Whitecat106

[1.1.3] Contract Pack: Historic Missions [V2.3.0] 23/07/2016 - Display Updates and Mars exploration!

How should the pack be separated? (In addition to the Full Pack)  

223 members have voted

  1. 1. How would you like the pack divided?

    • Agency Based
      54
    • Chronologically Based
      65
    • Country Based
      56
    • Era Based (1945-1975, 1976-1996, 1997 - 2017)
      89


Recommended Posts

Whitecat, did my response PM go through?

Sorry about that Nathan the notification of the PM never showed up! :(

Is this update OK to integrate with existing saves?

I would make a backup of your save first and complete any contracts you have active (accepted) and everything should integrate smoothly, of course you may have to update your contract configurator to the latest version too but everything should be fine! Just make a backup and let me know if there are any issues and ill see what I can do! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been trying the x-15 to 10k at mach 1 mission.... i complete the mission, land, everything is green except... return home. What am I missing here. do I have to drive the plane over to the sph?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Absolutely great mod! I've only got one problem; the logos are not showing ingame at all. There is just a white box where the logo should show on the contract.

Cheers,

JuxuR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been trying the x-15 to 10k at mach 1 mission.... i complete the mission, land, everything is green except... return home. What am I missing here. do I have to drive the plane over to the sph?

I ran into the same problem. Switching to space center view and back to the plane on the runway toggled it though

Edited by Jirnsum
Stupid autocorrect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been trying the x-15 to 10k at mach 1 mission.... i complete the mission, land, everything is green except... return home. What am I missing here. do I have to drive the plane over to the sph?
I ran into the same problem. Switching to space center view and back to the plane on the runway toggled it though

This will be fixed for the next release of Contract Configurator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi everyone,

Update 22:40

I have now released version 1.3.4 which includes the first round of vessel validation checks (So that a contract cannot be completed by a different contract vessel), these are a work in progress most should work, however I am unsure how these changes will effect some of the Soyuz missions (E.g some Salyut expeditions), If a contract becomes impossible to complete let me know and I will fix asap!

So I'm fixing Soyuz 4 & 5, and I'm going to suggest that they be merged into a single contract. Consider the following scenario:

You successfully dock and exchange crew, and successfully recover Soyuz 4, completing the contract. Unfortunately, the second vessel experiences an anomaly during re-entry that results in loss of mission. But since you already completed Soyuz 4, you can no longer complete Soyuz 5!

I'm going to give it a shot and it'll be on my github if i get it working.

unfortunately, it is still happening it took me almost 2 hours to get soyuz 4 to work, and then soyuz 5 needed soyuz 4! if you put both in one contract, it would work a lot better! I ended up cheat completing. Also although it said i completed 4, i never got a verification with how much I earned from finishing it. ( which was ONLY 1k)........

Also The first contracts totaled many $$, I could usually make 20-50 thousand per contract. So far in the soyuz and Gemini, the TOTAL amount is 30-31.5 thousand for each contract! I can barely make a 2 person Gemini for less then 45k! Luckily I use stage recovery, so on average I only lose about 2k. All I can say, is that I am lucky that I have millions of $$ saved and Sentinel contracts which give outrageous amounts! Otherwise my program would be in the hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great job with these missions. It's huge!

I'm playing with Kerbal Construction Time, and my build times are quite high so I found the deadlines to be a bit on the short side. So instead of doing the sensible thing and using Contract Reward Modifier (I wasn't happy with how it worked out) I went and edited all the configs in the pack. Now all missions have a minimum deadline of 1 year (except shuttle missions, they're still 30 days) and as a consequence I completely rearranged the folder hierarchy, merging likewise missions into single config files. This should make it really easy to balance (e.g. using find and replace) if desired, though gaps in missions are obscured.

