nightingale

Members
  • Content count

    3,997
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,006 Excellent

About nightingale

  • Rank
    Configurer of Contracts

Profile Information

  • Location Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

10,386 profile views
  1. Not easily, you'd have to edit the hotel into the validHotels list, and there's some data that's not easy to get in there. You'd be better off getting the hotel contract again and just using hyperedit or other cheats to get it into orbit.
  2. Hard to say without more info - what does the requirements on the "Bring tourists to a hotel or casino" contract look like?
  3. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    @VaPaL - Still valid. Your way would work, but it limits the players options (they can't do it in 3 launches if they want). It's also a bit more tutorial-ish (although that may be what you want).
  4. nightingale

    [1.4.x] Strategia [v1.7.2] [2018-06-12]

    @eddiew - I did fix something a while back around strategy levels that might be the problem. Let me do a release as is and see if that fixes it. If not, will get to it as soon as possible (which may be a bit as I'm travelling for work next week and on vacation the week after). Also - what do you even have going on? It looks like some sort of Strategia+ or something... custom icons, tweaked strategies... --- And here we go, new release. Strategia 1.7.2 Fixed logic for determining strategy level - this was causing some strategies to be the same for all levels (thanks ibanix). Fixed Astronaut Training Strategies not actually costing extra (thanks Jukelo).
  5. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    Something about it broke a long time ago (probably because of a stock update?). To be honest it hasn't been a priority to fix, but will try to look at it when I'm able to spend time on Contract Configurator. Next week I'm in Mexico City (sorry - not KSP related), and the week after that I'm on vacation. So it may be a bit before I'm able to get into the swing of things.
  6. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    I get why Arsonide added that from a gameplay perspective to prevent people from farming certain contracts, but I personally don't like it. The "Launch New Vessel" parameter was added into Contract Configurator as a request from a contract author (I forget who). Personally I'd rather have something where there needs to be an "initial" state of on the launch pad and use vessel parameters, but that's really a case by case basis. You might have better luck asking specific contract authors to remove them. Or you should hypothetically be able to write a module manager script to remove them all automatically in your own game.
  7. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    The intention had been to enhance the Orbit class with methods to generate various orbits and allow that to be an input to the OrbitGenerator (or allow it to be used instead). Unfortunately, that's probably not likely to happen with the amount of time I have for the mod. Right now your best bet is to figure out the various parameters yourself (you can use expressions to provide some randomization there if you want). Why? Only the first page and most recent couple pages are relevant - a new thread wouldn't really change that. And naming it 2018 means I'd have to create another new thread next year.
  8. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    You'd need to have completeInSequence on every parameter than needs to wait for a previous parameter to complete. If I recall correctly from RP-0, you can also have the duration parameter as a child parameter, and the countdown won't start until the parent is ready to complete.
  9. nightingale

    [1.4.x] Strategia [v1.7.2] [2018-06-12]

    I assume you mean strategies. Something is likely screwed up - when one fails to load I think it breaks the whole system. I'd need to see KSP.log to comment further though.
  10. None. I think I'd have to see a KSP.log to be able to comment on what's going on here.
  11. nightingale

    [1.4.x] Strategia [v1.7.2] [2018-06-12]

    This is a known bug - I need to do a release soon to get that fix out, but have been busy for the last little while. I'm out of town this week, so look for something next week.
  12. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    Sorry all, been a busy couple weeks with work travel, so I've been quite absent. Just about to leave on one last international trip, and hopefully things should be a bit less crazy after this one. Sort of known - I just piggy back off the KSP classes in this case and I've seen cases where they are not very reliable in detecting manned vs. unmanned. If you want me to dig deeper, raise something on the tracker with details and I'll look when I can. Contract Configurator's system for vessel tracking has always been quirky due to working around stock limitations. I haven't played around with the new stock stuff yet, but from what I read from @TriggerAu's dev notes on the subject it's just a special module that saves off the correct vessel names. CC relies more on the vessel's various part ids for each "sub-vessel" (which is a set of connected parts bounded by docking ports/decouplers). So I don't think the new stock stuff is at play. I'd say the bug is in the launch new vessel bit - that sounds like it's what's resetting everything. It does the same logic as the stock one (checking the launchId, which I haven't played with enough to know if that gets changed on docking at all (could it be one of the vessels in play launched prior to contract acceptance?) It's the OrbitGenerator behaviour that is responsible for generating the orbits that you can see in the tracking station. There's an Orbit.cfg in the test area that has some examples you can try looking at. For another example, I saw there are a few in severedsolo's Clever Sats contract pack. @CT96B - You want to use the completeInSequence attribute on your parameters to make things work right: // Indicates that this parameter needs to be complete "in sequence". // All parameters that are before this parameter in the list (and at // the same level) must be completed before this parameter is allowed // to complete. // // Type: bool // Required: No (defaulted) // Default: false // completeInSequence = true Note that this won't play very well with the nesting you have - so you may need to flatten out the parameters a bit.
  13. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    @CT96B - See the expression documentation for the Kerbal class. Because of the way overloading works in CC expressions, that particular function signature got renamed some time ago from NewKerbal to NewKerbalWithTrait. I'll fix the sample in the wiki.
  14. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    @Kematia - It's in the difficulty settings, there's a global multiplier. @CT96B - You'll need to be running KSP 1.4.x (ideally 1.4.3). I don't know what 3.1.1 is, probably 1.1.3, but either way you'll definitely need to be on the latest. @inigma - Officially no, but I didn't expect it to take so long to get my release out. The existing version seems to run fine against 1.4.3, but I always want to at least get a recompile in because there's historically always been *something* wrong. I expected CKAN to use the version file that is part of the tarball, but looks like it's all too happy to go to GitHub where I've made updates. I gave up on figuring out why CKAN does certain things long ago.
  15. nightingale

    [1.4.2] Contract Configurator [v1.25.0] [2018-04-15]

    I'm unaware of issues with 1.4.3, but I haven't tested extensively. I'd need a KSP.log to be able to comment any further though.