[1.4.x] BDArmory Continued v1.2.2.2 [8/8/2018] + Vessel Mover, Camera Tools, BDMk22, Destruction Effects, Burn Together

[Papa_Joe]

30 minutes ago, vexan said:

So will this work on 1.4.5, or will we have to wait for an update? I don't play KSP very often, let alone modded. Just had bad experiences.

I have performed a cursory check of the mod with KSP 1.4.5  It seems to be working, and does not throw any errors that I can see.  Give it a whirl....  I cannot vouch for any other BDA associated mods however.

[Nightguard]

14 hours ago, Papa_Joe said:

I have performed a cursory check of the mod with KSP 1.4.5  It seems to be working, and does not throw any errors that I can see.  Give it a whirl....  I cannot vouch for any other BDA associated mods however.

O00OOOO00h!!! yeah!!!!!

[SparkyFox]

not entirely sure who to go to about this, but the targeting cams while having scatterer installed causes weird camera angle issues(moving the ingame cam fidgets with the targeting cam)
(this is in 1.4.4 but ive seen this happen since 1.3.1) 

[Hojoz]

Just a quick question:

Have the AIM-9's been buffed? They're guaranteed hits for me

[DoctorDavinci]

5 hours ago, Hojoz said:

Just a quick question:

Have the AIM-9's been buffed? They're guaranteed hits for me

Yup ... @TheKurgan got a hold of the configs and now missiles are as deadly as their real world counterparts

All the config changes were done with consultation of serving military personnel and now are very close to what would be expected in a real world scenario

[SparkyFox]

also

 tntMass = 1.0275
 blastPower = 1.5
 blastHeat = 0
 blastRadius = 0.8

could someone explain those values please?
I was playing about with these values or settings and made the blastRadius ridiculously high(like 9999999) and didn't see a difference between  9999999 and 0
blastPower was the same
blastHeat, I did notice parts heating up, so I understand that
tntMass this seems to be the only thing that determines the explosion's power. At 1300 that's able to (rightfully)destroy any of the KSC buildings in one shot, any lower and it takes a few more(not complaining, I really like this), but on the other hand.. with these settings/values:

 explosive = True
 tntMass = 1300
 blastPower = 140
 blastHeat = 160
 blastRadius = 160

this is my result on crafts

ok, I get this is armored(which is fair), but this didn't lower any hitpoints on any of the parts
 

but if I fired that close to any of the KSC buildings with these settings, the building would be(rightfully) totalled

[TheKurgan]

@SparkyFox blastPower blastHeat and blastRadius are depreciated legacy values, and do not  have any effect anymore. The only value that will have an efect on the "BOOM" is the tntMass. Some missiles or bombs may still have these values in there, but only if they have been overlooked. or not updated yet.

Which weapon/weapons did you see these values in? If it's one of the BDAc weapons, I will fix it.

On 7/28/2018 at 10:53 AM, SparkyFox said:

not entirely sure who to go to about this, but the targeting cams while having scatterer installed causes weird camera angle issues(moving the ingame cam fidgets with the targeting cam)
(this is in 1.4.4 but ive seen this happen since 1.3.1) 

This has been a known problem since 1.4.0, and did not exist in 1.3.1. This is confirmed, and has been reported to @blackrack

KSP 1.4.2 BDAc Target Camera with Scatterer Installed

KSP 1.3.1 BDAc Target Camera with Scatterer Installed

Edited July 29, 2018 by TheKurgan

[Hojoz]

15 hours ago, DoctorDavinci said:

Yup ... @TheKurgan got a hold of the configs and now missiles are as deadly as their real world counterparts

All the config changes were done with consultation of serving military personnel and now are very close to what would be expected in a real world scenario

Ok, thanks. 

Time to up my plane game again

[SparkyFox]

6 hours ago, TheKurgan said:

@SparkyFox blastPower blastHeat and blastRadius are depreciated legacy values, and do not  have any effect anymore. The only value that will have an efect on the "BOOM" is the tntMass. Some missiles or bombs may still have these values in there, but only if they have been overlooked. or not updated yet.

