Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Update 1.186.4 - Beta Improvements

Discussion in 'Change Log' started by Drui, Mar 1, 2018.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. May Rears Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    269
    Which do you think would be more effective?

    A: "Fix the bug nao!"

    or

    B: Submitting a bug report and posting on an existing thread in the bug report forums to bring it to the front page or creating a thread about it?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. CinnabarDragoon Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    So.... should I hope for a major update within 1 month? Or are we doing major updates every 3 months now?
    :baby:
     
  3. Thrak Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    371
    C: Letting the moderators and developers speak for themselves.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Whitehawk001 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    4
    can you make rotors and pistons not cause servers to slowly die?
    --- Automerge ---
    you make the rotor guns too?
     
  5. mccorkle Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    22
    Its good practice to submit a bug report if you have a reproducible bug. If someone here is commenting on an existing bug in the update post to draw attention to it, it would be most helpful for them to link the bug post so that the rest of us can go to that thread, test it ourselves and be like "me too" instead of turning update threads into "please fix bug X" threads.

    Also, its midnight in Prague. I really hope they aren't refreshing the forums at midnight :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. Whiplash141 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    946
    So, nice fixes... but I see a distinct lack of post-processing options and small grid stations :p
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. Veidebreij Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    9
    I was rather counting on a fix for the autopilot not speed up over 15 m/s in gravity. There are two bugreports. In the last update you fixed another problem with the autopilot, but ignore this. In this update you ignore it again...
     
  8. Arcturus Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,611
    Suspension wheels can break all sorts of game physics rules that apply to other grids because you can't build on them. Might be possible to have an entire ship inherit friction/other special properties of wheels if that was allowed.

    What are the non-suspension wheels useful for? Tire shop decorations? Rotor devices?
     
  9. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,186
    A-HAH! It WASN'T just me :eek:.

    I don't think it was ignored. Probably one of their other fixes caused this. Could be they need to figure out which one, then figure out how to make it not break the auto-pilot. I reported this myself yesterday, I think.

    It's annoying, but if resources are scarce I'd rather they fix whatever still makes my game crash so much. At least I can still fly ships manually in gravity wells. Can't do anything when the game crashes.
     
  10. suicideneil Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    227
    Mono-rails, moving platforms that run along a straight path, towed trailers of certain designs, gun carriages, space elevators- probably more but you get the idea.

    He wasn't aware of the existing bug-report thread; he even said he checked the last 2 pages, hence it being mentioned here. As it is, Thrak also pointed out that the report thread was 3 weeks old but no developer has acknowledged it yet ( I bumped it and tagged zhiila ).

    In response to Thrak & Ray Mears though, option D: bump & tag- the developers don't tend to check every bug report thread as has already been stated, so tagging them to get their attention is all we have right now- or reporting it on Keen's Discord ( having to sign up for yet another forum is a bit silly to me but whatever ).
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  11. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,186
    Well, you can dual up rotor wheels, which was good back when rotor wheels had friction.
     
  12. Sinbad Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,774
    i believe the main reason why you cant attach stuff to suspension wheels has to do with the speed limit and how fast they want the wheels to be able to spin. too large of object spinning too fast and that object will break 100m/s. and we cant have that.
    i would be perfectly happy to have a new kind of rotor capable of high rpm that could only attach to a wheel block if thats what it takes to get higher speeds on rotor wheels, but thats not the issue here.
    the issue is friction. specifically directional friction like the suspension wheels now have.

    i find your lack of engineering imagination disturbing...
    go check out the engineering contest winners. the stuff @GrindyGears makes is the sort of thing im talking about.speed aside, those wheels prior to the update had similar friction to the suspension wheels (that is to say, similar to ice on hot teflon) but could carry more weight, with higher torque and include things like abs, traction control, ackermann steering at all turn radii not just maximums, increased travel, non-return to centre steering, skid steering, cruise control, non linear spring and damping responses, automatic ride height compensation with load, automatic steering response adjustment with speed, left to right differential speeds when turning, and those are just the things that i personally experimented with (grindy didnt use all of them, but it was fun to make them). they did this via script control (which the suspension wheels do not allow) of the moving parts of the suspension and drive.

    rotor wheels never had good friction. it didnt matter before because suspension wheels were no better. now suspension wheels have decent friction, the normal wheels (the ones you actually have to engineer into use) are noticeably lacking friction in comparison. they need attention.
    i mention it here because my bug report has gone without notice.
    https://forum.keenswh.com/threads/all-versions-wheel-blocks-still-have-no-friction.7400199/
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Cetric Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    619
    We could use this as motto for Space Engineers altogether... :woot:
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. Gustavo Julião Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    18
    I think they should devote more to multiplayer, especially if the dedicated uses only one core on the server, if they put the multi-thread on the dedicated server, a great improvement on multiplayer.(Sorry, my english is kinda bad)
     
  15. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,186
    Lack of response does not necessarily mean lack of notice. The have never, ever pledged to respond to every single bug report. If fact, they have made no pledge to respond to any of them. However, many have said that they read every one. Could be they believe their best response is to fix the problem?

    Well...



    OK. It might be hard to tell, but multiplayer optimization has been a focus since 2016. The game was conceived and written as a single player game, which is relatively much easier to write. Turning it into a multiplayer game is... well... hard work. It will take time.

    I have it on pretty good authority that even though SE supports multi-threading, if you are running SE on a server with a Xeon processor you want to use a processor with good single thread performance. He gave me a link to a list.

    SE will not run flawlessly on any machine, and having the best, most expensive stuff doesn't always help. However, when I watch people on Twitch having few issues they are usually playing on a server with Xeon processors and not some PC with an i7.

    Then, along comes some guy hosting SE on a laptop. Some people just live well, I guess.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  16. suicideneil Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    227
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  17. Thrak Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    371
    So here's the problem: While they may never have committed, verbally (or in text) to responding to bug reports, they have. At least two developers or QA folks routinely, in spurts, have gone through and responded to bug reports since I joined these forums last year-- and not just to ask for more info, but also to confirm that internal reports have been made, etc.

    So, no, they've never committed to it in writing... but they have set up the expectation that that's exactly how they intend to operate. People draw reasonable expectations based on the behavior of the devs-- and let's be clear, that behavior is largely welcomed when it happens.

    If they do, they don't understand how communication works.

    More than likely, a few well-meaning devs take time interacting with bug reports when they can, but they are not communication professionals, and they are no doubt expected to do it in addition to... you know... developing the game. Hence the inconsistencies.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Whiplash141 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    946
    Dude, I'd be excited if they just clicked the "Informative" rating to acknowledge the report. I don't even need a word, just give me something :woot:
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  19. pologoalie8908 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    19
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Pegas519 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    194
    Yeah soon I will dread major updates just as I dread Microsoft updates.
     
  21. Stardriver907 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,186
    So, let me get this straight...

    They have never, ever promised to respond to every single bug report. However, since they have, indeed, responded to some reports, the expectation is that they will respond to them all?

    I've submitted my share of bug reports. I have never expected a response other than a fix. I believe I retain my sanity by not expecting something that won't happen. Indeed, it is good when they do respond in writing, but I satisfy myself in knowing they can't claim they didn't know about something when I can link my own report. I don't need a written response to show people I converse with the devs.

    I'm not defending their lack of communication. I'm puzzled to this day that they went through the trouble of setting up Keen Community Network so long ago and have used it, what, three times? They have their own forums and Twitch channel yet information seems to show up on Facebook and Twitter first and often exclusively. I'll be the first to publicly state that Keen's greatest strength is not communication. Given that everyone in the organization from Marek on down is a certified tech geek I'm not surprised (no offense, staff. I'm a bit of one myself ;) ).

    There are some two million copies of SE out there. Figure one one hundredth of them actually running at any given time, and every one of those will crash and generate a crash report several times before the player gives up. That's a lot of reports. Occasionally I will put my real email address in the report. I've never gotten a response :(. But, sometimes I can tell that what made my game crash disappeared after a hotfix, or it goes away with the next minor update. Or it doesn't, in which case I report it again. I do it because they say they want to know. Because they say it helps. Because I believe it does help. More than loud outbursts of unsubstantiated conjecture and apocalyptic rhetoric.

    I don't need a personal response to my reports. I know what this game was like when I bought it four years ago and I know what it's like now and it's obvious at least to me that they would never have come this far by ignoring bug reports. Sure, they probably listen to some people more than others, but in the end I would rather be playing the current game than the one I bought back then. When a Thursday rolls around and there's no update but instead a statement saying they're done trying to fix things then we will have a different conversation. Until then I will accept the fixes that materialize, report the one's that annoy me, and work around the bugs that persist. That's living with an EA game.

