inigma

Contract Pack: Sounding Rockets 1.4 - 3/17/18

Recommended Posts

Nice idea. Altitude works fine for me however the cash rewards are lower than the contracts that only need a part test on launch pad. That's only a few hundred bucks on hard mode, which makes them barely worth doing. I would recommend increasing the cash bonus by at least 3x.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. I just recognized that this contract pack is (besides other quirks) "hardcoded" to Kerbin, so another homeworld makes CC throw a bad exception.

Edit: give Notepad++ a hit and done.

Edited by Gordon Dry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2018 at 10:48 PM, Frag2000 said:

Hi guys,

really like the Sounding Rocket pack, it's a breeze of fresh air between tweaking missions to Eve and adding modules to space stations. There is a bug with 1.4.5, like many here the altitude check commonly do not get complete even though I pass the altitude easily. From time to time it works (every few tries) but I was not able to see what I did differently.

I am using Kerbal Space Program 1.4.5 and Contract Configuration 1.25 (This is the latest version, supporting officially Kerbal 1.4.2)

I love the pack, but that check bug drives me nuts.

 

In prev versions of KSP/Sounding Rockets it was an issue with staging. I'll have to dive into it in my next playthrough to see if I can debug it.

On 9/21/2018 at 3:01 AM, Oneiros said:

Nice idea. Altitude works fine for me however the cash rewards are lower than the contracts that only need a part test on launch pad. That's only a few hundred bucks on hard mode, which makes them barely worth doing. I would recommend increasing the cash bonus by at least 3x.

Great suggestion. I'll take it into serious consideration in the next update.

On 9/21/2018 at 9:45 AM, Gordon Dry said:

Thank you! I like it when people contribute a fix for things they see. Anyone is welcome to add/fix. I consider this a free open source project for the community's sake. I'll see about including this fix in the next release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2018 at 1:14 PM, inigma said:

Thank you! I like it when people contribute a fix for things they see. Anyone is welcome to add/fix. I consider this a free open source project for the community's sake. I'll see about including this fix in the next release.

Another thing I would remove is the requirement to complete these contracts in order and one at a time. For me it just makes things more difficult. Players should be able to knock over a couple (or more) of these at a time if they have the ability and desire to do so.

If you like the sound of all that I can submit some pull requests but with balance changes like this I'd rather get your input first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love playing with the SR pack -- but it's a shame to only keep them around for "learning" how to get to space. It would be great to tap into the random mission generation to continue to request weather survey data, or maybe to test new scientific/atmospheric instruments from time to time even once interplanetary landings are already up and running.

Otherwise The parts just wind up unused and pruned after the contracts wrap up.

Edited by Beetlecat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Beetlecat said:

I love playing with the SR pack -- but it's a shame to only keep them around for "learning" how to get to space. It would be great to tap into the random mission generation to continue to request weather survey data, or maybe to test new scientific/atmospheric instruments from time to time even once interplanetary landings are already up and running.

Otherwise The parts just wind up unused and pruned after the contracts wrap up.

Free free to create additional contracts using the Contract Configurator wiki, and examples from the Sounding Rockets contract pack, and I will be happy to include them. You can create a fork on GitHub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, with KSP 1.8.1 and all mods updated plus starting a new career - the contracts are not shown anymore.

Update:

I found the error, some changes in stock KSP made one parameter of the contracts obsolete:

			PARAMETER
			{
				name = PartValidation
				type = PartValidation
				
				part = sepMotor1

				disableOnStateChange = true
				hideChildren = true				
				
			}

This triggered errors like this:

[INFO] ContractConfigurator.ContractType: Loading CONTRACT_TYPE: 'KSP-SR-2000m'
 
(Filename: C:\buildslave\unity\build\Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35)

ContractConfigurator.PartValidationFactory: CONTRACT_TYPE 'KSP-SR-2000m', PARAMETER 'PartValidation' of type 'PartValidation': Error parsing part
 
(Filename: C:\buildslave\unity\build\Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35)