It's just intended for my own use, but I thought I'd share the results :)

Before I upload, wanted to check permissions. (Is it okay to go ahead? Do I need to worry about licensing?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

I could be missing something, but while using RSS and Realism Overhaul, I keep running into issues during the Mercury-Redstone missions. I saw earlier in the thread that someone had identified the issue previously in the thread, but as of my fresh install yesterday I'm still having it. I think the issue lies with KSP's definition of "Sub-Orbital" for the purposes of contracts. For KSP with RSS-RO the "surface" doesn't end until 130km, but the Mercury-Redstone missions require you to be between 40km-120km, which the game terms as still being "flying." Modifying either of the values in the configuration, either bringing the max altitude allowable over 130km or changing the situation required to "flying," makes these missions able to be completed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all,

I could be missing something, but while using RSS and Realism Overhaul, I keep running into issues during the Mercury-Redstone missions. I saw earlier in the thread that someone had identified the issue previously in the thread, but as of my fresh install yesterday I'm still having it. I think the issue lies with KSP's definition of "Sub-Orbital" for the purposes of contracts. For KSP with RSS-RO the "surface" doesn't end until 130km, but the Mercury-Redstone missions require you to be between 40km-120km, which the game terms as still being "flying." Modifying either of the values in the configuration, either bringing the max altitude allowable over 130km or changing the situation required to "flying," makes these missions able to be completed.

Hello Bobman,

I can see what you mean, I had not realised that the RO atmosphere was defined so high, although I would like to make a fix now it may be counter productive since this pack is soon to undergo some big changes (as a result of Rokanov's hardwork), this involves a major overhaul to the pack (version 2.0.0 basically) and as such there will be changes to the RSS version too however I am unsure when this will release, I apologise for the inconvenience of this but your Mercury-Redstone issue should disappear by the Faith-7 or Liberty-Bell-7 mission where an orbital requirement is first introduced, from this point onwards there are no more sub orbital/flying requirements so you should be able to smoothly play though the missions, if you change the configs for these few missions there should not be any more issues. As I said I would fix this but at the moment this is a low priority in comparison to Rokanov's new version! (No pressure Rokanov :wink:)

So yes, development for me has stopped due to honestly some lack of interest and IRL things getting in the way, luckily Rokanov has made some massive and brilliant changes/additions to the pack and I will soon be releasing that version as the main release, I will continue development with the 2.0.0 version, however if there are issues with the new version I will patch things up for a 1.5.0 release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I'm currently going through and tweaking all the contracts which will improve RSS compatibility among other things. You can follow changes over at github but for now I've disabled all the contracts I haven't worked on and it's very experimental, so still pretty far from a public release!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Apollo contracts are um... broken essentially. In that they do not recognize a true Apollo style mission because the Command module that returns never lands on the moon. I'm not sure how hard of a fix this is but it's a spot where I have to do save file edits to get through so it's frustrating. (Ok I could also build a Nova rocket but it's going to get silly large at my current tech level)

Thanks for the mod though, still using it and loving it despite the periodic need for save file edits!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Apollo contracts are um... broken essentially. In that they do not recognize a true Apollo style mission because the Command module that returns never lands on the moon. I'm not sure how hard of a fix this is but it's a spot where I have to do save file edits to get through so it's frustrating. (Ok I could also build a Nova rocket but it's going to get silly large at my current tech level)

Thanks for the mod though, still using it and loving it despite the periodic need for save file edits!

Thanks for letting me know,

I am incredibly surprised that this issue has not been brought up sooner since the pack has been out for two months! :confused: As I said fixes galore for 2.0.0 but in the mean time I will try and patch up a 1.5.0 version, a solution I can see straight away would be to build your rocket using the lander descent pod as your root part and building the rocket around that rather than save file editing since this root part will be the one landing on the moon and completing the requirement, of course this is not ideal but honestly I had no idea this was an issue until now and it will be a quicker solution than afew days wait for my patch version. Thank you for playing through as far as you have done and letting me know about this one! :)

Edit - Now with the new 1.0.x VAB controls you can change the root part of the vessel from the return capsule to the lander pod to save rebuilding the moon rocket (I think!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... You may want to independently test this, I think I may have also slightly borked my save file as far as Contract Configurator is concerned because I redesigned my rocket for direct ascent and the problem didn't go away which makes... no sense... so that makes me think there must be a problem on my end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm... You may want to independently test this, I think I may have also slightly borked my save file as far as Contract Configurator is concerned because I redesigned my rocket for direct ascent and the problem didn't go away which makes... no sense... so that makes me think there must be a problem on my end.

Ahh maybe check your persistence file with a editor that can detect { and }'s such as Notepad++, there may be a curly bracket missing causing problems, try reinstalling Contract Configurator itself and seeing if it goes away too. If I get the chance I will do some experimenting myself, out of curiosity what version of Contract Configurator and Historic Missions are you using?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already use Notepad++, version is handled by CKAN for me and is updated every day that I play. It seems to not remember the state of being landed on the moon. It unchecks "situation: landed" the moment I lift off. Very odd, no idea if that helps suggest one way or the other as to where the issue is.

EDIT: Although it does come to think of it bring up the possibility that that was the real issue the first time and I didn't quite notice

Edited by kerrigan778

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Already use Notepad++, version is handled by CKAN for me and is updated every day that I play. It seems to not remember the state of being landed on the moon. It unchecks "situation: landed" the moment I lift off. Very odd, no idea if that helps suggest one way or the other as to where the issue is.

EDIT: Although it does come to think of it bring up the possibility that that was the real issue the first time and I didn't quite notice

Wow I can see the issue now, I cannot believe this had not come up before, I will update the pack now to fix this bug. Sorry for the trouble, darn 'DisableOnStateChange' issues again.

Edit 21:27 - There we go, the bugfix version is out, fixes for the Mercury RO/RSS issues included too, sorry for the trouble everyone!

Edited by Whitecat106

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if i complete a mission, what makes the next one get offered?

The pack is designed to work best with Kerbal Construction Time, therefore each mission has a cooldown period of about 10days, sometimes less sometimes more, I know that in the beginning this may seem irritating however once you progress and have multiple programs running you will not notice this so much. So the easiest thing to do is just wait 10 in game days and check back at the Mission Control, if a contract has not appeared after more than 30 days let me know it may be a bug, however for most early missions I think everything now runs smoothly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What community tech tree would you guys recommend for this mod? I've been using the SETI tech tree and I think it works fairly good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What community tech tree would you guys recommend for this mod? I've been using the SETI tech tree and I think it works fairly good.

The SETI tree is probably your best bet right now, I had considered making a tech tree for this but I never got round to doing so, if you are using RSS/RO I believe there is a very good one (I forget the name!) that works even better. Out of curiosity how far along are you into the pack relative to the tech tree progression?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The SETI tree is probably your best bet right now, I had considered making a tech tree for this but I never got round to doing so, if you are using RSS/RO I believe there is a very good one (I forget the name!) that works even better. Out of curiosity how far along are you into the pack relative to the tech tree progression?

I'm not using RSS/RO, but i am using the 6.4K mod. and for the career i just started it, but if things like altitudes are not done correctly for the 6.4K mod then I'll just change the myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not using RSS/RO, but i am using the 6.4K mod. and for the career i just started it, but if things like altitudes are not done correctly for the 6.4K mod then I'll just change the myself.

Wow that's something I had not considered, well I think you might be alright for the most part, you may need to change some values in the V.2 and early Mercury missions to a slightly higher value, it all depends on exactly what the exact atmosphere height is and thus what defines flying/sub orbital. But I think should be fine after the Gemini missions.

In other news I understand that the Soyuz-4/5 mission is really irritating everyone, I will provide a fix when I can in the meantime I would honestly just say to Alt-f12 and complete the pair straight out, they aren't exactly an exciting pair of missions. This will allow you to progress smoothly, (think yourself lucky I didnt actually make it so you had to rendezvous all three soyuz craft like in real like... or did I.... I cant remember....) :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you plan a compability to Real Fuels Mod?

Some contracts with restriction of not use solid fuel are not completeable. (PGM-11, Saturn-1, SM-65 Atlas,...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.