[1.12.x] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

[Gilph]

Was looking at the PDU maintenance problem, and had the brilliant idea to look at the KSP.log.  When I press the button, i get:

[EXC 08:03:30.301] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
    USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.GrabResources (System.String resourceName)
    USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.FinalizeMaintenance (System.String msg)
    USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.PerformMaintenance ()
    BaseEvent.Invoke ()
    UIPartActionButton.OnClick ()
    UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCall.Invoke (System.Object[] args)
    UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCallList.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
    UnityEngine.Events.UnityEventBase.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
    UnityEngine.Events.UnityEvent.Invoke ()
    UnityEngine.UI.Button.Press ()
    UnityEngine.UI.Button.OnPointerClick (UnityEngine.EventSystems.PointerEventData eventData)
    UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute (IPointerClickHandler handler, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData)
    UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute[IPointerClickHandler] (UnityEngine.GameObject target, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData, UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventFunction`1 functor)
    UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()

Since the PDUs were my first ships there, I'll just send another one and terminate these PDUs.  If it's still an issue, will create a save.  Thanks to all for the help.

[Parmenio]

20 hours ago, voicey99 said:

I'm pretty sure i was @Gilph, and I can't repro that either.

Sorry, @Gilph. I'll just claim senility on that one. 

[Perringo]

3 hours ago, WuphonsReach said:

Is it supposed to be possible to change the configuration of a 'Duna' Habitat module once deployed?  What about 'Ranger' inflatable habitats?

The "C1 Recycler=>Habitat" right-click button is not working for my EVA'd engineer on either of these modules.  Nor is perform maintenance.

  Reveal hidden contents

[EXC 06:11:50.212] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	USITools.ModuleSwappableConverter.HasResource (ResourceRatio resInfo)
	USITools.ModuleSwappableConverter.CheckResources ()
	USITools.ModuleSwappableConverter.LoadSetup ()
	BaseEvent.Invoke ()
	UIPartActionButton.OnClick ()
	UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCall.Invoke (System.Object[] args)
	UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCallList.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
	UnityEngine.Events.UnityEventBase.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
	UnityEngine.Events.UnityEvent.Invoke ()
	UnityEngine.UI.Button.Press ()
	UnityEngine.UI.Button.OnPointerClick (UnityEngine.EventSystems.PointerEventData eventData)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute (IPointerClickHandler handler, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute[IPointerClickHandler] (UnityEngine.GameObject target, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData, UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventFunction`1 functor)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()
[EXC 06:11:51.880] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.PushResources (System.String resourceName)
	USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.FinalizeMaintenance (System.String msg)
	USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.PerformMaintenance ()
	BaseEvent.Invoke ()
	UIPartActionButton.OnClick ()
	UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCall.Invoke (System.Object[] args)
	UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCallList.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
	UnityEngine.Events.UnityEventBase.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
	UnityEngine.Events.UnityEvent.Invoke ()
	UnityEngine.UI.Button.Press ()
	UnityEngine.UI.Button.OnPointerClick (UnityEngine.EventSystems.PointerEventData eventData)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute (IPointerClickHandler handler, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute[IPointerClickHandler] (UnityEngine.GameObject target, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData, UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventFunction`1 functor)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()
[EXC 06:11:53.898] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.GrabResources (System.String resourceName)
	USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.FinalizeMaintenance (System.String msg)
	USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.PerformMaintenance ()
	BaseEvent.Invoke ()
	UIPartActionButton.OnClick ()
	UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCall.Invoke (System.Object[] args)
	UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCallList.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
	UnityEngine.Events.UnityEventBase.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters)
	UnityEngine.Events.UnityEvent.Invoke ()
	UnityEngine.UI.Button.Press ()
	UnityEngine.UI.Button.OnPointerClick (UnityEngine.EventSystems.PointerEventData eventData)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute (IPointerClickHandler handler, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute[IPointerClickHandler] (UnityEngine.GameObject target, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData, UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventFunction`1 functor)
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()

 

Yes, I'm running USI Tools 0.8.14

I'm having this problem too since the last versions. The last fix took care of the inflation problem but I can't still change the mode of the modules, both inflatables and tundra. Maintenance seems to work though, at least it says it does. Best wishes!

