Alshain

Community Database of Module Manager Patches for Stock KSP

163 posts in this topic

"Add Attachment Nodes to Solar Panels" breaks some mod parts, particularly when the mod part has nodes already. Probably should be modified to specifically fix the stock solar panel parts only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, westamastaflash said:

"Add Attachment Nodes to Solar Panels" breaks some mod parts, particularly when the mod part has nodes already. Probably should be modified to specifically fix the stock solar panel parts only.

You will have to ask @Enceos about that.  It's his patch and to be honest, I'm not entirely sure what it is trying to accomplish :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

14 hours ago, westamastaflash said:

"Add Attachment Nodes to Solar Panels" breaks some mod parts, particularly when the mod part has nodes already. Probably should be modified to specifically fix the stock solar panel parts only.

Define "breaks" please. I'm using a patch without the attachment restriction in my game and I never encountered any problems.

Spoiler

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

More patches from this league:

Spoiler

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleWheelBase]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleRCSFX]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleRCS]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableRadiator]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf

 

Edited by Enceos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 hours ago, Enceos said:

Define "breaks" please. I'm using a patch without the attachment restriction in my game and I never encountered any problems.

  Reveal hidden contents

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

 

When this patch is in place: In this mod, the Gondola parts will only attach at one node to a parent part, and then no other parts will allow themselves to be attached. The parts contain a ModuleDeployableSolarPanel module, but also have 4 nodes *and* are surface-attachable.

Without the patch, things attach just fine to all the nodes.

 

 

Edited by westamastaflash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@westamastaflash I also have Heisenberg. Use the version I posted, without attachment restriction to avoid the problem.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 minutes ago, Enceos said:

@westamastaflash I also have Heisenberg. Use the version I posted, without attachment restriction to avoid the problem.

Thank you! I must have had an older/different version. 

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,0,0,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size1, srf

Edited by westamastaflash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2017 at 8:19 PM, Jarin said:

So I, uh, borked something (and I didn't even add that new script yet), and now I'm getting over a hundred MM errors on load; looks like a lot of it is in tweakscale, but all I get from the loading screen is error totals. Is there a log to get details of MM load errors somewhere?

@Alshain any idea what to look at here? Google searches are failing me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jarin said:

@Alshain any idea what to look at here? Google searches are failing me.

If it isn't related to a patch here, you should ask in the MM thread or possibly Tweakscale thread.  I don't know how to troubleshoot those.  Sorry :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alshain said:

If it isn't related to a patch here, you should ask in the MM thread or possibly Tweakscale thread.  I don't know how to troubleshoot those.  Sorry :(

That... is a really good idea. <.<

(just take it as a complement that you're a visibly knowledgeable authority on the topic of MM scripts, so I missed the obvious action here)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@PART[*]:HAS[@Module[ModuleDockingNode]:HAS[~snapRotation[True]]]:FINAL

this shoud, in theory, target all docking ports that DONT have snaprotation, correct? (the mm wiki says ~ is the oppisite of #, similar to @ and !)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Alshain The patches that duplicate stock structural parts for other sizes (e.g. duplicating the 1.25m 6-way hub to 2.5m, etc) don't update the bulkheadProfiles for the parts, so the parts don't show up correctly when filtering by cross-section.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
// Swap Crew report and EVA report biome-dependence in space low
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[crewReport]]:FINAL           { @biomeMask = 23 }
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[evaReport]]:FINAL            { @biomeMask = 7  }

When one finds it is silly to get out to get all the biome science :rolleyes:

Note that if you apply this patch mid-game the old biome EVA reports won't get deleted.

Edited by pwhk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pwhk said:

// Swap Crew report and EVA report biome-dependence in space low
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[crewReport]]:FINAL           { @biomeMask = 23 }
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[evaReport]]:FINAL            { @biomeMask = 7  }

When one finds it is silly to get out to get all the biome science :rolleyes:

Note that if you apply this patch mid-game the old biome EVA reports won't get deleted.

Just want to point out that this creates a huge buff to very early career science returns (before the expensive astronaut complex upgrade which allows EVA in flight), when science is still comparatively hard to get.  Is that intentional?

I'd probably agree on philosophical grounds that the crew report makes more sense as a detailed planetary observation than the EVA report.  But I would personally go so far as to call this swap (in my usual Hard mode rules, where building upgrades are ruinously expensive) cheating.  Cheating myself out of the enjoyable challenges of early career.

Edited by fourfa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now