[1.0] Enhanced Navball 1.3

[Tebryn]

I've used anti-node a few times when I had a vessel that was a puller design, and I forgot to (or for tech limitations couldn't) put a Probe/docking port aimed in the correct direction. Helps a lot when you're pulling a 3k ton asteroid under those limitations.

[Superfluous J]

why would I want to move my trajectory away from a maneuver?

When you get your Kethane scanner to Moho and THEN realize you put the Okto-2 probe core on upside down, you'll be happy you have that anti-maneuver marker. I know I wanted one.

[joolsjewls]

I've used anti-node a few times when I had a vessel that was a puller design, and I forgot to (or for tech limitations couldn't) put a Probe/docking port aimed in the correct direction. Helps a lot when you're pulling a 3k ton asteroid under those limitations.

Now that makes sense...and in such situations you really have no other recourse. So you really SHOULD never need anti-maneuver, but if the situation that shouldn't occur does happen, you will be totally hosed without it.

[BudgetHedgehog]

I just had this spammed in my output log after switching to a probe I'd sent to Duna

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at EnhancedNavBall.CalculationStore.RunCalculations (.Vessel vessel, Quaternion gymbal) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at EnhancedNavBall.EnhancedNavBall.LateUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

Mind you, that was after this initial error, which could be to blame

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at ModelMultiParticlePersistFX.OnSave (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at EffectList.OnSave (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at Part.SaveEffects (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at ProtoPartSnapshot.Load (.Vessel vesselRef, Boolean loadAsRootPart) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at ProtoVessel.LoadObjects () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at Vessel.Load () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at Vessel.MakeActive () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at FlightGlobals.setActiveVessel (.Vessel v, Boolean force) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at FlightGlobals.SetActiveVessel (.Vessel v) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at FlightDriver.Start () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

I say to blame because my probe is now just a fuel tank and engine with fairing. DOE did say something about trying to draw its parts within rendering range, so god knows what's gone wrong..

[ap0r]

Have you tought of adding KerbalStuff support?

[Climberfx]

Great, installing...

[BudgetHedgehog]

Well, it was bound to happen eventually..

Marco (Samssonart): Now that the cat is well out of the bag, I can disclose that I have been working on a few features. First of all, additional NavBall icons! Now, the Normal and Radial vectors will be visible on the NavBall. An arrow will also indicate the general direction of the maneuver marker when using maneuver nodes.

I wonder how different it'll be from ENB, hmm..

[Bomoo]

Well, it was bound to happen eventually..

I wonder how different it'll be from ENB, hmm..

While I'm glad the features of this mod are being made stock, it's a little ratty of them to do so without even so much as mentioning that there had been a mod that performed the same function. I get they want to keep coding in-house, but would it kill them to be respectful toward people who put work in for no compensation? Blarg.

[Nori]

But will is have scaling of the nav ball...

[Alewx]

Finally the basic features fo EN are going into the stock game

[Streetwind]

While I'm glad the features of this mod are being made stock, it's a little ratty of them to do so without even so much as mentioning that there had been a mod that performed the same function. I get they want to keep coding in-house, but would it kill them to be respectful toward people who put work in for no compensation? Blarg.

EnhancedNavBall itself was inspired by/meant to replicate something that was planned for stock looong ago and just never got implemented. This is basically Squad digging out and finishing their own concept. It has nothing to do with this mod.

There's even a quote to that effect from Harvester in the opening post.

[Apollo13]

But will is have scaling of the nav ball...

If the new stock NavBall doesn't have scaling and the ability to move it out of the way, I'll stick with this mod. Secondly, I'm "wait-and-see" concerning the arrows that were mentioned in the DevNotes. I like this mod's "ghosting". It's non-intrusive, but provides the info I need.

I think Squad could have saved a lot of time, effort, and expense by making a deal with kitoban to include Enhanced NavBall as stock. Pay him/her for the rights and incorporate all further development in house.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Apollo13

[Alshain]

I went back and reread the devnotes. Based on how they describe it, it's not the full functionality of this mod. The arrow they mentioned looks like it only occurs for the maneuver point, not the prograde, retrograde, et. al. While a lot can be removed from this mod for 0.25 (normal and radial points), it sounds like Enhanced Navball will still be desired for the ghosted icons, scaling, and positioning.

Edited August 20, 2014 by Alshain

[KerbMav]

scaling, and positioning.

This alone would be worth installing it!

[Nori]

This alone would be worth installing it!

Yeah stock navball is too tiny to do precise maneuvering on larger monitors. My poor eyes can't handle it.

[kitoban]

I do intend on releasing whatever features are not "stockified" after 0.25 so these will still be available.

I get they want to keep coding in-house, but would it kill them to be respectful toward people who put work in for no compensation? Blarg.

They did make alot of hype around SP+ integration (whether intended or not) but then didn't even mention ENB and SM/CM.

I know ENB was a concept that they had intended (as mentioned by Harv) and am sure they would have had a crew manifest in the backlog as well, but given that squad have stated that part of their decision process on which functionality they are implementing is dependant on what is being covered by mods or not, it would have been nice to at least acknowledge these as well.

I'm "wait-and-see" concerning the arrows that were mentioned in the DevNotes. I like this mod's "ghosting". It's non-intrusive, but provides the info I need.

Is my thoughts as well, as I did consider having an arrow in place, however this would have meant another symbol on the navball and as quick understanding of the navball is critical to your control of the craft I decided to maintain the same symbol throughout so you always know what to look for. The same reasoning is why the radial and normal nodes are removed while a maneuver is in place, as if you have a maneuver you already know what you intend to do so do not need the extra nodes in assisting with that action.