[Gilph]

12 hours ago, WuphonsReach said:

Okay... MKS base with:

• (8) kerbals (1 is a pilot)
• (8) inflated 'Ranger' habs configured as Hab-Common (16.8 kerbal months + 5.2 multiplier for 4 kerbals)
• (2) inflated 'Tundra' 4.25m habitats (77 kerbal months)
• (2) Hitchhikers (25 kerbal months, 4 crew)
• seating capacity from all the Duna/Tundra modules of 26 seats (2 ASMs, 2 PDUs, 7 'Duna's)

Base hab alone should be: 26 x 0.25 months + 16.8 x 2 + 77 x 2 + 25 x 2 = 244 kerbal months

244/8 = 30.5 months per kerbal = 2.14 years

The multipliers should be: 5.2 x 4 = 20.8x (from the inflatable ranger habs configured as hab-common), which should kick base habitation up to about 44 years, right?  Each ranger can handle 4 kerbals (I have 8) and I have eight rangers expanded and working (everything has machinery and power).

Instead, I'm only getting a value of about 3.7 years per Kerbal on the base.

Issues with the hab calculations are in Github.  I have some also, but am waiting until after the original ones get fixed.  May be the same issue with different symptoms.

[PolecatEZ]

Is anything for MKS dependent on the new "configurable containers"?  Its trashed every design I pulled up in the VAB or SPH by completely screwing with and re-configuring every fuel tank on the craft...sometimes to very odd combinations.

----

And if I take it out, all other fuel configs on parts no longer work and they're stuck at whatever that thing did to my ship.  Ugh.  Need to track down the MM file also looks like.

---

Killed it with fire...everything back to normal.  Deleted "Configurable Containers" folder and the .dll from the AT_Utils.  My parts all have screwy fuel levels now (the ones I saved), but its just a matter of filling them with the slider.

SpaceCrane part seems busted without it...I'll live.

Question remains though, will anything good be dependent on this?

Edited February 6, 2017 by PolecatEZ

[Gilph]

My tanks look OK in VAB so far, but getting this spam:

[ERR 12:29:41.189] Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'SpaceCrane' is inactive!
 

[panarchist]

@RoverDude - love the new documentation on the Wiki and interesting info on resource extraction.  Regarding one of your comments which was reproduced there:

Quote

 

So going one step down... we get to refining. Since this is the step where we're taking rock and getting valuable stuff out of it, the lossiness is significant (to the point where you'd never want to ship around raw ore). The standard here is 25:1 for everything other than dirt, which is 50:1. Resource Lodes (coming in the next update) are the exception, in that they represent almost pure deposits (i.e. you are actively seeking and retrieving these vastly superior chunks vs. passively pulling stuff out of rocks).

Optimisticaly, this could drop to 10:1 or even 5:1, though below that would get a little sketchy. But you are never going to realistically live in a world where your refinery is the same size as your fabricator with 100% efficiency and throughput on both ends as that would just not make sense.

In real world terms, this number is reasonable. While you can get really good yields out of high quality iron ore (say, a 3:1 ratio), copper ore would be more like a 100:1 ratio. So the refinery to make that iron ingot will be significantly larger than the machine shop that shapes it into rivets and panels if you want said machine shop to operate non-stop at 100% capacity.

 

For common metals like iron, yields can be as high as 1.5:1, and typically are about 2:1 (Michigan and Minnesota hematite and magnetite are 60%-70% Fe).  Most iron ores are currently 5:1, but were 1.5:1 a century ago when mining started.

Rare earth minerals, phosphate, and coal used to be in the 3:1 range but ore yields have degraded to the 30:1 to 100:1 range.  Just wanted to point out that when grabbing space resources, or a virgin planet, yields will be higher than what we're used to in our lifetimes.

