The Grand KSP 1.1 Discussion Thread

[Pecan]

Just now, m4v said:

...That's a false dilemma, the good option was to not release and keep the pre-release branch open....

Or, for everyone that's paying attention, there's another option: release AND keep 1.0.5 open ... which is what they did.
MOST people, if they are paying attention, have EVERY version since they first bought the thing.  It's easy.  A LOT easier and more effective than howling at the moon.

EVERYONE has both releases available so what, really, is your problem?.

[pandaman]

18 minutes ago, m4v said:

That's a false dilemma, the good option was to not release and keep the pre-release branch open

I thought you would pick up on that.

What I deliberately missed out, as I thought there was no point including it, was that this was most likely one of the many bad (as in far from optimum as they see it) options on their list.  It's a good option from your point of view, and I respect that, but you do not have the information that was available to them when they made the choice.  If you were there, presented with all the same issues, options and considerations they had to take into account then it is at least possible that you would have made the same choice they did at that time.

Also, what @Pecan said above.

[The_Rocketeer]

4 hours ago, m4v said:

Change isn't going to come if we all stay quiet and nice, Squad being aware of the issue doesn't mean that they will do something about it.

On the contrary, change is inevitable in a game under development.

On the other hand, if you mean change in Squad's practice and approach to release, I can only repeat that smoke and noise on the forums is likely to have little further effect. If Squad like the way they're doing it at the moment for whatever reasons, that's just going to be that. If they think their ongoing approach is resulting in sub-optimal business outcomes it will change, but changing protocols and procedures is in itself expensive. Unless there's a better business reason than "post-sale customers think we're doing it wrong", it probably won't happen.

[Vanamonde]

Quote

Change isn't going to come if we all stay quiet and nice...  

Staying nice isn't the same thing as staying quiet. 

[glibbo]

Ok, so I have given 1.1.2.1260 a fair amount of my time, in my opinion, and I have to say that I am sorry but I am staying with 1.05 until it becomes the updated version

that I suspect everyone wants. It is not worth any more effort until it is fixed correctly. I'll keep an eye on the forums and wait for the magic to appear.....

Keep up the good work everyone, and thanks for developing this awesome game.

[Violent Jeb]

Just going to put it out there that conversely^, despite the bugs and other issues i've discussed i'm very satisfied with 1.1.2.

I've got flags on Duna, Ika, Moho, and crafts en route to the others. ISRU is operational on Ike, and I have SCANsat maps everywhere.

If you view the game as still in EA (that's what I do), it's plain to see that 1.1.2 is categorically better than 1.0.5 (which was better than .90), save for general instability, the orbits, and the wheels. Nonwithstanding the instability for those experiencing it, life in 1.1.2 is very possible if you don't try to utilize the features that aren't working, ie, no wheels, and nothing that requires high orbital accuracy, such as remotetech, synchronous orbits or comms networks. (Jeb would also like me to mention that we've had a few flags tip over, which he insists is a travesty)

I can't speak for a body the size of jool (yet), but the orbital decay at kerbin is such that it would take hours of realtime focus to decay sufficiently for a 75x75km orbit to result in re-entry. I have docked literally dozens of times in LKO in 1.1.2, with little practical difference compared to 1.0.5. Re-entry is exciting again now, and everything else gameplay wise is [very slowly] coming together and interacting with a nice balance.

very excited for the next patch, to see what improvements come.

 

Edited May 30, 2016 by Violent Jeb

[Terwin]

On 5/27/2016 at 8:48 PM, Andem said:

Here's a few suggestions:

1. Alert the community to major outstanding bugs that have been ignored for other reasons, and
2. Give an explanation as to why those bugs have been ignored.
3. Listen to pre-release testers beyond just "Thanks for finding x bug!" Make sure most of them would cnsder the game release worthy. Nothing big, just a quick survey they have to complete whenever they file a bug report.
4. Prereleases - Focus on features. Releases - Focus on the bugs those features create. It doesn't matter how long you call it a prerelease, but a releas should have all of the ajor bugs ironed out or at least acknowledged.

1&2

Like Squad telling us that the wheel/landing leg problems are related to Unity issues that they have not been able to work around and may require waiting for a new Unity version?

How about telling us that they fixed every CTD that they could reliably reproduce. (indicating that there were some CTD bug reports they could not fix because they could not get it to happen locally) 

3) Volunteer testers are not generally in a good position to determine when it is in the best interests of a company to release the next version.

Setting marketing and financial reasons aside, 50%+1 of the testers could easily get over-excited with a new, not quite finished feature, or hold out for a version that has every feature that they deem important.  After all, how many people will volunteer to play-test a new version of a game that they do not already have strong feelings about?

4) Which major bugs has Squad not acknowledged?  They acknowledged wheels/landing struts(Unity issue), Random CTD issues(fixed all the ones they could reproduce), Orbit decay(Bug fix that took an issue from 'small but only annoying' to 'tiny but potentially serious').  The only other issue I have seen (unable to move research window) is probably mod related(I have dozens) and not annoying enough to even work out which one is causing it.