What a may end up doing is to retain the logic for maneuver ghosting and creating an option to switch between stock and mod functionality, but we will have to wait and see for 0.25 as to how this is setup.

[Ixonal]

I just had this spammed in my output log after switching to a probe I'd sent to Duna

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at EnhancedNavBall.CalculationStore.RunCalculations (.Vessel vessel, Quaternion gymbal) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at EnhancedNavBall.EnhancedNavBall.LateUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

Mind you, that was after this initial error, which could be to blame

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at ModelMultiParticlePersistFX.OnSave (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at EffectList.OnSave (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at Part.SaveEffects (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at ProtoPartSnapshot.Load (.Vessel vesselRef, Boolean loadAsRootPart) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at ProtoVessel.LoadObjects () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at Vessel.Load () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at Vessel.MakeActive () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at FlightGlobals.setActiveVessel (.Vessel v, Boolean force) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at FlightGlobals.SetActiveVessel (.Vessel v) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at FlightDriver.Start () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

I say to blame because my probe is now just a fuel tank and engine with fairing. DOE did say something about trying to draw its parts within rendering range, so god knows what's gone wrong..

Was there ever a solution to this? I'm having a very similar problem. Different error repeating, but based on exactly the same starting exception, and all I have on screen is an engine that looks like it's running, with a faring attached to it...

Edit: Answered my own question. I removed Hot Rockets and the ship loaded normally. I'm not sure what's up with that, but at least the problem can be fixed fairly simply.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Ixonal

[FreeThinker]

Why didn't the designers integrate this improvement yet into KSP yet?

[Errol]

Could I feature request that this mod adds all its functionality to IVA nav balls save for scaling/moving?

[micha]

Hi Kitoban,

Just another shout-out as a happy ENB "customer" and I really hope you continue your mod post-0.25. Just watched the video on that and the SQUAD version of the ENB is sadly lacking (imho).

But will it be possible for you to get rid of that obnoxious new manoeuvre-node arrow? Much prefer your approach of ghosting the symbols.

Also, as a feature-request, any chance of adding an option to not remove the additional nodes when a manoeuvre is active? Often I set up a manoeuvre node just to get a rough idea, but then fly "by the seat of my pants" as it were to perform the actual burn.

Cheers,

- Micha.

[iFlyAllTheTime]

Definitely in my top 5 mods for this game!

I got this to work on my latest save but there's something that is nagging me.

This mod comes with two PNG files in the resource folder. During "installation" I copied the contents of <Plugins> folder into the identically named folder in my KSP game directory. I continued to copy the two aforementioned files in the <Resources> folder.

On the toolbar, the icon that is supposed to open the Navball Config window appears to be just a plain purple square.

Has this happened to anyone else? Did I do something wrong during the installation process?

I know it isn't a big deal, but I'd like it to display the intended icon.

Any help would be appreciated.

PS: I would've liked to upload an image to show you what I mean, but seems like I can only link to an image URL; which I can't at the moment.

[BigD145]

Well there's your first and likely only problem. Mods only go into the 'gamedata' folder. DO NOT remove them from their folder inside the zip. Just drop the "enhanced navball" folder into gamedata. Many mods require a very specific folder chain inside gamedata like gamedata-enhancednavball-plugins/resources and gamedata-plugins or plugins would fail. Not all do this, but enough do that using gamedata only is not only safer but saner to update.

Edited October 5, 2014 by BigD145

[kitoban]

Definitely in my top 5 mods for this game!

This mod comes with two PNG files in the resource folder. During "installation" I copied the contents of <Plugins> folder into the identically named folder in my KSP game directory. I continued to copy the two aforementioned files in the <Resources> folder.

On the toolbar, the icon that is supposed to open the Navball Config window appears to be just a plain purple square.

As BigD145 mentioned just leave the folder structure as is and copy to the GameData folder, the mod only looks within it's own folder structure for the icons, so without the files within that structure you will see a random block of memory loaded as an image instead of the icon.

Could I feature request that this mod adds all its functionality to IVA nav balls save for scaling/moving?

It is something I hope to look into, is just a bit trickier to implement and I have been looking at colour blindness support recently, although I have not had much time for coding of late.

Just another shout-out as a happy ENB "customer" and I really hope you continue your mod post-0.25. Just watched the video on that and the SQUAD version of the ENB is sadly lacking (imho).

But will it be possible for you to get rid of that obnoxious new manoeuvre-node arrow? Much prefer your approach of ghosting the symbols.

Also, as a feature-request, any chance of adding an option to not remove the additional nodes when a manoeuvre is active? Often I set up a manoeuvre node just to get a rough idea, but then fly "by the seat of my pants" as it were to perform the actual burn.

Glad you appreciate the mod, do you have a link to the video of what they have implemented I have not had a chance to see it yet. It was my hope that if it is possible to add the option to override but until the release of 0.25 I am unable to see how the new code interacts with the mod (probably not in a nice way considering they have changed this area of the game engine)

I have been on hold on dev with the looming 0.25 release as anything I change at present is liable to have unforeseen interactions with the new game code that is being implemented.

[AndreyATGB]

Around

for official implementation.

2:15 in case link doesn't work for some reason.

[therealcrow999]

Around

for official implementation.

2:15 in case link doesn't work for some reason.

Its not really Enhanced Navball, they do have the extra vectors, but instead of the "Ghosting" Enhanced Navball has, .25 has a blue arrow telling you were to go for maneuver node. Which I kind of don't really like, I think the arrow will bother a lot of people too. I would of like to had "Ghosting" over a arrow, but the arrow only does one thing. Enhanced Navball still does a lot more then their new navball. They should of ported over Enhanced Navball a long time ago, like they were suppose to do.