[1.4.1] Kerbal Construction Time 1.4.0.69 (2018-03-24) - Unrapid Planned Assembly

[magico13]

Noventta, I'd like to see the logs for that if you can get them. There shouldn't really be anything like that happening (obviously). I've seen a similar issue in the past with an out of date StageRecovery API being called, but I doubt that's the issue. Could be KAC API related. Are you using the v3 beta of KAC? If you're using v2 then it's possible that's causing issues, but it shouldn't be :/

Btw, all those bugs are caused by the Start() function not completing, which is all caused by the same problem. So all those bugs are really just one bug

[severedsolo]

I got the same three bugs... well almost. I'm 99% certain it's KAC related.

I did some testing and came up with this:

1st run: KCT only. Results:I got a icon for KCT on the stock toolbar (was this always there? I presume it switches itself off with blizzy installed, which is why I never saw it). everything seemed to just work, vessel built, got on the pad, was crewed etc

2nd Run: KCT+KAC 2.7.9.0 (I'd rather not use 3.0 right now if I can help it, as I feel this is an essential mod, so would like to use stable versions only). Results:

Nothing. No build window in space centre scene, icon disppeared from toolbar. I didn't actually try and build anything, as I felt this was a gamebreaker right there.

3rd Run: In an attempt to get everything working, I re-installed Blizzys toolbar. This time I got my build window back, managed to build a vessel ok (although I got the first two bugs Noventta reported, ie menu for KSC +VAB not going away, and build time not updating itself in VAB). When I pressed the launch button (before crewing), this happened:

I created a dropbox folder with all 3 output logs:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xckyhl1omiszv8q/AACntk0TWoewtzcOSegXDwr0a?dl=0

[magico13]

Thank you for that severedsolo! I have an idea of what the problem may be, if it's not that I think I have another idea of what it is. Either way I'll try to get that fixed up tonight!

Also, when Blizzy's isn't installed, the KCT button will show up in the stock toolbar, as you observed. That's been like that since 0.24 came out I should provide a config option to let you select which one you prefer, but I'm too lazy

[Noventta]

My fault as I installed KAC 2.x (stable) instead 3beta. If I have any problems with it i'll report it with log if available.

[magico13]

My fault as I installed KAC 2.x (stable) instead 3beta. If I have any problems with it i'll report it with log if available.

No problem I think I probably made a call to the KAC API without first verifying that the API was ready, which is a silly thing to do on my end.

[magico13]

I've got one more update that will hopefully fix/avert the issues with KAC v2 and has a couple other fixes. Usual warnings apply. Here's a copy of the commit message:

Added try/catch to get around issues when KAC v2 is installed and not v3. Made sure to not give funds when part purchases are bypassed. Added config option to disable automatic alarm generation. Set version to 1.0.2.2 so that beta users will be alerted to the official update or new betas.

[Galenmacil]

Very interesting mod magico13! Been testing the 0.25 beta of KCT on a new game with several other mods and so far, after about a dozen craft build, I am impress by the immersion this add to the game. Build planning now plays a big part in success or failure of a KSP. Thanks!

Just 2 things to report, not really bugs per see but more requested features:

1 - It would be great if, when launching a manned vehicle via the VAB/SPH "storage" one could choose the astronaut(s) that would take part in the flight. This would add to the "storytelling" potential, you know, like, "It would be better to send Octavius Kerman on this rescue mission since he is more experienced..."

2 - When running a simulation, the main "KCT simulation window" cannot be dragged around and repositioned. Minor thing really but that would be nice as well.

Keep it up, so long, and thanks for the fish!

[severedsolo]

Just re-installed my full mod suite and threw the new dll in there, the previous bugs all fixed, managed to build/launch/simulate fine (the camera bug has gone as well, although I gather that was a MJ issue). Just one small issue:

When you exit a simulation, any parts that have been recovered during the simulation are taken into account in the build time estimate (ie they are put into the inventory). - This is cosmetic only, if you go ahead and build the true build time is used (ie, in my case the craft was going to take 5 days with the simulated parts, but the build time went to the proper time of 10 days when I actually hit build). I'm also using stage recovery so might be a bug with that instead. Output log (sorry it was a long session)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ivrtklna104p7ty/output_log.txt?dl=0

Disclaimer: not tested upgrades or reconditioning as I turn those off, also not tested simulating around another body/in orbit.

1 - It would be great if, when launching a manned vehicle via the VAB/SPH "storage" one could choose the astronaut(s) that would take part in the flight. This would add to the "storytelling" potential, you know, like, "It would be better to send Octavius Kerman on this rescue mission since he is more experienced..."

Try clicking "remove" next to Jebs name, and then you'll get the option to add your own kerbal. (This is working for me in the latest beta btw)

Edited October 11, 2014 by severedsolo

[Galenmacil]

Try clicking "remove" next to Jebs name, and then you'll get the option to add your own kerbal. (This is working for me in the latest beta btw)

Yes, you are right. Did not see that or was not in the version I was testing yesterday. Thanks!

