[1.5.0 <-> 1.8.1] Kerbalism v3.2

[HansAcker 159]

On 11/27/2019 at 3:05 PM, Sir Mortimer said:

You can get CO2 from Ore, see here. There also is a chart with all processes that exist in Kerbalism at the top of that page.

Right, I had read that page when I first started with Kerbalism and totally forgot about it. It's at least another 1000 science points for me to unlock Molten Regolith Electrolysis. I've got a contract for a Mun station with an ISRU part now, so I'll send a manned mission for now. Kerbals produce CO2 and Ammonia, too.

For my unmanned fuel farm, I guess I better plan big. To run one (large ISRU) Sabatier/Anthraquinone process at full capacity, I'd need 16 water electrolysis plants and some 3000+EC/s. The water extraction rate is probably going to be the first limiting factor.

I came across talk on Github that Kerbalism's ISRU processes will eventually be aligned with Rational Resources. Is that on the near roadmap? I'm asking before I start building a large ISRU plant

 

Congratulations to 100 pages Kerbalism thread

Edited December 2, 2019 by HansAcker

[Gordon Dry 548]

@Sir Mortimer that chart needs a clickable link to a bigger version. Actually I have to download it then I can open and resize it.

Edit: yeah I know I can CTRL+MouseWheel the website, but I won't

Edited December 2, 2019 by Gordon Dry

[Retro Starship 631]

7 hours ago, OnkelMatze197 said:

Hi.

I have a simple question. Does anybody have any experience with kerbalism and Kerbal Construction Time?

I want to play with kerbalism, kct, and the krash Mod. But I'm not sure, if it works well together. 

Greetings

Matze

Hi @OnkelMatze197 I have been using it for about 3 weeks now and love it. Really fun but at 1st a little intimidating. You really need to realize that kct is about time management with your rockets and aircraft. The interface may seem confusing but after a few launches you'll get it. You will use time warp alot but thank god tho, it saves waiting which would not be fun. What it does for me is that it puts a much more challenging part to it and very interesting with the details (like kerbalism). Its what may be a true way to look at space flight issues and what it takes to get there.

I never did like, you push a button go there, flip a toggle go here. I like to be apart of the action.

All three work together for me with no problem and I am on KSP 1.8.1

[OnkelMatze197 5]

6 hours ago, Saturn5tony said:

Hi @OnkelMatze197 I have been using it for about 3 weeks now and love it. Really fun but at 1st a little intimidating. You really need to realize that kct is about time management with your rockets and aircraft. The interface may seem confusing but after a few launches you'll get it. You will use time warp alot but thank god tho, it saves waiting which would not be fun. What it does for me is that it puts a much more challenging part to it and very interesting with the details (like kerbalism). Its what may be a true way to look at space flight issues and what it takes to get there.

I never did like, you push a button go there, flip a toggle go here. I like to be apart of the action.

All three work together for me with no problem and I am on KSP 1.8.1

Thx for the replys. 

Then I will give it a try. 

Greetings 

 

Matze

[Flavio hc16 350]

i'm loving this mod but it's very complicated, there is a manual somwhere? A in dept review ( i already say the kottaboos review on yt)

[Carni35 22]

6 minutes ago, Flavio hc16 said:

i'm loving this mod but it's very complicated, there is a manual somwhere? A in dept review ( i already say the kottaboos review on yt)

Hi ! You can find all you need on the wiki : https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki   

 

[Flavio hc16 350]

39 minutes ago, Carni35 said:

Hi ! You can find all you need on the wiki : https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki   

 

thanks mate

[Sir Mortimer 290]

3 hours ago, Flavio hc16 said:

i'm loving this mod but it's very complicated, there is a manual somwhere? A in dept review ( i already say the kottaboos review on yt)

The Kottaboos review is so old that you could say it's for a different mod. A *LOT* has changed since then.

Unfortunately we don't have much more than what is on the wiki, but there are a few YouTubers who currently have a series on Kerbalism (f.i. sthedgehog or Mike Aben).

[FreeThinker 3,493]

I'm having a problem with the kerbalsim modified stock drill

As you can see I'm getting the "no ground contact message" while clearly having drill that is at least half way under ground

Edited December 4, 2019 by FreeThinker

[Sir Mortimer 290]

9 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

As you can see I'm getting the "no ground contact message" while clearly having drill that is at least half way under ground

Does it work when you move around a bit?

[FreeThinker 3,493]

26 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

Does it work when you move around a bit?

It tried several locations with the same result

[Sir Mortimer 290]

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

It tried several locations with the same result

OK; looked at the code: there might be a case where KSP behaves oddly, I added a check for that. I'll upload a test build tonight (=in ~12 hours, if life permits), could you test it with that one then?

