Bug Status [1/12]

[Intercept Games]

Heya Kerbonauts,

Welcome back to another K.E.R.B. report - our first of 2024! We've processed A TON of bug reports from you all from over the holidays and, as you'll see, the top issues have changed dramatically.

Some of these were on our radar already prior to the break so the team was quick to jump into working towards some (New Year) resolutions to these issues, while also investigating causes for issues found by you all!

v0.2.1.0 is still coming together and we just want to warn that it's possible that some fixes mentioned here may not arrive in time - so they'd slip to v0.2.2.0+.

We'll share an ETA with you all once we finalize the release. 

As always, thank you all for submitting your bug reports - and a massive shoutout to our Bug Hunters as well!

KSP Team

Community's Current Top Issues: 

#	Bug	Status
1	No trajectory lines in map view	Partial fix being tested
2	Stage activation requires a double-click / double-spacebar pressing	Fix implemented and verified
3	Incorrect "landed" status while in orbit causes trajectory to disappear in Map View	Reproducible
4	Parts inside fairing heating up	Fix in progress
5	Rovers are hitting a physics glitch every 1000m from the Location of Rover Being Loaded into the Game with Disastrous Results	Improved, investigating long-term solutions
6	"Experiment" button shows available experiments even though the experiments have been done before	Fix implemented and verified
7	Signals go through planets and moons (CommNet/Antennas not affected by occlusion)	The current behavior is how it was designed. We will consider the feedback.
8	Upper atmospheres heat up and destroy parts far too quickly	Tuning being tested
9	Landing gear blocked when it is not [also happens with other deployable parts]	Unable to reliably reproduce
10	Illuminators (lights) do not function [Flicker/Blink for a second and turn off]	Fix implemented and verified
11	SAS does not hold orientation during time warp	Reproducible, investigating alternative solutions
12	Timewarp limit is too restrictive on some non-atmospheric planets (Gilly, Bop, Minmus...)	Reproducible
13	Struts in higher symmetry than the parts they are attached to causes issues	Investigating
14	Control Surface Oscillation in Atmosphere	Reproducible
15	Parachutes didn't deploy	Need more information
16	For the difficulty of the LIL CHONKER mission, 35 Science as a reward is too low	Fix in progress
17	Inconsistent Framerate During Launch [Edit: The Video Shows a Gradual FPS drop as the Launch Continues]	Need more information
18	Resource Manager (RM) disallows re-placement of a resource in the Transfer list of the RM, creating duplicates in the parts list of the RM	Investigating
19	A Kerbal on EVA Exerts a Force upon the Vessel	Reproducible
20	Orbit decay still happening [Landing legs or certain parts interacting can cause it]	Fix implemented and verified

Note: this report is not fully representative of the work our team is focused on. This is just to provide insight into our progress on the most concerning issues to our community. Additionally, the lack of a status update does not imply a lack of importance or general progress - we just do not have anything to share at this time.

[Dakota]

omg wow look at that header. new year new kerb!!

[Krzysztof Jaromir]

That header looks nice!

[NovaRaptorTV]

There is also an issue with fairings in the VAB.

 

[pk9sp]

Awesome!!! Always love to see a new KERB!

[Clayel]

like the new header, already has 140 views on imgur wow

[Jaypeg]

ORBITAL DECAY FIXED!

[Stephensan]

Signals go through planets and moons (CommNet/Antennas not affected by occlusion)

the community just wants ComNet just like ksp 1, and if you want to make it more complex if you like..

non kerbal controlled builds are far far to easy, and it will slowly boil down to the features and mindset like Ksp 1 Comnet.

 

Also, just like Surface Scanning to find the POI's without needing to use other people question to find it..

something like Orbital Survey, By  Falki works just fine right now. just make it find POI's aswell. this includes what they just posted 2 hours ago.. its shockingly already exists in the game as a mod.

i only somewhat dislike it uses parts vanilla but as a mod its perfectly ok.. its something sorely missing right now in ksp 2. i don't mind if its almost a drop in as of right now, but much prefer a actual new model(s)

Edited January 13 by Stephensan

[Little 908]

10 minutes ago, Jaypeg said:

ORBITAL DECAY FIXED!

I hope so, that has been bothering me a lot.

Also, I'm not sure what the "Reproducible" status means on #12, but I hope it means its in progress. Thanks for the kerb.

Edited January 13 by Little 908

[Vallius]

Of all the bugs. Parachutes not opening is the one that's causing me the most trouble at the moment.

[Dakota]

1 minute ago, Stephensan said:

the community just wants ComNet just like ksp 1, and if you want to make it more complex if you like..

I'll just echo what @Nertea has said in the Discord about this:

Quote

Lots of the depth people would want requires a set of supporting visual and planning tools that are a fair bit of work to design and build
....
I think I could say with some confidence that increasing commnet complexity has to come with more viz and planning tools

and @Nate Simpson:

Quote

A lot of us like all the detailed line of sight/relay features in Commnet and it's definitely a thing we want to revisit, but as always we're having to balance multiple priorities.

[DibzNr]

Great work as always!

[PDCWolf]

Some good work in there. 

Just now, Little 908 said:

I hope so, that has been bothering me a lot.

Also, I'm not sure what the "Reproducible" status means on #12, but I hope it means its in progress. Thanks for the kerb.