ArgumentException: 'sepMotor1' is not a valid Part.
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.PartParser.ParseIdentifier (ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.BaseParser+Token token) [0x000a7] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.ExpressionParser`1[T].ParseVarOrIdentifier (ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.BaseParser+Token token) [0x000e2] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.ExpressionParser`1[T].ParseSimpleStatement[TResult] () [0x003a6] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.ExpressionParser`1[T].ParseStatementInner[TResult] () [0x00060] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.ExpressionParser`1[T].ParseStatement[TResult] () [0x0010e] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.ExpressionParser`1[T].ParseExpression (System.String key, System.String expression, ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.DataNode dataNode) [0x00045] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
Rethrow as Exception: Error parsing statement.
Error occurred near '*':
sepMotor1
.........* <-- HERE
  at ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.ExpressionParser`1[T].ParseExpression (System.String key, System.String expression, ContractConfigurator.ExpressionParser.DataNode dataNode) [0x000aa] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseSingleValue[T] (System.String key, System.String stringValue, System.Boolean allowExpression) [0x000a3] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.MonoMethod.InternalInvoke(System.Reflection.MonoMethod,object,object[],System.Exception&)
  at System.Reflection.MonoMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, System.Reflection.BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x00032] in <ad04dee02e7e4a85a1299c7ee81c79f6>:0 
Rethrow as TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation.
  at System.Reflection.MonoMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, System.Reflection.BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x00048] in <ad04dee02e7e4a85a1299c7ee81c79f6>:0 
  at System.Reflection.MethodBase.Invoke (System.Object obj, System.Object[] parameters) [0x00000] in <ad04dee02e7e4a85a1299c7ee81c79f6>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseValue[T] (ConfigNode configNode, System.String key, System.Boolean allowExpression) [0x00240] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
  at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseValue[T] (ConfigNode configNode, System.String key, System.Action`1[T] setter, ContractConfigurator.IContractConfiguratorFactory obj, T defaultValue, System.Func`2[T,TResult] validation) [0x00099] in <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7>:0 
UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:Internal_LogException(Exception, Object)
UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object)
UnityEngine.Logger:LogException(Exception, Object)
UnityEngine.Debug:LogException(Exception)
ContractConfigurator.LoggingUtil:LogException(Exception)
ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil:ParseValue(ConfigNode, String, Action`1, IContractConfiguratorFactory, List`1, Func`2)
ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil:ParseValue(ConfigNode, String, Action`1, IContractConfiguratorFactory, List`1)
ContractConfigurator.PartValidationFactory:Load(ConfigNode)
ContractConfigurator.ParameterFactory:GenerateParameterFactory(ConfigNode, ContractType, ParameterFactory&, ParameterFactory)
ContractConfigurator.ParameterFactory:GenerateParameterFactory(ConfigNode, ContractType, ParameterFactory&, ParameterFactory)
ContractConfigurator.ParameterFactory:GenerateParameterFactory(ConfigNode, ContractType, ParameterFactory&, ParameterFactory)
ContractConfigurator.ContractType:Load(ConfigNode)
ContractConfigurator.<LoadContractTypeConfig>d__30:MoveNext()
ContractConfigurator.<FinalizeContractTypeLoad>d__29:MoveNext()
UnityEngine.SetupCoroutine:InvokeMoveNext(IEnumerator, IntPtr)
 
(Filename: <84643f2491b348b1b80d1575e71e23d7> Line: 0)

ContractConfigurator.ContractType: Errors encountered while trying to load CONTRACT_TYPE 'KSP-SR-2000m'

I'm already testing a fix, just need to boot up KSP. If it works, I will open a PR on the repo and post it here.
 

Edited by Gordon Dry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/21/2016 at 5:10 PM, stub said:

I've had the same issues as @Liondrome on various contracts.

I think you need to succeed with the first rocket you build that matches the requirements (sounding rocket, launch stick etc.). If this launch fails to reach the height goal, then no future launches will succeed. Until you cancel the contract, retake it and succeed on the first launch.

I love the mod and this associated contract pack so much. Blasting tiny model rockets into space feels so kerbal!

Alas this issue is still persistent. If you don't succeed with your first try, the contract cannot get fulfilled until cancelled and retaken.

I'm currently running with the part failure mode OhScrap!, so things fail all the time, which makes these contracts nearly impossibly to fulfill on the first try.

 

Do you think you could provide a fix?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2020 at 1:13 AM, FasterThanFlourite said:

I love the mod and this associated contract pack so much. Blasting tiny model rockets into space feels so kerbal!

Alas this issue is still persistent. If you don't succeed with your first try, the contract cannot get fulfilled until cancelled and retaken.

I'm currently running with the part failure mode OhScrap!, so things fail all the time, which makes these contracts nearly impossibly to fulfill on the first try.

 

Do you think you could provide a fix?

The only recourse to failed contracts is to cancel them and retake them unfortunately. What you could do though is go through the cfg files in the mod and set the

failureFunds = 0
failureReputation = 0

that way there would be no penalty for failure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@inigma Have you considered adjusting these contracts to allow them to be viable with Luciole as well? It contains both 0.3125 and 0.625 rocket parts.

Share this post


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

set the

failureFunds = 0
failureReputation = 0

While not fixing the problem, it circumvents it. Thanks :).

Unlike most other contracts, yours seem to only apply to the first vessel which matches the parameters. So when I launch a rocket with sounding rockets parts requested, reach the required altitude, but fail to land safely (OhScrap!), the contract outright fails completely.

That is the behavior I would expect from a rescue mission or similar, where I obviously can't just try again to safe the Kerbal.

 

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.