Lisias

"Safety first, Cooper!"

As safe as it's possible. This crisis is more a social/political/economical one than a health one around here. We are on Summer here at South Hemisphere, the higher temperatures helps, and helps a lot - what Winter is reserving for us is still to be seen, on the other hand. The behaviour of people under the crisis, however, is worse than the crisis itself. Ignorance and selfishness are a deadly combination.

I'm fighting this thing for some time, and managed to get the history of it. The Module AA uses to do its thing extends (an OOP term) the stock ModuleControlSurface. The problem is that by doing it, the module itself is renamed on the craft, and so the default values are reapplied. Initially things worked fine, but somewhere in 2014 (if memory serves me right) something inside KSP changed and so this misbehaviour started to bite us. In a nutshell: the ModuleControlSurface is renamed SyncModuleControlSurface. New crafts and savegames, after installing AA works fine because everything is created from scratch, using SyncModuleControlSurface. But older savegames and craft gets the control surfaces reset to default because the ModuleControlSurface data is ignored, and a new SyncModuleControlSurface one is created with default values. There's a cumbersome workaround for it: using an editor, open the craft and savegames (after making backaups!!) and replace every instance of "ModuleControlSurface" to "SyncModuleControlSurface" - this will "import" your artifacts to be used on a KSP with AA installed. The other way around is also possible - exporting savegames and crafts to a AA-less instalment is essentially doing the inverse: replace every SyncModuleControlSurface to ModuleControlSurface. An automated tool to do that would be the ideal solution, however.

It's the price we pay for inheriting their work. You know, someone had to work and earn money and pay taxes before you had born. Just Imagine how it would be your life if they had choose to burn all that money with iPhones and travels instead of applying on investment funds and paying taxes... Wonder what would be your country if every elderly man and woman just leave to live somewhere else, taking all their money with them... We live on a Consumerist Society. We need consumers to be alive, otherwise we would not have an Economy to be rebuilt. Living People are the reason we need an Economy at first place. It's hard to understand when we are young (been there, done that). But as we grow older and start to understand how things really work, we change our minds. Be patient. Be wise. Your generation will have to cope with things that my own generation just knew from history books.

Tonight I decided to put KSP 1.9.1 on test on something I value very much : water ships. I'm toying with hydrofoils since KSP 1.4, maritime crafts are my second most favorite type of crafts - hydroplanes? Just love them. So I made this ship, a hydrofoiled MK3 fuselage. 64 PAX and 2 pilots being pushed over the waves by 4 Wheesleys. It worked perfectly on KSP 1.7.3, beautifully surfed the Kerbin seas at > 70 m/s. Not bad for a 53 tons fatty lady. But... Why in KSP 1.7.3? I wasn't going to probe 1.9.1? Well, I did. And got his: The freaking thing just took off and reached 5K high at Mach ~1. I don't know exactly what's happening, but apparently wet fuselages and wet lifting surfaces lose drag. And perhaps weight? So I made this stunt to check the facts: And yes, this time I got drag, the thing didn't got beyond 200m/s - but it took off the same. The (almost) very same craft behaved absurdly differently on KSP 1.9.1, what again confirms my original thesis that it's plain impossible to import a reasonable complex KSP < 1.8 game into current KSP. it just doesn't worth the trouble, things changed too much on essential, primordial behaviours on the game to the point I consider migrating savegames from KSP < 1.8 a liability. So I will just won't.. I'm currently reevaluating my options. There are real value on KSP >= 1.8, better graphics and faster physics. And some new cute and usefull parts. But none of it worths my savegames, I'm playing them for 2 years for a reason. My verdict is that KSP 1.9.1 is almost good enough for newcomers (the glitches are annoying!), as long they stay away from the water and don't mind (too much) airplanes. Anything that splashes down will behave in an absurd way, harming the game if you enjoy KSP by what it is (was?) - a physic simulation with some resemblance with real physics. On the bottom line? I'll handle KSP >= 1.8 to keep my Add'On working and supporting them, but my gaming will remain on 1.7.3 . Crafts on my site, one of them on Kerbal-X.

Use your 3D glasses.

Source: https://divinity.yale.edu/news/15000-year-old-bone-and-fall-2013-issue-reflections

So, I did another run on KSP 1.9.1, but this time using KAX and Open Cockpits - yeah, I'm wetting my feet slowly, Add'On by Add'On. However, this time the glitches are starting to get on my nerves. Problems on Symmetry on editing parts on VAB/SPH are annoying, but survivable (you just set things twice). Glitches on the Map where you need to select a Node in order to KSP "remember" to load all the Manoeuvring Nodes (instead of remembering them as you load the Map Scene) are annoying, but finding and clicking on a Node on entering the Map is not the worst thing that happened to me on this game. But Symmetry glitches on the Control Surfaces on craft spawn are near unbearable - every time I spawn a craft, need to revise all the controls to make sure nothing got the deployment inverted (pretty nasty on flaps). There's also a new glitch (at least for me): something is forcing the "Control from Here" to be set to the wrong part! I had to force the "Control from Here" on the Stage action, otherwise I would had to fix it manually every time too. On the other hand, once these bugs are manually fixed (or "gambiarrados"), the thing is working fine, I had some fun on it: On a nice touch, the gunners can be set to automatically "search for targets", a pretty guns animation! Craft on Kerbal-X.

The last news I had about UK is that they are going to avoid closures and lockdowns - the rationale is that it's impossible to hold the spread of the virus by now, the Winter is near the end (and so the Public Health will be less pressured by the winters diseases) and that it's better to immunise the population by now, when the rest of the World is on a lockdown anyway (and so the economic impact is unavoidable) than have to cope with the same drama next winter when the disease will be back - by there, they expect way less UK citizens to be vulnerable. However, besides UK is still receiving passengers from outside, I think it's unlikely that other countries would be receiving passengers from UK...

Ah, the Prophet-5.... Friend of mine owned one, once...

This one is what I managed to build on the free time today - just some more silliness on KSP 1.9.1 . This time, with the craft on Kerbal-X.

Money talks, "Piece of Paper" walks...

Yep. But, sir, the logs are not for you. The logs are meant for people that will provide support for the Add'Ons. These logs are the reason we can diagnose the problem by just telling the user to send us the logs, instead of going through a tedious and long series of "please try this, please execute these steps, please do that".

Problem is... It's our best tool for diagnosing problems. Messages on the screen are useless, as they don't have enough information (there's no enough screen!) - we usually issue messages on screen to alert about nasty conditions, but pushing on the screen all the messages needed to diagnose the problem is unfeasible. Once a problem happens, diagnosing it is not a mere look on the Exception message - it only tell us what happened, not why , and without the why, there's no possible fix without guessing (what, usually, ends up on finger pointing). So, some logging is needed - otherwise you will not get proper support when things goes badly on this Add'On or even others inducing this one to bork by collateral effect. You may think logs is bad - but it's way worse without them. That said, some logging messages are only meaningful on development (we call these "debugging messages" - and I agree that these ones should be suppressed on releases.

Thrust should be something as logarithmic, but this type of scaling are not available (yet) on TweakScale. That said, I totally encourage specialised sets of customised TweakScale patches for a challenge. You don't want engines being scaled? Get rid of these patches. You wanna different scales for weight, thrust and ISP (fuel consumption), talk to me and let's see what we can do. The same for everything else.

Dawn Patrol (who played it?) on KSP 1.9.1 Somewhat glitchy, but I hope fixable. .

Except that the guy explicitly allowed TweakScale, so it's not a pure stock challenge. So the argument itself is bogus. On your original post, you complained about how unrealistically TweakScale scales parts. Well, I can say for sure: it depends. The scaling is doing using linear, quadratic or cubic exponents depending on how you configure the receipts. From my experiments, engines are tricky to scale because in the real life the trust don't scale on a linear curve as the current configs is set, but instead tends to scale on a logarithm or exponential curve - what's theoretically possible if someone rewrites the patches (the scale is not limited to 2 or 3, you can use rational numbers as 0.123 or 2.444 too!). It only happens that nobody did it to this day. So I agree that scaled jet engines can be shady on a contest. However, it can be very handy for propelled engines used on Firespitter and KAX. Control surfaces and wings behave very well on scaling by the way, this allow you to do some very nice looking crafts. Way more realistic than clipping lots of parts in order to get something near what you indented to do - clipping two wings parts to look as one 50% bigger (150% of the original size) will give you twice the drag and twice the lift, while a scaled part to 150% will give exactly what you intend. And the wheels on the Beta too (to be released soon™), with the sturdiness and strength correctly scaled with the sizing. (and.. by the way.... How realistic is a "space simulator" with green guys poofing around on a planet with a soup as atmosphere and one third the size of the Earth but with the same gravity? Had I missed something? )

Well, this guy took it to the next level!

Just an ordinary song for an Ordinary Man.

Oh, my apologies for that! Exactly. And by being a business, they need revenue. Somehow. I'm on this business too, but not on games (something way less entertaining but equally complicated). And let me tell you, I do some of the stunts these guys are doing, I close business for good - it's not the bugs the problem, but how you cope with them. Every time we bork on the development, people will waste time. No one likes wasting time (worse if you on the paying side of this equation), but most of the time, people are willing to take the hit as long they are helping to get a better solution tomorrow. As soon as people realizes that they are having their time wasted because you choose to save yours instead of trying to make their lives better, they will react - and the aggressiveness of the reaction will be exponentially proportional to the efforts they made in the past to withhold your past borks. Users are your customers, not your subjects - and even subjects had deposed their sovereigns in the past when they got enough. Same here. These freaking little green guys helped me to cope with some really nasty situations. The degree of freedom this game (and the Add'Ons) give us allow people to replicate, in a simulacro, real life challenges and this is therapeutic - it helps on going through that Five Stages of Grief. However... Add up what we just said to what I had said on the previous paragraph, and do the math. Whatever is being done right now on KSP, is not being done with users in mind. Whatever are the objectives aimed by the current development practices, they don't aim the user satisfaction. However, make no mistake, they aim to satisfy someone - we just are not going to like it.

Nope. Just install Recall and the latest TweakScale and you are set.

You will need to check with the All Tweaks Maintainer to be sure. IIRC All Tweak overrides the Default TweakScale patches, but I don't remember what it does when a patch is not supported yet by TweakScale, nor when it became supported later...

One need to be invited to be a guest. Sometimes I think I crashed into this party!

Jan Hammer!