock in 1.3.  (It also happens in my modded 1.4.3 career, but I haven't played enough stock 1.4.x to know whether it still happens in stock).

[MR L A]

this is one of the reasons I don't use shrouds. You have two options, turn the shroud toggle off OR,  my preferred option, use the other node to connect parts to heat shields

They have one which creates the shroud or a gap if you turn the shroud off, and a second node on the same side much close to the shield itself, which the connecting part will be flush with... just in case you didn't already know this

[Snark]

12 hours ago, AngrybobH said:

I didn't see anything on the subject. Anyone got anything? Quick save/load works about 80% of the time but interplanetary ships usually loose their shrouds no matter what.

I get it myself from time to time, too (with engine shrouds)-- I think it's a stock bug.  It happens to me pretty rarely, and when it does, quicksave/quickload always fixes it for me-- I've never seen it not work.  So it's a pretty minor issue for me, given that it's a rare hiccup that's easily/reliably fixed.

Also, it never happens to me for heat shields, ever, just because I never have heat shield shrouds.    I've never liked the shrouds on the shields-- I find them ugly-- so I always play with a little ModuleManager patch that turns off the heatshield shrouds, and tweaks the connector node on the shields so that parts automatically attach snugly and directly to the heat shield itself, which is always what I want anyway.  Looks way better (to me, anyway), makes building ships more convenient.  The fact that it also happens to prevent the shroud bug for heat shields is just a convenient side benefit. 

[qzgy]

23 minutes ago, Snark said:

little ModuleManager patch that turns off the heatshield shrouds, and tweaks the connector node on the shields so that parts automatically attach snugly and directly to the heat shield itself, which is always what I want anyway.  Looks way better (to me, anyway), makes building ships more convenient. 

Hey mind sending that patch over (or linking a  convenient place for it)? I'd quite enjoy it too..... dont like the shrouds either.

[AngrybobH]

1 hour ago, qzgy said:

Hey mind sending that patch over (or linking a  convenient place for it)? I'd quite enjoy it too..... dont like the shrouds either.

yeah, me too. I really don't like the shroud offset on the heat shields.

[Snark]

1 hour ago, qzgy said:

Hey mind sending that patch over (or linking a  convenient place for it)? I'd quite enjoy it too..... dont like the shrouds either.

https://github.com/KSPSnark/SnarkTweaks/blob/master/stock/UnshroudedHeatShields.cfg

Somewhere there's a "community library of useful ModuleManager patches" thread for collecting stuff like this, and I believe this was listed there, too... thought I remembered where the thread was, but am having trouble digging it up at the moment.  Anyway, the above link will get you the file that I use.

Note that one of the things the patch needs to do is to get rid of one of the two nodes on the part.  There were two options:  get  rid of node_stack_direct, or get rid of node_stack_bottom.  Whichever one is deleted... any existing ships using that one will have game-breaking problems.  I picked node_stack_direct as the one to axe, since that was the one that I never, ever used, and therefore removing it caused me, personally, no problems.

• If you're in the habit of habitually using only the node_stack_bottom node, then this patch will work just fine for you.
• If you're in the habit of habitually using only the node_stack_direct node, then this patch will break all your ships as-is, but you can easily fix it by switching it to remove the node_stack_bottom node instead.
• If you have a mix of node_stack_bottom and node_stack_direct usages among your ships... then this patch is not for you, because no matter which way you go, you're guaranteed to break something.

[FleshJeb]

6 minutes ago, Snark said:

Somewhere there's a "community library of useful ModuleManager patches

 

[Snark]

17 minutes ago, FleshJeb said:

Ah, there we go, thanks!  I remembered that it was Alshain, and I remembered that it referred to ModuleManager in the title.

What defeated my search efforts is that he's been and gone and spelled it "Module Manager" as two words, thus cleverly evading my search for "ModuleManager". 

[Vanamonde]

I have never seen that happen. But it sounds like a support issue, and so, moved to Support. 

[Superfluous J]

11 hours ago, Snark said:

I get it myself from time to time, too (with engine shrouds)-- I think it's a stock bug.  It happens to me pretty rarely, and when it does, quicksave/quickload always fixes it for me-- I've never seen it not work.  So it's a pretty minor issue for me, given that it's a rare hiccup that's easily/reliably fixed.

Hmm for me every time I load the vessel it's offset in a different way.

[qzgy]

21 hours ago, Snark said:

https://github.com/KSPSnark/SnarkTweaks/blob/master/stock/UnshroudedHeatShields.cfg

Somewhere there's a "community library of useful ModuleManager patches" thread for collecting stuff like this, and I believe this was listed there, too... thought I remembered where the thread was, but am having trouble digging it up at the moment.  Anyway, the above link will get you the file that I use.