Which weapon/weapons did you see these values in? If it's one of the BDAc weapons, I will 

I found all the values for cannon shells, shells and bullets in BDArmory\BulletDefs\BD_Bullets.cfg I think nearly all the bullets and shells and cannon shells or ammo type still have their legacy values
I made a radial bofor gun and trying to make its own ammo type and have it work like the real thing. It was a modified version of the BDA cannon shells, with the values being a little bit higher to try an simulate the real effects of a bofor shell(specifically from an AC130 :P)

 

Quote

This has been a known problem since 1.4.0, and did not exist in 1.3.1. This is confirmed, and has been reported to @blackrack

KSP 1.4.2 BDAc Target Camera with Scatterer Installed

KSP BDAc Target Camera with Scatterer Installed

ahhhhh thank you!

[TheKurgan]

1 hour ago, SparkyFox said:

I found all the values for cannon shells, shells and bullets in BDArmory\BulletDefs\BD_Bullets.cfg

OH in the bullets... Not 100% sure about the bullets... I'm the "Missile" guy

I think the same applies, but I am not sure. Hopefully one of the other BDAc members can confirm.

2 hours ago, Hojoz said:

Time to up my plane game again

Here is a challenge for you. Build a plane that can dodge an AMRAAM more then 1 out of 20 times... 5% of the time when being piloted by the AI. (using no countermeasures, ie no chaff) ANY mods can be used, so it's unlimited class.

Good luck

I can't do it, and I have built some EXTREME planes just for this purpose.

Oh, and it can't be a micro plane, it should be at minimum half the size of an average fighter jet.

Edited July 29, 2018 by TheKurgan

[Xd the great]

15 hours ago, TheKurgan said:

OH in the bullets... Not 100% sure about the bullets... I'm the "Missile" guy

I think the same applies, but I am not sure. Hopefully one of the other BDAc members can confirm.

Here is a challenge for you. Build a plane that can dodge an AMRAAM more then 1 out of 20 times... 5% of the time when being piloted by the AI. (using no countermeasures, ie no chaff) ANY mods can be used, so it's unlimited class.

Good luck

I can't do it, and I have built some EXTREME planes just for this purpose.

Oh, and it can't be a micro plane, it should be at minimum half the size of an average fighter jet.

Using turrets to shoot down missiles.

Also, if you want your missiles to blow up half the ksc, go to .cfg of the part, mess with the tnt mass, set it to something like 999999999999

Edited July 30, 2018 by Xd the great

[Hojoz]

20 hours ago, TheKurgan said:

Here is a challenge for you. Build a plane that can dodge an AMRAAM more then 1 out of 20 times... 5% of the time when being piloted by the AI. (using no countermeasures, ie no chaff) ANY mods can be used, so it's unlimited class.

Good luck

I can't do it, and I have built some EXTREME planes just for this purpose.

Oh, and it can't be a micro plane, it should be at minimum half the size of an average fighter jet.

Challenge not accepted, the 9's are already a pain in the ass for me with flares

[jrodriguez]

3 minutes ago, Hojoz said:

Challenge not accepted, the 9's are already a pain in the ass for me with flares

You can survive one or two 9's  missile impacts with some armor plates covering the key part of your plane using some structural parts as spacers between the part and the armor plate.

 

[Hojoz]

1 hour ago, jrodriguez said:

You can survive one or two 9's  missile impacts with some armor plates covering the key part of your plane using some structural parts as spacers between the part and the armor plate.

 

Competiton rules say no

[DoctorDavinci]

2 hours ago, Hojoz said:

Competiton rules say no

Well that's an issue for the person who created the challenge

We develop the mod, users decide how it is used .... if the rules don't allow for it then not our problem as we didn't create the challenge

Edited July 30, 2018 by DoctorDavinci

[greydragon70]

I run a battle competition on youtube called Plane Fight Club and have had this series running for a while. I have had lengthy experience with BDA. I am close to starting PFC 8. Here are the results of my preliminary testing of the latest BDAc version...

