Thomas changed the topic of #kspmodding to: Welcome to #kspmodding - the channel for discussing, and learning about, modding Kerbal Space Program. Code of Conduct: https://git.io/vSQh6 | Always provide logs (do !support for help). | *** PSA: https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/api/index.html | <Red5> Guy was asked for a log file, he gave this link: http://pastebin.com/wfVarZPf
hashashin has joined #kspmodding
xEvilReeperx has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<Virindi>
bound sorta works on pol but it is still glitchy hmm
<Virindi>
that is not even this condition
<Virindi>
it is something else
<Virindi>
the kerbal is bouncing
<Virindi>
they launch themselves too much
* Virindi
enables state diagnostics :(
<taniwha>
the best state diagnostic tool I've found so far: graphvis :)
<Virindi>
and now the ksp debug log window is broken!!
<Virindi>
of all the things.
<taniwha>
KSP.log :)
<taniwha>
(but how did you do that?)
<Virindi>
no idea
<Virindi>
when input goes to the log
<Virindi>
it flashes on the console for 1 frame
<Virindi>
then vanishes
<Virindi>
the display is stuck at some point in the past
<Virindi>
the scrollbar has no effect
<taniwha>
anyway, write some code to run through the fsm dumping graphvis data
<Virindi>
but
<Virindi>
the new lines DO appear in ksp.log
<Virindi>
there is no error or anything
<Virindi>
I am really good at breaking things.
<Virindi>
I am that person who walks into a room and everything explodes
<taniwha>
anyway, graphvis is a truly wonderful too: extremely easy to generate the data and the defaults are usually ok to look at
<taniwha>
s/wonderful too/wonderful tool/
<Qboid>
taniwha meant to say: anyway, graphvis is a truly wonderful tool: extremely easy to generate the data and the defaults are usually ok to look at
<Virindi>
on pol the kerbal just steps too hard and overshoots the bound timeout
<Virindi>
:(
<taniwha>
not unreasonable, really
<taniwha>
probably pretty hard not to
<Virindi>
you would think they would learn to step more lightly.
<taniwha>
the less stupid ones might ;)
<Virindi>
regardless it does look and feel glitchy.
<xShadowx>
Virindi: while you're at that area of code, mod suggestion - magnetic boots to walk on the surface of a vessel
<Virindi>
hahahaha no thanks.
<xShadowx>
aww XD
<Virindi>
take a look at kerbaleva sometime and then decide if that is a good idea
<Virindi>
I mean I guess it could be done but meh
<xShadowx>
id rather avoid risk of nightmares :P
<Virindi>
I would just bypass half the logic
<Virindi>
problem is vessel surfaces aren't good for walking anyway. and it is scifi tech
<Virindi>
I'm no so into scifi handwavy tech
<Virindi>
not*
<Virindi>
I'd rather be able to move from handhold to handhold, or have better tethers, or both
<Virindi>
but kerbals have such short arms
<xShadowx>
uh not scifi tech, that tech exists
<xShadowx>
just electromagnets in boots
<Virindi>
boots that latch onto the surface of a spacecraft? a lot of spacecraft shells are nonferrous!
<xShadowx>
as for tethers, unity5 has a rope sim
<Virindi>
heat shields, aluminum...
<xShadowx>
no clue if used in space, i just know magnetic boots are a thing
<Virindi>
electromagnets only work if the surface material is steel
<Virindi>
steel is heavy
<xShadowx>
if used is more a question for RO
* xShadowx
knows how magnets work
<Virindi>
just saying :P
<Virindi>
when you started talking about magnetic boots I imagined you picturing star trek beaming onto the klingon ship where the gravity is broken
<xShadowx>
or star trek first contact where they eva
<taniwha>
Virindi: many steels are non-magnetic
<xShadowx>
ever notice your forks/spoons?:3
<taniwha>
varying magnetic respons
<Virindi>
I am also aware of that.
<taniwha>
Virindi: however, your point stands (even firmer with my comment)
<Virindi>
my statement was not if steel then magnet
<Virindi>
it was, if magnet then steel (in all practical materials)
<xShadowx>
bzzt
<taniwha>
induction would result in repulsion
<xShadowx>
there are magnets with no steel
<Virindi>
I said in all practical materials.
<xShadowx>
i have 2 magnets, only made of copper :)
<Virindi>
copper is like aluminum in terms of stress cracking but worse
<Virindi>
don't think you'd want to build a spaceship out of it
<taniwha>
copper is the king of work hardening :)
<taniwha>
or was it aluminum?
<taniwha>
one of the two
<xShadowx>
prolly copper
<taniwha>
AvE is interesting, but watch too much and you get confused
<Virindi>
keep your dick in a vise?
<taniwha>
yeah
<Virindi>
entertaining but his knowledge really is mechanical and he is pretty nooby when he strays from that realm
<taniwha>
(got a game object with a RectTransform instead of a Transform)
<Virindi>
watch more eevblog instead :P
<Virindi>
not sure the best way to make pol less glitchy, maybe increase bound timeout in lower gravity? but that would still make walking pretty terrible
<Virindi>
let's try that and see
<taniwha>
smoother transition between bound and float-idle
<taniwha>
but that would take animation hacking
<taniwha>
maybe
<xShadowx>
wish was a way to search entire github :(
<Virindi>
the kerbal should not go idle during normal bounding
<Virindi>
unless you walk off a cliff or something of course.
<Thorbane>
How would I make "@MODULE[ModuleResourceConverter_USI]" apply to all modules of type "ModuleResourceConverter_USI" in a part, and not just the first one it finds?
* xShadowx
found a way to search all github repos mwuhaha
<taniwha>
xShadowx: /all/ or just public?
<xShadowx>
taniwha: im assuming public, org:github PartModule
<xShadowx>
google ^
<taniwha>
yeah, likely public
<xShadowx>
can also do repo:taniwha/kerbalsexprogram to search just the listed repos
<taniwha>
won't get many hits with that string, though :P
<xShadowx>
im trying to search for repos i never seen before / mods i dont have
<xShadowx>
i figure with all that goes to forums, a lot has to exist that people only 1/2 made
<taniwha>
that air-walk looks a little wonky, but maybe it's maintaining balance
<taniwha>
Virindi: what about bounding with RCS already on?
<Virindi>
toggling rcs puts you in idle
<Virindi>
so you can toggle it twice if you want
<taniwha>
so it works as intended? (which was my point)
<Virindi>
yes
<Virindi>
and works in first person and third person modes of course :P
<taniwha>
[WRN 11:14:15.894] Parent of RectTransform is being set with parent property. Consider using the SetParent method instead, with the worldPositionStays argument set to false. This will retain local orientation and scale rather than world orientation and scale, which can prevent common UI scaling issues.
<taniwha>
sometimes, unity can be really helpful
<Virindi>
wish I could take over the through the eyes mod
<taniwha>
wanna take over FreeEVA? :)
<Virindi>
nah :P
<taniwha>
or want me to put these fixes into FreeEVA?
<Virindi>
nah, I would prefer if there were just one eva mod to rule them all
<taniwha>
or, you could try asking JPLRepo nicely
<Virindi>
because multiple mods messing with the state machine would be chaos
<Virindi>
jplrepo is the author? I thought the author was ser, is that the same person
<taniwha>
JPLRepo is squad dev
<taniwha>
ie, inside man :)
<Virindi>
what does squad have to do with it :P
<taniwha>
"one mod to rule them all" :)
<taniwha>
get the fixes into stock
<Virindi>
hey squad is welcome to use it if they are interested, but I am really not used to that kind of community involvement from the "official team"
<Virindi>
heh in AC the official team wouldn't even answer our messages, even when we sent them bug reports on their game, I sent a bunch of reports of exploits and radio silence
<Virindi>
they had a no talking with the evil modders policy
<JPLRepo>
There is no such policy at Squad
blowfish has joined #kspmodding
<Virindi>
sweet.
<Virindi>
these "fixes" are really super simple though
<taniwha>
all the better
<Virindi>
I think though that there should be some way other than toggling rcs to break out of bound once you have been bound floating for a long time
<Virindi>
like
<taniwha>
super simple = noninvasive = fewer bugs
<JPLRepo>
haven't been following.
<Virindi>
let bound float have an UBER long timeout but after the current stock timeout, break it if you change key controls
<Virindi>
I've just been working on kerbal first person and taniwha had some annoyances with kerbal walking in general that he wanted me to add
<JPLRepo>
but reading back. you can flush log via the debug menu. look in "Debugging" section "Immediately Flush Log File to Disk"
<Virindi>
1) bound on a sharp slope gets stuck in bound float because you cannot get close enough to the surface to land
<JPLRepo>
and notepad++ now has a tail option. "View->Monitoring (tail -f)" with version 6.9.2
<Virindi>
2) bound times out too quickly on very low g worlds like pol and gilly
<Virindi>
3) there is no way to break out of bound float other than letting it time out
<Virindi>
I solved #1 by having a second chance ground check based on the surface normal
<JPLRepo>
1) sounds like something that can be fixed.
<Virindi>
#2 and #3 are kinda related, if the bound timeout is increased then there definitely needs to be breakout
<JPLRepo>
2) sounds like something that also can be fixed by increasing the time based on the g
<Virindi>
yeah that's what I did
<Virindi>
of course the kerbal's feet moving animation transitions to zero as it hits the expected bound time but that's fine
<taniwha>
here's an idea for 2, assuming the kerbal actually leaves the ground when bounding an it's not just animation: base the time on the orbit
<Virindi>
the kerbal leaves the ground I'm fairly sure
<taniwha>
as am I, but hedging bets
<Virindi>
I mean otherwise the hit check would always succeed
<taniwha>
I mean landed/flying etc
<Virindi>
oh
<Virindi>
situation
<Virindi>
I have no idea.
<taniwha>
easy to check
<taniwha>
(for you, since you already have instrumentation)
<Virindi>
yeah I am adding break out of long bound atm :)
<taniwha>
one suggestion for that: f
<taniwha>
(ie, clamber)
<taniwha>
might be good for trying to stop a tripped slide, too
<taniwha>
"mash f key to stop sliding" :)
<Virindi>
yeah I don't like that you can slide for a really freaking long time without recovering but that seems more of a gameplay choice than fixing a glitchy aspect of movement
<Virindi>
which is what I am really doing
<taniwha>
yeah
<taniwha>
my though is it would work only while contacting the ground
<taniwha>
so actually bouncing down the hill would need good timing, but sliding would usually work
<Virindi>
for breaking out of long bounds I was just thinking left or right keys
<taniwha>
Virindi: sometimes, gameplay choices are poorly thought out
<Virindi>
since those otherwise wouldn't do anything
<Virindi>
sure but if I was going to make gameplay choices for the mod user I'd have to add an option to the config!! PFFFT
<taniwha>
or poorly play-tested
<taniwha>
gameplay choice: don't hit f :)
Olympic1 has quit [Quit: Nice talking to you]
Olympic1 has joined #kspmodding
<Virindi>
thing is, when you are in the middle of a long bound you can't actually do much anyway unless rcs is on, hmm
<Virindi>
maybe if rcs is on any movement key change breaks you out
<Virindi>
after you have exceeded some time
<Virindi>
so you have been floating in bound state for awhile now, now rcs is available
<Virindi>
that would probably be the most intuitive for the user
<Virindi>
and it also needs two implementations to deal with first person vs. third person rcs :P :(
<Virindi>
hmm
<xShadowx>
the joys of tearing apart cheap plastic boxes and cramming their electronic guts into a single box
<Virindi>
what in particular?
<xShadowx>
2 usb hubs, a card reader, a lone usb jack, 2x 3.5mm jacks, a few LEDs, a few barrel jacks, all into a piece of wood i still need to carve
<xShadowx>
and still gotta cram in more
<Virindi>
cnc router? hand chisels?
<xShadowx>
my monitor stand is a single mast, with arms extending near top to hold 3 monitors, so clearing off desk of various smaller electronic stuff, and making a wooden cover to go around the base of the mast
<xShadowx>
cram all the stuff into the wooden cover :)
<Virindi>
yes which school of woodworking are you, new school (cnc all the things), old school (hand chisel & plane), or, uh, mid school (bunch of manually operated power tools like table saw, etc)
<xShadowx>
Virindi: you got a 3d printer? and using lathe + chisels
<xShadowx>
too poor for a cnc machine ;p
<Virindi>
I have scratch built 3x 3d printers each of my own design
<Virindi>
the 3d printing restrap campaign, never buy when you can make
<xShadowx>
Virindi: s/scratch built/bought kit
<Qboid>
xShadowx thinks Virindi meant to say: I have bought kit 3x 3d printers each of my own design
<Virindi>
never bought a kit :P
<xShadowx>
made all the software to control em eh
<Virindi>
no
<Virindi>
I use standard software.
<Virindi>
I didn't create the universe either :)
<taniwha>
or the previous universes
<Virindi>
I did have to write a lot of helper software for my first one though
<Virindi>
since it was mechanically such crap
<xShadowx>
no cheating and buying premade controller?
<Virindi>
arduino
<Virindi>
dunno if you consider that cheating
<Virindi>
I mean driving motors, at first I built my own h-bridges out of a box of mosfets but
<Virindi>
soon after I just got real stepper drivers
<Virindi>
on the first one I gave up and bought the extruder as well.
<xShadowx>
if only wood could be 3d printed
<Virindi>
you need a cnc router, it is not that hard to build one
<Virindi>
a wood capable one that is
<xShadowx>
ya, i ment accually print out wood though
<xShadowx>
id want it XD
<Virindi>
well there is "wood filament" :P
<Virindi>
it's just sawdust mixed in to plastic though.
<Virindi>
and a huge price markup because it's boutique :P
<xShadowx>
with printing you can make it thin bits and not worry about pre existing cracks
<Virindi>
sure there is no grain, but if you are woodworking you can use plywood
<xShadowx>
"wood filament" sounds like particleboard in gluegun form
<Virindi>
get some baltic birch ply or whatever for your project instead of solid wood if you are worried
<Virindi>
it is.
<xShadowx>
ugly
<xShadowx>
but i do want a cnc machine to card wood for me :|
<xShadowx>
carve
<xShadowx>
i got worlds most useless hobby atm lol
* Virindi
plays classical music while watching kerbals slowly bound around in lowg
<Virindi>
still slight animation glitch on steep surfaces on pol, mehh I hate animations
<Virindi>
I think kerbaleva is picking strange values for expected bound anyway
<Virindi>
yeah these controls feel really natural.
<Virindi>
taniwha: okay I committed all those fixes, since you were the one complaining about the issues now it is your duty to try out the fixes https://github.com/Virindi-AC/Through-The-Eyes
<Virindi>
:P
<taniwha>
cool, thanks :)
<Virindi>
my fork of the mod is getting pretty slick now
<Virindi>
:)
<Virindi>
what I started with was practically unusable
<taniwha>
you might hate me for this, but why didn't you do a T CreateDelegate<T>(...) ? :)
<Virindi>
why.
<taniwha>
save a lot of casts in the code
<taniwha>
and nulls
<Virindi>
how so
<Virindi>
oh
<Virindi>
delegate.createdelegate
<Virindi>
no idea, I just used the first override that popped up
<Virindi>
I don't think it matters :P
<taniwha>
you'd have one function that does the actual call to Delegate.CreateDelegate with the null and typeof and cast, then just eva_m_updatePackLinear = CreateDelegate<delvoidEVA>(tf)
<taniwha>
(eg)
<Virindi>
oh meh
<taniwha>
anyway, back to getting stake plaques up and running :)
<Virindi>
I don't like splitting off tiny amounts of logic like that
<Virindi>
dunno
<Virindi>
it is just style
<Virindi>
it could be either way, doesn't matter
<taniwha>
I split off as much repetitive stuff as possible
<Virindi>
although to be fair
<taniwha>
or rather, I like to
<Virindi>
the .net CLR is terrible at inlining and I'm sure mono is no better
<Virindi>
so doing that actually has a performance cost.
<Virindi>
(in this case it is really irrelevant)
<Virindi>
but in hot path code doing a billion tiny method calls harms performance
<Virindi>
the stuff that in cpp you would traditionally make a macro
<Virindi>
but I've done one liner methods like the one you suggest before too so :)
<taniwha>
time and place for everything :)
<taniwha>
also, it's the compiler's job to inline, not the runtime's
<Virindi>
inlining is handled by the JIT engine.
<Virindi>
the JIT engine is part of the runtime
<Virindi>
:)
<Virindi>
so yes, the runtime handles inlining
<taniwha>
I didn't say what's handling it, I said what should be handling it
<Virindi>
well like it or not that's not how .net works
<taniwha>
no reason the compiler can't do it anyway
<Virindi>
the first stage compiler can give hints about inlining
<taniwha>
it can even /do/ the inlining
<Virindi>
sure but it doesn't
<taniwha>
which is dumb
<Virindi>
well not really
<Virindi>
I mean
<Virindi>
if the first stage compiler inlined stuff, your metadata would not be as written
<Virindi>
so reflection, would give an unexpected result
<Virindi>
when the JIT inlines at runtime it can fix up and/or detect when that is not an issue
<taniwha>
the compiler could do that too
<Virindi>
perhaps
<Virindi>
it would be hacky :P
<Virindi>
I know that JIT sucks but JIT is an integral part of the .net system
* Virindi
hands taniwha some more darts to throw at the "bill gates borg" poster on his wall
<Virindi>
maybe c++ .net is the right language for you, too bad mono doesn't support mixed mode assemblies
<taniwha>
JIT doing additional inlining the compiler can't is fine
<Virindi>
I think in addition to metadata the theory was, the JIT knows about the hardware situation and is best suited to know what optimizations are best for this particular platform
<Virindi>
while the first stage complier knows nothing about what the code will run on
<taniwha>
true for low-level optimizations
<taniwha>
but high-level ones are best done at compile time
<taniwha>
and inlining is high-level
<taniwha>
along with global and local CSE optimizations
<Virindi>
but inline vs. not inline has different costs on different arch
<Virindi>
inlines are cheaper, say, on x64. but if you have very little memory, inlines are more expensive because you are using up precious memory
<taniwha>
depends more on how much is inlined
<Virindi>
(on x64 because there is so much more register passing available)
<Virindi>
cheaper as in less savings
<Virindi>
I typed that wrong
<Virindi>
"function calls are cheaper, say, on x64."
<Virindi>
.net does run on devices with very little memory
<Virindi>
like microcontrollers, though I have no idea what kind of fool would run .net on a microcontroller. KIDS THESE DAYS GET OFF MY LAWN
<Virindi>
I built mono for my kindle keyboard and use it for custom menus, there is only a few mb free
<Virindi>
s/is only/are only
<Qboid>
Virindi meant to say: I built mono for my kindle keyboard and use it for custom menus, there are only a few mb free
<Virindi>
interesting, the mun arch seems to have a giant polygon zfighting itself
<Virindi>
oh shadows are broken somehow hum
<Virindi>
heh you can just walk up the side of the mun arch now............very slowly and painfully with some climbing to get over edges
<Virindi>
maybe there should be an actual, maximum angle that you can walk on, rather than just having glitchy mode take care of that
xEvilReeperx has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
<xShadowx>
ram is cheap, inline everything
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<Virindi>
good luck adding "cheap" ram to a device without replaceable ram
<Virindi>
more and more common these days
* xShadowx
looks at his pc with 128gb of ram
* xShadowx
stands by his words
<xShadowx>
is there a way to take the choice away from compiler and force inline?
<xShadowx>
like some attribute to toss on a method?:3
<Virindi>
every pc doesn't have that kind of memory, or even support that kind of memory
<taniwha>
xShadowx: gcc has such for C/C++/Objective-C
<SilverFox>
did they change the names of the biomes in 1.2.x?
<Olympic1>
not that I know of but I can check
<Olympic1>
SilverFox: None got renamed but there were added a lot. 8 to Eve, 2 to Kerbin, 2 to Mun, 9 to Duna, 5 to Laythe, 5 to Vall, 1 to Tylo and 4 to Eeloo.
<SilverFox>
I see the two that got added
<SilverFox>
weird how "Southern Ice Shelf" is seen in both north and south poles
<xShadowx>
there is also one of the snow biomes right next to ksc
<Virindi>
when biomes were first introduced there was a tiny polygon of "tundra" just over the hill outside ksc
<Virindi>
dunno if it is still there
<xShadowx>
ya thats it :|
<xShadowx>
dunno if fixed either
<xShadowx>
never figured out why it existed
APlayer has joined #kspmodding
<xShadowx>
part of me thought testing purposes and forgetten about
<Virindi>
I assumed it was a bug in the code since it was on a terrain seam
<Virindi>
you had to be very close to the seam
<xShadowx>
aso u5 has cloth abilities o.O
<xShadowx>
seems like that would be usable for a tether too, as you can constrain the polys at both ends
<Virindi>
couldn't you just make a tether out of a billion rigidbodies with no stretch infinite strength joints
<SilverFox>
probs, this could be the same as well, since my code looks at the direct north and south poles, on the dot
<xShadowx>
u5 has a rope sim too, and that was my original thoughts
<xShadowx>
but ksp controls position of both 'vessels' (ie ship + eva kerbal) so...what hold both ends of rope, and watch rope, if straight/tight apply force to the 2 vessels to pull together?
<Virindi>
problem is the tether has to collide with the ship or it works poorly, that is the biggest problem with winches
<xShadowx>
and chutes
<xShadowx>
oh god if chutes could tangle
<xShadowx>
<3 id be so happy
<xShadowx>
all the kids whod cry at failing chutes because they ejected them the wrong way :P
<Virindi>
what, you don't like the "stock only!!11" cheaters clipping 400 chutes into one spot to spacex their "STOCK REUSABLE ROCKET"
<SilverFox>
couldn't you do a raycast thing to check for collisions rather than trying to murder the CPU wth rigidbody simulations?
<xShadowx>
im not even talking of the chute clipping
<xShadowx>
just the ropes of 1 chute clipping ship body
<Virindi>
silverfox: but it has to wrap around pieces if you want it to work "right"
<xShadowx>
or ships with 1 chute spinning around fast
<Virindi>
hey, the end of your chute ropes, where it attaches to the ship, could have a rotating bearing
APlayer has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<xShadowx>
oh if you want 'chute spread' theres that on claw stock fix
<Virindi>
or even a powered turntable that spins based on rotation
<Virindi>
to keep it from tangling
<xShadowx>
it only 1/2 way fixes (only chutes that are their own symetric group spread)
<xShadowx>
would be nice for every chute to calc its force and spread all chutes, but thatd be a bit heh
<Virindi>
if there is some situation that is faced in ksp but not faced in real life, you needn't force ksp parts to work like real life parts if real life engineering could solve the problem if needed but such a solution has simply not been needed
<xShadowx>
as far as ksp being video game, chutes are fine, as far ss realism, ksp is a cartoon joke, and chutes tangling their ropes would make me die happy :P
<Virindi>
we should assume kerbals applied a modern human equivalent level of engineering in designing their stuff
<xShadowx>
what the fuck have you been playin
<xShadowx>
kerbals find <thing> in back yard and tack it on
<xShadowx>
5 year old mentality :P
<Virindi>
if that were really the case they would never have the capabilities they have, unless there is a wormhole dropping fully engineered parts in their backyard
<Virindi>
you wouldn't be able to fly supersonic let alone get to space if kerbals were really that dumb
<xShadowx>
ever heard the give 1 million monkeys 1 million typewriters, and eventually 1 would right a masterpiece?
<xShadowx>
write*
<xShadowx>
its all rolling the dice, early kerbals fail with that mentality, but they dont give up, and eventually find a combination that works
<Virindi>
so when I research a new part, there is a 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% chance that it is useless? :P
<xShadowx>
never said the science system wasnt screwy :P
<xShadowx>
looking at rock dust makes engines work better yo
<Virindi>
yeah science is silly but obviously that's because the vast majority of improvements in part design don't come from space experience but from manufacturing experience, and society's technology level as a whole
<Virindi>
but how fun would it be if you only got better parts by rolling out more ships
<Virindi>
or waiting for the kerbal economy to demand consumer products which were stronger and lighter
* xShadowx
would do it
<xShadowx>
well with testflight, making engines and running them 1/2 way goes there, its closer to running them to bugfix, than get full new engine
<Virindi>
flying and having failures and using that to make parts fail less at least is realistic
<Virindi>
and it is nice to have a reason to have a launch escape system
<xShadowx>
i did add a bit where test data makes the next tech node (child node to whatever node had said part) chezper
<xShadowx>
so essentially you could fully play build engine A > use A enough to get knowledge > get engine B tech free > build engine B
<Virindi>
I haven't run it because I don't like the idea of a situation where like, some part fails which there was no way I could mitigate and there is no answer and I just die after a super long prep mission
<Virindi>
that is a gameplay thing: you can't penalize the player at random when they didn't have any chance to avoid the penalty
<xShadowx>
redundancy and backups :)
<Virindi>
so every lander has to have a twr of over 2 and 2 or more engines
<Virindi>
too harsh.
<xShadowx>
no
<xShadowx>
but you dont have to land it to consider it to have value either
<xShadowx>
take ascents which is where people fail the most
<Virindi>
if I am landing, say on tylo or whatever
<Virindi>
I am already suborbital
<Virindi>
I am slowing down
<Virindi>
engine fails
<xShadowx>
you have say 4 engines, 1 is likely to fail, is mission dead?
<Virindi>
am I supposed to have enough engines to deal with it
<Virindi>
because if I don't I'm dead
<xShadowx>
you think in the direction of having only 1 big engine
<xShadowx>
use 4 smaller ones
<xShadowx>
3 can get you down :P
<Virindi>
but that is also unrealistic.
APlayer has joined #kspmodding
<xShadowx>
even likely 2 wil get you down if failure is near ground where twr better due to used fuel
<xShadowx>
nay
<Virindi>
a real life lander would be more likely to have one big engine which was extra super carefully constructed
<Virindi>
...like apollo
<xShadowx>
how many times has nasa lost probes to mars?
<APlayer>
Twice
<APlayer>
AFAIK
<xShadowx>
its quite realistic to have things fail
<xShadowx>
and using a single engine, leaves you at a single point of failure
<Virindi>
well I am talking about a combination of realism and fun
<APlayer>
What are you guys crafting?
<Virindi>
like I said, while it would be realistic for something to fail and you just be fucked sol, it would be no fun
<APlayer>
Well, I like a certain thrill that arises from the possibility of failure.
<xShadowx>
first off, most TF stufffails around 10-20% ish :P you act like its 80% ish heh
<APlayer>
Although it is certainly more fun if it happens in a way that allows you to prevent it or plan an emergency procedure.
<Virindi>
anyways I don't think it's even possible to build a ship such that no one part failing would hurt it
<xShadowx>
and the more you test and bugfix, the better it gets, less likely to fail, you wouldnt send that shiny new design to the moon
<APlayer>
Virindi: A failure is by definition hurting a ship...
<xShadowx>
Virindi: i and many others in RO have done it :P
<xShadowx>
well 'hurt' yes, fuck mission no
<APlayer>
^
<APlayer>
That's the fun thing about failures. Planning so that your mission is robust despite their possibility.
<Virindi>
you would need multiple command pods, duplicate the entire ship several times, and even then the central part failing would cause the ship to break up so I hope every "duplicate" can land independently............BUT even then!! what if just one side falls off, then you have extremely unbalanced thrust and cannot operate your engines
<xShadowx>
theres also reasons that nasa uses free returns :)
<Virindi>
this is a reality of the fact that ships are made of a tree of parts
<Virindi>
it is impossible to deal with the failure of the root part
<Virindi>
I mean okay you could have some kind of redock after failure thing
<xShadowx>
many things in O have 3-4 engines, 1 engine dies on ascent, is mission fucked due to 'thrust imbalance'?
<xShadowx>
in RO*
<Virindi>
but now we are talking about a ship that is like 10x as big as it would be otherwise
<APlayer>
Virindi, consider this: You have enough redundancy, room for faults and finally abort plans so that even the ship totally falling apart doesn't stop you from assembling an escape pod and safely aborting the mission.
<Virindi>
no but what if the fuel tank above one of the engines explodes.
<Virindi>
or like I said
<Virindi>
what if the root part fails
<APlayer>
Abort & retry
<Virindi>
what if the pod the kerbals are in fails
<xShadowx>
like you're treating mission critical worst case failures as if they were the norm
<APlayer>
If you can't abort, that's what you screwed up
<APlayer>
Well, I could say what if your Kerbals get cancer and die mid mission. That's not realistic.
<Virindi>
I'm just saying a plugin where I could be happily playing, then suddenly my pod detonates and my kerbals all die with nothing I can do, is not for me
<APlayer>
Failures should be of the sort that is possible to fix or at least work around
<xShadowx>
ive had ascents fail many times, and ive lost 8 kerbals during play ever :) abort systems are great
<APlayer>
^
<APlayer>
Virindi: Know Kerbalism?
<Virindi>
I haven't used it
<APlayer>
It has an implementation of failures
<APlayer>
It can fail pod built in LS systems too
<APlayer>
This sucks, since there is no replacement but adding another pod
<xShadowx>
apollo 13 anyone?
<APlayer>
So what do you think? I patched an external LS part and the game os great
<xShadowx>
free return trajectory and try again :D
<Virindi>
every ship must have 2 pods at all times or you could be sol
<APlayer>
I can just slap on redundancy
<APlayer>
As for "pod blowing up". No you can't do anything about that. So don't implement it in a failure mod.
* xShadowx
hides spark causing gemini pod disaster under the rug
<APlayer>
I know four failure mods which implement the wildest failures, but none makes non engines and non tanks blow up.
<Virindi>
reentering in your pod, heat shield fails, you die. oops should have two connected pods each with their own heat shield
<xShadowx>
well......technically battery isnt a tank :P
<Virindi>
oh really
<APlayer>
Actually not even tanks. They just start leaking.
<xShadowx>
APlayer: dynamite mod?;3
<Virindi>
I thought in failure mods any part could just poof
<xShadowx>
nope
<APlayer>
No
<Virindi>
I thought that was the whole point???
<APlayer>
Nope
<xShadowx>
TF only engines go boom
<xShadowx>
maybe batteries due to short circuit forget
<Virindi>
well if it's only engines who cares that's easy
<APlayer>
They have fairly diverse failure modes with the thought in mind to be able to fix it
<Virindi>
but that's not realistic :P
<xShadowx>
TF handles a ton of parts, but RO only uses the engines side - nobody made RO configs
<APlayer>
Reaction wheels and thrusters may fail, solar panels degrade, tanks leak, ...
<xShadowx>
rcs can fail / jam
<xShadowx>
haha when rcs jams 'on'
<APlayer>
Lights fail, LS systems fail, parachutes fail
<Virindi>
that's not realistic, there should be a way to manually cut off the thrusters
<xShadowx>
rcs jamming on most certainly can happen
<APlayer>
Close the tank flow, for example
<xShadowx>
valves seize
<APlayer>
That's a way to stop every permanently on engine
<Virindi>
a real life system would have multiple redundant cutoff valves.
<Virindi>
ah
<xShadowx>
oh heatshields can blow up technically from heat though not just boom
<xShadowx>
thats just failures i publicly released
<xShadowx>
avionics can fail causing various control issues
<APlayer>
Then, I don't remember what mod it was (Dang it?) which implements diverse failure modes for most of those parts, that is an engine failure could be different from another
xEvilReeperx has joined #kspmodding
<xShadowx>
heatahields can flake off chunks of ablator leaving 'unprotected' areas for quicker heating
<APlayer>
It could be the alternator failing, the engine overheating, underthrusting, ...
<xShadowx>
agathorn made TF, i just made everything break :P
<xShadowx>
he only did enines
<xShadowx>
engines
<APlayer>
Humm, if we're at this, do you know a reason why TF may simply not do anything when installed?
<xShadowx>
solar panel hing can break
<xShadowx>
gimbals jam
<APlayer>
Is there a troubleshoot documentation,
<APlayer>
?*
<Virindi>
cool I just saw some video where someone was playing and there was an alarm sound and then a wing fell off their craft
<APlayer>
LOL
<Virindi>
I didn't realize it was custom per module
<xShadowx>
APlayer: is TF icon ingame?
<xShadowx>
i think hes to wow stage instead of poo poo it stage :P
<APlayer>
xShadowx: I am not on my computer, I just remember badly wanting to use TF and being unable to, even after two separate installations
<Virindi>
meh
<xShadowx>
Virindi: also KKS, dent stuff, you could label it a failure mod, but its foreground you fucked it up yourself style - crashing dents you instead of blanket boom
<APlayer>
Could there be a mod incompatibility causing it not to take any effect at all? Or is there anything I may screw up while installing?
<xShadowx>
APlayer: if icon is there, id check if configs, the configs are seperate from the mod, for purposes of chosing style ie stock vs RO
<Virindi>
how is persistentrotation working, have you tested it enough that I can just pull request it yet :P
<xShadowx>
i aint yer tester bitch :P i mean it looks good from 5 minutes of screwin with it, but i barely have time to open ksp :|
<APlayer>
xShadowx: Humm, let me try again tomorrow when I'll be on my computer. Do you plan to be here then? Or should I just check from time to time and hope to meet you?
<xShadowx>
APlayer: im usually around o.o what time so i can plan not to be :P
<xShadowx>
jk
<APlayer>
Virindi: I found a nice alternative to PR. It's called "Mandatory RCS" and implements a reaction wheel nerf and PR functionality
<APlayer>
And seems to be more likely to work
<xShadowx>
does it keep spin through timewarp?
<Virindi>
I spent 2 days fixing persistentrotation so it doesn't change your orbit when you come out of warp
<APlayer>
xShadowx: Uh, around UTC 12:00 - 16:00 or so, probably. But don't let me bother you too much, I was just asking if I am likely to meet you here
<xShadowx>
APlayer: PR main gimic is spin through timewarp/unload
<xShadowx>
does mandatory RCS do that?:|
<APlayer>
As I said, this new mod seems nice. And, unlike PR, I got it to work from the first try despite my dozens of mods installed.
<APlayer>
I haven't noticed
<xShadowx>
without looking, it sounds like its just nerf RW and force RCS use, which wouldnt be alternative :P
* xShadowx
goes to look
<APlayer>
It does make rotation persist through time warp
<APlayer>
I am using it for only a day, though, and may have missed flaws
<APlayer>
And if you have a proper fix, why is it not released?
<Virindi>
so it persists properly who cares :P
<xShadowx>
Virindi: cuz...properly....LOL
<Virindi>
because I started it 4 days ago, finished it a day and a half ago, and haven't fully tested yet
<Virindi>
I have been messing with it now
<APlayer>
Ah
<APlayer>
xShadowx: So Mandatory RCS is fine at last?
<APlayer>
Or what persists properly?
<xShadowx>
APlayer: no it has the same flaws due to using same code, its just a cleaner framework fixing the sloppy other non math-flawed areas
<xShadowx>
PR saves to files in gamedata
<xShadowx>
MRCS saves properly with vesselmodule to your game save file
<APlayer>
Okay, I'll stop bombarding you guys with questions. I feel like contraproductively disrupting productive actions
<APlayer>
Thanks for answering
<xShadowx>
overall PR has its 'ups' of it just fixes rotation
<APlayer>
Ah, understood
<xShadowx>
MRCS is more of add-balance-tweaks
<xShadowx>
so i can see an argument for both to exist
<xShadowx>
but atm PR is the only correct math one
<APlayer>
Humm, okay
<xShadowx>
and MRCS the correct framework one
<Virindi>
well that's pretty funny
<APlayer>
So let's all cooperate and create one which is correct everything! :D
<Virindi>
I took my vessel out to past the mun
<Virindi>
and noticed the pe was creeping up while I was doing nothing
<Virindi>
so I restart the game totally stock
<Virindi>
still doing it
<xShadowx>
lol o.o
<Virindi>
ummmmm crap :(
<xShadowx>
sure no rcs or rw movin?
<APlayer>
Sounds familiar from KSP 1.2
<Virindi>
the vessel has nothing on it but a pod and an engine which is off, and a fuel tank
<xShadowx>
is fuel being used / moving its CoM?
<Virindi>
no.
<xShadowx>
:/
<APlayer>
If the fuel is being used, then the cause of orbital change os pretty obvious, LOL
<Virindi>
it is phantom drift
* Virindi
kicks taniwha
<xShadowx>
i wanna find how to fix that moving fuel gives free momentum bit -.-
<APlayer>
Virindi: In 1.2.2 there is an option to fix the phantom drift - is it checked?
<Virindi>
pretty easy if you can easily override the fuel transfer code
<xShadowx>
cuz technically having the fuel move even to engines that use it, would effect movement too, currently it just poofs and you get thrust
<Virindi>
aplayer: is it checked by default? this is a test install with 100% default game settings.
<APlayer>
Not sure
<APlayer>
Look in your settings, it has a somewhat subtle name, but I guess you'll find it if you know what to look for
<APlayer>
The settings from the main game menu
<Virindi>
it is enabled.
<APlayer>
Humm, then...
<Virindi>
:P
<APlayer>
Make another save?
<xShadowx>
disable it
<xShadowx>
then maybe re enable after tests
<xShadowx>
could simply be a bug and it isnt using the same value as shown
<APlayer>
I doubt that
<Virindi>
it is only when your vessel is rotating, it is probably true floating point error.
<xShadowx>
ive had that with RCS, it says RCS is on, yet wont act like it, i toggle RCS and suddenly works
<Virindi>
it just freaked me out because I thought I might have caused it somehow
<APlayer>
How fast is your PE creeping up?
<Virindi>
like 1 meter per 5-10 seconds depending on rotation rate.
<APlayer>
Woah
<APlayer>
Well, I need to go... xShadowx, I'll see when I can join here tomorrow. Thanks for the help so far.
<xShadowx>
APlayer: where do i send the bill?
smoke_fumus has joined #kspmodding
<APlayer>
:D
<APlayer>
What's your E-Mail adress?
<APlayer>
:P
<APlayer>
Jokes aside, I'd be glad to pay back by helping with whatever I can
<xShadowx>
okthissux@<redacted>
<xShadowx>
is accually my email XD
<xShadowx>
i tried like 30 min for a name and was like fuck it :P
<xShadowx>
junk email anyways so no point in caring
<xShadowx>
APlayer: i demand bacon
<APlayer>
Actual URL: having.to.do.this.sucks.fyi/but/we/are/sorry.html
<xShadowx>
lol o.o
<APlayer>
I probably screwed it up, but something like that
<APlayer>
Ill check it, I have a bookmark somewhere
<xShadowx>
nah ima afk foodz
<APlayer>
Okay. Now, bye, for real this time! ;-)
<Virindi>
okay I think I'm going to call this good
<Virindi>
prepare for the author to reject in 3, 2, 1...
VanDisaster has joined #kspmodding
* xShadowx
hacks github and clicks reject
<Virindi>
I am writing out my case
<xShadowx>
remember taniwha suggestion (with quoytes) "worked around stock bug"
<xShadowx>
:)
<xShadowx>
im pokin at MRCS and im kindawondering about the value
<xShadowx>
playwise i mean
<Virindi>
oh I forgot to test with KJR
<Virindi>
will do that before posting this
<xShadowx>
like it looks like its just PR and some rebalance tweaks, so figuring out the diff between MRCS and a few MM cfg to tweak balance
Thorbane has joined #kspmodding
<xShadowx>
Virindi: know if PR does any calcs for rotation if vessel is fully unloaded?