[FreeThinker 3,493]

2 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

OK; looked at the code: there might be a case where KSP behaves oddly, I added a check for that. I'll upload a test build tonight (=in ~12 hours, if life permits), could you test it with that one then?

sure

[FreeThinker 3,493]

@Sir Mortimer I still have the same problem with the latest release

[pmborg 359]

Hello, @FreeThinker,

Please note that in some places of the Mun there are no Ore, the best thing to do is to use the SCAN Map to make sure that you are in a place with Ore. of course you know it but sometimes we have bad luck

 

One hint from my side, at least described here:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/220200/discussions/0/350543951940086390/?ctp=2

In resume make sure that you are not running a save from 1.8.1 into 1.7.3, I am not sure if that is still the case, but probably you can try to check it.

 

Edited December 4, 2019 by pmborg

[FreeThinker 3,493]

44 minutes ago, pmborg said:

Hello, @FreeThinker,

Please note that in some places of the Mun there are no Ore, the best thing to do is to use the SCAN Map to make sure that you are in a place with Ore. of course you know it but sometimes we have bad luck

 

One hint from my side, at least described here:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/220200/discussions/0/350543951940086390/?ctp=2

In resume make sure that you are not running a save from 1.8.1 into 1.7.3, I am not sure if that is still the case, but probably you can try to check it.

 

Ore density is not the pronlem, I increased the thresshold to allow collection of lower densities of Ore.

[Sir Mortimer 290]

9 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

Ore density is not the pronlem, I increased the thresshold to allow collection of lower densities of Ore.

No, it quite explicitly sates "no ground contact", which is checked by Kerbalism using a method that apparently no longer works correctly. Might be related to something that changed in KSP during the recent versions. I'll remove that check until we have something better, and assume that a harvester always has ground contact if the vessel is landed.

Expect a new dev build tonight.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Sir Mortimer

[FreeThinker 3,493]

3 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

No, it quite explicitly sates "no ground contact", which is checked by Kerbalism using a method that apparently no longer works correctly. Might be related to something that changed in KSP during the recent versions. I'll remove that check until we have something better, and assume that a harvester always has ground contact if the vessel is landed.

Expect a new dev build tonight.

Perhaps you can use the following code, which is used to verify if the drill can reach the ground. This code is confimed to work for the Universal Drill in KSPIE:

        /// <summary>
        /// Helper function to calculate (and raycast) if the drill could potentially hit the terrain.
        /// </summary>
        /// <returns>True if the raycast hits the terrain layermask and it's close enough for the drill to reach (affected by the drillReach part property).</returns>
        private bool CanReachTerrain()
        {
            Vector3d partPosition = this.part.transform.position; // find the position of the transform in 3d space
            var scaleFactor = this.part.rescaleFactor; // what is the rescale factor of the drill?
            var drillDistance = drillReach * scaleFactor; // adjust the distance for the ray with the rescale factor, needs to be a float for raycast.

            RaycastHit hit = new RaycastHit(); // create a variable that stores info about hit colliders etc.
            LayerMask terrainMask = 32768; // layermask in unity, number 1 bitshifted to the left 15 times (1 << 15), (terrain = 15, the bitshift is there so that the mask bits are raised; this is a good reading about that: http://answers.unity3d.com/questions/8715/how-do-i-use-layermasks.html)
            Ray drillPartRay = new Ray(partPosition, -part.transform.up); // this ray will start at the part's center and go down in local space coordinates (Vector3d.down is in world space)

            /* This little bit will fire a ray from the part, straight down, in the distance that the part should be able to reach.
             * It returns true if there is solid terrain in the reach AND the drill is extended. Otherwise false.
             * This is actually needed because stock KSP terrain detection is not really dependable. This module was formerly using just part.GroundContact 
             * to check for contact, but that seems to be bugged somehow, at least when paired with this drill - it works enough times to pass tests, but when testing 
             * this module in a difficult terrain, it just doesn't work properly. (I blame KSP planet meshes + Unity problems with accuracy further away from origin). 
            */
            Physics.Raycast(drillPartRay, out hit, drillDistance, terrainMask); // use the defined ray, pass info about a hit, go the proper distance and choose the proper layermask 

            return hit.collider != null;
        }

 

@Sir Mortimer  Btw, how is the ISRU on the Stock ISRU refinery supposed to work. I configured it with a module to convert stock Ore into Oxygen, CO2 and Shielding but I have no way to activate it. Are there some special condition I have to meet before I can use this ISRU process?

Edited December 5, 2019 by FreeThinker

[mindstalker 59]

Thanks for the new supplies parts in the dev build. One question, the text doesn't seem to change when you change the type, as it does when in your included photo. Its always just "supplies"

Edited December 7, 2019 by mindstalker

[Sir Mortimer 290]

3 hours ago, mindstalker said:

Thanks for the new supplies parts in the dev build. One question, the text doesn't seem to change when you change the type, as it does when in your included photo. Its always just "supplies"

Do you have B9PartSwitch installed? Texture switching only works if you're got that

[WarriorSabe 159]

Is there a way to change the temperature of the CMB? I'm making a planet pack set in the (very) far future, and want to lower it appropriately. Also, does albedo and body radiation consider multiple sources or just the orbited body?

[mcwaffles2003 1,083]

@Sir Mortimer

Quote

Remove incompatibility warning with DynamicBatteryStorage. 

Saw this in the Github pull requests

Is dynamic battery storage now compatible with kerbalism 3.1? Near future electrical as well?

Edited December 11, 2019 by mcwaffles2003

[Sir Mortimer 290]

2 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

@Sir Mortimer

Saw this in the Github pull requests

Is dynamic battery storage now compatible with kerbalism 3.1? Near future electrical as well?

DynamicBatteryStorage is not, and never will be, compatible with Kerbalism (see below). There is a change in the works that will essentially disable DBS if Kerbalism is installed. However, you can use Near Future Electrical without dynamic battery storage being installed. I know CKAN says it is a dependency, but it really is not.

That said, there are some parts in NFE that currently are a bit problematic: capacitors won't work as expected for unloaded vessels, and reactors don't produce any heat and thus are very OP. But those issues have nothing to do with DBS.

The reason for the incompaitibility is this:

1. DBS dynamically changes the battery storage capacity of a vessel during time warp, this is a workaround for the stock KSP resource system that doesn't do very well in that situation. However, Kerbalism uses its own resource system that, while synced with the stock system, does not expect a vessel to magically shrink or grow storage capacities. Just by doing that, dynamic battery storage could kill Kerbals because it confuses the Kerbalism resource framework.

2. DBS comes with a cool UI that you can use to determine the power status of your vessel in the editor. You can see what uses EC and how much, how much EC is generated by panels and such, you can tweak your distance to the sun and other things. And there is a heat management system too, mainly for the NFE reactors I suppose. But that UI only works for part modules that dynamic battery storage knows how to handle, so it works for the stock game and a few mods only. Kerablisms part modules don't appear in that UI, so the readout would be wrong. But what's more, Kerbalism has its own planner that you can use for that. It will tell you if you're going to run out of power or not, or how long any of the resources will last that you need to operate your vessel. So not only is the DBS UI incomplete with Kerbalism, it also is redundant - which is why it won't be fixed.

[mcwaffles2003 1,083]

2 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

DynamicBatteryStorage is not, and never will be, compatible with Kerbalism (see below). There is a change in the works that will essentially disable DBS if Kerbalism is installed. However, you can use Near Future Electrical without dynamic battery storage being installed. I know CKAN says it is a dependency, but it really is not.

That said, there are some parts in NFE that currently are a bit problematic: capacitors won't work as expected for unloaded vessels, and reactors don't produce any heat and thus are very OP. But those issues have nothing to do with DBS.

The reason for the incompaitibility is this:

1. DBS dynamically changes the battery storage capacity of a vessel during time warp, this is a workaround for the stock KSP resource system that doesn't do very well in that situation. However, Kerbalism uses its own resource system that, while synced with the stock system, does not expect a vessel to magically shrink or grow storage capacities. Just by doing that, dynamic battery storage could kill Kerbals because it confuses the Kerbalism resource framework.

2. DBS comes with a cool UI that you can use to determine the power status of your vessel in the editor. You can see what uses EC and how much, how much EC is generated by panels and such, you can tweak your distance to the sun and other things. And there is a heat management system too, mainly for the NFE reactors I suppose. But that UI only works for part modules that dynamic battery storage knows how to handle, so it works for the stock game and a few mods only. Kerablisms part modules don't appear in that UI, so the readout would be wrong. But what's more, Kerbalism has its own planner that you can use for that. It will tell you if you're going to run out of power or not, or how long any of the resources will last that you need to operate your vessel. So not only is the DBS UI incomplete with Kerbalism, it also is redundant - which is why it won't be fixed.

Thanks for the quick response and thats good to know as running 50ish ion thrusters gets a bit difficult with only solar panels

[Miguelsgamingch 258]

So This will still work on sandbox mode or not?