Jump to content

gomker

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    376

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by gomker

  1. gomker
    Wow - much better than expected considering all the targeting / guidance changes we made since it was created.
  2. gomker
    I only use Sandbox mode for the most part , never used Community Tech Tree. The only thing that I know affects this is "TechRequired = precisionEngineering" from the weaponManager Config This part config has not been changed in quite some time.
  3. gomker
    I will reopen the existing issue. It may take us some time as localization issues are hard to test because of language differences.
  4. gomker
    We did have a similar issue some time ago (https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/BDArmory/issues/285) Let us know if the problem is still showing up in this last release we just published.
  5. gomker
    I can help you setup a post-build script like we have in BDA so it does it on compile. Also makes a nice zip with the version number / date
  6. gomker
    JR and I use git for Work related stuff too. It will be a leg up for you when you work on teams with other devs. I see a lot of recruiters starting to ask people if they have public github commits / projects.
  7. gomker
    lol I don't know what you are going to school for , but anything tech related , I'd suggest getting ready for it now rather than later
  8. gomker
    Github my man, if its in the cloud, you cant lose it
  9. gomker
    Spanner actually had some parts ready for that, some torpedo decoy's etc... was going to work on that next after the Armor/Damage updates Speaking of which I will be PM'ing you about those changes right now as they will have a major effect on your weapons
  10. gomker
    Oh yeah , no problem, It was on my to-do and was already recompiled. Lost in the email notify for the follow of thread, ping was much appreciated.
  11. gomker
    I needed to update the version spec stuff for SpaceDock / CKAN anyway https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/VesselMover/releases/tag/1.6.2
  12. gomker
    No problem, a ping now and then wakes me up to threads I may have missed
  13. gomker
    Whoops, been so focused on the other work, will have a recompile published today.
  14. gomker
    BlastPower - the amount of force applied by the explosive (think pressure wave) BlastHeat - the damage of the explosive ( was the heat applied, we are moving to our own "health" units for better control) We are looking to move this to one value of KG of TNT. For bullets the values really start to matter for Tanks, Artillery, Naval shells etc... You will probably end up with nominal values. RE: Pen Curve - I think I will just kill it now, its adding too much confusion, plus we really have deprecated it, I just need to update the code. Lets just leave that off for now, I will have that done before the beta release. Penetration is done now via standard Kinetic formulas taking into account the "Armor Thickness"
  15. gomker
    Correct, all you need to do is follow the same format at have all the fields in a config file (YourBullets.cfg somewhere in your mod) and KSP will load the values. A few notes use the default "penetration" curve - not in use right now but may find a use later, we may deprecate (being discussed) use the default curve from "def" at top bulletDragArea - a default constant at the moment , we are looking into the drag code now, 1.209675e-5 if "explosive=true" we consider this the HE - and will detonate, this is not controlled per weapon, it is now per-bullet Will use the explosive values of the bullet apBulletMod - To be implemented , will give the bullet additional penetration for armor as long as your names are unique there should be no conflicts and you can maintain your own bullets The new armor system will allow you to add armor to any part via VAB or MM config. Let me know if you have any other questions
  16. gomker
    @Murican_Jeb To help prep for the new damage system you can start checking to see If I have all of your ammo types supported. Here is the new documentation https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/BDArmory/wiki/1.2.2-Bullet-Configuration Current Full Bullet Listing https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/BDArmory/blob/feature_armor/BDArmory/Distribution/GameData/BDArmory/BulletDefs/BD_Bullets.cfg If you have ones to add I will need the caliber, muzzle velocity and mass (now in KG) - these should be the "real world" values for the ammunition We will have a open beta soon, combined with the new Radar testing - so you can see how the new changes affect damage. Notes: * All damage values move from per-weapon to per-ammo * there will be a per-weapon "bulletDmgMult" to allow for final balancing by you Regards,
  17. gomker
    @Deathpuff12 Et Al. In regards to BDA Autopilot For some historical context on this code it pretty much has not changed since it was first implemented by Baha and Ferram (the dude who made FAR ( I should just probably put this in the wiki too as this comes up a lot )). To be honest , we are not all that familiar with how it works We of course will do our best to fix any issues however, the code may be showing its age, its a miracle its lasted this long through KSP changes, a testament to Ferram's skills. I can tell you that looks to have been initially coded for Air To Air Combat. While it did so some ground combat , you can tell its bad at it. This is definitely something I would like fixed too as I do a lot of Air/Ground/Boat scenarios. Currently we are in a code sprint for Radar updates (theDog) and Damage/Armor refactor (myself and JR) When these are complete the team will get together and discuss our next set of issues to tackle, which I can tell from https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/BDArmory/labels/AutoPilot, there are a lot for the AI open.
  18. gomker
    I was thinking of trying to back track it with a ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-area-to-volume_ratio But same problem, approximation. If its just using the Rectangular bounds, but this will not be accurate for irregular shaped parts... I guess it could work for sphere's, cylinders and rectangular parts
  19. gomker
    Yeah, I think that ultimately it will be an approximation unless the game engine does it for us as it would be too difficult due to the variety of shapes. You could limit to just cylinders, spheres... Anyway, I did find that KIS is just using the bounds https://github.com/ihsoft/KIS/blob/master/Source/KIS_Shared.cs#L539 public static float GetPartVolume(AvailablePart partInfo) { var p = partInfo.partPrefab; float volume; // If there is a KIS item volume then use it but still apply scale tweaks. var kisItem = p.GetComponent<ModuleKISItem>(); if (kisItem && kisItem.volumeOverride > 0) { volume = kisItem.volumeOverride; } else { var boundsSize = PartGeometryUtil.MergeBounds(p.GetRendererBounds(), p.transform).size; volume = boundsSize.x * boundsSize.y * boundsSize.z * 1000f; } // Apply cube of the scale modifier since volume involves all 3 axis. return (float) (volume * Math.Pow(GetPartExternalScaleModifier(partInfo), 3)); }
  20. gomker
    @linuxgurugamer did you ever find a solution to this problem? I have a similar issue and would like to roughly calculate the surface area and / or volume of a part
  21. gomker
    Hello all, How would one define a TWEAKCALEEXPONENT to ignore a resource? The documentation reference a module, yet these parts do not have a module I can key off of. Is that something that is required for the syntax?
  22. gomker
    Hey there @harpwner glad to see you are back. I wanted to check to see if you were also testing with PRE (Physics Range Extender) installed. I know JR had been working on some improvements / fixes that may have an effect on your testing. PRE is pretty much required for BDA (and may be merged eventually) as we have started to extend the ranges of weapons and radars.
  23. gomker
    It would be impolite for us to create MM patches that affect another mods I would ask the maintainers in their respective threads to add support. Two ways you can handle this on your own: 1) add the inline radome some where and / or clip it in. 2) this is what you can add to the part config for a fighter radar MODULE { name = ModuleRadar omnidirectional = false scanRotationSpeed = 120 directionalFieldOfView = 120 lockRotationAngle = 4 canRecieveRadarData = true minSignalThreshold = 150 minLockedSignalThreshold = 220 rwrThreatType = 1 maxLocks = 3 multiLockFOV = 40 canTrackWhileScan = true }
  24. gomker
    There are three settings you would want to use to increase the range in the settings.cfg MAX_GUARD_VISUAL_RANGE = 40000 MAX_ACTIVE_RADAR_RANGE = 40000 MAX_ENGAGEMENT_RANGE = 40000 Be aware if you do increase you may have to increase physics range in PRE as non loaded vessels will not be detected. JR has done more work at extreme distances and we can say it does work for the most part, we just picked 40KM as a baseline as that is what we "know" works right now. As was mentioned before the AI will try and turn the plane to orient the weapons to the proper FOV value , i.e. for missile lock. One thing I did on my B52 bomber (with a tail gun) was set the rear gun to only fire on missiles. It does not really work too well as the plane tries to do some crazy maneuvers when targeted. The AI at the moment is really written with dog fighting in mind.
  25. gomker
    Galane, you may just be bumping into the limits of the system as designed. For context, the code for GaurdAI and AI Pilot is pretty much the original from Baha and Ferram. The avoidance routines are being triggered by missile lock and part of how the code is expected to work. Do you have countermeasures installed as well (Flare, Chaff and ECM?) You should see those firing immediately on missile lock. Also you can see more about "what" the AI is doing by enabling Debug labels and toward the bottom you can see more diagnostic messages. There may be more we can do later with @TheDog's pending Radar improvements. My thoughts were using the lock strength as a limiter for the avoidance routines that are being triggered. If you could create an issue here and put in your craft and test scenarios we can start looking at the logic and discuss further with the team.
×
×
  • Create New...