Loving the recent changes, it's amazing how much the mod has grown in the last 6 months as the codebase and methodology have matured.  I really like the direction the mod has taken, and I still think you have a great balance between playability and realism.  Thanks for your continued work on this.

[Fobok]

2 hours ago, PolecatEZ said:

Is anything for MKS dependent on the new "configurable containers"? 

----

Question remains though, will anything good be dependent on this?

2

I believe Ground Construction requires it. At least, in CKAN, it's a mandatory download for Ground Construction. 

[jd284]

2 hours ago, PolecatEZ said:

Is anything for MKS dependent on the new "configurable containers"?  Its trashed every design I pulled up in the VAB or SPH by completely screwing with and re-configuring every fuel tank on the craft...sometimes to very odd combinations.

 

2 hours ago, Gilph said:

My tanks look OK in VAB so far, but getting this spam:

[ERR 12:29:41.189] Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'SpaceCrane' is inactive!
 

Both things come from Ground Construction, or other mods it depends on.

Really, I think making Ground Construction a hard dependency was... a bad move. It could work maybe if GC was on its own, but it also depends on another bunch of mods that shouldn't really be needed for it.

It would be worth trying to disentangle this, I don't really want to have reconfigurable tanks messing with everything just so I can play MKS.

And why is it a hard dependency anyway? I deleted it and everything seems to be working well, better in fact. Sounds like it shouldn't be more than a recommended mod.  I understand Roverdude likes it a lot more than EL, but that's not a good reason to force everybody else to move.

[RoverDude]

@jd284 - I'm checking with @allista about removing the Configurable Containers constraint, since that really is not necessary for what I use GC for.

The reason it is a hard dependency is pretty simple.  There was going to be a native, built-in construction component in MKS regardless.  This is something that has been on the roadmap for ages.  And since GC already has 90% of what I would have built anyway, and since @allista has been great to collaborate with, the bundling makes sense.  Same way I bundled Firespitter (even before I helped maintain it).

I consider GC as much of the core mod going forward as Firespitter, but recognize there will be a few hiccups along the way.  Said hiccups are still infinitely better than me rebuilding the whole thing from scratch.  It also means that unlike EL, I can have really seamless integration without dealing with the friction of having to override configs.  

There will be no conflict with EL... so if you prefer EL, that's fine... no different than people who prefer TAC-LS to USI-LS.  But the support is going to be towards GC, not EL going forward, other than some alternate configs.

[danielboro]

id like to add that thers a posebelaty that  Configurable Containers  is conflicting whit IFS

i was fixing my urlom-ship fule tanks back to LF only wen right menu stopped working whit esc and go to KSC buttons

i had to kill the game

Edited February 7, 2017 by danielboro

[RoverDude]

If it is, then that's something to bring up with IFS  Given that MKS has always used Firespitter (because it is strictly opt-in wrt tanks).

[voicey99]

7 minutes ago, danielboro said:

id like to add that thers a posebelty that  Configurable Containers  is conflicting whit IFS

i was fixing my urlom fule tanks back to LF only wen right menu stoped working whit esc and go to KSP button

i had to kill the game

From what I can read of that, you aren't supposed to use IFS with MKS as it already has its own switchers from FireSpitter and Configurable Containers-which perform exactly the same function as IFS anyway, you don't need it.

(Ninja'd)

Edited February 6, 2017 by voicey99

[sh1pman]

5 minutes ago, voicey99 said:

From what I can read of that, you aren't supposed to use IFS with MKS as it already has its own switchers from FireSpitter and Configurable Containers-which perform exactly the same function as IFS anyway, you don't need it.

(Ninja'd)

I use MKS with IFS without any issues.

[danielboro]

10 hours ago, voicey99 said:

From what I can read of that, you aren't supposed to use IFS with MKS as it already has its own switchers from FireSpitter and Configurable Containers-which perform exactly the same function as IFS anyway, you don't need it.

