Discussion ICARUS Terminal (Pre-Release)

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Hey there,

after playing around with your tool a few times I've had the first "real" use case for it last night. I'm out exploring in VR and decided to pin a terminal window with the system info in my VR space while scanning systems. This is all from a VR user's point of view and stems from the fact that the pinned window is relatively small compared to the fullscreen display on a 24" monitor:

I usually begin the system scan with the gas giants, at least when there are no obvious gems in a system. I find and scan a giant and then look for all the moons around it. So when scanning the first giant, it gets depicted REALLY big in the ICARUS terminal, and the moons are placed under it one by one. Problem I had: The first moon was still visible, the others just dissapeared out the bottom. At first I thought ICARUS failed to update the displayed system map, until I realized that the bodies were out of frame . This gets better the more planets I scan, as the display auto scales with the "width" of the system map. I tried scaling the display down with CTRL-wheel, but all I got was tiny text . Maybe you can add an option for auto scaling in the other dimension, too? Or scale the system map together with the text scaling?

Most systems I scanned were very boring and filled with icy bodies, but in the few interesting systems I scanned I kind of had a hard time differentiating landable atmospheric planets from the non ones. In Odyssey I have the same problem in the system map, to be honest, the only ones I can really make out at a glance are the non-atmospheric landables. Maybe there is a way to mark the different types of bodies (in terms of landability and atmosphere, not the body type) more... obviously? I mean, I can always click on the body and get the text info as I use the mouse for scanning anyway (and not the HOTAS), but in VR this means losing mouse focus for the elite window, and getting that back can be fiddly (I sit in the middle of my room and have to peek sideways at my desk to find the elite window and click into it).

Apart from these minor quirks: Great tool! Hope this feedback helps in any way.

 

[Connie Spaceplone]

Maybe there is a way to mark the different types of bodies (in terms of landability and atmosphere, not the body type) more... obviously? I mean, I can always click on the body and get the text info as I use the mouse for scanning anyway (and not the HOTAS), but in VR this means losing mouse focus for the elite window, and getting that back can be fiddly (I sit in the middle of my room and have to peek sideways at my desk to find the elite window and click into it).

yes please, i had the same problem. @Flash Moonboots can you steal the "Landfall" icon without getting sued?

 

[Flash Moonboots]

but both of these are problems that have been solved before, arent they? i mean, EDDiscovery seems to handle these scenarios very well.

in that it just pretends you are still in your ship and doing the things you are doing in multicrew. this is fine enough.

That's what already happens in ICARUS Terminal. It already knows when you disembark, or are in an SRV (but not when you are in someone else ship) but have explained the context before (and in my most recent post in this thread).

and it can detect to which cmdr the logs belong to. there is even a dropdown.

Have addressed this a couple of times already in this thread.

 

[Flash Moonboots]

Hey there,

after playing around with your tool a few times I've had the first "real" use case for it last night. I'm out exploring in VR and decided to pin a terminal window with the system info in my VR space while scanning systems. This is all from a VR user's point of view and stems from the fact that the pinned window is relatively small compared to the fullscreen display on a 24" monitor:

I usually begin the system scan with the gas giants, at least when there are no obvious gems in a system. I find and scan a giant and then look for all the moons around it. So when scanning the first giant, it gets depicted REALLY big in the ICARUS terminal, and the moons are placed under it one by one. Problem I had: The first moon was still visible, the others just dissapeared out the bottom. At first I thought ICARUS failed to update the displayed system map, until I realized that the bodies were out of frame . This gets better the more planets I scan, as the display auto scales with the "width" of the system map. I tried scaling the display down with CTRL-wheel, but all I got was tiny text . Maybe you can add an option for auto scaling in the other dimension, too? Or scale the system map together with the text scaling?

Yeah, there are some posts about this already (and some small improvements in this direction were made).

It's actually a tricky problem to solve well. There is a plan to address it over time, by compositing bodies into a single, fully saleable map. It's even more complicated to solve for the use cases ICARUS Terminal addresses (affordances for rendering and interactions on tablets and mobile phones as well as Desktop and VR) than it is for the game and so probably isn't going to be solved any time soon, but I do have it in the back of my mind. In the short term, I might explore options like tweaking the body scaling to still allow it to convey scale but without large bodies overly dominating the UI.

I have been thinking of other ways to address highlighting interesting bodies in a system specifically for exploration. EDDI does a great job of this and similar logic (perhaps with some Odyssey specific recommendations) would be a nice addition I think.

Most systems I scanned were very boring and filled with icy bodies, but in the few interesting systems I scanned I kind of had a hard time differentiating landable atmospheric planets from the non ones. In Odyssey I have the same problem in the system map, to be honest, the only ones I can really make out at a glance are the non-atmospheric landables. Maybe there is a way to mark the different types of bodies (in terms of landability and atmosphere, not the body type) more... obviously? I mean, I can always click on the body and get the text info as I use the mouse for scanning anyway (and not the HOTAS), but in VR this means losing mouse focus for the elite window, and getting that back can be fiddly (I sit in the middle of my room and have to peek sideways at my desk to find the elite window and click into it).

Apart from these minor quirks: Great tool! Hope this feedback helps in any way.

I know how you feel - while I don't play in VR anymore (it was great, but my headset broke a while back and it's a bit inconvenient for me personally due to issues with my vision) this sort of thing was also part of the motivation for creating this tool (that, and issues with the in-game system map).

FYI, if it's not obvious, bodies are rendered differently for landable/not landable and for bodies with atmosphere.

I'm not sure if that this isn't super obvious, or if just it's hard to make out in VR. The color thing should be at least easy to make out, but I can see the atmosphere indicator maybe being hard to read (and if that's the case, could revise). I've also been thinking about improving the icons in the list view to also expose more details like this).

 

[Flash Moonboots]

yes please, i had the same problem. @Flash Moonboots can you steal the "Landfall" icon without getting sued?

Although no word from FDev on this thread they have given their blessing to other projects as long they are not commercial so I think I could probably re-implement that without it being a problem and I did consider it (as it follows existing design language in the game).

However, instead I opted for using color for that (see image above) and going beyond what the game does and using the space for an icon to show if Settlements and/or Ports are present (with different icons for each, using icons designed after the established in-game icons for each of them). I appreciate the game has a design language for indicating landable planets with ports, but I find it hard to make out. In the list view, landable planets/settlements/ports/stations/outposts/megaships are also highlighted with a different color.

I might add some sort of legend/summary to the system map that can be clicked/tapped to explain the symbolism.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Yeah, there are some posts about this already (and some small improvements in this direction were made).

It's actually a tricky problem to solve well. There is a plan to address it over time, by compositing bodies into a single, fully saleable map. It's even more complicated to solve for the use cases ICARUS Terminal addresses (affordances for rendering and interactions on tablets and mobile phones as well as Desktop and VR) than it is for the game and so probably isn't going to be solved any time soon, but I do have it in the back of my mind. In the short term, I might explore options like tweaking the body scaling to still allow it to convey scale but without large bodies overly dominating the UI.

Right, I get that this is a tricky task if you're targeting a multitude of different platforms. It's also only a problem if you do the scan like I do, starting with the (usually) largest body and its moons . But if you do, boy, that first gas giant is big on screen .

FYI, if it's not obvious, bodies are rendered differently for landable/not landable and for bodies with atmosphere.

I'm not sure if that this isn't super obvious, or if just it's hard to make out in VR. The color thing should be at least easy to make out, but I can see the atmosphere indicator maybe being hard to read (and if that's the case, could revise). I've also been thinking about improving the icons in the list view to also expose more details like this).

Well, I didn't pick up on the colour thing. But then again I'm not the most perceptive in the bunch . I think I remember I could make out the atmospheric planets pretty well, but I couldn't figure out which ones were landable without the text info. But again... old and blind and such . I'll check that out tonight!

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

I might add some sort of legend/summary to the system map that can be clicked/tapped to explain the symbolism.

That's actually a great idea. I'd say the color coding is a RTFM moment, but a) there is no M right now and b) nobody reads them anymore anyway .

 

[Flash Moonboots]

Well, I didn't pick up on the colour thing. But then again I'm not the most perceptive in the bunch . I think I remember I could make out the atmospheric planets pretty well, but I couldn't figure out which ones were landable without the text info. But again... old and blind and such . I'll check that out tonight!

Honestly you'd think this would be easy to solve, but it turns out it's really awkward to solve well for all scenarios, at least with how the rendering currently works. When it's just one big map for all bodies in a system (like in the in game map) that should get a lot easier to address.

I feel your pain on this though as I run into the same issue with just a tablet on systems where there is a main star with just a big gas giant.

I might try tweaking the scaling so massive bodies are not quite as massive and seeing if that helps any.

 

[Flash Moonboots]

That's actually a great idea. I'd say the color coding is a RTFM moment, but a) there is no M right now and b) nobody reads them anymore anyway .

As it seems like from what @Connie Spaceplone was saying it's not just you, so I guess isn't as obvious as I was hoping it would be

Agree with you on no manual and nobody would read that (and would probably hate a tutorial!) but I'll maybe see about a small icon in the top right of the map that can be clicked on to display a legend / system summary as it sounds like it need some sort of hint.

The differentiation by color/brightness is also one reason why it doesn't try to show more 'realistic' colors for bodies, there is partial support for that in ICARUS but it's not enabled as it wouldn't mean I couldn't use color in this way and also it looks a bit garish and not as nice as monotone (but it still has roughly appropriate coloring for stars, based on class / subtype.

If helped to stand out more I could increase the contrast difference between landable and non-landable bodies so it's maybe more obvious.

As @Connie Spaceplone was suggesting I could add the Lander icon to landable bodies, but I'm wary of that as that might make it harder to see at a glance what systems have Settlements or Ports.

 

[amcb10]

Has something changed with the executable? My TotalAV has flagged it as [HEUR/APC] and deleted it?

I added it to exceptions after googling what it is but strange it hasn't triggered before.

 

[Flash Moonboots]

Has something changed with the executable? My TotalAV has flagged it as [HEUR/APC] and deleted it?

I added it to exceptions after googling what it is but strange it hasn't triggered before.

Ah yeah, HEUR (Heuristic) warnings are like the ML (Machine Learning) warnings that @BDelacroix ran into, where AV software goes "oh this uses some of the same functions as malicious software I've seen once before, so am going to guess maybe this is also bad" (which is terrible but pretty common). I had Windows Defender pull the same thing on me today, super annoying.

It's a particular problem for both unsigned code (e.g. open source and personal projects) and code that hasn't been installed by a lot of users, as it assumes things it hasn't seen much of before is more likely to be problematic.

This morning I actually shelled out for a personal code signing certificate so I can sign future releases (both the .exe files and installer) and that will take a few days to come through but when it does this shouldn't be as much of an issue as AV software heavily factors in if code is signed. It will also mean there is no scary prompt when running the installer for the first time. When the cert is issued the signed versions will go out like a regular release so there will no action to take.

 

[DarkLeir]

Ah yeah, HEUR (Heuristic) warnings are like the ML (Machine Learning) warnings that @BDelacroix ran into, where AV software goes "oh this uses some of the same functions as malicious software I've seen once before, so am going to guess maybe this is also bad" (which is terrible but pretty common). I had Windows Defender pull the same thing on me today, super annoying.

It's a particular problem for both unsigned code (e.g. open source and personal projects) and code that hasn't been installed by a lot of users, as it assumes things it hasn't seen much of before is more likely to be problematic.

This morning I actually shelled out for a personal code signing certificate so I can sign future releases (both the .exe files and installer) and that will take a few days to come through but when it does this shouldn't be as much of an issue as AV software heavily factors in if code is signed. It will also mean there is no scary prompt when running the installer for the first time. When the cert is issued the signed versions will go out like a regular release so there will no action to take.

Thank! I had the same issue and i was going mad trying to make it work (it never open since windows defender thinks that it's a trojan... even after marking the folder as an exception...). I'll wait the new version with signed code with patience. Keep your awesome work

 

[GJ51]

Ah yeah, HEUR (Heuristic) warnings are like the ML (Machine Learning) warnings that @BDelacroix ran into, where AV software goes "oh this uses some of the same functions as malicious software I've seen once before, so am going to guess maybe this is also bad" (which is terrible but pretty common). I had Windows Defender pull the same thing on me today, super annoying.

It's a particular problem for both unsigned code (e.g. open source and personal projects) and code that hasn't been installed by a lot of users, as it assumes things it hasn't seen much of before is more likely to be problematic.

This morning I actually shelled out for a personal code signing certificate so I can sign future releases (both the .exe files and installer) and that will take a few days to come through but when it does this shouldn't be as much of an issue as AV software heavily factors in if code is signed. It will also mean there is no scary prompt when running the installer for the first time. When the cert is issued the signed versions will go out like a regular release so there will no action to take.

I just ran into the

Malware.Heuristic​

on Malwarebytes on the scan this morning as well.

I just began testing yesterday. So far I like what I see.

Thanks for the hard work

 

[Flash Moonboots]

A few small updates this weekend, mostly cosmetic fixes and enhancements across the app and some internal refactoring to lay the groundwork for future features.

The updates included a couple of new features of their own including the first iteration of a floating info box on the System Map as a starting point for additional system info (e.g. planet and route info).

The other small feature is a button to mute Notifications if you don't want to see them in a particular window, as a quick win especially for folks using multiple terminals who are sick of them.

(This screenshot from mobile.)

 

[Greybeard Seawolf]

Just an FYI I just took a mission to a settlement on Carener AB 1 B to Henriquez Arms Garrison. The terminal shows the planet as landable but it doesn't show the settlement at all

 

[Flash Moonboots]

Just an FYI I just took a mission to a settlement on Carener AB 1 B to Henriquez Arms Garrison. The terminal shows the planet as landable but it doesn't show the settlement at all

Hey thanks for the heads up!

There are few cases like this, where if data is not in EDSM.net it won't show up (e.g. a recent change by FDev or nobody has detected the Settlement or Station who is running a client that syncs with EDSM, or only by Horizons players). Mostly this is an issue in less frequently visited areas. At the moment the System Map relies heavily on data from EDSM with local data only for current system data, as that works well for both remote systems that you haven't visited as well as for the current system, but ideally the view would prefer local data where you have it (and just use EDSM to fill in the gaps).

I'm also interested in supporting submitting updates to EDSM / Dangerous Data Network, as well as including / falling back to local scan data, but that might be something for even later; using local data is not a huge amount of work and will probably come first.

Until that work is done, right now if you use it alongside something like EDDI (or any tool that submits info to EDSM) anytime you Scan a body or Honk then System Map in ICARUS Terminal will update, and things like new systems should be able to be rendered on the ICARUS Terminal map a few seconds after. This is what I've been doing while exploring in small trips into the black from Colonia, as it means the map in ICARUS Terminal is still useful, as it updates as I scan/honk (usually with a latency of 2-3 seconds, EDSM is wicked fast all things considered).

 

[DarkLeir]

I have a problem with the program, no matter how many try but it never opens, i downloaded many times, older versions, try diferent AV programs, disabled them, disabled windwos defender (as much i can) and nothing works... I tried in my wife laptop and works without problem but can't make it work in my main pc.... Any clue? the terminal window blink less than a second and close it. Thanks in advance.

 

[Flash Moonboots]

I have a problem with the program, no matter how many try but it never opens, i downloaded many times, older versions, try diferent AV programs, disabled them, disabled windwos defender (as much i can) and nothing works... I tried in my wife laptop and works without problem but can't make it work in my main pc.... Any clue? the terminal window blink less than a second and close it. Thanks in advance.

Oh sorry to hear that! No idea what would cause that, sorry. If there is any sort of problem it should display an error at startup.

There is only one run time dependency and it should be installed automatically using the Microsoft Installer when ICARUS Setup.exe is run, so I don't know what would cause it not to run.

The only thing I can suggest is opening a Windows command prompt and going to "C:\Program Files (x86)\ICARUS Terminal" and running "ICARUS Terminal.exe" from there to see if it display an error message on the command line. I suspect it won't but it's worth a shot.

Alternatively, it could be it's just a problem Windows GUI app (ICARUS Terminal.exe) - you try double clicking on the service (ICARUS Service.exe) in "C:\Program Files (x86)\ICARUS Terminal" then going to http://localhost:3300 in Chrome or Edge to try using the web UI (which is the same, except the web view lacks always-on-top'/borderless windows). ICARUS Service.exe should also display an error message if it has a problem running.

I'd be interested to know how you get on / if you do get any error messages.

 

[DarkLeir]

Oh sorry to hear that! No idea what would cause that, sorry. If there is any sort of problem it should display an error at startup.

There is only one run time dependency and it should be installed automatically using the Microsoft Installer when ICARUS Setup.exe is run, so I don't know what would cause it not to run.

The only thing I can suggest is opening a Windows command prompt and going to "C:\Program Files (x86)\ICARUS Terminal" and running "ICARUS Terminal.exe" from there to see if it display an error message on the command line. I suspect it won't but it's worth a shot.

Alternatively, it could be it's just a problem Windows GUI app (ICARUS Terminal.exe) - you try double clicking on the service (ICARUS Service.exe) in "C:\Program Files (x86)\ICARUS Terminal" then going to http://localhost:3300 in Chrome or Edge to try using the web UI (which is the same, except the web view lacks always-on-top'/borderless windows). ICARUS Service.exe should also display an error message if it has a problem running.

I'd be interested to know how you get on / if you do get any error messages.

Thanks for the help. Running through powershell doesn't nothing (same issue, a blink less than a second and then close) but running the Icarus sevice and try the web view make the job without problem.

Thanks very much i apreciated your work and help

 

[BDelacroix]

This morning I actually shelled out for a personal code signing certificate so I can sign future releases (both the .exe files and installer) and that will take a few days to come through but when it does this shouldn't be as much of an issue as AV software heavily factors in if code is signed. It will also mean there is no scary prompt when running the installer for the first time. When the cert is issued the signed versions will go out like a regular release so there will no action to take.

I suspect this is part of the reason why they don't change the algorithm. Gets them a bit more money. So cynical of me, I know.