-
Posts
3,288 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by katateochi
-
Is the MEM really this Meh?
katateochi replied to johnnyhandsome's topic in Making History Discussion
yes, I agree. It seems very un-Kerbal to have a pre-built part. I hope it doesn't suggest a new direction for future KSP parts. It's a part that I'm very unlikely to use. -
Stock Game not very fun without Delta-V & TWR readout
katateochi replied to Kobymaru's topic in KSP1 Discussion
As a community stabilizes, searches for it diminish, so that doesn't really say anything about sustained interest. The best data would be data we don't have access to; ie analytics of this forum; view and posts per day would be a fairly good indicator, but that's still only a cross section of the player base. Steam stats, but again, that's only a cross section (and one which cuts out some of the players who were onboard before it was available on steam). I have the google analytics stats for KerbalX, which again, is only a cross section of the player base, but since I started tracking analytics in for it back in 2015, it shows a steady upward trend in users/sessions per day. I say that suggests a continued interest and engagement by the community. As you say, some people will only have a short lived interest in the game and the lack of some bits of in game info probably contributes to that. But for others the need to go and find stuff out and the fact the game doesn't just hand you everything, is the very reason that they stick around. Speaking for myself, that's been what's made KSP so captivating and kept me interested since 2012! -
Stock Game not very fun without Delta-V & TWR readout
katateochi replied to Kobymaru's topic in KSP1 Discussion
I wouldn't put too much significance in "interest" in a search term. All that really shows is the number of people looking for the front door. For a lot of us, who've maintained interest over the years, how often do we search for Kerbal? not often, we've prob already got tabs open (or bookmarked or however you roll) to the forum and other resources. If I do search for something "kerbal" it's usually prefixed with KSP rather than kerbal - ie KSP wiki, KSP calculators, etc, I'd say I almost never search for Kerbal. So yeah, Stock dV; I'm on the "I prefer the mod solutions" side of the fence, but I get some peps don't want, or can't use mods, so yes, there is the raw maths approach, but that's not for everyone. There's a kinda hacky Kerbal way which, while not 100% accurate, is "good enough for govt. work"; build, launch, open debug menu, cheat craft into orbit, create maneuver node without any dV, wait until you reach node, fire engines. The maneuver node will count the dV expended. I don't think KSP should provide a stock dV readout, because KSP is about figuring out weird solutions to problems; maths it, mod it, or do something Kerbal! -
KerbalX.com - Craft & Mission Sharing
katateochi replied to katateochi's topic in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
That is infact the original way to update your craft, but it turned out that it was a rather hidden feature and I got lots of requests to add a more obvious update craft method. The "new" way on the edit page, just hooks into the original way....and that was why that bit got broken in the last update (as the primary upload panel now has extra logic to deal with missions being dropped on it). Anyway, I've got a fix for that but i've not deployed it yet. Might just push that fix on it's own, or if the next thing I'm working on is simple then I'll push it with that.....so...prolly the first option! Now I've got a look at the DLC I realise some changes that need to be made. I wasn't sure if the DLC was going to be included in the main Squad folder or have it's own, but now I see that it basically behaves like a mod. And so KerbalX thinks it's a mod. So "Stock" craft that use the DLC are currently being classed as mod craft. That will change, but I don't want to just make them Stock. So there'll be Stock, Stock+ and Mod. That's what I'm working on right now and once that's done the existing DLC based craft will get re-classified as Stock+. -
yeah, this annoyed me too. Wasn't an issue on the first mission because "restart mission" was basically the same as revert to editor, but on the second one, revert mission is right back to the first mission. As a forgetful perfectionist, that kinda thing is frustrating. I want to complete all objectives, and the chances of me remembering the "hidden" ones some time later when I replay the mission are slim. So....I'm now a "forgetful perfectionist git", in that I initialized a git repo in the missions folder, made a commit before launching each part of the mission and then I can just checkout the commit .sfs file and reload that (the non git way would be to just make copies of the .sfs files). It's a few more steps than doing a standard revert to editor, but it's the end result is basically the same. yeah, cheater, whatever; I don't have time to replay whole missions just because I missed a sub-objective half way through.
-
KerbalX.com - Craft & Mission Sharing
katateochi replied to katateochi's topic in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
hmmm, yeah I seem to have broken something. I can see that it's not working, but the why eludes me at this late hour! I shall have a look tomorrow when I've got more awake brain cells. In the meanwhile, if you go back to the home page, and upload the craft like it was a new craft, so long as the updated one has the same name, the site will ask you if you want to update the existing one. That will do the same thing but that seems to still be working. -
So I guess I'm joining the queue of early adopters (from 2012) who got it on the store and am now waiting for support to get back to them...... I don't want to get salty and I honestly don't mind waiting for the DLC, but what I find really annoying is; how on Kerbin can a website be so shoddy! I mean, how badly does it have to be written that you can't just select all users with a create date before X (or users with purchase ID within a given list) and change an attribute on their account, and how chronic is the routing table that sometimes clicking on your account takes you to your account page and other times it roles a dice and randomly redirects you back to the front page (and that lame loading counter, that doesn't actually load anything, don't even get me started on that). I didn't mind it when it was just Squad all on their lonesome, but now with TT and the more corporate feeling that's come with that, I'd expect a website that was a bit more pro. Edit: They have quite quickly sorted it out and I'm now downloading the DLC. but my aggravation with the KSP store website still stands!
