Madrias Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 1 hour ago, snekposter said: phantom force So that's what's been winding up like a big rubber band and flinging my rovers up to stupid speeds. Was wondering what caused that, thought it was just the new wheels and my typical insane building style being totally incompatible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 8, 2016 Author Share Posted September 8, 2016 Bodge after bodge after bodge... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiktaalikDreaming Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 7 hours ago, Madrias said: So that's what's been winding up like a big rubber band and flinging my rovers up to stupid speeds. Was wondering what caused that, thought it was just the new wheels and my typical insane building style being totally incompatible. Well, the "main" phantom force is gone. As far as I know there's still some loopy logic around faking a differential type relative speed that means if you have a wide wheel track, and are turning, you can accelerate faster than straight ahead. It's like, instead of selective braking for turning, there's some sort of turbo boost based turning. It's most noticeable on the extra large rugged wheels (I forget what they're called). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpannerMonkey(smce) Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 8 minutes ago, TiktaalikDreaming said: Well, the "main" phantom force is gone. As far as I know there's still some loopy logic around faking a differential type relative speed that means if you have a wide wheel track, and are turning, you can accelerate faster than straight ahead. It's like, instead of selective braking for turning, there's some sort of turbo boost based turning. It's most noticeable on the extra large rugged wheels (I forget what they're called). Hi, It's not just confined to wheels either, my latest marine interests have led to the same discovery when using a pair of rudders on a ship and they are in full water contact , and it's not a small force either, massive speed increases are easily caused by exuberant or heavy handed course changes, and being launched into the air is not that unusual, thanks for clarifying that which i had suspected. Seemingly the heavier the parts the worse the effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 8, 2016 Author Share Posted September 8, 2016 This is all rather worrying... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riocrokite Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 (edited) I just hope that they'll fix steering curve bug that so the steering at higher speeds would be at all possible: http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/9853 Edited September 8, 2016 by riocrokite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madrias Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 10 hours ago, SpannerMonkey(smce) said: ... massive speed increases are easily caused by exuberant or heavy handed course changes, and being launched into the air is not that unusual... Yep, that just confirmed my driving style 100%. Keyboard driver here. And I like going fast. Just I like having control over how fast, which direction, and not rolling over all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blub01 Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 is there any chance that at least the repulsors are working with 1.1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 9, 2016 Author Share Posted September 9, 2016 Sigh. I'll get the holy mackerel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mycroft Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 I kinda liked the turning bug... I used it to get ultra-massive vehicles like armored personnel carriers moving... If it's fixed, I'm not sure what I'll do. Also the person above @lo-fi was really asking about current compatibility, if the current versions agrav repulsors worked in 1.1.x. I would say that they might, but I think they'll be buggy since (I think) it's basically an invisible, frictionless wheel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TARDISES Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 47 minutes ago, blub01 said: is there any chance that at least the repulsors are working with 1.1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blub01 Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 46 minutes ago, TARDISES said: I didn't ask for an update or a release date. I asked if a certain feature of the mod was not (or at least not gamebreakingly) broken in 1.1. I believe that is a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 9, 2016 Author Share Posted September 9, 2016 I'm afraid if they were working, I would have released them. They're based on the same broken bit of U5 that means wheels don't work, and that's about all you can say really :/ The repulsors will likely be the first things that get handed over to a trusted few for testing, as they only use suspension. One step at a time! I'm waiting for 1.2 beta to be available so we can test in-game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 10, 2016 Author Share Posted September 10, 2016 (edited) Seems to compile for 5.2 as long as the jointdrive modes are set to position only, but does some WEIRD stuff. The joints just don't behave like they should! Almost like the damper is doing nothing. I'll poke it a bit more, but looks like waiting for 1.2/U5.3 is the way forward. EDIT: Yup. Pointless. I don't know what's wrong in U5.2, but seems little point figuring out what it is when everything works fine in 5.3. Let's hope they drop 1.2 beta soon! Edited September 10, 2016 by lo-fi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiktaalikDreaming Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 7 hours ago, lo-fi said: Seems to compile