Asteroids as Stations and Contracts

[DustInTheWind]

Do asteroids with modules clawed on still count as stations for fulfilling contracts? I have a class D in orbit of Minmus, and a new contract for a station with 3100 ore, ISRU, 4000 LF, science lab, and 8 Kerbals. I would be able to build a much more "useful" design if I could do mining, refueling, habitat, and fuel modules which would allow for upgrades along the way, but I don't know if I want to accept the contract if it is just another contract required structure that won't have any utilitarian value.

I did some searching and was unable to find a definitive answer for 1.1 and a Convert-o-Tron 125 has not fulfilled contrasts that asked for ISRU in the past.

Thanks!

[DChurchill]

If you rename it and set it's type to station, you might get a contract to expand if from there, but I doubt it will count as a "new" station.

[Snark]

Moving to Gameplay Questions.

34 minutes ago, DChurchill said:

If you rename it and set it's type to station, you might get a contract to expand

Note:  the "vessel type" as determined by the rename dialog (e.g. "ship", "lander", "station", etc.) is completely irrelevant to all gameplay terms.  It doesn't affect contracts or anything else.  It affects the icon that's used for displaying it in the map view, and that's it.

I don't actually know the answer to the OP's question about asteroids, but whatever the answer is, there's no point in trying to "rename it to station" because that won't do anything.

[regex]

44 minutes ago, DustInTheWind said:

Do asteroids with modules clawed on still count as stations for fulfilling contracts? I have a class D in orbit of Minmus, and a new contract for a station with 3100 ore, ISRU, 4000 LF, science lab, and 8 Kerbals. I would be able to build a much more "useful" design if I could do mining, refueling, habitat, and fuel modules which would allow for upgrades along the way, but I don't know if I want to accept the contract if it is just another contract required structure that won't have any utilitarian value.

I'd imagine launching the craft(s) that fulfills those requirements and then latching them to the asteroid would complete the contract, but the asteroid might not count as a new vessel at the time of accepting the contract (often a requirement of contracts) and thus not complete it.

One thing you might want to try is accept the contract and then latch all the parts to other parts, complete the contract, and then latch everything to the asteroid?

Edited June 3, 2016 by regex

[cantab]

Idea: Ensure that whatever you launch completes the contract, *then* claw it to the asteroid.

[DChurchill]

1 hour ago, Snark said:

Moving to Gameplay Questions.

Note:  the "vessel type" as determined by the rename dialog (e.g. "ship", "lander", "station", etc.) is completely irrelevant to all gameplay terms.  It doesn't affect contracts or anything else.  It affects the icon that's used for displaying it in the map view, and that's it.

I don't actually know the answer to the OP's question about asteroids, but whatever the answer is, there's no point in trying to "rename it to station" because that won't do anything.

So how does it know when a ship is a station? The parts it contains?

[DustInTheWind]

1 hour ago, regex said:

I'd imagine launching the craft(s) that fulfills those requirements and then latching them to the asteroid would complete the contract, but the asteroid might not count as a new vessel and thus not complete it.

One thing you might want to try is accept the contract and then latch all the parts to other parts, complete the contract, and then latch everything to the asteroid?

Or I could build it and release the claw after I have the fuel and ore wait until the contract fulfills, the rcs back onto the asteroid... It is just going to be really cumbersome to do in one launch 

[Snark]

1 hour ago, DChurchill said:

So how does it know when a ship is a station? The parts it contains?

It doesn't "know" that a ship is a station... it decides. 

I don't know the actual algorithm, so the following statement is pure unsubstantiated guesswork on my part.  However, I do note that all build-a-station contracts have a certain minimal set of requirements:  they always require docking port, antenna, can-generate-power, and minimum capacity of 5 kerbals.  (Sometimes it's more than that, but always at least five.)  So my guess would be that it considers a "station" (for contract expansion purposes) to be any orbiting craft that has docking port, antenna, power generation, and seating capacity for 5 or more.

But that's just a total guess, as I say.

[DChurchill]

1 minute ago, Snark said:

It doesn't "know" that a ship is a station... it decides. 

I don't know the actual algorithm, so the following statement is pure unsubstantiated guesswork on my part.  However, I do note that all build-a-station contracts have a certain minimal set of requirements:  they always require docking port, antenna, can-generate-power, and minimum capacity of 5 kerbals.  (Sometimes it's more than that, but always at least five.)  So my guess would be that it considers a "station" (for contract expansion purposes) to be any orbiting craft that has docking port, antenna, power generation, and seating capacity for 5 or more.

But that's just a total guess, as I say.

Hehe ok. Thanks.

[bewing]

The whole question is how did this asteroid end up at Minmus? All craft and asteroids have creation timestamps attached to them. When a ship klaws another object, the system takes the earlier of the two timestamps and assigns it to both.

So, if you previously had a ship that went and grabbed this asteroid and moved it to Minmus, then the asteroid has the timestamp of that ship. If you klaw it again, the timestamp of your new ship will be reset backwards to the timestamp of the asteroid -- and suddenly the ship will no longer be eligible for fulfilling the contract. If the asteroid has never been visited before, then I think you're OK. But I'm pretty sure that asteroids never spawn in Minmus's SOI, so I'm betting you put it there. But I'd recommend you create a savegame, and then go try it, and see if I'm wrong. Then you can revert in case of disasters.

And yes, a "station" is any old ship that meets the minimum criteria of the contract.

 

[Norcalplanner]

Some mods using contract configurator do look at the vessel type when deciding whether you've fulfilled a contract.

[magnemoe]

Think the game looks at crew capacity and probably module types too, I have an planetary base in Minmus orbit availing an target and was asked to expand it with more crew capacity and a secondary docking bay while in Minmus orbit. it had only moded crew compartmets 

[Geschosskopf]

19 hours ago, bewing said:

And yes, a "station" is any old ship that meets the minimum criteria of the contract.

That's certainly how milestones work.  If you dock any 2 things together somewhere, World's First calls it a station and writes you a check.

This also works with asteroids.  For instance, I Klawed an asteroid in solar orbit and gotten the milestone for starting a station there.

However, as to contracts....  The typical contract makes no mention of asteroids and asteroids don't fulfill any of the part/resource requirements, so I'm assuming they have no effect one way or the other.  I suspect, though, that milestones and contracts use a lot of the same logic, so that Klawing counts as docking and station-building for both.  Thus, if you had an asteroid and stuck various modules onto it with Klaws, and those modules together satisfied the contract, it might work.

NOTE:  I have seen some contracts that REQUIRE asteroids as parts of stations.  These typically are worked like "Build an orbital base in Minmus orbit around a new Class E asteroid".  Then it goes on to list a bunch of parts and such typical of station-building contracts.  They don't say the word "station" but that's obviously what it is.  In this case, then, obviously Klawing various modules onto an asteroid is what you're supposed to be doing.  This leads me to believe that the above situation of Klawing modules to an asteroid, which isn't part of the contract, would probably work.