Wheels we even knew about before the beta-test period started

 

I am not saying your ideas are bad, but what have you asked Squad to do that they have not already done, aside from handing over full control of the release cycle over to volunteer testers?

[Sandworm]

22 hours ago, Terwin said:

1&2

Like Squad telling us that the wheel/landing leg problems are related to Unity issues that they have not been able to work around and may require waiting for a new Unity version?

How about telling us that they fixed every CTD that they could reliably reproduce. (indicating that there were some CTD bug reports they could not fix because they could not get it to happen locally) 

3) Volunteer testers are not generally in a good position to determine when it is in the best interests of a company to release the next version.

Setting marketing and financial reasons aside, 50%+1 of the testers could easily get over-excited with a new, not quite finished feature, or hold out for a version that has every feature that they deem important.  After all, how many people will volunteer to play-test a new version of a game that they do not already have strong feelings about?

4) Which major bugs has Squad not acknowledged?  They acknowledged wheels/landing struts(Unity issue), Random CTD issues(fixed all the ones they could reproduce), Orbit decay(Bug fix that took an issue from 'small but only annoying' to 'tiny but potentially serious').  The only other issue I have seen (unable to move research window) is probably mod related(I have dozens) and not annoying enough to even work out which one is causing it.

Wheels we even knew about before the beta-test period started

 

I am not saying your ideas are bad, but what have you asked Squad to do that they have not already done, aside from handing over full control of the release cycle over to volunteer testers?

(4) It depends on what you call a bug.  Some of the SAS silliness and inconsistencies have been around for so long they are now "features".  Difficulties in placing maneuver nodes seems eternal.  Gittery/random trajectories are here to stay, despite being "fixed" by multiple updates.  Anyone who has played KSP for more than a couple years has grown to ignore these issues.  And let's not even mention the various graphical anomalies that come and go depending on your hardware.

[Padishar]

48 minutes ago, Sandworm said:

(4) It depends on what you call a bug.  Some of the SAS silliness and inconsistencies have been around for so long they are now "features".  Difficulties in placing maneuver nodes seems eternal.  Gittery/random trajectories are here to stay, despite being "fixed" by multiple updates.  Anyone who has played KSP for more than a couple years has grown to ignore these issues.  And let's not even mention the various graphical anomalies that come and go depending on your hardware.

All of those things have been acknowledged by Squad as being issues...

[teag2]

#nevergoingback

[Vermil]

On 5/14/2016 at 4:03 AM, Andem said:

I have to agree that the update has been a little dissapointing due to the over hyped nature of 1.1.0. The new wheels are a result of Unity 5's new wheel system AFAIK, and SQAUD has to work within the boundries of the engine they originally chose. As far as maneuver nodes go, you are experiencing either a unique bug or you are in career and haven't upgraded the Tracking Station. 1.1.0 was shipped early, and that  was extremely frustrating for a release. in 1.1.2, the game is more profoundly fixed, and has stabalized quite a bit more than previous releases. And I highly doubt the Dev team uses MechJeb, a third party addon, during development. Threatening to leave doesn't affect the state of the game an is kind of pointless, frankly.

Oh no. That's a misunderstanding. I haven't played KSP for so long in order to threaten to quit. I'll always play KSP. I was just taking a break, waiting for things to settle.

Meanwhile, I've had a lot of fun with old classic Dungeon Keeper and Master of Orion 2. 

No, my game was upgraded alright. No bug, it's a feature. The problem is that they made a weird optional setting for the navigation node into default. Can't understand why and I can well imagine it'll keep some new players struggling for too long as well.

As for the wheels,.. Well, I can exploit an ape out of their physics. I mean, I now have a rover that will climb mountains at +17m/s while it charges its batteries, so why would I complain? It's just that I assume they will change it again, and I don't like all change without reservations, because it might invalidate all the hours and days of development I put into my creations.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Vermil

[Pentazer]

Has there been any news on progress for the pre-release? The 1.1.3 patch didn't seem to have any affect on the pre-release as it's still showing as build 1228. They are still working on this right? I'm kinda worried. It's been a few months and the last update I saw from Romfarer was over a month ago. I just hope Squad hasn't abandoned the 64bit project... I really prefer it over 32.

[Red Iron Crown]

15 hours ago, Pentazer said:

Has there been any news on progress for the pre-release? The 1.1.3 patch didn't seem to have any affect on the pre-release as it's still showing as build 1228. They are still working on this right? I'm kinda worried. It's been a few months and the last update I saw from Romfarer was over a month ago. I just hope Squad hasn't abandoned the 64bit project... I really prefer it over 32.

Switch back to the main branch, the prerelease hasn't been updated since 1.1 dropped.