My Thoughts So Far...

1) Missiles are more effective without a jammer.
2) Missiles still randomly explode on launch destroying the plane.
3) Guns seem weaker and less accurate.
4) Still have trouble with A.I. weapon selection. Seems to ignore my set distance limits on missiles and guns and gets stuck on AIM-9 and AIM-120's
5) Distinct lack of aggression with some planes. No missiles fired and evades when not targeted.
6) I like the adjustable sizing for the radars and the other U.I. improvements.

Items 2),  3), 4), and 5) have greatly affected the competition.

Here is a video I made of my testing so far...

https://youtu.be/PvBAXrict8E

Edited July 31, 2018 by greydragon70

[XOC2008]

42 minutes ago, greydragon70 said:

I run a battle competition on youtube called Plane Fight Club and have had this series running for a while. I have had lengthy experience with BDA. I am close to starting PFC 8. Here are the results of my preliminary testing of the latest BDAc version...

My Thoughts So Far...

1) Missiles are more effective without a jammer.
2) Missiles still randomly explode on launch destroying the plane.
3) Guns seem weaker and less accurate.
4) Still have trouble with A.I. weapon selection. Seems to ignore my set distance limits on missiles and guns and gets stuck on AIM-9 and AIM-120's
5) Distinct lack of aggression with some planes. No missiles fired and evades when not targeted.
6) I like the adjustable sizing for the radars and the other U.I. improvements.

Items 2),  3), 4), and 5) have greatly affected the competition.

Here is a video I made of my testing so far...

https://youtu.be/PvBAXrict8E

While I cannot answer everything here I can give some responses based on being a tester:

1) This is certainly intended. @TheKurgan spent a good deal of time tuning the missiles in BDAc and as a result they are more effective. Heat seeker, radar, and anti-rad.

2) Make certain your decouple speed and drop time are set to avoid this, but this sometimes just happens, and has happened since .90.

3) Guns and damage is an ever-evolving thing so this will change in time.

4) AI still chooses what it thinks has the best chance of hitting the target, regardless of how you set engagement options per weapon.

5) I don't have any good answer for this. Sometimes its due to engagement speed. Sometimes its due to the AI thinking the weapons will cause a collision. Sometimes it's just a chicken.

[greydragon70]

22 minutes ago, XOC2008 said:

While I cannot answer everything here I can give some responses based on being a tester:

1) This is certainly intended. @TheKurgan spent a good deal of time tuning the missiles in BDAc and as a result they are more effective. Heat seeker, radar, and anti-rad.

2) Make certain your decouple speed and drop time are set to avoid this, but this sometimes just happens, and has happened since .90.

3) Guns and damage is an ever-evolving thing so this will change in time.

4) AI still chooses what it thinks has the best chance of hitting the target, regardless of how you set engagement options per weapon.

5) I don't have any good answer for this. Sometimes its due to engagement speed. Sometimes its due to the AI thinking the weapons will cause a collision. Sometimes it's just a chicken.

1) Is not a criticism, just acknowledgement of the changes. I prefer more realism.

2) This happens often and I"ve tried many different set ups on the tweakables to no effect. 

3) Again this is not a criticism just an acknowledgement of the change.

4)  and 5) Cause the most issues with trying to record accurate battles. I would think the AI would work better using the parameters we set... what's the use of having the parameter settings if the AI ignores them? And, having cowardly chicken AI pilots in the ranks is not acceptable when filming battles in a competition. lmao, It's very aggravating.

I'm posting my results to help make this become a better more realistic mod. I have been a fan and user of BDA for a long time and wish it to continue being a success.

Edited July 31, 2018 by greydragon70

[XOC2008]

1 minute ago, greydragon70 said:

1) Is not a criticism, just acknowledgement of the changes. I prefer more realism.

