[WIP] KerbTown v0.13 Beta - Place static buildings, cities, launch sites & more!

[Smurfalot]

I am having some trouble with your instruction manual. I need something more remedial.

It assumes I have imported my model into Unity and that KSP Part Tools is installed in Unity.

Also it assumes that I have a model to import and know how to create a model in the first place.

Can you start at the beginning?

[ZRM]

Haha

And here I was about to try and construct a massive yardstick...this is a much better idea. Its not stupid or out of proportion at all =)

How did I get global messuring tape before I got rover...

A giant yardstick/global measuring tape on a runway... now that is Kerbal. Maybe you've been in IVA too long - Jeb is getting inside your head. However this should definitely be some form of challenge - "Kerbal Land Surveyors".

[sirkut]

Haha

And here I was about to try and construct a massive yardstick...this is a much better idea. Its not stupid or out of proportion at all =)

How did I get global messuring tape before I got rover...

What if you get a craft hovering high enough to see both ends and use the Lazor targeting system to get the coordinates of each side and use that as your measurement. It would be a rough estimate but I guess it would work.

[Razchek]

I am having some trouble with your instruction manual. I need something more remedial.

It assumes I have imported my model into Unity and that KSP Part Tools is installed in Unity.

Also it assumes that I have a model to import and know how to create a model in the first place.

Can you start at the beginning?

Thank you for the feedback. It is appreciated! I will add links to the manual for further reading on modeling when I update the manual tomorrow.

------

Version 0.09 Beta has been released!

Essentially added support for launch sites and selecting one!

See the first post for more information.

I will see if I can help Extra-planetary launch pads implement this solution tomorrow. I believe a lot of people would appreciate that.

Also found a bug that will be fixed in the next update:

- [Critical] Instances are not loaded on first flight.
-- Temporary work around: Reload the flight (exit to the space center and come back to the flight scene).
-- The reason is understood and will be fixed in the 0.1 (0.10) beta release.

Finally; I will be updating the manual tomorrow. Need sleep for work in 4 hours lol.

Feedback please.

[TheCardinal]

Haha

And here I was about to try and construct a massive yardstick...this is a much better idea. Its not stupid or out of proportion at all =)

How did I get global messuring tape before I got rover...

Same here. I was about to create a 50 m tank to measure one section and multiply it by 16 (16 sections in the runway).

[TheCardinal]

Great ideas.

I will try with a standard biodome and see how that looks.

Also, good news for some:

Launch-site support for static objects is almost done. The code works, now it's time to fine tune end-user experience.

Watch the video below for an example of me changing the launch site to a cube nearby called "CubeSite".

Take note that I had launched a vessel off of it prior to filming, just to so you could see it acts like a normal launch site and clears the launch area.

-video-

Being able to launch from other sites has been my most wanted mod! * brushes a tear of joy away *

Edited July 29, 2013 by TheCardinal

[KhaosCorp]

FYI: the KSC runway is 2.4km X 60.5m

[ZRM]

Thank you for the feedback. It is appreciated! I will add links to the manual for further reading on modeling when I update the manual tomorrow.

------

Version 0.09 Beta has been released!

Essentially added support for launch sites and selecting one!

See the first post for more information.

I will see if I can help Extra-planetary launch pads implement this solution tomorrow. I believe a lot of people would appreciate that.

Also found a bug that will be fixed in the next update:

- [Critical] Instances are not loaded on first flight.
-- Temporary work around: Reload the flight (exit to the space center and come back to the flight scene).
-- The reason is understood and will be fixed in the 0.1 (0.10) beta release.

Finally; I will be updating the manual tomorrow. Need sleep for work in 4 hours lol.

Feedback please.

Great, I will try this once I have a break from coding my next update to KCA.

P.S. FYI: Something that irks me about some people's versioning style is the use of the points between each number as decimal points. Most professional bodies follow the [major].[minor].[bugfix] system (or something very similar), where each number is a distinct number, not a fraction or decimal. For example, KSP 0.20 (a very recent version) is not the same as KSP 0.2 (a very old version). The main advantage of this system is that you can have an infinite number of versions between major releases, instead of being unnecessarily constrained by your versioning system, for example you should not be forced (in your style) to go from version 0.99 to version 1.00, instead you can use 0.100.

Edited July 29, 2013 by ZRM
typo

[ZRM]

FYI: the KSC runway is 2.4km X 60.5m

Was that done using rovers? And I am a bit sceptical that it is so huge, and especially so wide. One of the largest runways on Earth, at Edwards Air Force Base, is 11.9km × 0.27km long, and everything is larger on Earth than on Kerbin. Are you sure you measured it correctly? Running across the runway takes hardly any time at all, certainly not 2.4km's worth of Kerbal waddling. You are saying that the runway is nearly as long as the atmosphere is high.

