Jump to content

[1.3.0] Kerbalism v1.2.9

ShotgunNinja

By ShotgunNinja
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

ShotgunNinja

ShotgunNinja

Posted
  • Author
Posted

New version released 1.1.8:

  - the science dialog is back (but can be hidden with settings)
  - stop disabling Science if ScienceRelay is detected
  - new API functions to deal with science data
  - better support for SSPX by Yaar Podshipnik
  - telemetry env readings require sensor parts
  - kerbin magnetotail now extend just beyond mun orbit
  - SCANsat support in automation
  - show BodyInfo window automatically the first time user enter map view or tracking station
  - tweak antenna distances on supported planet packs
  - fix: popup message about data when entering from EVA
  - fix: configure window is closed when related part is deleted in editor
  - fix: minor fixes in Science.cfg
  - fix: heliopause crossing contract
  - fix: pass credits instead of data size when firing OnScienceReceived event
  - fix: do not throw exception during data hijacking if science container is not present
  - new Experiment module with custom situation support (WIP, currently disabled)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@raptor_xxl@mikegarrison Send me the log when this happen.

OK, I'll try.

By the way, I have figured out now how to tell (on designs without an always-on antenna) when this is happening. If I load the ship onto the launchpad and I get a message saying that communication has been lost, then kerbalism has picked up that ship and is tracking it. But if I don't get any such message, then I know this ship is being ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted (edited)

So, in the stock game the science lab takes in data from science experiments (even in biomes you have visited before) and slowly turns them into new science.

In kerbalism, has the lab been reduced to only making samples (surface samples, material samples, etc.) transmissable? And if so, does that mean that if you have already gotten science data from a biome, it does you no good to take a lab to it?

(It seems that undercuts the power of the lab quite a bit, especially considering how difficult it can be to bring a lab to a remote site as compared to just a simple lander that can grab the data and come home.)

Is there any replacement for the ability to generate science in biomes you have already visited?

I think I liked the stock lab mechanism better, because it gave you a real purpose to take a lab with you. Is there a way to configure kerbalism to do the same?

PS. I see this as a gameplay issue. The stock system make the lab quite powerful, because you can mine a LOT of science out of it by sending it to a place like Minmus and collecting all the raw data along the way. But with no life support system, it's kind of overpowered. But it somewhat replaces biome grinding, which is good.

With kerbalism, you now have to consider life support for those scientists, which makes it even more challenging. But at the same time, it seems you reduce almost all the incentive to bring the lab. It also means we're back to LOTS of biome grinding if we want to collect enough science for some of the more expansive modded tech trees.

Edited by mikegarrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jade_Falcon

Jade_Falcon

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

 

@Jade_Falcon Thanks, that exception is thrown to let me know when the code can't find a container. Probably catceye is opening the science dialog, but has no data container at all. I have an idea how to make the hijacking work anyway in that case, will implement it in next version.

@ShotgunNinja The changes in 1.1.8 worked perfectly, Cacti telescopes seem to work properly now! Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted (edited)

Another issue that is a minor problem. I find it interesting that the fuel cell takes hydrogen and oxygen and makes water and power. And of course you have another part that takes water and power and makes hydrogen and oxygen.

But the stock fuel cell runs as a low-priority energy source. If the ship has enough power from other sources, the stock fuel cell doesn't run. Your fuel cell will happily run all the time even if there is plenty of other power. So it involves more micromanaging. It would be nice if your fuel cell had the same behavior as the stock fuel cell, only turning itself on as a backup power supply when needed.

Also, I haven't tested it out, but will it pull hydrogen and oxygen from a cryorocket fuel tank or does it explicitly need your little gas tanks? I'm guessing it won't, because the resources are named different things.

EDIT: I found where you can set things to turn on and off based on whether you reach 20% or 80% power. Is this supposed to handle this? I'm trying it out now.

Edited by mikegarrison
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidfu

sidfu

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, SmarterThanMe said:

Hmm.. So I have TAC-LS, and I thought that it played nicely with Kerbalism (or, rather, that Kerbalism deferred to TAC-LS, when it was installed). But apparently not?

here u go this allow u to keep all the kerbalsim features and have tac be main LS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yaar Podshipnik

Yaar Podshipnik

Posted
Posted (edited)

Two PRs for better NFT support are up on github. Also couple of issues I've spotted while working on the patches. I couldn't find a way to add the RPH process to the default profile without editing it explicitly - is there even a way to "extend" a profile in another file?

Edited by Yaar Podshipnik
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Yaar Podshipnik said:

Two PRs for better NFT support are up on github. Also couple of issues I've spotted while working on the patches. I couldn't find a way to add the RPH process to the default profile without editing it explicitly - is there even a way to "extend" a profile in another file?

I have seen some funny things happening with NFT, particularly the reactors, when in high time warp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
APlayer

APlayer

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

 [...] High-quality extra mass/cost is defined as a proportion of the part mass/cost. This was added in 1.1.6 to make cfg files easier to write. [...]

I know, and that's what I suggest to change. It would make sense to have an exception to this rule for reliability modules, which are obviously not involving the whole part, like reaction wheels for pods or ECLSS modules. And similar.

My suggestion is to, by default, use the ECLSS module cost and mass (250 - 500 funds and 10 - 25 kg, IIRC?) for the high quality calculation, rather than the whole pod. And a smaller ratio for parts with many reliability modules - maybe in such a way that all reliability modules on high quality would result in the whole part's mass and cost increase by the current ratio?

E.g. if a high quality reliability module adds +50% of mass and +100% cost, but there are five reliability modules in a part, then the part gains (50 / 5) % and (100 / 5)% mass and cost, respectively, per enabled high quality module.

However, I still suggest to use the ECLSS module's mass and cost for reliability calculations (perhaps with a bigger default percentage) for high quality reliability calculations, because it just makes more sense that way.

 

Also, I may repeat my suggestion to allow empty ECLSS slots and allow equal ECLSS modules be installed in one part. And a way to add ECLSS processes without having to attach an additional pod would be nice - for example via a copy of the chemical plant part, or just added to the old chemical plant. I tried to do this, but I failed horribly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShotgunNinja

ShotgunNinja

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

@mikegarrison I see the lab as something you want on somewhat more permanent stations in orbit or on surfaces. So you send the lab (and a scientist, and the means to keep it alive) because you can't return the samples, and the only option you got is analyzing them in-place. Personally I despise the stock lab mechanics very much, but if you want it instead the only option is disabling Science feature completely I'm afraid.

 

11 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

But the stock fuel cell runs as a low-priority energy source. If the ship has enough power from other sources, the stock fuel cell doesn't run. Your fuel cell will happily run all the time even if there is plenty of other power. So it involves more micromanaging. It would be nice if your fuel cell had the same behavior as the stock fuel cell, only turning itself on as a backup power supply when needed

I will consider making the fuel cell not dump overboard anymore for next version. Meanwhile it is very easy to change that: just go in Default.cfg and change the fuel cell process to this:

Spoiler 

Process
{
  name = fuel cell
  modifier = _FuelCell
  input = [email protected]
  input = [email protected]
  output = [email protected]
  output = [email protected]
  dump = false                    //< add this line
}

 

11 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Also, I haven't tested it out, but will it pull hydrogen and oxygen from a cryorocket fuel tank or does it explicitly need your little gas tanks? I'm guessing it won't, because the resources are named different things.

Now I don't know about cryorocket fuel tank at all, but any container will work as long as it has the right resources.

 

11 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

I found where you can set things to turn on and off based on whether you reach 20% or 80% power. Is this supposed to handle this? I'm trying it out now

Yes that can also be used to turn fuel cells on and off automatically. Isn't the automation system awesome? :) 

 

@APlayer

I can't really disagree with your point of view here. It make sense, and I'll think about that for next version. 

Meanwhile you could make the extra cost/mass not proportional to part cost/mass by dividing both fields with the part cost/mass. Example (untested but should work):

Spoiler 

@PART[mk1pod]
{
  MODULE
  {
    name = Reliability
    type = SomeModule
    title = My module
    redundancy = 
    repair = 
    mtbf = 36288000
    extra_cost = 250                  // define cost in space bucks
    extra_mass = 0.1                  // define mass in tons
    @extra_cost /= #$../cost$         // make cost proportional to part cost
    @extra_mass /= #$../mass$         // make mass proportional to part mass
  }
}

 

 

Edited by ShotgunNinja
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Dax

Captain Dax

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, ShotgunNinja said:

Now I don't know about cryorocket fuel tank at all, but any container will work as long as it has the right resources.

The fuel cell is set up to work with the "Hydrogen" resource, whereas mods featuring cryogenic rocket fuel use the "LiquidHydrogen" resource.

I don't think there are lots of hydrogen containers (I've seen one in Planetary Base system though), maybe adding some sort of gasification module is easier and realistic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JediRangerkendor

JediRangerkendor

Posted
Posted

I apologize. I didnt realize that EVERY craft i have built was using Blue Dog antennas, which others have already said do not work. Bit strange that they dont, but that is life. What antenna packs work with Kerbalism, and any reason why i am always getting a build up of CO2 in the capsule, or is yet another failure of the mod with Blue Dog?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcirth

lordcirth

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, JediRangerkendor said:

any reason why i am always getting a build up of CO2 in the capsule, or is yet another failure of the mod with Blue Dog?

Do you have the CO2 scrubber ECLSS module added to the capsule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@mikegarrison I see the lab as something you want on somewhat more permanent stations in orbit or on surfaces. So you send the lab (and a scientist, and the means to keep it alive) because you can't return the samples, and the only option you got is analyzing them in-place. Personally I despise the stock lab mechanics very much, but if you want it instead the only option is disabling Science feature completely I'm afraid.

Well, it's your mod.

But as I said, whether you like the idea of the lab generating science, it really works well as a gameplay mechanism because it reduces biome grinding. It's so nice to have an alternative (and more realistic, really) mechanism for getting science rather than landing in the East Crater, then the Northwest Crater, then the Southeast Crater, then the Twin Craters, etc. etc. It's more challenging and more fun to bring a lab and build a base that can stay awhile, and that is especially true with mods that make it harder to stay there, with life support and hab volume requirements.

It's a shame, because I'm happy with the rest of your science changes, but the biome grinding annoys me enough that I'll probably have to switch them off and go back to stock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShotgunNinja

ShotgunNinja

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@JediRangerkendor Right now these antennas are supported directly:

  • stock
  • ven stock revamp
  • J2X Antenna
  • Origami
  • the little transmitter of SurfaceExperimentPack
  • SampleReturnCapsule get an embedded antenna
  • the antenna in Tundra parts pack
  • one of the cupolas in Stock-alike Station Parts Expansion get an embedded antenna

I am open for contributions of other patches. It's not hard to write these (the Antenna module specs are here, for instance).
The ones in the list above are either things that I used personally at some point, or patches that users wrote for themselves and then shared with all other users.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pslytely psycho

pslytely psycho

Posted
Posted

@ShotgunNinja , Not going to waste your time with my log files.

I R A Idiot.

I have been running a lot of mods that are unnecessary and likely conflict with Kerbalism. I have used it so long that a lot of what is in your mod now was in the to-do list the last time I bothered to read it.

So I bit the bullet and deleted all mods and started fresh. I haven't done that in over a year. There were mods in there that CKAN didn't see and some of them were very old mods that were rendered moot with the new update and some that I don't even know what they were for in the first place, some mods have very cryptic names after they are installed. Massive amounts of dead config files, etc.

So far things seem to be working now.(only played 30 minutes) I never did re-install Remote Tech after reading the OP for Kerbalism. I  will try later but at this point, I don't think it adds much anymore like FAR and Deadly Re-entry have pretty much become irreverent over the last year. I don't think Kerbalism did anything with signals when I first installed it so long ago.

Basically my install has become so dirty that tracing a specific glitch likely has become well nigh impossible.

Thanks for putting up with me.

I was actually shocked at how much more Kerbalism covers since the last time I read the description. Took a lot of redundant mods out.

You're the best man!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShotgunNinja

ShotgunNinja

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@mikegarrison I understand perfectly. I don't like the biome grinding either. My whole plan for revamping the science system is about making it less LOLkerbal. Hoppers are an abomination in my eyes.

I am working on some custom science situations (together with the collection over time), but is still a WIP (and probably will be for some time). We could say it is still in the design phase. Right now in my tests I made only landed situations biome-related (doesn't make sense at all to be inside the inner belt over kerbin grassland...). Perhaps I could remove the biomes entirely instead? Maybe replacing them with latitude zones or something like that? I'm looking for some ideas on this.

There is a new Experiment module with the custom situations already. It is currently unused, and as I mentioned is all very WIP at the moment. To try it you can rename Experiment.disabled to Experiment.cfg inside Kerbalism/System folder. But do not expect to have a meaningful user-experience yet.

 

@pslytely psycho No problem, and thanks! :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@mikegarrison I understand perfectly. I don't like the biome grinding either. My whole plan for revamping the science system is about making it less LOLkerbal. Hoppers are an abomination in my eyes.

I am working on some custom science situations (together with the collection over time), but is still a WIP (and probably will be for some time). We could say it is still in the design phase. Right now in my tests I made only landed situations biome-related (doesn't make sense at all to be inside the inner belt over kerbin grassland...). Perhaps I could remove the biomes entirely instead? Maybe replacing them with latitude zones or something like that? I'm looking for some ideas on this.

There is a new Experiment module with the custom situations already. It is currently unused, and as I mentioned is all very WIP at the moment. To try it you can rename Experiment.disabled to Experiment.cfg inside Kerbalism/System folder. But do not expect to have a meaningful user-experience yet.

 

@pslytely psycho No problem, and thanks! :) 

Well the whole science thing is a kludge to start with. It's always been very odd that apparently Kerbals have to go to the Mun and check the pressure of vacuum to learn how to build bigger rockets.

Surface samples really should be different depending on where you collect them, like inside of a crater or up on the highlands. So that's OK. But some of the other things are a bit strange. I really like the idea of getting a lot more science if you send a more complicated mission. Perhaps if not the lab, then some kind of remote science station (possibly unmanned) that similarly accumulates science points over time. Maybe they would have a chance to malfunction after a while and might need an engineer to visit to fix them. I mean, we don't just send probes to Mars, take a couple readings, and bring them back. We put little rovers there that accumulate data over long periods of time. We learn about the weather, the seasons, etc. There should be some way to gain science semi-passively over time, as long as your probe keeps working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...