Note that one of the things the patch needs to do is to get rid of one of the two nodes on the part.  There were two options:  get  rid of node_stack_direct, or get rid of node_stack_bottom.  Whichever one is deleted... any existing ships using that one will have game-breaking problems.  I picked node_stack_direct as the one to axe, since that was the one that I never, ever used, and therefore removing it caused me, personally, no problems.

• If you're in the habit of habitually using only the node_stack_bottom node, then this patch will work just fine for you.
• If you're in the habit of habitually using only the node_stack_direct node, then this patch will break all your ships as-is, but you can easily fix it by switching it to remove the node_stack_bottom node instead.
• If you have a mix of node_stack_bottom and node_stack_direct usages among your ships... then this patch is not for you, because no matter which way you go, you're guaranteed to break something.

Thanks. One clairification though - which node is which? Like is the node_stack_bottom the one that would normally produce the shrouds or the one closer to the heatshield that removes the shroud?

[Snark]

6 minutes ago, qzgy said:

Thanks. One clairification though - which node is which? Like is the node_stack_bottom the one that would normally produce the shrouds or the one closer to the heatshield that removes the shroud?

In the stock (unmodified) heat shield, the node_stack_bottom is the lower one-- the one that's floating in space below the shield, and which causes the shroud to appear when used.  The node_stack_direct is the upper, "hidden" one that allows for direct attachment to the shield with no shroud.

For my own reasons, I've never used the node_stack_direct myself (because its design makes it unusable as far as I'm concerned).  So I've been stuck with the node_stack_bottom, which is usable and convenient for building; it's just (to me) ugly and unpleasant.  So what I did was to eliminate the (to me) awkward / confusing / unusable node that I never use anyway and only gets in my way, and then take the usable one that I've always been in the habit of using, and change it to make it look the way I want.

Ridiculously long part-design rant in spoiler section since it's kinda peripheral to the topic. 

Spoiler

A preface to the following:  Not sure if this is actually a criticism of the part design-- maybe it's just a statement about how I, personally, interact with the game.  But the stock heat shields and I go together like balloons and porcupines. 

I guess I can see the design intent behind providing the node_stack_direct... sort of.  That is, in the stock unmodified heat shield, I guess theoretically it would be convenient to have the option of doing that.  Imagining the thought process of whomever designed it, I picture it going something like:  "See, we have this neat shroud thing that we expect most people will want, so that's the default.  But maybe some folks won't care for it, so let's give them this other option, too!  Now each player can have exactly what they want and everyone wins."

That's great... in theory.  Maybe it does work that way for other players, I dunno.  But it doesn't work for me, even slightly-- and I end up with (from my perspective) the worst of all possible worlds.

For me, node_stack_bottom is ugly-but-usable, and node_stack_direct is cosmetically pretty, but unusable and "toxic" (in the sense that not only don't I ever use it, ever, under any circumstances... but its mere presence makes working with the heat shield unpleasant and awkward in the editor, even when I'm not using it).

What I want is something that's both usable and pretty.  But if I only get to have one, I gotta go with usable, which is why I always went with node_stack_bottom before making this MM patch.

So... why do I find node_stack_direct so toxic and useless?  Several reasons:

First, engineering flaw = wobbly ship.  Even if this node had none of the other problems I describe below, this alone would be a total showstopper that would prevent me from ever using it.  Here's the deal:  The node_stack_direct, for each heat shield, is implemented as being one node size below the right one for that part diameter.  For example, the 2.5m heat shield should have a 2.5m connector node, right?  And the node_stack_bottom does, as you'd expect... except that the node_stack_direct is only a 1.25m node.

That's... incredibly bad.  Node sizes matter.  They determine the stiffness of a joint.  Ever notice how much more rigid a stack of 2.5m parts is than a 1.25m stack the same height?  That's because it's linked together with bigger nodes.  By making node_stack_direct be sized one node-size down, it means that attaching to it causes a weak, floppy joint at that point in the stack.

Seriously?  I mean, really?

Nope.  Uh-uh.  Do not want.  Outcast unclean.  Do not use, ever, under any circumstances.

I can only speculate as to why on earth this was done.  My guess is that since the two nodes are spaced pretty close together vertically, maybe making both of them the same size would have made them harder to tell apart, or something?  No idea.  Even if that were the reason... not only does it leave the absolutely-unacceptable, show-stopper "floppy joint" problem, but (for me at least) it doesn't actually address the problem because it's too easily confused anyway (see below).

Pause.  Inhale.  Okay, on to the next problem I have with this design:

 

It's awkard and unpleasant to have two snappable nodes so close to each other.  Heat shields are not tall.  It's one thing to have two nodes, but quite another to have two nodes that are really really close together.  It means that every single time I want to attach something to the heat shield, I can't just do a casual swish-click-swish-click of the mouse to slap stuff together quickly, the way I do with pretty much every other part in the game.  No, I have to caaaaaarefully move it to make sure it goes to the right place.  And if it goes to the wrong one, I have to sit there and arm-wrestle my gosh-darn mouse to try to trick it into going to the node that I want.

Ugh.  Do not want.  A major, major part of the sheer joy that is the VAB, for me, is how ridiculously easy and smooth and fluid it is to slap together a rocket.  It's a brilliant game design, and one of my favorite parts of KSP.  And this breaks that feature.  It turns the VAB from being a fun experience to being a twitchy, nit-picky, anxiety-inducing, oh-my-gosh-did-I-do-it-wrong slog.

So, no.

And it gets worse.  Since the node_stack_direct is (in my world) utterly disqualified from participation in polite society by its undersized connector, I have to use node_stack_bottom; I have no other choice, if I don't want to break the physical sturdiness of my rocket (which of course is non-negotiable).  But the node_stack_bottom is hideously ugly (for me)-- can't stand the unfinished we-forgot-to-put-a-texture-on-it look of the shroud, can't stand the protruding "lip", can't stand the extra blank vertical space it inserts-- which means that for me to use it, I need to make it look the way it should have looked in the first place.  Which means I need to manually turn the shroud off, and them manually scootch it into position.  But doing that takes it so close to the other node that now things get even more awkward for attaching.

 

And finally, the biggie, the most rage-inducing aspect of node_stack_direct for me:

Lack of visual confidence and feedback also disqualifies node_stack_direct.  This one's a little more subtle and harder to explain, but it is (to me, at least) really, really important.  It's a fundamental principle of UI design.   When the user does a thing, there needs to be clear, unambiguous, intuitive sensory feedback that lets them know it happened the way they want.  And node_stack_direct breaks this.

I click a button.  Did it do the thing the button is supposed to do?  Or did I maybe not press the button hard enough?  Or is the button maybe broken or disconnected or disabled or something?  And did I push the correct button?

This is really, really important.  Elevator buttons light up when you push them.  Smartphone keyboards provide little tactile "bumps" as you type, and/or audible clicks.  Clicking on an icon to drag it instantly highlights the icon, even before you start dragging.  Door latches go "click" when they engage, so you know the door's actually closed.  And so forth.

Trying to use a UI that doesn't provide effective feedback is like trying to do manual work when your hands are numb.  It's an exercise in frustration.

Which brings me to the final reason why the node_stack_direct is absolutely unusable for me:  It's too close to the bottom node of the part that the heat shield is attached to.

We all know how we want to build a ship, right?  Part A is on top.  Part B attaches below part A.  Part C attaches below Part B, and so forth.  Each piece can and should have only one thing attached to its bottom.  When I go to attach Part C, I want it to be attached to the bottom of Part B.  What I really, really do not want is to accidentally attach Part C to the bottom of Part A, i.e. to the same node as Part B.  That would result in clipping and bizarre behavior, which is not what I want.

And the game doesn't prevent it.  There's nothing in the VAB software that will prevent you from attaching a thing to a node just because something else is already attached to that node.  It happily allows it, even though that's something that I, personally, would never, ever want to do.  It has happened to me a few times, accidentally without realizing it, resulting in very bizarre ship behavior that was extremely confusing and difficult for me to diagnose, and a major source of frustration.  But I've never done it on purpose, ever, not even once in over four years of playing KSP.  And I never will.

Fortunately, "accidentally attach two things to the same node" is normally not something that ever comes up.  First, most KSP "stack" parts are reasonably tall, even the "thin" ones like the Z-4K battery or the larger probe cores.  They're tall enough that there's a reasonable vertical separation between the top and the bottom nodes.  So it's hard to accidentally attach something to a piece that's already there.

And there's also a learned piece of muscle memory that I developed very early into my KSP experience.  Whenever I'm attaching something to the bottom of the stack, as I'm dragging the piece along with my mouse in preparation to snap it into place... I always, always bring it up from below to attach it.  I move the piece into the empty space below the ship, and then bring it up until it snaps into place.  I never, ever (for example) bring it in from the side or from above, moving through the ship until it gets to the place I want it.  I bring it up from below.  It's so ingrained and automatic that I don't even think about it-- it's instinctive, involuntary, and completely outside of my control.

And it's really useful in making sure that I never accidentally double-attach something (such as, for example, accidentally attaching a fuel tank to the bottom of the tank above, instead of to the bottom of the stack decoupler below it, which would be a catastrophic mission-terminating engineering bug).  Because no matter how thin the bottom-most part is-- and, consequently, no matter how close its bottom node is to the bottom node of the piece above it-- bringing the new piece in from below means that it will encounter the actual bottom-most node first.  So that makes life easy and I don't have to think about it.  I sweep the piece upwards until it clicks into place, and then I move on.

And you know what?  The habit was so naturally developed and so automatic that I never even knew that I had it-- until the dual-node heat shields came along and broke it.

Having the two nodes on the heat shields completely breaks that approach.  If I sweep the new piece up from below, it will always encounter node_stack_bottom first, every time.  So it will only ever attach to that.  It will never, ever reach node_stack_direct.

And suppose I did want to use node_stack_direct, what then?  I'd have to override my ingrained muscle-memory (which would be onerous and vexing to do).  I'd have to carefully "thread the needle" to get the piece to attach on that node and not node_stack_direct below it.

And-- critically-- when I do that... how the hell do I know that I did in fact attach it to the heat shield's node_stack_direct?  And not, for example, accidentally attached to the bottom of the part immediately above the heat shield?  Those two things are microscopically close together, and if I accidentally do it one way or the other there is basically no visual feedback.  I can't tell if I've done it right or not.

So even if I wanted to use node_stack_direct-- which I don't, because it's the wrong size and therefore makes the rocket too fragile-- trying to use it is an exercise in frustration.  Instead of being like every other piece in the game-- i.e. quick and simple, a trivial intuitive click-drag that lets me confidently know that it's placed exactly how and where I want it-- I instead have to do a finicky, thread-the-needle patient exercise to get it to attach there at all, and then don't know if it's wrong after I've done it.

Absolutely do not want.

So, for me, the solution is simple:

• Having two nodes on the heat shield is a choice that's not really a choice.  I only ever want to do one thing, so giving me a supposed "choice" is simply unwanted clutter. Get rid of one of the choices.
• If I'm going to get rid of one of them, then get rid of the one that, 1. I've never ever used anyway (so getting rid of it won't break my ships), and 2. is the wrong size and causes fragile ships.
• Having gotten rid of the evil node... then take the usable-but-ugly node and change it so that it acts the way I like.  No shroud, and placed for a snug connection.

 

 

[qzgy]

59 minutes ago, Snark said:

In the stock (unmodified) heat shield, the node_stack_bottom is the lower one-- the one that's floating in space below the shield, and which causes the shroud to appear when used.  The node_stack_direct is the upper, "hidden" one that allows for direct attachment to the shield with no shroud.

Oh ok. Thanks for the clarification.

59 minutes ago, Snark said:

Ridiculously long part-design rant in spoiler section since it's kinda peripheral to the topic.  

I realize we're straying very far from the original topic but........ I guess here's something of a response.

Spoiler

This is really definitely not a defense of the part design. Its really more just a response to habits and stuff.

For myself personally I've never had as much of an issue as you with this whole dual-node heat shield thing.

I myself never really liked the VAB. In normal stock gameplay I spend now maybe about 3% of my time there, mostly because I didn't click on the SPH. I think this is because I got into a habit of building in the SPH from building planes, boats and what not. From that, I had learned to use the SPH camera tool to allow me to see things better, focus on details, look inside ships to help better hide things and so on which is really great for high detail craft and very precise placement. I dont get that level of camera controllability in the VAB. Consequently, I've also gotten into the habit of learning how to finickly place stuff since thats maybe one of the things the SPH doesn't do great (place things in a super easy intuitive way. Theres a bit of wrestling). Like if I want to place a tank in front of another one and I have the camera adjusted (as in moved off of the original center with the middle mouse click thingy), the part sometimes zips off into space all the way on the other side of the hangar. Which is annoying. The other part I hate about the VAB is also the whole symmetry thing. in the SPH, mirror symmetry is very obvious and so is radial. However, for myself personally it isnt in the VAB. Since I do often use mirror symmetry for stuff, I tend to stick to the SPH. Anyway, the main point is that I almost never use the VAB, even for building rockets and rocket-esque things. I almost exclusively use the SPH for crafts. So I never got into that habit that you describe, the drag up to a part from below thing. Therefore, I've never had too too much of an issue in maneuvering a part into that tiny tiny sliver where it attaches to the direct node instead of the very bottom node. This might also be a result from SPH building in which everything's a bit less linear.

As for wobbly ships - Really? It gets extra wobbly? Most of the time (again, gameplay habit) I haven't encountered that problem using node_stack_direct (the node I guess I habitually use). Again this is a habit thing and while it might be an issue, its probably one I'm blind to because a) The heat shield typically is not sandwiched between two very heavy masses, only the capsule and the entirety of the rest of the rocket and b) I just autostrut everything with EEX which more often than not kills any structural issues. I do get your point that it really isnt a great choice, but I've not had too much issue with it.

I will agree though, its hard to tell with this part whether it did the thing you wanted. However, most of the time there isn't a case where I'm confused which one I've attached to since there's that great big shroud that shows up in your face. Or an air gap. Both of those are pretty good giveaways.

In short - I think because of the differing playstyle of me as compared to you, I haven't encountered to such a severity or even at all the problems you lay out.