Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BTDT not remembering some anomalies (randoliths?) #381

Open
JonnyOThan opened this issue Jun 26, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

BTDT not remembering some anomalies (randoliths?) #381

JonnyOThan opened this issue Jun 26, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@JonnyOThan
Copy link

JonnyOThan commented Jun 26, 2020

We've noticed an issue on my "twitch plays ksp" stream. Currently on KSP 1.8.1 using scansat 1.8.14 (according to the version file anyway).

When we use the BTDT near a randolith, it will get marked as visited. If we switch vessels, scenes, quicksave/load or anything, the anomaly is still marked as visited. But if we restart KSP, the anomaly is no longer visited. This seems to only happen to randoliths - other anomalies stay marked across restarts. This has happened on at least 2 different bodies - eeloo and ceti (from GPP).

We've done a complete orbital anomaly scan, so we have the geocoordinates of each one. The anomalydetail coverage at the randolith seems to be what is controlling whether the anomaly is marked or not, and after restarting ksp that coordinate is no longer covered.

We can reproduce this quite easily, so I'm willing to test out any ideas you might have.

Interestingly, if we switch to a vessel that is near the randolith, it then gets marked as visited even if there are no active BTDT scanners nearby.

@DMagic1
Copy link
Contributor

DMagic1 commented Jun 28, 2020

To be clear, the randoliths are still showing up on the maps, but are marked with grey icons and say "Anomaly: Unknown" when you mouse over it? Or the marker disappears altogether?

I'm not seeing either in my testing, but it's not entirely surprising that something weird could be going on with the BTDT and the random anomalies. I've seen other things like the random anomalies moving to different locations, though.

The root of the problem might be the way that the BTDT scan works. I think I need to just overhaul that altogether to come up with a more robust system.

@JonnyOThan
Copy link
Author

Right, the location is still known but the AnomalyDetail coverage in that spot is missing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants