Ippo

What is exactly the proper way to initialize my module before the flight? Right now I am doing this: public override void OnStart(PartModule.StartState state) { if (state == StartState.PreLaunch) { this.Log("OnStart, performing initialization"); // and other stuff } else { this.Log("OnStart, not initializing"); // and other stuff } } And of course, in the log I get that it's not initializing: DangItBattery [-184916]: Entering OnStart: state is PreLaunch, Landed, enabled is True DangItBattery [-184916]: OnStart, not initializing

Budget integration will definitely be a thing, but I can't decide anything about until we know exactly how the system works and how we can influence it.

URGENT: I found a über bug in the current build. The age of the parts is plain wrong, simple as that. I temporarily removed the download from GitHub. If you already installed it, I advise you to delete it and wait for the update. (THIS is why I called this alpha)

Actually it's more of a "Wait, *THAT* NathanKell!? OH GOD" attitude I'm sorry, I don't understand: do you mean that I should increase the lifetime of the engines? If this is the case, well, 70 hours of burn time before the EOL seemed quite a lot to me, but of course, the balancing simply hasn't been done yet, so it can still change.

Refer to this: http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/012/367/evilest.gif Not suggested, but thought of: it will come... whenever 1. I will look into those, thanks for the pointers! 2. Well, that's cool, I didn't know it. I'll search for some info. Both models have their pros and cons, I suppose... how about a U shaped curve? So it works against you whatever you do! 3. BTW, when I saw a name as big as yours in my thread, I kinda expected a scolding

Would you mind sending me your output log? It's located in KSP/KSP_data/outputlog.txt. Send me an email to [email protected]

I've added screenshots on the first page on how it should look. Do you have any other mod installed? If you have the gimbal then I don't know. I will investigate and let you know, but for today I can't work on it, so don't expect a fix for a couple of days, sorry

I just checked: code-wise, it's not a subclass, so the current EngineReliability module cannot work as is. The simples fix will be a separate reliability module for the EngineFX, but there are a grand total of FIVE lines of code that needs to change. It would bother me a lot to duplicate this much code for just five lines, so I will try to get around it using templates (and will fail horribly). The first point is only a matter of cfg files. Obviously, I haven't written cfg files for single parts yet: I'm using Module Manager to slap the same module onto every command pod, with the same values. You can just add a separate config file for the parts you are interested, like this: @PART[mk1pod]:BEFORE[DIRandomFailures] { // spare parts module with the values you like } For the second part: inactive parts do age, but only if they are set to age always. In this case, their age is equal to the mission time, and so it increases also during time warps and when inactive. Currently this only applies to tanks and control surfaces. Of course this prevents permanent space stations (even though, with the current values, the EOL of tanks is around 17 years). I will comment more on re-using when 0.24 is out: at that point I will be able to see how I can factor the budgets in. If you get any budget back when you recover ships, I will see if it's possible to reduce the recovery value for worn out parts, and the like. Of course, these features are merely theoretical until 0.24 is out. Please check this: when you are in the VAB, right click on an engine or a command pod. The LV45 engine should be perfect. When you right click, in the information tab you should see the reliability modules (engines, alternator and gimbal for the LV45). If you don't see them, then the mod is not loaded at all. If you wanna go the advanced route, press alt + f12, choose the "Database" tab, and open the list of loaded assemblies: you should see a DIRandomFailures.dll in the list.

Dude, I swear to god, I hadn't read your post until this morning O.O I had seen that thread, of course (that's where I got the regex code), but had stopped reading before you posted your suggestions! Well, I see that most of the remaining stuff is not only very feasible with what I'm doing, but also fits very nicely in the general philosophy of this mod

Well, there isn't much to see actually: there is no UI except the failed parts glowing red, and no spare parts container atm, it is only a resource added to command pods. I will make a couple screenshots later though You have to be close to a command pod or probe and right click: you should see a "Take parts" event in the menu. As above, screenshots later. That would be absolutely awesome, I've never tried modeling before and it would be wonderful! Go ahead! Finally, some bug reports! I will look into that ASAP. For the first issue though: I'm not sure what the ModuleEnginesFX does exactly. My guess is that right now it will not work, unless ModuleEnginesFX is a subclass of ModuleEngines.

Right now it's more like: "I've picked up a fault in the AE35 unit: it happened just 2 seconds ago when Jeb decided that ovethrottling was totally safe". Oh yeah, I forgot to mention this one bit: with this mod installed, engines don't like when you are throttle-happy... It might be safer to be a little more careful during your burns Technically: for engines, the istantaneous chance of failure is multiplied by (x + 0.5*x^5), where x is the current throttle from 0 to 1. This means that running an engine at 100% you are 50% more likely to break it than normal. The "neutral" throttle is ~82%: less than that, you decrease the failure chance almost linearly; more than that, you increase it exponentially.

Because I can't be sure yet that it is actually fnished, there may be a lot of bugs lurking around. Plus, it still lacks some key features. RTGs are planned; other mods... one day. Before tackling mod compatibility, I want to have mine finished This is the exact reason why they were left out in the first place We discussed in the dev thread, and agreed that failures should be recoverable, otherwise it is only annoying. I might make an "expansion" with deadly failures one day, but I'm not sure yet.

Well, they are on their own, so yeah... either you send a repair mission, or you will have to go on with what you have. Two, actually: you get a message on the screen, and all the failed parts glow red as long as they are disabled.

Added in the first post.

Already thought of that, will definitely come one day Along with some mechanism to extend the life of a part, so that permanent stations become possible. Sorry for the slow update, it should look at least decent now

Also, I can kinda see the point of knowing the user-base of each mod: let's say that I want my mod to integrate into a life support mod... which one should I target? Do I do TACLS or IonCross first? Is it worth my time to support that other mod I really like, but has no active users? Stuff like that.

EDIT: I was *****ing about something that was totally my fault for not reading carefully what I was agreeing to and was clearly written in the first post. Sorry.

You should have received my report, it was sent just a moment ago. Btw, I had never realized I had 40 assemblies loaded... I'm starting to think that in reality I don't really like KSP at all.

Ok so basically, I have tested the last build and it *seems* to work as intended. Therefore, here we go... Alpha 1 Release

I was writing it as you posted And ofc, it still needs a lot of documentation and explanations and stuff. Please, PLEASE backup everything!

DANG IT! A random failures mod for KSP This mod is now maintained by Coffeeman, who's awesome. Thanks Louis <3 Install it using CKAN! CKAN is the awesome package manager for KSP. Or install manually. Still not frustrated enough? Add more Entropy, Coffeeman's extension that takes the ragequit to 11! Having problems / questions? There's a WIKI! With explanations, troubleshooting, and... well nothing much really. INCOMPATIBLE WITH: [TABLE=class: outer_border, width: 500, align: center] [TR] [TD]Mod[/TD] [TD]Effect[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]FAR[/TD] [TD]Control surfaces won't fail.[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Procedural Parts[/TD] [TD]Procedural tanks are not recognized.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] What is this? It is a mod that will cause the parts on your ship to fail randomly, and you will need to repair them before you can use them again. Be careful... some failures might be relatively harmless, but others might seriously ruin your day. The more you use a part, the less reliable it will become: so don't be too throttle happy with those mainsails! This mod requires Module Manager to function: it will also target ANY part mod that you have installed. (As long as some conditions are respected) What's changed in the latest update? This update has been entirely made by Coffeeman and I take no responsibility for the bugs credit for the new features that have been added. Alpha 6: Compatible with KSP 1.0.2 Add FailureModules for steering and tires Rework experience system using the Stock XP system. Configurable in the Module Toggalable in settings Fully compatible with MissionController Tweaks to engine reliability calculation Unfortunatley at this point nothing is refunded for having bought upgrades to Kerbal Experience. Sorry! (You can hack your funds up, it's ok, you have my permission ) Report a problemon the issue tracker Suggest in the development thread See the source code (GPL-3.0)

Yes, they are just a normal resource like any other, except that it cannot flow. As such, it can be config'd into any part you like: I still didn't think about how, just that one day there will be containers. Just a little ago I saw this, tell me it isn't the perfect container

Basically, it's like solid fuel: you cannot pump a solid between parts, so you can't pump spare parts. They will have to be manually transfered between the resupply vehicle and the station. Eventually, when I get around to make some models, you will also have containers: just dock one to the station and you are good

Just a quick update for the interested... once again, please tell me if the mods think I'm bumping and bothering people. In these screenshot you can see Bill having troubles with the engine on the launchpad. Really wanting to go to space today, he gets out of the pod to grab some spare parts, and head for the engine... and promptly discovers, he didn't bring enough! But after a short gravity hack to the command pod, he is able to grab the remaining spare parts and bring the engine to life again On a more serious and informative note, the core things seem to be all in place now: things can fail and can be repaired using a resource called Spare Parts (I settled on a single resource in the end: might change... but unlikely). This resource can only be moved around by kerbals (no flow) and is very heavy: a kerbal fully loaded with this will have trouble moving around. Now I have some bugs to iron out, but basically, we are close

Thank you, this fixes the last issue that remains now. However, when I first posted it simply didn't show up, even when closing and reopening the panel. For some reason, moving it around fixed it (most likely, moving things around I accidentally removed the bug I had put there).