-
I like using rovers to aid in construction. Admittedly that tends to imply using robotics mods, but there are some stock examples. But a rover with a movable arm with a grapple/magnet on one end is useful for base construction.
-
Speaking as a dev, I depend on that information. Info that users manually submit is poor at best and very skewed, but automatic error collecting is fantastic, so long as it's properly aggregated. As a dev I don't care about each report, I care that suddenly there's a spike in one particular error, or (as a web dev) about the speed of requests and being able to see which requests are being slow helps me make improvements to the places that need it. Well written bug reports are like unicorns, and honestly, about as useful. Properly aggregated automatic stats and error logs is where it's at. I know some places just collect reports because someone higher up thought it would be a good idea. And yes, that's useless and never gets used. But there are some fantastic tools out there which collect and aggregate the data and present a graphical overview and those are really useful.
-
People have said that, but there's nothing to actually support that happening. The only bit of hard data I've seen is in this comment which shows the sort of data KSP is transmitting, and it's all perfectly fine. In fact, I think it's rather minimal. I'd actually like to see KSP collecting more info like crash reports and analytics (like average part count of crafts, average frame rate, etc), because all of those provide the devs with good information about their user base and how they use the software and that helps make things better for all.
-
Where are we going to share the Mission Builder missions?
katateochi replied to Radiatin's topic in KSP1 Discussion
KerbalX is now ready and standing by for you to post your missions!! The feature is pretty basic at the moment, but as we start playing with them we can see what other info would be useful to include. Checkout the dev_blog on KerbalX for more info. -
KerbalX.com - Craft & Mission Sharing
katateochi replied to katateochi's topic in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
Site Update - 1.3.0 Just deployed an update which will enable you to share the missions you create in the new DLC! It's very basic at the moment; missions are parsed for which planets/moons they require you to go to and you can then filter missions based on destinations. If a mission contains craft you can have those craft posted as separate craft (which will also link to the mission page). Once everyone starts playing with missions we'll get a better idea of what other info might be useful to have. Let me know your thoughts! The mission pages are very simple for now, but in time they will become the same fully customizable pages that craft have and have all the other trimmings like upvotes, notifications etc. (You can add comments to missions now). Check out the dev_blog for more info. Big thanks to @UomoCapra for providing me with an example mission and helping me understand how they are structured! -
Why isn't delta-v exposed in Stock (yet)?
katateochi replied to eightiesboi's topic in KSP1 Discussion
I agree, KSP has forced me to learn so much, and that's been so satisfying! If the game just gave you the info then you don't need to learn. (I actually felt a little sad when maneuver nodes got added, 'cos I felt it removed what was for me one of the greatest ahha moments about how orbits interact and made rendezvous rather simple, but then again, with them you can be so much more efficient). It's also because the game didn't tell me anything about dV that I met all of you folk! After a couple weeks of trail and mostly error and only making it to Mun on pure luck, I thought there must be a better way and went looking and found this awesome community of helpful (and frighteningly clever) folk. And that's when KSP really started for me. A game that's insanely fun and yet makes people go out and learn stuff and connect up with other like minded folk is an awesome thing. It's also spawned a whole ecosystem of resources, not just mods, but online calculators, dV charts and shared spreadsheets. -
Where are we going to share the Mission Builder missions?
katateochi replied to Radiatin's topic in KSP1 Discussion
'cos there are still some of us weirdos who don't have KSP on steam (bought from store). So it would result in a community split with some people unable to make use of the workshop content. -
Anyone mad about mods keeping up with latest updates?
katateochi replied to Conric005's topic in KSP1 Discussion
nope, can't be mad, or even slightly peeved. It's actually staggering what the mod community achieves, not just in creativity and skill but also in providing support (and no coder ever sits down and says "I'm going to write this thing so I can then provide support for it", it's always "yay, I've made a thing.....oh darn, now people want support"). Most mods get updated really quickly, some a bit longer but that's ok. And sure some fall by the wayside, but most of the time someone (*glances at the post above*) picks them up and keeps them alive. And I actually like the fresh start that happens with a new KSP release. I prefer to go full stock for a bit on each new KSP as you get a better sense of what's changed, so I take it as a good thing that the mods are not ready right away. -
Where are we going to share the Mission Builder missions?