    Especially one that only cost me six bucks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Late Late x 1
  22. suicideneil Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    227
    [​IMG]

    Funny, my/our loud out bursts have fixed a couple very large & negative changes to the game that would have otherwise been left as-is because the dev team don't play the game enough to understand just how frustrating the changes were ( thruster damage ( twice ) & rotor lock). Deluding one's self into believing that every report is seen & will be acted upon at some point is cute though, lol.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 6
    • Funny Funny x 1
  23. Sinbad Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    2,774
    i dont want an email, or a lengthy post in reply to my bug reports. i dont even expect to see a simple 'we know about this' or 'working as intended'. all i want is some indication that someone on the team has read the bug report. so i know that it hasn't slipped out of the first few pages of new posts and disappeared into the void without having been seen. thats it. having a tester or dev click the 'informative' button would work for me. simple little thing to let me know that it has been seen before it fades away into obscurity.

    and because not even community members are backing me up on it, here is another link
    https://forum.keenswh.com/threads/all-versions-wheel-blocks-still-have-no-friction.7400199/
    if you feel the same way, click on something!
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  24. Arcturus Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,611
    Peeked at the game code (praise C# reflection!). Code in MyRemoteControl.UpdateThrust() appears to take the control panel's max speed and scale it from 15% to 100% based on elevation above ground level (linear from 150 m to 50 m or so) if you are in a natural gravity field. Digging deeper, you've got to see the function they are using to gauge elevation above ground level:
    Code:
    ...
    			internal double EstimateDistanceToGround(Vector3D worldPoint)
    			{
    				return 0.0;
    			}
    ...
    
    Yep, it will assume you are at 0 m altitude and lock speed at 15% (15m/s if the console limit is set to 100 m/s).

    Meanwhile, the player's HUD, or some properties of the remote control retrievable via programmable blocks, shows this elevation/altitude.
     
    • Informative Informative x 4
  25. Thrak Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    371
    "All" might be unreasonable (which is why I didn't say it). Otherwise, within reason, yes.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  26. MacKnight Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    25
    Good work. May I make a Request for the Dev team?
    I do large ship builds. LARGE.
    I do them in empty space with limited range and space to reduce the load.
    I have a high end computor. 6 core 4ghz, 8gb grafic with 16gb ram.
    But the game itself cant take the builds. it slowly lagg itself apart as the build progress.
    The lagg begins to show when it passes around 200k blocks. and thats bearly 20% of the build done...
    Can the dev team find a way to improve the code so the game can take larger builds?
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  27. suicideneil Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    227

    You and me me both dude- epic builds are great but the physics engine itself is very limited, hence limits on the number of physics shapes before the game breaks down pretty much ( go over the limit and blocks no longer have collision physics ). That aside, yeah, as soon as your ships start getting large the sim speed/frame rate grinds to a crawl- adding in things like gyros and thrusters really kills it ( save those till last ).

    Can't even build giant small grid ships to get around any kind of physical size issue as small and large blocks seem to be treated the same in that sense.

    We need a better game/physics engine, nothing else to it...
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  28. DigitalStone Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    239
    Really, you would think there's a limit huh!?? Well dahh, build you own physics engine to integrate in your own written game engine where nobody went before and quit whining.
    Either that or build yourself at least a decent computer, but i guess you're incapable of that since you like to focus so hard about bragging so much how you can't pass your limits.

    Oh boohoo, i had nothing of these issues before no matter how big the ships were... EVER
    Good luck with your Amiga ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  29. MacKnight Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    25
    No need to be bloody rude..
     
  30. Cetric Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    619
    So, how's about me, with my video card from 2012 and processor AMD FX-6100, and my Space Engineers world with more than eight planets, not to count moons and asteroids, currently five large grid ships of impressive size each (cruiser to battlecruiser sizes, I would estimate), two stations big enough to offer docking cages to aforementioned ships, plus a two digit number of small block ship(s) (sections) and satellites, some of them on autopilot voyage between those two stations which are 18k km apart (in game measurements)... and I won't go into details about my 100+ mods in use....
    ... how it's possible I am still able to play in such crowded world and enjoying it? Could it be it is just a marvellous work from KEEN's side still enabling me to do so? I do not deny I have some lag under such circumstances, but I don't complain about it, because I know *who* is responsible for it - over-productive me. And I can live with it. With some major updates I noticed an improvement in game speed DESPITE of my world being so packed with builds. And you are still wondering why I am all in favor of our Devs and their baby?
    I know why! :tu: And no whining or nagging attention seeker will change that.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Funny Funny x 1
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.