Edit: :facepalm: Oh dear Kod, I cannot read. Please ignore me. Not enough sleep and too much debugging.

Edited July 29, 2013 by ZRM

[KhaosCorp]

Yes, I used rovers to measure it out. It seems like it may have got bigger in 0.21

[Smurfalot]

Thank you for the feedback. It is appreciated! I will add links to the manual for further reading on modeling when I update the manual tomorrow.

I have been messing with sketchup all afternoon. It took me over an hour to just to draw a proper circle.

[KhaosCorp]

I have been messing with sketchup all afternoon. It took me over an hour to just to draw a proper circle.

Unless your a pro at Unity I would suggest modeling with Blender. Due to the way SketchUp exports models once it is imported into Unity it will be super high-poly, even for a just a cube. If your really REALLY good at using Unity its not an issue. Otherwise your better off using a program that has more compatible export formats.

Blender is free, made for 3D modeling (sketchup was made more towards engineering and blueprints), and there are just as much(if not more) tutorials online for Blender.

[Dilin]

Woah this seems interesting!

[Smurfalot]

Unless your a pro at Unity I would suggest modeling with Blender. Due to the way SketchUp exports models once it is imported into Unity it will be super high-poly, even for a just a cube. If your really REALLY good at using Unity its not an issue. Otherwise your better off using a program that has more compatible export formats.

Blender is free, made for 3D modeling (sketchup was made more towards engineering and blueprints), and there are just as much(if not more) tutorials online for Blender.

Well I was trying for something like this:

and ended up with this:

I think you can at least smell what I am stepping in. It is a 3m in diameter module that is supposed to fold out as shown. The small squared off bits are to be ramps in the front and back-- or possibly one really long ramp if you unfold the segments that way.

I cannot figure out how to get the extra flappy bits to fold down and close up the gaps in the rectangular area, but that is going to be the base plate for all my various structures.

I would theoretically like to see telescoping poles to come out of the corners and center of the pad and have it animate deploying similar to that self-deploying tent.

As you can see my 3D modeling skills are very rudimentary. I am probably going to be dependent on someone who actually knows what they are doing for awhile.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Smurfalot

[Razchek]

Great, I will try this once I have a break from coding my next update to KCA.

P.S. FYI: Something that irks me about some people's versioning style is the use of the points between each number as decimal points. Most professional bodies follow the [major].[minor].[bugfix] system (or something very similar), where each number is a distinct number, not a fraction or decimal. For example, KSP 0.20 (a very recent version) is not the same as KSP 0.2 (a very old version). The main advantage of this system is that you can have an infinite number of versions between major releases, instead of being unnecessarily constrained by your versioning system, for example you should not be forced (in your style) to go from version 0.99 to version 1.00, instead you can use 0.100.

Hah! I was wondering if anyone would mention this.

I understand versioning best practice and semantics and we maintain best practice throughout my business. But I just like decimal places.

I'll tell ya what. Starting from minor version 10 of the beta I will start following best practices here as well. Savvy?

I will be finishing work in a few hours, then I'll get onto the next update.

[ZRM]

Unless your a pro at Unity I would suggest modeling with Blender. Due to the way SketchUp exports models once it is imported into Unity it will be super high-poly, even for a just a cube.

Hmmm, in my experience this is not the case. I use a DXF exporter, and for a cube I get exactly 12 triangles, as expected. I find Sketchup is ideal for quickly constructing architectural designs. In fact I would recommend it for any buildings people are thinking of making for KerbTown. It also produces a sensible topology, unlike the meshes that you get out of many CAD programs. Just don't use it for curved surfaces - it is not so well suited to them. For curved surfaces I would switch to Blender. And of course do not do the texturing in Sketchup either. Just the modelling.

[ZRM]

Hah! I was wondering if anyone would mention this.

I understand versioning best practice and semantics and we maintain best practice throughout my business. But I just like decimal places.

I'll tell ya what. Starting from minor version 10 of the beta I will start following best practices here as well. Savvy?

I will be finishing work in a few hours, then I'll get onto the next update.

Great, thanks. Also, I hope that the myth that KSP 0.20 is in fact KSP 0.2 can eventually be dispelled from the forums. Some strange people use the decimal interpretation as an indicator that development is 1/5 of the way towards the full version.

[Smurfalot]

Extraplanetary Launchpads has been updated work with Kethane again--- these mixed with KerbTown = no planet is safe from Kolonization.

[Greys]

One correction to that, EL, Kethane, Kerbtown, and This mean no planet is safe

In discussions on IRC it sounds like it may be possible to make a static that is a valid kethane drill, it'd need to be able to contain the resource it drills so Kethane can put the kethane somewhere, and it'd probably be really weird to provide electricity, but it sounds do-able.

