Actuation Limiters

[JMBuilder]

No, not quite the same as actuation toggles or gimbal limiters. These would allow players to specifically tune the gimbal limit in certain directions.

In my case, I'm messing around with asymmetrical shuttle-style designs. The Vectors are the obvious choice of propulsion considering the fact that they were added specifically for shuttle replicas, but they have a real problem overcompensating for roll, causing a vessel to wobble a lot if not being kept stable manually. Disabling roll actuation solved the wobbling issue, but left the vessels with little to no roll control. Reducing the gimbal limit also toned it down enough, but also reduced the pitch and yaw control by too much.

I propose the addition of actuation limiters instead of or in addition to actuation toggles. This way, the issues of not having enough gimbal range and having too much roll compensation are both dealt with, provided the player is willing to get into the nitty-gritty details of their designs (which I am thanks to my over-the-top OCD). It could also be applied to control surfaces.

Edited August 24, 2020 by JMBuilder

[Gavin786]

More fine-grained control is always welcome.

Been thinking about your post, and previous one I just wrote about helicopter controls, very similar requests, we need more and finer-grained control options.

Serious players bump against frustrating limitations to perfection, not because it is out of spec in the device but because we cant set the right limits, etc.

Being able for any control actuation, and this also is true for helicopter blades, to be able to rather than having a single global limit "authority limit" to have individual limits for each axis.  However, this gets hard for beginner players and very complex for KALs etc.

I really think a proper stock scripting system, that can be used as an alternative/extension for KALs and also parts.

When a part is right-clicked, simply have another tab, which introduces all the values as a script, then many more can be added for fine-grained control for advanced players while still having the basic set for newcomers.

So there is when right clicked, still the standard set of options we know and love, and where the # is to turn to numeric, another value which turns to script mode, where all the values are just as as a script with :

// hello i am a comment
<setting> = value;

function yes_we_need_the_power_for_those_who_can( v ) {
    return v * 2;
}
Deploy Angle : yes_we_need_the_power_for_those_who_can( input_roll );

gimal.yaw.minimum = what_jm_builder_needs; // set the individual limits on the gimbals
gimal.yaw.maximum = also_what_jm_builder_needs;

// and so on
////////////////////////////

Can have the script be declarative in nature, very similar to the amazing and wonderful yet under appreciated QML(qt modelling language).

We do need more options for advanced builders, yet still respect those who dont/cant.  And 99% of time we just need basic options, even intially it can be a choice of script OR page, no parser is needed for first release.

We also desperately need something like this for KALs, we truly need looping and decision making.  kOS can do that but is more specialised to higher-level autopilot like functionality, rather than low-level actuation of control surfaces based upon conditions/input.

One thing that cannot be build for now is true flying wings like B2 spirit because of lack of horizontal stability.  This is compensated for IRL by flight control mechanisms, and can be also in KSP if we had KAL-script that could take angle of sideslip, yaw input, and make changes to breaks/engines as needed to stop frisbeeing.  There are so many cool things we can do with more control, and extending it to a scripting system for those who can, is going to make it very easy to update/change compared to a UI-based system.  GUIs just dont/wont cut it for what advanced players need, and there is no reason why there cannot be a graceful transition between GUI and script.  Can even have it be like advanced tweekables that is hidden completely from newcomers unless they switch it on in the options menu.

Anyway, we need something MOAR.

Please, SQUAD!

[mattinoz]

Would changing the activation style do the job?

Change from linear to cam Ease-in Ease-out profile.

 

[JMBuilder]

1 hour ago, mattinoz said:

Would changing the activation style do the job?

Change from linear to cam Ease-in Ease-out profile.

 

Wait, what? Never heard of that.