(Ninja'd)

Its a hard dependency of interstellar extended

I never had a problem having IFS and MKS. Only whit the new update after adding cc I'm seeing problem's

Edited February 7, 2017 by danielboro

[voicey99]

Oops, getting confused with TweakScale being "not recommended". Still, I don't see much need for IFS given CC pretty much does the same thing.

[sh1pman]

Just now, voicey99 said:

Oops, getting confused with TweakScale being "not recommended". Still, I don't see much need for IFS given CC pretty much does the same thing.

IFS is a hard requirement for some mods. Procedural Wings, for example.

[RoverDude]

I'm working to sort how to remove CC as a hard dependency, though part of this is handling it on the CKAN side (I can handle it easily enough on the MKS side).

 

[DStaal]

34 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

I use MKS with IFS without any issues.

Just wanted to echo: I've got mods with hard dependencies on CC, IFS, and Firespitter, running side-by-side.  You can't always use the one you want on the tank you want, but I don't run into general problems.  Just make sure you know which one is applying to the tank you're using at the moment.

[Gilph]

Just finished testing some hab scenarios.  Will write up shortly.  The issues seem to be with the hab sharing, meaning that when the "vessels shared within 150m" equals 0, the values are what you would expect.  If not, a few things happen, like the hab common multiplier disappears.

I took a vessel with three large Kerbitats and a Colonization module. One was configured as hab quarters, one as hab common.  With one Kerbal inside, the values in orbit around Minmus are: 226D (everything off), 7Y353D (hab quarters only), 34Y219D (both on). Landed next to an unmanned miner with both turned on and status at 34Y.  At 150m away, hab drops to 7Y353D (not at physics range, like I first thought), right when the vessels shared changed from 0 to 1. Toggling the hab common button has no effect, but toggling the hab quarters does.

I reset everything and landed the same ship by my large base (9 vessels, 12 kerbals). at the 150m point, my hab changed from 34Y to 1Y135D. Not only did I lose the 5x hab common multiplier, the hab time was spread out with 9 other vessels and lowered the hab time considerably.  Which also means that, at the moment, it's very hard to have a high hab base within a colony. Putting that same vessel back in orbit restores everything.  The timers all go back to normal, the hab common multiplier returns, and you can toggle both on and off.

Sharing may not be an issue once the hab common multiplier is fixed, but I thing the sharing part needs some consideration.

Hope this was helpful.

[WuphonsReach]

@Gilph I think you're possibly on to something.  The space station around Kerbin? seems to work just fine.  The base on the Mun, with other ships landed nearby?  Not so much.

[PolecatEZ]

3 hours ago, RoverDude said:

I'm working to sort how to remove CC as a hard dependency, though part of this is handling it on the CKAN side (I can handle it easily enough on the MKS side).

 

I completely removed CC and the .dll from the tools area.  I was able to build craft using the new system without any issues.  The native parts (the workshop truck and SkyCrane) were probably missing some resources but the models don't jive regardless and I'm thinking of killing those as well.  

That workshop truck with its free battery/generator and being the only thing with 100% efficiency doesn't seem balanced at all, but I understand this is the initial merger.

[dlrk]

Roverdude ,

Minor problem. Spacedock still shows MKS as 1.1

[mikerl]

When Configurable Containers is installed with another fuel switcher that affects multiple tanks, both must be configured to the desired fuel configuration or the vessel may launch with an incorrect fuel type.  Inside the CC folder are MM patches to apply it to various tanks, and deleting these will restrict to only the workshop and skycrane from GC.  It would be possible to give the workshop Materialkit storage and the skycrane LFO via MM patch and then remove CC.

[Baladain]

On 2/5/2017 at 7:11 PM, Baladain said:

Since the update, my convert-o-tron 250 is no longer functional.

smelt ore, mono-prop and LF produce no resources, thermal efficiency says N/A and core temperature doesn't move.

Also, pulse drill 100 can't change separators.

Updated to current as of today, these problems still exist.  Will start pulling mods tomorrow to see if it's a conflict.