for 5.2 as long as the jointdrive modes are set to position only, but does some WEIRD stuff. The joints just don't behave like they should! Almost like the damper is doing nothing. I'll poke it a bit more, but looks like waiting for 1.2/U5.3 is the way forward. EDIT: Yup. Pointless. I don't know what's wrong in U5.2, but seems little point figuring out what it is when everything works fine in 5.3. Let's hope they drop 1.2 beta soon! It does seem they're hyping the 1.2 pretty heavily now, I expect the open beta will be very soon. Depending on how much the selected minions manage to break the closed beta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 10, 2016 Author Share Posted September 10, 2016 Hopefully a week or two, then. I'll wait it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMMY (JEB 2.0) Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 3 hours ago, lo-fi said: Hopefully a week or two, then. I'll wait it out. umm lofi try to use older vergins of u5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lo-fi Posted September 11, 2016 Author Share Posted September 11, 2016 (edited) The famous vergins of U5. They are getting on a bit. I wonder if they have a beacon that looks grail-like... Edited September 11, 2016 by lo-fi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oniontrain Posted September 12, 2016 Share Posted September 12, 2016 From what I've seen so far most of the stock wheel problems seem to be 'fixed' in the 1.2. How 'fixed' they are is another story though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frybert Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Some posts have been fishkilled. Let's not go pestering for updates, speak proper english, and try to stay on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mycroft Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Speaking of updates, for those who want to test 1.2 compatibility…. [drum roll please] 1.2 HAS ENTERED PRE-RELEASE!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpannerMonkey(smce) Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 On 12/09/2016 at 1:26 AM, oniontrain said: From what I've seen so far most of the stock wheel problems seem to be 'fixed' in the 1.2. How 'fixed' they are is another story though. A bit like this , lets say provisionally that they are sorted , still haven't broken blocked or exploded .. not very kerbal Spoiler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madrias Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 1 hour ago, SpannerMonkey(smce) said: not very kerbal Could you do a test for me, just out of curiosity? How many wheels does it take before the KSP wheel and suspension physics gives up and 'jitterbugs' the craft? Basically, just starts bouncing around on the suspension, while being virtually undrivable due to lack of control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpannerMonkey(smce) Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 Just now, Madrias said: Could you do a test for me, just out of curiosity? How many wheels does it take before the KSP wheel and suspension physics gives up and 'jitterbugs' the craft? Basically, just starts bouncing around on the suspension, while being virtually undrivable due to lack of control. no problem. Should be interesting muwahahaha.... etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madrias Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 It's just one of those things I'd normally run into, but I tend to stay away from pre-releases because as good as I am at creating localized bug reports, the way I load things up, I can't tell if the bugs come from a mod or come from the base game in beta testing. Hence, I'm trying to avoid having to flush the mod load I have in order to test something that not having the mods makes irrelevant for me. In other words, it's something I can't logically test myself without having the mods I typically use in 1.1, because I build strange vehicles designed to carry out a specific mission and carry everything they'd need for said specific mission. And, let's face it, the stock parts just... Well, they work, but they don't have a single design scheme that works well for a rover platform. Parts you need to carry are often way too big to justify carrying, like the ISRU and Mining equipment, and yet if you're using a lot of electricity, can't use big solar panels because you're on the move all the time, it'd be too many parts to justify RTG's, you end up using LF+O and fuel cells. Which is great until the fuel runs dry, at which point, you end up having to either spend just as much, if not more time sending fuel trucks to your rover, or you scrap the mission there. I suppose it's kinda why I want the DSR-4 to be modular enough to carry everything. A single cohesive design with an ability to mine ore, process resources, generate plenty of power, and yet have tons of room for science stuff, because there are just times you want to drive around Kerbin to get your science instead of going to one or more planets. But back on course, I don't do pre-release testing because my attempts to break things typically end up in the "Well, just don't do that and you won't have that problem" pile. I like having rovers that do everything, I bring extra wheels along as double or triple redundancy (because if you break a wheel, it shouldn't strand your rover immediately, it should be able to continue until stopping is convenient or further damage is sustained), and as a result, I often end up trying to drive around 300+ part land-ships that worked okay in 1.0.5, but jitterbug in 1.1. Hence, asking someone who is testing in 1.2 if they could see how many wheels it takes to break the physics engine, because it's a test I'd normally do if I didn't actually enjoy my 1.1 folder right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts