Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. Hello Guest!
    Welcome to the Bug Report forum, please make sure you search for your problem before posting here. If you post a duplicate (that you post the same issue while other people have already done that before) you will be given a warning point which can eventually lead into account limitations !

    Here you can find a guide on how to post a good bug report thread.
    Space Engineers version [Extra] --- Medieval Engineers version
  2. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Important [1.181.0] Physical Limits

Discussion in 'Bug Reports' started by Alewx, Jun 1, 2017.

  1. Commander Rotal

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,845
    Trophy Points:
    267
    Then don't give a limit at all. All i know is it took Keen several months to fix my ship and now you're killing it. The game is supposed to improve, not get worse. If it worked last week but doesn't work this week there is no improvement. A potential crash is still better than a ballgag.
     
  2. Akhera Developer Developer

    Joined:
    May 10, 2016
    Messages:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    27
    It didn't work. It never did. Amanda Tapping is at 96% of the hard limit. Without this change, it would crash once you added another 1000 or so blocks and you'd be complaining about that.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. Commander Rotal

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,845
    Trophy Points:
    267
    I know. It took months to figure out her block limit. She had a shitty interior downsized to less of a skeleton but she was done. She ran shitty but she worked after the last time she was fixed.
     
  4. Daev

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2016
    Messages:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    2
    One in a thousand will build a ship that can exceed the limit of havok! Why do you restrict these elect and break their work? Pay yourself 70% of salary to feel the difference between 70 and 90! You even promised in the patch LOD trees! And added questionably excellent optimization! Breaking the connectors. Sounds in realism. Blocks placement.
    more etc........................:?
    p.s: You can not even write a description for hotfixes! What would people have guessed that you repaired?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Eikester

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    157
    so why does Keen dont tell the Players about such changes? Why do you let your Customers in the dark? Thats just BAD, i would expect having a havok licence would also give access to the source so why dont you guys remove that limit or contact Havok or whatever?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2017
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Zoladen

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2014
    Messages:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    67
    I have never personally built anything that large, but 1000 blocks to hit the hard limit while at 96% of that still seems like a fair sized number to me (without having looked into the block count numbers it currently has). At 96% of the block limit, is there a single block that could be removed from the tapping to make it go over the crash limit? Would there be any combination of blocks to be removed that would make it hit the limit? The Tapping already seems like a good test case for it. Why not start with a number closer like 90% or 95% of the hard limit?

    I don't have a personal investment currently in the block limit at 70%, but for the people who do build really large, why not start somewhere closer and use their feedback as testing to find a good safe zone? Rotal is very vocal about the things that grind her gears (which is a good thing I think), so you can be sure she would let you know what's going on. I'm sure others would jump on board too.


    On a personal observation side note, don't be afraid to engage the player base on what could be controversial changes. If at the end of the day, the answer is still not something the player base is going to like they will at least have felt involved in the decision making and not blindsided from the change. Without any information on the why, anyone immediately affected by this would likely feel betrayed even if 70% (not saying it wasn't/isn't, but there was no information as to why 70% other than it should be safe) was a largely tested number and the absolute maximum for safety from crashing. Is it by any way a requirement on Keen's part to do so? No, but I personally feel from my own experience more good than bad would come of it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Commander Rotal

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,845
    Trophy Points:
    267
    Not to my knowledge and i've experimented with block counts A LOT trying to find a right balance. As far as my own experience goes every block less decreases the chances of crashing; this is the first time anyone mentioned a "shape limit". In fact, removing more blocks would just get the block count down and whatever problem the shapes cause, the reduced block counts will offset it by, well, being lower. Of course, ADDING blocks was a problem (for example, adding a third Nacelle - several tens of thousands of blocks, iirc - would relyable crash the game) but i could have still done some re-arranging of the interior.
    Plus, y'know, i was kinda hoping that multithreading Havoc would INCREASE blocknumbers, not cockblock them.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. Echillion

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2014
    Messages:
    1,270
    Trophy Points:
    137
    So...Not only is there a block limit there's a shape limit as well...Didn't see Xocliw explaining that one in any update video! so the max before complete crash is 285k at 100% (70% being 200K) Damn! there's gonnabe a lot of unhappy campers on this one. This is why players get the proverbial "arse" with Keen because the update fixes and features are not fully listed or mentioned by Xocliw in the videos if were told about something rather than having to find out the hard way players will be more reasonable about it somewhat rather than grabbing their pitchforks and laying siege to the forums. I can understand why Keen did it to prevent crashes but I can also understand the players frustrations when not told about major restrictions being imposed without any notification.
     
  9. Arcturus

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    Messages:
    1,328
    Trophy Points:
    157
    Havok probably programmed the entire engine with the number of shapes on a grid stored in an "unsigned short integer" memory, which is 65535 maximum.
    The license won't include modifying the source.



    Putting things on pistons/rotors probably bypasses the 65535 or 45874 shape limit because it is now multiple grids. Activating the "safety lock" afterwards to make everything one rigid massive grid may crash the game however.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. aether.tech

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Messages:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    52
    "Space Engineers is a sandbox game about engineering, construction, exploration and survival in space and on planets. Players build space ships, space stations, planetary outposts of various sizes and uses, pilot ships and travel through space to explore planets and gather resources to survive."


    So, by "various sizes," they mean "fuck you and your dreams that you've been working on for years because we never disclosed that there was a hard-cap limit preventing you from building big things. Go small or go home."

    ALso, if the game can have INFINITE other things...
    • "Super-large worlds – the size of the world to 1,000,000,000 km in diameter (almost infinite)
    • Procedural asteroids - adds an infinite number of asteroids to the game world
    • Exploration - adds an infinite number of ships and stations to the game world; discover, explore, acquire and conquer!"

      Suitably large "Shape" and "Block" counts should be a trivial thing to code up. Fix it, or refund?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Roxette

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2014
    Messages:
    495
    Trophy Points:
    102
    I think the fundamental problem was developing a game with no clear idea where it was going from the beginning, then listening to what the vocal minority of players on a forum wanted and deciding to change the game and add features on an ad-hoc basis without considering the consequences or the limitations of the underlying game engine. The motive was good, but the implementation has been poor because the foundation of the game was unsuitable for the direction it drifted into.
     
  12. guran

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    52
    Just to my understanding, and please correct me if i am wrong: You shrink down the physics by combining shapes of a grid (thats good!), but you keep them ALL active all the time, even if there is no reason for it?

    Edit: Sorry, my bad, i was not precise enough. I ment you keep ALL COLLIDERS active all the time even if there is no reason for it
     
  13. Devon_v

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,492
    Trophy Points:
    177
    Havok is clearly using 16-bit ints to store the shape ids. The maximum number that can be stored in that fashion is 65,535. They probably never thought anyone would ever need more. Actually the fact that they never wrote an error message for it and just hard crash at 65,536 makes that pretty darn likely. Unfortunately this isn't Keen's problem, it exists entirely without thier code.

    As has been mentioned Havok needs a new shape whenever you change your ship in such a way that it's collisions cannot be described by simple geometric shapes. The more complex your ship is shaped, the more shapes Havok needs to describe it. You save shapes every time you lay out part of your ship such that a simple cube or cylinder accurately describes its area. However, as your ship takes damage or has blocks removed, its shape can become more irregular, thus upping the number of shapes required.

    Now that it's out in the open, this is indeed what's been wrong with the Tapping all along. It was never her block count, it's all her smooth curves and endless corridors. It literally takes over sixty-thousand geometric shapes to describe where she is solid and where she is not.

    Basically, the tech SE is built on is too old. Havok was never meant for this. Multithreading sadly only opens more CPU power to Havok, it doesn't allow it to exceed its own programming.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 2
  14. guran

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    52
    I agree, but that's not the problem. It's not an "old havok", its a design problem. You can handle a moving grid by just having a few physical shapes, detecting if there is somthing in colliding range. Then you activate parts of the real complex shapes to detect the real collision. This way you reduce calculations dramatically to a few percent of the whole, with 2-3% percent overhead calaculations for "collision range detectors".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Squire

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2016
    Messages:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    2
    My very first build ever, almost a year worth of work is now down the drain.
     
  16. Eikester

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    157
    thats what i think too, to start with you only need 1! shape, a simple square for the grid, if it intersects with another grid check where it intersects and now use smaller shapes in that section (i.e. the front of a ship) and check again for intersections, and so on till you have the blocks that are involved in a collision, for players you only need the current blocks around the player for collision checking, not the whole grid which brings the needed shapes down to just a handful etc. there ARE ways to solve this properly, if devs says they can not do anything they are just lazy

    if by optimization you mean limits everywhere why not limit the grids to a few hundred blocks and done? the game would run smooth like a hot knife trough butter
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. guran

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2015
    Messages:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    52
    Eikster, YOU got it man, thats what i ment.

    Edit: dont forget to make the detectors bigger then the complex colission shape. The bigger they are, the better you can detect colissions at high speed. And they must overlap each other.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2017
  18. Brewtis

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    2
    you are all very disappointing.
     
  19. Devon_v

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,492
    Trophy Points:
    177
    But Havok is used for everything as I understand it. Not just colliding grids, but also moving the engineer through the environment, and for hit detection on all weapons. Wouldn't that mean you end up having to recalculate shapes for the ship every time a bullet heads into the main bounding box? That seems like it would kill performance. It would also still mean that if the Tapping, or something even larger and more complex, were under massed fire, it would still end up having to calculate more shapes than it can.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Stardriver907

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2014
    Messages:
    1,937
    Trophy Points:
    207
    Maybe we need a new kinda merge block. A block for semi-permanently connecting grids.

    Not planning on making my ships smaller.
     
  21. shanjoo

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2016
    Messages:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    2
    There is a mod called "smart unmerge" that does just that, in case you were wondering.
     
  22. Herpaderpa

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Maybe put it in a config file somewhere to change the limit to 99% for those that don't mind crashing the game, like you have with the speed limit? :D
    I do value the patch tho, i think it's a big step in the right direction, i'll put my giant 1:1 recreation of my penis on hold, and hope for a more stable gaming experience :DD
     
  23. kittle

    Joined:
    May 22, 2014
    Messages:
    1,053
    Trophy Points:
    172
    While I understand the dev's point of view here -- They dont want the game to crash, so the limit was imposed, im with everyone thread here -- the limit is TOO LOW.

    Suggestion:
    Set the limit to a much higher level, and check on every block add AND remove. If said operation would exceed the limit, then you give back a DESCRIPTIVE message saying why you cant do that. And yes that means people will be able to build things that cant be edited. Such is life in a sandbox game.
     
  24. aether.tech

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Messages:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    52
    Maybe they need to get a fucking upgraded version of Havok, and take the time and effort to actually work with the Havok devs to do so.
     
  25. Commander Rotal

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2014
    Messages:
    4,845
    Trophy Points:
    267
    Well... isn't Havok dead?
     
  26. aether.tech

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Messages:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    52
    Well, if they are dead - someone has to have the license.
     
  27. Alewx

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    2
    So why continue playing the game when it is not possible to build the stuff you want to....
    So from starting the game after each update, now to starting the game once every half year or even longer just to see that it won't work.

    What is the idea behind making a minecraft in space when there are so "small" limits for things.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  28. KissSh0t

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Messages:
    3,125
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Why would Havok be dead? Microsoft didn't purchase it just to kill.

    It still exists, video games still use it.
     
  29. Lander1

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2016
    Messages:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    2
    Set the hard limit to 99% and add a 70% soft-cap with a toggle checkbox in the Advanced tab with a red warning box stating that the game may crash/corrupt if you disable it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  30. sumdumguy

    Joined:
    May 29, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    2
    This is a sad thing. om guessing that my IDS will be dead now, as it is a monster of a ship at over 800k blocks