katateochi replied to Radiatin's topic in KSP1 Discussion
I am currently adding mission sharing to KerbalX.com. It'll work pretty much like craft sharing; drop the mission package zip onto the site and it'll create a page that you can customize and missions will be searchable by name and other characteristics (currently just the destination planets, I'll add more searchable attrs once I know more about missions after the DLC release). I don't want to promise anything about in game integration, but if I can I will, but that will come later. -
New Mission builder and carreer interactions
katateochi replied to Warzouz's topic in KSP1 Discussion
yep, same. I was thinking that we were going to get a whole little community resource of missions that you could run as part of your career (and maybe never need the stock ones). My hope was that I could say "right, I'm careering off to Moho, I wonder what interesting community missions to Moho exist" and then run those along side whatever else I was doing in career. Pity, I wonder why they chose to build it like that? There are mods that can add missions into a standard career game, so the means to do that is there, seems like an odd choice to make the missions as stand alone only things. -
Kerbal Space Program update 1.4 Grand Discussion thread.
katateochi replied to UomoCapra's topic in KSP1 Discussion
btw guys, if you have 1.3.x (or older) craft on KerbalX, you can download a version which updates the part names to use the new versions. You then need to open that craft in KSP 1.4.0 and save it which will make KSP add any extra modules it needs. It just updates the command pod and fuel tanks, I didn't try to make it replace the decouplers as they have different sizes so that would result in weird part offsets in the craft. Go to you craft, click edit, and then near the bottom of the edit page click "Download with upgraded parts" (you can only do this for your own craft). -
Craft files auto-converter?
katateochi replied to Jestersage's topic in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
tbh it's pretty simple; parse the file for all part names (full name, including the identifier values) and select from that those which have a legacy part name. Then split the part name string on "_" and take the first part (that's just the name without the id), string replace that with the new name. So something like "Mark1-2Pod_4294774928" becomes "mk1-3pod_4294774928", then grep the whole craft file for any instances of "Mark1-2Pod_4294774928" and replace with "mk1-3pod_4294774928". What that doesn't do is add in the extra modules which define which style they use, but if you load the craft in KSP 1.4.0 and save it, KSP will add those extra modules in. Here's the Ruby code that I'm using on KX (the unclear bit is the line; self.file.find_all("part"), that's from the KX craft file parser, and that just selects all lines in the file that start with "part =") module Upgradeable UpgradeChanges = { "Mark1-2Pod" => "mk1-3pod", "fuelTank4-2" => "Rockomax8BW", "fuelTank2-2" => "Rockomax16.BW", "fuelTank1-2" => "Rockomax32.BW", "fuelTank3-2" => "Rockomax64.BW" } def upgrade_13x_parts_to_140 args = {:preview => true} raw = self.craft_file UpgradeChanges.each do |old, new| old_parts = self.file.find_all("part").select{|p| p.match(/^#{old}/)} old_parts.each do |part| new_name = part.sub(part.split("_")[0], new) raw.gsub!(part, new_name) end end return raw if args[:preview] self.craft_file = raw end end Note, this doesn't change the decouplers or the fairings (but you could just add them into UpgradeChanges). I decided that changing the decouplers would be a problem because they have different sizes so you'll get weird offset issues. If you come up with something that can deal with those nicely I'd be interested. And the fairings just seems to upgrade on their own without needing any work (at least as far as I've seen). well, I don't want people abusing this, because it puts load on KerbalX, but you can upload a craft (without publishing it), download the upgraded version and then delete the craft. Just please don't hammer the site doing that, uploading is the most intensive process and lots of people doing that will slow things down for other users. KX is about sharing with the community, so doing that is just taking up a resource without contributing, so yeah, don't abuse it, Thanks! -
KerbalX.com - Craft & Mission Sharing
katateochi replied to katateochi's topic in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
So I've added a little feature. On your own craft, you can go to the edit page and click "Download with upgraded parts". This won't change the craft stored on KX, but it will download a version that has the legacy part names updated to their 1.4.0 names. This just applies to the command pod and fuel tanks (I think fairings work fine without a change and I didn't want to mess with the decouplers as they are different sizes so might cause issues). Once downloaded you do need to load the craft into KSP 1.4.0 and save it so it gets the extra modules added to the parts, then if all is ok, you can upload that and update the craft on KX. -> May not be 100% reliable, but it's worked on everything I've tested it with. Let me know if you find any issues. -
well, with 1.4 out I did the only sensible thing; quick trip round Mun and then everyone bailed out after reentry for a group skydiving session (sorry kinda dark pic); new chutes handle really nicely (surprisingly maneuverable), next time I'll try and get a tight formation.
-
[1.3.x-1.5.x] KerbalX Mod - upload to KerbalX direct from KSP
katateochi replied to katateochi's topic in KSP1 Mod Releases
Ok! A KSP 1.4.0 compatible version is now available - download KXmod 0.1.4 here This version is not backwards compatible with KSP 1.3.1 or lower, if you're still using KSP 1.3.1 or lower use the 0.1.3 version of the KXmod -
Another question: It seems that textures used for this like the icon in the toolbar are now affected by the texture quality setting. In 1.3.1 with the texture quality set to half res or full res the toolbar icons looked the same. In 1.4.0 with texture quality at half res the toolbar icons are, well, at half res. Is this intentional? is there a way to disregard the texture quality setting for a specific texture?