Means they've been able to reproduce the bug consistently in internal testing, which is kinda the first step to get it fixed.

 

[regex]

34 minutes ago, Intercept Games said:

5

Rovers are hitting a physics glitch every 1000m from the Location of Rover Being Loaded into the Game with Disastrous Results

Improved, investigating long-term solutions

"Improved"? I think y'all really need to invest in that new terrain engine, especially if this is going to continue being "a thing".

How about more torque (or torque parts) so we can build proper rock hounds too?

[dandoesstuff]

LETS GO THESE ARE SICK

[Jaypeg]

4 minutes ago, regex said:

"Improved"? I think y'all really need to invest in that new terrain engine, especially if this is going to continue being "a thing".

How about more torque (or torque parts) so we can build proper rock hounds too?

it seems to be caused by like 7 different things. Most likely means they fixed like 3-4 causes of it but some remain

 

[GradientOGames]

4 minutes ago, regex said:

I think y'all really need to invest in that new terrain engine, especially if this is going to continue being "a thing".

It's likely to do with floating point imprecision with the wheel physics 3rd-party addon the devs are using. A good long term solution would simply be creating their own wheel system that is compatible with their terrain system's floating point origin shifts within local space.

[MARL_Mk1]

18 minutes ago, Dakota said:

I'll just echo what @Nertea has said in the Discord about this:

and @Nate Simpson:

Just wanna say that remarks like these are appreciated Dakota. Some people don't go around Discord and the likes often and voicing dev's responses to doubts and questions over on the forums when people ask is valuable. Keep it up

Edited January 13 by MARL_Mk1

[The Space Peacock]

a KERB friday is always a good friday! 

[The Aziz]

39 minutes ago, Intercept Games said:

12 Timewarp limit is too restrictive on some non-atmospheric planets (Gilly, Bop, Minmus...)

Too bad it only now got attention when I posted the very thing in Suggestions forum back in June.

As for the parachutes not opening, probably needs more than one on the returning vessel, and I would guess as another step, be some stage switching mid-flight.

Also, I would put the docking and loading issues a bit higher as these look a bit more severe and annoying (one requires save editing, the other is nearly a Kerbal killer) than, say, 35 points for a secondary mission. yes I read the red text this time, I know.

[Jaypeg]

22 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Too bad it only now got attention when I posted the very thing in Suggestions forum back in June.

As for the parachutes not opening, probably needs more than one on the returning vessel, and I would guess as another step, be some stage switching mid-flight.

Also, I would put the docking and loading issues a bit higher as these look a bit more severe and annoying (one requires save editing, the other is nearly a Kerbal killer) than, say, 35 points for a secondary mission. yes I read the red text this time, I know.

community voting, i guess lol

[The Aziz]

Aaaaalso

48 minutes ago, Dakota said:

I think I could say with some confidence that increasing commnet complexity has to come with more viz and planning tools

Quoting a quote didn't work but anyway - I'd say that the whole game needs some better visualization and planning tools (well seen in the latest weekly challenge - aside from active missions or leaving vessels on the surface next to the discoverables, there's no way to reliably find them other than eyeballing, which is a) tedious, and b) on larger bodies, pretty much impossible. I only found a discoverable on Gilly by accident, because I was orbiting slow and the structure-to-body size ratio made it easy. And I still only saw few darker pixels from orbit. At this point I don't know where the Kapy rock or Mun arch are even though I visited them, as they can't be tracked after mission completion or marked in any other way)

Edited January 13 by The Aziz

[Jaypeg]

7 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Aaaaalso

Quoting a quote didn't work but anyway - I'd say that the whole game needs some better visualization and planning tools (well seen in the latest weekly challenge - aside from active missions or leaving vessels on the surface next to the discoverables, there's no way to reliably find them other than eyeballing, which is a) tedious, and b) on larger bodies, pretty much impossible. I only found a discoverable on Gilly by accident, because I was orbiting slow and the structure-to-body size ratio made it easy. And I still only saw few darker pixels from orbit. At this point I don't know where the Kapy rock or Mun arch are even though I visited them, as they can't be tracked after mission completion or marked in any other way)

I'd really like a marking system. Would be useful in multiplayer, too

[Mushylog]

1 hour ago, Dakota said:

omg wow look at that header. new year new kerb!!

it's yellow

I like yellow

[ChrisShourai]

1 hour ago, Dakota said:

I'll just echo what @Nertea has said in the Discord about this:

and @Nate Simpson:

Personally I find it hilarious that a space sim game (it’s not just a rocket sim or you wouldn’t have a literal star system, and more coming up, AND colonies etc) that’s supposed to be an analogue of the physics of reality doesn’t want to design a basic system that the first game had and was loved by most of the community. 
 

By all means make it less complicated but of ALL the features to lament you lament the one thing that most of us keep asking for and are frustrated about and that’s some decent (at the most basic level) UI for us to understand exactly what is going on with all aspects of our ships. How do you possibly expect us to plan out an interstellar mission if you don’t want to bother spending time on UI development? If you’re dumbing it down so much by interstellar that I don’t have to actually plan a trip from the bottom up to hope to be successful in going to another system, let alone the edge of the Kerbolar system, and all I have to do is press a few buttons to ensure my engine starts and my landing legs deploy in 200 years, I’m gonna uninstall KSP2 and go play KSP1 with mods for the rest of my life (dramatic, I know, but I think it emphasized the point).