2) This happens often and I"ve tried many different set ups on the tweakables to no effect. 

3) Again this is not a criticism just an acknowledgement of the change.

4)  and 5) Cause the most issues with trying to record accurate battles. I would think the AI would work better using the parameters we set... what's the use of having the parameter settings if the AI ignores them? And, having cowardly chicken AI pilot in the ranks is not acceptable when filming battles. lmao, It's very aggravating.

I'm posting my results to help make this become a better more realistic mod. I have been a fan and user of BDA for a long time and wish it to continue being a success.

I didn't think you were criticizing anything, just providing some information as I know it in response.  Your reasoning for the results is one of the reasons why the missiles have been tuned so effectively, and guns and damage are certainly in the works, but making it realistic is time consuming and the team has been working hard.

[TheKurgan]

1 hour ago, greydragon70 said:

1) Missiles are more effective without a jammer.

Thank you... I think  I don't know if they are more realistic, but they are definitely more effective.

1 hour ago, greydragon70 said:

2) Missiles still randomly explode on launch destroying the plane.

99.99% of the time this is caused by the missile rail. Make the missile rail as short as possible, this is the key... and make it a couple ticks higher (make sure the fins clear the fuse or wings by at least a few centimeters). Also set the decouple speed to 10 and drop time to 1 or more for laterally fired missiles. Decouple speed to 10 and drop time of 0 for forward firing missiles. I have tested and tuned 65 missiles, in both BDAc and SM_Industries... I fire the missiles from fighter jets with insane maneuverability, from the belly, wing tips, and even from the inside of modified cargo bays... I fire them from bomber type aircraft, and from my A-10. Since I have been making the missile rail short as possible, I have had zero missiles explode on launch... even after literally thousands of launches.

I can't really help with the rest, I don't see the issues 4 and 5. BUT it may be tied to #2 if the WM thinks the missile is obstructed by it's own rail... make the missile rail as short as possible, and make the decouple 10 and try it all out again.

Edited July 31, 2018 by TheKurgan

[greydragon70]

8 minutes ago, TheKurgan said:

Thank you... I think  I don't know if they are more realistic, but they are definitely more effective.

99.99% of the time this is caused by the missile rail. Make the missile rail as short as possible, this is the key... and make it a couple ticks higher (make sure the fins clear the fuse or wings by at least a few centimeters). Also set the decouple speed to 10 and drop time to 1 for laterally fired missiles. Decouple speed to 10 and drop time of 0 for forward firing missiles. I have tested and tuned 65 missiles, in both BDAc and SM_Industries... I fire the missiles from fighter jets with insane maneuverability, from the belly, wing tips, and even from the inside of modified cargo bays... I fire them from bomber type aircraft, and from my A-10. Since I have been making the missile rail short as possible, I have had zero missiles explode on launch... even after literally thousands of launches.

I can't really help with the rest, I don't see the issues 4 and 5. BUT it may be tied to #2 if the WM thinks the missile is obstructed by it's own rail... make the missile rail as short as possible, and make the decouple 10 and try it all out again.

Thank you for the tips on the missiles, I will test that out and pass it on to my viewers and contestants.

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

1 hour ago, greydragon70 said:

I run a battle competition on youtube called Plane Fight Club and have had this series running for a while

5) Distinct lack of aggression with some planes. No missiles fired and evades when not targeted.