<Virindi>
don't think so?
<Virindi>
how would it
<Virindi>
it wouldn't do much
<xShadowx>
some mods run stuff on unloaded vessels heh
<Virindi>
it might
<xShadowx>
MRCS claims to avoid doing it, so was just curious if PR did do it
<Virindi>
hold on
<Virindi>
foreach vessel {
<Virindi>
if vessel.packed && vessel.loaded {
<Virindi>
spin it using the packed spin
<xShadowx>
else do nothing?
<xShadowx>
or link me that block?:D
<Virindi>
else do nothing
<xShadowx>
kk
<Virindi>
oh wait no
<Virindi>
else do stuff only if unpacked :P
<Virindi>
if packed and not loaded then do nothing
<xShadowx>
im kinda proud of the MRCS guy
<xShadowx>
says his first plugin and properly used vesselmodule
ferram4 has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
<xShadowx>
so many mods dont use vesselmodule, and instead throw in partmodules everywhere ;x
<Virindi>
whoa what the hell
<Virindi>
I turn on sas and the vessel goes nuts
<Virindi>
oh
<Virindi>
that is an issue
<xShadowx>
i want a mod that lets me select max rpm that rcs/rw will spin to
<xShadowx>
theres fixes around to 'slow and not overshoot' with sas but i havent seen a maxrpm
<Virindi>
that's just pid tuning
<Virindi>
how the heck is this rpm feature supposed to work
<Virindi>
it looks like I didn't change it???
<xShadowx>
oh thats what pid is?;x
<Virindi>
pid is one particular approach to the problem of "control"
<Virindi>
the problem of "control" is basically, as taniwha might say, the math of, you have some variables that you can change (such as how much you thrust in yaw/pitch/roll) and some dependent variables (such as your vessel's orientation and rotation rate) and the goal is to maintain some "setpoint"
<Virindi>
this maintenance can be in the presence of unknown external forces, such as aerodynamics
<Virindi>
or you can use a model of the external forces as an input to the function
<Virindi>
pid is one of the simplest types of control schemes
<Virindi>
it merely takes a "current error now" vector, then outputs a "what to do" vector
<Virindi>
each axis is independent
<xShadowx>
i just wanna tell my ship "spin max 2 rpm" rather than burn RCS etc to spin at 20 RPM, use time instead of fuel :)
<Virindi>
in that case you just clamp the output, or have two pids chained with the second one clamped
<xShadowx>
so using the pid stuff, get vector for 'where i should be now' vs "where i am now" and adjust forces?
<xShadowx>
and "where i should be nice" is based on 2 rpm
<Virindi>
like if you have one pid controlling "desired rotation rate" then you would clamp that one
<xShadowx>
be now*
<xShadowx>
ah k
<Virindi>
so like, picture you have two pids
<Virindi>
desired location takes a location and outputs a desired rotation rate
<Virindi>
the second one takes a desired rotation rate and outputs a how much force to apply
<Virindi>
:)
<Virindi>
ksp's stock sas has two modes
<Virindi>
when you are spinning a lot, it only acts on rotation rate (in stability mode)
<Virindi>
once you get relatively slow it instead tries to stick to a position
<Virindi>
that is what that little spinny yellow icon means
<Virindi>
the spinny yellow icon means you are in rotation rate mode not position mode
<xShadowx>
mmmk
<Virindi>
that is because when rotation rate is low it will tend to drift more and more slowly if it is merely acting on that
<Virindi>
but as a result, in stability mode, try spinning up your craft then letting sas slow it
<Virindi>
you will note that it will overshoot a bit after slowing down
<Virindi>
that is because the "location" setpoint is applied when it goes out of yellow icon mode, and it tries to get back there.
<Virindi>
in this case the overshoot is a function of that dual nature
<Virindi>
and how it decides when to switch off yellow mode
<Virindi>
I haven't actually read that logic so I am not sure heh
<Virindi>
it may be that it simply uses angular velocity, when it should use angular momentum (deja vu?)
<Virindi>
or it may be smarter
<Virindi>
ideally it should be a function of the available torque of the craft vs. angular momentum
ferram4 has joined #kspmodding
<Virindi>
control stuff is fun :D
<Virindi>
that reminds me though, I should write a better pid for through the eyes. I just threw a who cares write this in 30 seconds one in there
<Virindi>
note that this problem of "control" exists in real life in anything that tries to drive a real life motor or process, such as fly by wire, autopilot, chemical reactions, nuclear reactors...
<Virindi>
apply force to cancel based 1) proportionally on the error, 2) how long the error has "built up", and 3) how quickly the error is changing
<xShadowx>
so anyways, time to stab at makin a paertmodule to control stuff ^.^
<xShadowx>
would also be kinda nice to have RW unable to do massively high rpm spins, like kerbals built in a max rpm or hardware wise just cant go faster
<Virindi>
in real life the derivative has to often be put through a "low pass filter" because real life sensors have noise, but in a computer model there is less noise
<xShadowx>
cuz currently you just hold down spin key and it goes faster n faster
<Virindi>
is that so bad?
<xShadowx>
1) IRL theres a mechanical max 2) theres a preset max for just safety
<xShadowx>
you dont want crew gettin sick :P
<Virindi>
but you have a maximum rotation rate of 50
<Virindi>
radians per second I guess according to ferram
<Virindi>
rigidbodies cannot rotate faster than that
<Virindi>
yes some kind of safety mode would be nice
<xShadowx>
thats like 8 rpm
<Virindi>
like a software that limits your rotation rate for safety, with a manual override (everything in spaceships has an override!)
<xShadowx>
er no
<xShadowx>
480 rpm
<xShadowx>
8 rps
<xShadowx>
a lot of things shouldnt spin that fast
<Virindi>
yeah 60*50/(2pi)=477.5
<Virindi>
pretty fast
<xShadowx>
!wa 50 radians per second to rpm
<Qboid>
xShadowx: convert 50 rad/s (radians per second) to revolutions per minute: 477.5 rpm (revolutions per minute)
<xShadowx>
heh
<xShadowx>
go spin a single mk1 pod on launchpad
<xShadowx>
see how it appears to basicly glitch out?
