Jump to content

Recommended Posts

TL;DR: WE HAVE A .2 RELEASE, PEOPLE! JOY UP!

On 3/20/2021 at 2:40 AM, BezKartuza said:

Okay. It's at least something

Not only that, it's a x.y.2 release - they listened to us. And this makes me very happy (at the same time I'm still angry due the other problems - these are not mutually exclusive options! Being a KSP enthusiast is an exercise on Schizophrenia, apparently... :) ).

I don't know details about the costs, but building a release involve some on big companies - so, it's understandable when a company try to reduce the releases to a minimum. But when that nice pieces of paper hits the turbofan, someone have to concede - and hopefully we are going the 1.7.x way: incremental releases, tackling down the worst bugs and rushing up releases as the worst are fixed or worked around. (Fail early, fail often - but always fail forward) - the 1.7 releases are the best from the Unity 2017 era, almost as good as the 1.3 ones (being "goodness" that sweet spot where bugs from KSP and bugs from Add'Ons co-live together without screwing up the gameplay).

It's not ideal, of course - ideally, there should be no bugs at all. But we don't live on an ideal World, Squad is not an Ideal Company and frankly, we are not Ideal Customers neither. So we need to find a compromise - they burn the Midnight Oil hunting the show stopper bugs, early adopters do the same testing the thing for bugs (or fixes), common users wait a bit while the others do their trick.

Spoiler

Make no mistake - the angriness and even some vitriol we see sometimes (eventually, from me) are due the "relative" success of the product.

We want to use the new version, there're excellent new features (besides less than optimally implemented) and we are terribly frustrated due the really bad choices taken on development that is preventing us from doing that. And the frustration piles up - and when we see a marvellous feature tainted by really <insert your favorite non forum compliant adjective here> decisions, it's like an offence added to the injury.

Both parts must remember now and then that both parts are working their SAS out to get out of the mess.

Spoiler

And it's always a good idea revisiting the theory about how we create trust.

 

 

Edited by Lisias
Tyops. as usulla... And that was a hell of a typo! o.O
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lisias said:

Being a KSP enthusiast is an exercise on Schizophrenia, apparently... :) ).

"We" don't need to exercise Schizophrenia, me, myself, and I are doing quite well at it. ;p

 

8 hours ago, Lisias said:

we are not Ideal Customers neither.

Me and myself are ideal customers, but I can sometimes be a pain :joy:

 

Being the smallest patch I remember seeing for ksp at the moment, I didn't think it was that bad at all. I agree that minor bug fixes show that it is moving in the right direction, especially with the short time of release after 1.11

 

Sure there's more to go, but if they keep up this pace and concentrate on the bugs (yes I experience them too) over content for a bit, we can get a (near) stable, bug free game to keep us going before ksp2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Daniel Prates said:

Ah crap, here we go again. 1.11.2 conflicts with some mod I have installed, out of some 150 mods or so, and now I don't know what is causing it. Damn. Every time, man, every time. 

Thats why some people play vanilla. :sticktongue:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rakete said:

Thats why some people play vanilla. :sticktongue:

What's not working anymore... :P

 

1 hour ago, Daniel Prates said:

Ah crap, here we go again. 1.11.2 conflicts with some mod I have installed, out of some 150 mods or so, and now I don't know what is causing it. Damn. Every time, man, every time. 

Send me the KSP.log in PVT. Chances are that I already had diagnosed it for someone else. ;) 

Cheers!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lisias said:

Send me the KSP.log in PVT. Chances are that I already had diagnosed it for someone else. ;) 

Cheers!

Thanks Lisias for being the usual COOL DUDE. However I ran that "check integrity" tool from steam and that solved it. No less than 198 "non-integral" (??) files. Most likely things changed by mods. Its ok now. I leave it here as a heads up for everybody else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Daniel Prates said:

Thanks Lisias for being the usual COOL DUDE. However I ran that "check integrity" tool from steam and that solved it. No less than 198 "non-integral" (??) files. Most likely things changed by mods. Its ok now. I leave it here as a heads up for everybody else.

And that, my friend, it's why the GameData should be considered sacred land. No user configuration or editable data should be there, only readonly files . :/

(I have a single use case of a fix I'm cooking where the original file was so messed up that I had to replace it - but this is still bugging me, I'm trying hard to find an alternative)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BezKartuzaIf you cant find a bug report for it, do a bug report for it and attach the craft file and I will test it. (one where the RCS ports aren't moving with the craft)

Edited by Anth12
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Anth12 said:

If you cant find a bug report for it, do a bug report for it and attach the craft file and I will test it. (one where the RCS ports aren't moving with the craft)

Why do you need a craft file? look at video there is nothing unusual. You take the "service bay SM-18" and install RCS on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BezKartuza said:

Why do you need a craft file? look at video there is nothing unusual. You take the "service bay SM-18" and install RCS on it.

Because sometimes things are not so obvious, and since developer's time is usually scarce, every minute you save them from trying to reproduce the problem is a minute they can spend on something else - including eating and resting. ;)

 

14 hours ago, Anth12 said:

@BezKartuzaIf you cant find a bug report for it, do a bug report for it and attach the craft file and I will test it. (one where the RCS ports aren't moving with the craft)

It took me some tries to get the problem, most of the time the RCSs just vanishes with the shroud. But I managed to create a craft with the sweet spot here. Launch the thing, cheat it into orbit and hit Stage.

Spoiler

LYCLQyA.png

5RfZH4w.png

 

 

Edited by Lisias
Yep. Tyops.
Link to post
Share on other sites

@BezKartuza Bug reports is something I do as a hobby, 

I have the following goals:

  1. The bug report makes sense and has the developers see what I need them to see.
  2. If there is a video of the bug I want it to be very short and just shows the issue so the developers don't have to search it out. (or will take up too much of their time)
  3. I want to make a quicksave of the video if its necessary, so the developers can test it as quickly as possible.
  4. The issue shown is the core issue, not a complicated craft that happens to have the bug, to avoid questions that are irrelevant to the main issue.
  5. That the bug happens every time.
  6. If there's a craft file it only has the minimum amount of parts needed to show the issue.
  7. That the bug gets fixed. (which is why all of the above is important)

I am probably missing other personal requirements

 

It takes me hours to get my bug reports correct, and I am working on a bug report right now that is taking me weeks. 

Your bug is interesting, but a bug report that is already created and a craft file/quick save would save a lot of my time.

And I don't get paid to do any of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Anth12 said:

Thanks for that craft @Lisias

@lisias The craft file is from a modded save?

Ouch, completely forgot... Yeah, it was on my 1.11.2 test bed and I forgot to clean it, I did it on rush.

Yeah, just save the craft again and it will be cleaned up from anything you dont have installed. Sorry for that, I completely missed it.

 

15 minutes ago, Anth12 said:

And now the RCS is actually not disappearing but doing what the video did. What did I do to get two different results I wonder

Or something else on my rig was masking one problem and promoting the other...

 

17 minutes ago, Anth12 said:

And now the RCS is actually not disappearing but doing what the video did. What did I do to get two different results I wonder

Assuming a mod on my rig wasn't interfering, it may be an initialisation error perhaps? The bug is the RCS thrusters vanishing, but now and then another bug happens on the bug (an uncaught exception, perhaps?) leaving the RCSs in a semi deleted state: they were removed from the part, but the code aborted in exception before removing them from the World...

I will fire up my rig again, this time after cleaning up the test bed, and give it a new shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[WRN 09:51:08.637] [OrbitDriver Warning!]: FloatingRCSerror Debris had a NaN Orbit and was removed.
[LOG 09:51:08.637] ObT : 0
M : NaN
E : NaN
V : NaN
Radius: NaN
vel: [NaN, NaN, NaN]
AN: [0.105995691146841, -0.994366589068954, 0]
period: Infinity

That error I have seen before. related to decoupling of physicless parts

Interesting. The SM-18 Service Module Decouples parts that are radially attached to it.

I just had it decouple M-Beams

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its two bugs in one.

  1. Decoupling physicless parts causes a NAN orbit error (known bug)
  2. SM-18 appears to be decoupling everything radially connected to it on staging its shroud

How long did that take to test? over 1 hour

And I still dont know why the parts sometimes disappear and sometimes stay when staging

Ok...lets now see if this bug is in an older version of KSP

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1.7.3 it is decoupling the rcs ports as well

but the rcs ports are drifting off like they should (because thats a 1.11 related bug)

@BezKartuza at the end of that video there are 4 rcs ports attached to the pod. were they attached to the pod or the SM18 before hand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its been doing it since 1.4

I will do a bug report later. but we are talking about 2 hours+ of testing

 

Squad employees I doubt have the time to do that much testing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Anth12 said:

Its been doing it since 1.4

I will do a bug report later. but we are talking about 2 hours+ of testing

For the sake of completute, I redid some basic tests on my side on a cleaner KSP 1.11.2 . The file is here.

I also confirmed a M.O.: 

  1. Load the craft on editor
  2. Launch it into the LaunchPad
  3. Cheat it into orbit
  4. Stage
    1. The panels stages, the RCSs's trusters vanish
  5. Revert to Launch
  6. Cheat it into orbit again
  7. Stage
    1. NOW the RCSs' trusters present the misbehaviour

The uncaught exception hypothesis is still valid, but now I think we have an initialisation error too on the mess. Two cascading problens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
* Fix same part collisions invalidating valid EVA construction placement on some parts.

 

I'm hopeful this cures my strut additions on orbit!   :)

 

Well, i guess not. Can anyone explain why if I'm putting struts on my station to assist in rigidity between modules, tat they go into place, but when i return to the station, they are gone, except one anchor for each?

 

Edited by RW-1
question
Link to post
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...