HI,  what kind of environment do you run these battles in? A custom game no overloaded with mods and just what you need?  Or a normal game install  with a gazillion mods  and a dirty log?  I ask as i view perhaps 20 logs a week ,  and generally a messy log results in BDA AI misbehavior, stick in an NRE (Null Reference Exception) or two and  poor response is pretty much a certainty  , while a clean one with few if any errors and no NRE's at all, will produce a better game.
  I'm not suggesting you do have a messy game, but it's always worth making it as clean as you can for AI controlled battles.  All of the cowardly confused  behaviors   are usually seen in the grubbier logs, not the cleaner ones.
If you do have a spotless 145 install and fancy running a few battles with debug labels ON,  I'd be interested in taking a look at the KSP.Log

[DoctorDavinci]

55 minutes ago, greydragon70 said:

I'm posting my results to help make this become a better more realistic mod

So on the one hand we have users of BDAc, such as yourself, who value realism in their games and look for realistic gameplay

On the other hand we have users who are looking to play a game which realism can take all the fun out of

My point is there is a ballance that the team is trying to maintain so as to not alienate a specific type of player

Basically if we cater directly to realism then we ignore the rest of the users who aren't necessarily interested in the realism aspect and just want to blow some stuff up in KSP with weapons ... Conversely, if we cater to the 'arcade' style of gameplay then we alienate the realism seekers (honestly, we're launching little green bipedal humanoid blobs of algae into space ... not that realistic )

Anyways, just thought I'd mention this so as to give you and the rest of the community insight into BDAc development 

Not much else I can really say as @TheKurgan and @XOC2008 have summed up the situation quite nicely and are some of the more knowledgeable of users of BDAc on this forum (both have been playing with BDAc development releases for over a year and know what they are talking about)

Also, what @SpannerMonkey(smce) said above is definitely something to take into consideration ... If you have a dirty game install then BDAc can and likely will start to show some 'bad' behaviour

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by DoctorDavinci

[greydragon70]

26 minutes ago, SpannerMonkey(smce) said:

HI,  what kind of environment do you run these battles in? A custom game no overloaded with mods and just what you need?  Or a normal game install  with a gazillion mods  and a dirty log?  I ask as i view perhaps 20 logs a week ,  and generally a messy log results in BDA AI misbehavior, stick in an NRE (Null Reference Exception) or two and  poor response is pretty much a certainty  , while a clean one with few if any errors and no NRE's at all, will produce a better game.
  I'm not suggesting you do have a messy game, but it's always worth making it as clean as you can for AI controlled battles.  All of the cowardly confused  behaviors   are usually seen in the grubbier logs, not the cleaner ones.
If you do have a spotless 145 install and fancy running a few battles with debug labels ON,  I'd be interested in taking a look at the KSP.Log

 

18 minutes ago, DoctorDavinci said:

So on the one hand we have users of BDAc, such as yourself, who value realism in their games and look for realistic gameplay

On the other hand we have users who are looking to play a game which realism can take all the fun out of

My point is there is a ballance that the team is trying to maintain so as to not alienate a specific type of player

Basically if we cater directly to realism then we ignore the rest of the users who aren't necessarily interested in the realism aspect and just want to blow some stuff up in KSP with weapons ... Conversely, if we cater to the 'arcade' style of gameplay then we alienate the realism seekers (honestly, we're launching little green bipedal humanoid blobs of algae into space ... not that realistic )

Anyways, just thought I'd mention this so as to give you and the rest of the community insight into BDAc development 

Not much else I can really say as @TheKurgan and @XOC2008 have summed up the situation quite nicely and are some of the more knowledgeable of users of BDAc on this forum (both have been playing with BDAc development releases for over a year and know what they are talking about)

Also, what @SpannerMonkey(smce) said above is definitely something to take into consideration ... If you have a dirty game install then BDAc can and likely will start to show some 'bad' behaviour ... I would be interested in seeing a KSP.log myself from one of your battles as described in the post above this one

 

Pictured below is my mod list.

I can get you the logs, no problem. These battles were the last thing done in that KSP install. Where should I send/upload it?

I also have been using BDA since the early days with BahamutoD.

Edited July 31, 2018 by greydragon70

[DoctorDavinci]

3 minutes ago, greydragon70 said:

 

Pictured below is my mod list.

I can get you the logs, no problem. These battles were the last thing done in that KSP install. Where should I send/upload it?

Upload to a filesharing site such as dropbox and then post the link to it