[Pentazer]

Thanks for your help! This did it!

[Nicholas Kerman]

So what date did the update happen and how do I update my ksp game?

[Vanamonde]

@Nicholas Kerman, a new version came out last week, and the update method depends on where you bought the game. So, where did you buy the game?

[Nicholas Kerman]

The ksp website 

[Starhawk]

@Nicholas Kerman  Log in to the store.  Click on 'My Account'.  Then click on 'Download'.

You will be taken to a page with links to the downloads.

Happy landings!

Edited June 30, 2016 by Starhawk

[T3Kaos]

Will this game never reach a state of stability. I use Ckan for plugins management and yet again, after investing hundreds of hours already into my 1.1.2 game I'm back to having to consider restarting the game again (Career Mode) as about half the plugins I use still haven't been updated almost 2/3 weeks after the 1.1.3 update. Will we ever have stability or is this going to be an ongoing thing because if it is I may has well not bother. This was a really good game save as well. I was really happy with it. Come on guys? Can we get this stable or what? Even when those plugins do get updated I take it 1.1.4 is just around the corner so I'll be back to square one again?? And before people say, why not just go vanilla all the way - two reasons amongst many, MechJeb and TweakScale aren't built in even though really they should be. :/

UPDATE: Hooray, even though CKAN is saying that about half of my mods aren't compatible anymore, everything seems to be working fine! Yay, I can finally deorbit my KCS Artemis I satellite and get KCS Artemis II launched and docked with KSS Spire which is in low-orbit (200km) around Kerbal. Hooray! I can start getting things built again. Whoop, whoop. Well, until they Squad release 1.1.4. :/

Edited July 7, 2016 by T3Kaos
Update

[Blaarkies]

On 7/6/2016 at 4:00 PM, T3Kaos said:

Will this game never reach a state of stability. I use Ckan for plugins management and yet again, after investing hundreds of hours already into my 1.1.2 game I'm back to having to consider restarting the game again (Career Mode) as about half the plugins I use still haven't been updated almost 2/3 weeks after the 1.1.3 update. Will we ever have stability or is this going to be an ongoing thing because if it is I may has well not bother. This was a really good game save as well. I was really happy with it. Come on guys? Can we get this stable or what? Even when those plugins do get updated I take it 1.1.4 is just around the corner so I'll be back to square one again?? And before people say, why not just go vanilla all the way - two reasons amongst many, MechJeb and TweakScale aren't built in even though really they should be. :/

UPDATE: Hooray, even though CKAN is saying that about half of my mods aren't compatible anymore, everything seems to be working fine! Yay, I can finally deorbit my KCS Artemis I satellite and get KCS Artemis II launched and docked with KSS Spire which is in low-orbit (200km) around Kerbal. Hooray! I can start getting things built again. Whoop, whoop. Well, until they Squad release 1.1.4. :/

How about making an independent copy of your kerbal directory, and keep playing that indefinitely? It is not like we need new updates to be able to play the game(like most online games), we can keep playing v0.90 until the day that the normal mainstream operating system doesn't support it anymore(windows 11?)

[specialopsdave]

Everyone turns Kerbals upside-down to survive high-velocity impacts with the ground, but I've noticed that the survivable velocity is just barely below the terminal velocity of Kerbals, meaning that the EVA RCS pack has enough thrust to save a Kerbal (not on impact with water).

[Andem]

1 hour ago, specialopsdave said:

Everyone turns Kerbals upside-down to survive high-velocity impacts with the ground, but I've noticed that the survivable velocity is just barely below the terminal velocity of Kerbals, meaning that the EVA RCS pack has enough thrust to save a Kerbal (not on impact with water).

Yeah, I would quite appreciate a nerf to Kerbals. They're literally indestructable unless your goal is to kill them.

[specialopsdave]

41 minutes ago, Andem said:

Yeah, I would quite appreciate a nerf to Kerbals. They're literally indestructable unless your goal is to kill them.

I wouldn't say indestructable, as without these methods, they can still die easily.

[Andem]

55 minutes ago, specialopsdave said:

I wouldn't say indestructable, as without these methods, they can still die easily.

I have actually never had an EVA'd kerbal die of anything other than bugs or running out of LS. Valentina survived a deorbit once. At the very least they should look into lowering the thrust on the EVA pack significantly or lowering the crash tolerance of EVA'd kerbals.

 

[specialopsdave]

45 minutes ago, Andem said:

I have actually never had an EVA'd kerbal die of anything other than bugs or running out of LS. Valentina survived a deorbit once. At the very least they should look into lowering the thrust on the EVA pack significantly or lowering the crash tolerance of EVA'd kerbals.

 

Even with re-entry heating? Well... I think adding a G-force survival limit would work better than a crash tolerance buff, as it works on re-entry too (Kerbals have an INSANE drag to mass ratio).

P.S, What exactly is LS?

Edited July 16, 2016 by specialopsdave