And by fiddling with the animation it should be possible to make the kethane derrick only extract kethane on the up stroke without any additional coding.

[Razchek]

I've updated the KerbTown manual to include information on placing your remote launch sites, and how to launch from them straight from the VAB/SPH.

I'm sure you'll enjoy this Greys.

I tested launching from other celestials than Kerbin and Mun - works great!!

[ZRM]

I've updated the KerbTown manual to include information on placing your remote launch sites, and how to launch from them straight from the VAB/SPH.

I'm sure you'll enjoy this Greys.

I tested launching from other celestials than Kerbin and Mun - works great!!

What do you think about the possibility of an optional gameplay aspect to placing extra-planetary launchpads/runways/other utility structures? For example you must transfer all of the construction equipment and resources to the designated site before constructing the static object. This would also mean that the static object is per-save.

[Greys]

I'm certainly enjoying myself so far

Bug report, when I zoom out past a certain range, which changes depending on where the static is relative to the camera, it disappears.

Edit:

I'm not sure how this happened

Neither is Samsen.

Edit2: I angered the Kraken!

Edited July 30, 2013 by Greys

[Razchek]

What do you think about the possibility of an optional gameplay aspect to placing extra-planetary launchpads/runways/other utility structures? For example you must transfer all of the construction equipment and resources to the designated site before constructing the static object. This would also mean that the static object is per-save.

Not at this point, but the concept has been suggested before.

This will definitely be a nice feature in a future release though, and it isn't hard to throw in so i would like to somewhere around the corner.

I'm certainly enjoying myself so far

http://i.imgur.com/0VncpDj.jpg

Bug report, when I zoom out past a certain range, which changes depending on where the static is relative to the camera, it disappears.

Edit:

I'm not sure how this happened

http://i.imgur.com/HS4DpDc.png

Neither is Samsen.

The zoom thing is probably visibility range, I forgot to change the default setting. I'll fix that.

For now you can edit the cfg after you've saved your instances and change the visibility range to 100000 instead of 1000.

If it isn't, it could be that you're zooming out to space and the sphere (celestial body) is becoming inactive. I'll take a look at that.

Are the vessels spawning as they should otherwise?

Also.. Are you able replicate the second image issue, where it looks as if you spawned/were thrown into the middle of no where at the speed of.. something fast lol?

[Greys]

The speed of 661 times faster than the fastest speed.

I haven't tried to replicate it but basically what I did is I placed a runway at geosync altitude, spawned a ship on it, that didn't work so I made a new runway, and bumped the ship with the runway for a while, and then suddenly I was traveling at two lightyears per second.

This is not currently appearing to be a significant concern.

The third image resulted when I set the runway's position to be x,y,z = 0, alt = 80, which apparently isn't a place. In further messing around it became evident that Y cannot equal zero, the other two seemed fine with being zero and X,Z = 0, Y = 10 is very near the north pole.

I will say, the way you have the Select Launchpad button is very fiddly, the selector drops down if I click the text, the ship launches if I click away from the text, and both happen if I click not on but near the text. It would really be best for them to be separate buttons entirely. Also it would be nice if what launchpad was stored with the craft, or last launch pad was remembered, every time I go back it wants to launch from the default of the building I'm in.

I experienced a lot of exploding, and Kerbals being unable to walk on the runway, but in all my testing the _spawn transform was located exactly at the runway surface, I've moved it up 5m which should cause KSP to settle spawned craft onto the runway like normal, and prevent Kerbals from EVAing partially clipped into the collider, but I don't have time to test I have to go sleep.

It should be noted that everything I did falls under the category of "dicking around" and "bad ideas"

[Razchek]

It should be noted that everything I did falls under the category of "dicking around" and "bad ideas"

Hahaha that is to be expected of anyone playing KSP. So I should fix the problems that occur during such events hahah. Well maybe not the third one. I will be writing a better placement system soon.

I will say, the way you have the Select Launchpad button is very fiddly, the selector drops down if I click the text, the ship launches if I click away from the text, and both happen if I click not on but near the text. It would really be best for them to be separate buttons entirely.

It may be from the quantity of beers I've had so far, but I don't know if I understand that paragraph. I'll check back tomorrow lol.

.. I just realized it may be because of your screen resolution that my silly placement of the buttons is awkward. I'll set one of my monitors to 1024x768 (or just change the ksp settings.. must be running out of alcohol) and see if I can make better sense of what you're saying.

As for remembering the last used launch site, globally or per-save?

Edit:

MY GOD, How do you play in 1024x768. You crazy man.

I see what you mean though. I'll put the button else where for smaller width resolutions.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Razchek