<Virindi>
ummmm yeah if you didn't "move the ship up" then "walk the ship down until just before it intersects the ground" then spawning on any nonflat surface would cause your ship to explode
<Virindi>
that should be pretty duh
<taniwha>
I let gravity "walk" it down
<Virindi>
ah
<Virindi>
that explains why when spawning huge stuff I had to put landing legs on it
<taniwha>
19cm just isn't enough to cause damage
<Virindi>
for my eve station
<Virindi>
where I was building insane ascent rockets at eve sea level :)
<taniwha>
something I still want to try :)
<Virindi>
heavy stuff likes to explode on eve, ePl or no
<taniwha>
Virindi: for more that slightly rough ground, I suggest using a -Y bounds stake
<taniwha>
and launch clamps
<Virindi>
like I made a really huge fuel tank to fuel my spawned stuff
<taniwha>
I would say that's decidedly more than "slightly bumpy" :)
<taniwha>
Virindi: for a 19cm drop to result in 7m/s, local g would have to be 26g :)
<taniwha>
however, yeah, really big stuff wouldn't like a 19cm drop anywhere
<taniwha>
(flex)
<Virindi>
I was just reporting behavior not talking about why :)
<taniwha>
:)
<taniwha>
anyway, have you tried using launch clamps yet?
<Virindi>
yeah I did that at some point more recently
<taniwha>
yay, survey plaques now toggle with pad highlighting :)
<Virindi>
hahaha
<Virindi>
I tried the current release build of persistentrotation
<Virindi>
yep it still goes nuts in "momentum" mode
<Virindi>
notmybug
<Virindi>
fuck now I am somehow on an escape trajectory
<Virindi>
I have about had it with this mod
<Virindi>
I don't care this much
<Virindi>
I bet it is the rotating reference frame.
<Virindi>
the rotating reference frame seems to only apply super rarely and randomly? what a pita
<taniwha>
rotating reference frame threshold varies by body
<Virindi>
it seems to apply based on the ui
<taniwha>
and yes, it is a RPITA
<taniwha>
?!?
<Virindi>
like if I have the main menu open
<Virindi>
it isn't doing it now :(
<Virindi>
before it would give me some spam about switching to rotating reference frame, when I opened the main menu
<taniwha>
weird
<Virindi>
I am like
<Virindi>
if nobody cared before about the suuuuuuper insane level of glitching in this mod before
<Virindi>
why should I care now to fix everything
<Virindi>
-before
<Virindi>
it's like nobody even notices problems
<Virindi>
you could put out the most glitchy as fuck mod and as long as it kinda sorta did something cool people would be like WOOT BEST MOD
<Virindi>
I am just not used to that level of bug acceptance :(
APlayer has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<taniwha>
me neither
<Virindi>
yeah I can tell you are a stickler
<Virindi>
I like that.
<Virindi>
makes me want to run nothing but ePl and far
<Virindi>
ferram also seems to care about fixing little stuff.
<xShadowx>
would be kinda nice to make a group of a few peeps, each day/week go through a small chunk of mods, and basicly overhaul / do stuff correct/efficient
<xShadowx>
even if not make 100% perfect, just....clean up 90% of the big nonos :)
<Virindi>
I am making a shitlist and I am checking it twice
<Virindi>
trying to find out which mods are nooby and nice
<xShadowx>
lol
<taniwha>
xShadowx: just steer clear of USI stuff. 1) probably a quagmire 2) RD would have a fit if anybody corrected his code
<xShadowx>
i went a bit further, im kinda a fan of as much as possible throw into part rightclick menu, not custom GUI, esp when said GUI is unneeded
<Virindi>
persistentrotation seems typical: download the stock package, install it into a stock game, open menu, click "momentum", click "activate"....bam your ship goes out of control
<taniwha>
xShadowx: PAW is getting too crowded
<Virindi>
PAW?
<taniwha>
part action window
<taniwha>
"official" name
<xShadowx>
taniwha: haha....i tried to fix up a couple of the 'stock bugs' in the resource harvest crap and got enough headache from his 'style' >.>
<xShadowx>
taniwha: im a fan of how FAR does it, button to expand subsections :) got rid of a lot of crowding
<taniwha>
yes, ferram did well with that :)
<taniwha>
even MFT puts the essentials into the PAW
<taniwha>
(but provides a GUI for finer control)
<xShadowx>
i think my only real wish for PAW is 1) DROPLISTS PLOX and 2) a 2nd tiny btn at left edge of each line to 'pin' and show that uicontrol/kspfield regardless of visible flag
<Virindi>
fine, I don't care about his other bugs, I'm PR'ing
<xShadowx>
the latter so that collapsable stuff can collapse groups with visible tag but you can still pin 1-2 important bits
<xShadowx>
which UI_control was the one like proc parts uses for texture selection?
<xShadowx>
to sidescroll
<taniwha>
I don't remember off hand, hang on
<xShadowx>
i can look :)
<taniwha>
floatrange, maybe
<taniwha>
chooseoption
<xShadowx>
a 3rd wish ish item would be a mix between that and detacting the color bar, so i could scroll to change tank 'type' text, but then the bar fullness for tank fullness
<taniwha>
man, it was nice driving those nails into KSPAPIExt's coffin
<xShadowx>
detatching
* xShadowx
should learn to make UI_controls
<taniwha>
xShadowx: go study Unity's UnityEngine.UI docs
<taniwha>
that's what you need
<xShadowx>
can do it all by code, no unity?
<taniwha>
yes
<xShadowx>
^.^
<taniwha>
I did those plaques purely by code
<taniwha>
(using standard Text rather than TMPro (which KSP uses))
<taniwha>
I'll poke at TMPro again later, but I was having trouble getting anything to be visible at the time
<xShadowx>
some stuff you need unity for? or can pretty much all be done code only, and unity is just a helper to make easier with a view of it?
<taniwha>
unity is just a helper
<xShadowx>
^.^
<taniwha>
only thing you might run into is shaders if you need a custom one
<taniwha>
otherwise, defenestrate Unity :)
<xShadowx>
admittedly im tempted to play with unity to toy with the rope stuff for tether, but at same time, im a coder ;\ i hate tolls betyond text editors lol
<xShadowx>
s/tolls betyond/tools beyond
<Qboid>
xShadowx meant to say: admittedly im tempted to play with unity to toy with the rope stuff for tether, but at same time, im a coder ;\ i hate tools beyond text editors lol
<taniwha>
you will want to play with Unity to get a feel for the UI stuff
<taniwha>
especially anchors and pivots
<taniwha>
I used it to check what components I needed
<xShadowx>
i do kinda wanna throw in a 3d house i made like 10 years ago when i did 3d modelling, to get a nice first person walkthrough view of it heh
<xShadowx>
all i ever did was make in blender with fixed camera views
<taniwha>
blender has a game engine
<xShadowx>
ah right forgot about that
<xShadowx>
wonder if i can tie vive into blender :P