[hjrrockies]

I'm having an issue with simulations and reverts - if I start a simulation, and revert back to the editor (using either the esc menu or the KCT menu), the UI freezes and doesn't allow me to exit the VAB or modify the craft. The simulation timer is also still displayed. Anyone else having a similar problem?

Here is my output log:

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=E2FC350951BE3C37!2513&authkey=!AMhZwjbNB6P3oao&ithint=file%2ctxt

Edited October 11, 2014 by hjrrockies

[JeffreyCor]

It sounds like you might be having a conflict with another mod. I had encountered a major problem but it turned out to be Tarsier Space Tech causing problems all over the place.

[hjrrockies]

I cleared out TweakableEverything and E.V.E., and that fixed it. I'm not sure which was the problem - EVE doesn't seem like it would conflict, but it had tons of NullRefs in the log. TweakableEverything didn't throw up any exceptions, but seems like it could have interfered.

[hjrrockies]

Actually, I had the wrong KCT .dll evidently. I had downloaded the newest .25 beta version, but forgot to replace the .24.2 one.

[JeffreyCor]

Are least it's working now TweakableEverything works together with KCT without any issues so that is safe to put back in as well I have not tested EVE as last I checked it has not been updated for .25 yet and errors are reported with the .24.2 build in .25.

[tdubic]

This mod does not work for me. I have 0.25 64 bit, and even I see all KCT options in toolbar, I can lunch any rocket instantly. Also on space center after opening some KCT options, I can't access to any building anymore, even if I close toolbar window. I need restart game to fix that and the all over again. So after few attempts to fix that I decided to just delete the mod, and game now works just fine.

[aron123]

i am haveing a bit of a cosmetic problem it seems that if i research a node that contains a experimental part then that part is hidden until the node is activated as i said is only cosmetic but can be a pain when trying to setup future missions while waiting for the current one

[soulsource]

This mod does not work for me. I have 0.25 64 bit, and even I see all KCT options in toolbar, I can lunch any rocket instantly. Also on space center after opening some KCT options, I can't access to any building anymore, even if I close toolbar window. I need restart game to fix that and the all over again. So after few attempts to fix that I decided to just delete the mod, and game now works just fine.

There is no official KCT build available for 0.25 yet. Nevertheless, a few pages back in this forum, you can find a dll file which might work. Anyhow, if you are using the 64bit Windows build of KSP, don't expect *any* mods to work properly. Quite a few mod authors are simply fed up by users complaining about bugs in their mods, that are actually bugs in the 64bit Windows build of KSP, so quite a few mods simply will disable themselves when being run with the 64bit Windows version of KSP.

[theonegalen]

Really excited to get this into 0.25! Starting over with the Explorer probe core and sounding rockets through FASA now!

[Kamik423]

Wow, this mod is great, i've always been thinking, that there had to be such a mod - and there is! I love it!

however I have one suggestion: you should be able to build your subassemlies and put them into storage, so they would not take time to build when in a bigger craft. Recovered stages should also be checked for subassemblies, and not completely dissolved into all of their parts.

it would be great if you could add this!

kamik423

[magico13]

however I have one suggestion: you should be able to build your subassemlies and put them into storage, so they would not take time to build when in a bigger craft. Recovered stages should also be checked for subassemblies, and not completely dissolved into all of their parts.

Glad you're enjoying the mod The way the inventory system was developed was to make subassemblies not take substantial time to affix onto a larger craft. Simply build the subassembly ahead of time, "scrap" it, and then use it in a new build. The parts from the subassembly will add nearly negligible time to the total build time for the craft. Alternatively, if what you're adding on is very inexpensive (like a small satellite onto a prebuilt launcher) you can "edit" the constructed launcher and add the satellite in (should save more time than scrapping the subassembly).

I purposefully designed the inventory system to not treat subassemblies specially, but instead to treat all parts separately. This provides far greater freedom than if I required the use of subassemblies for similar functionality. Also, actually checking for subassemblies would be much harder to program, in addition to being more restrictive. Hopefully you can see that what you suggest is already implemented (since the very beginning) in a more abstract way and I hope that is satisfactory. A total rewrite of that system is virtually impossible at this time (in the manner you describe at least, it is actually being rewritten right now to use a different mod for handling the inventory system, which has been a real pain to get working properly, which will make it even harder to do anything specific to subassmeblies).

If you've got any other suggestions, I'm always willing to hear them. I try not to shoot them down too often, and a large amount of KCT's features came out of user suggestions. My development time has been slim as of late, otherwise I would have already implemented some that I promised to include in the next update (sorry guys, but rollout instead of reconditioning is still on hold :/ )

[Godot]

Very useful mod, thanks

Looks like exactly something I was looking for .... it makes much more sense to have a build time for rockets ... and the separation of revertable simulated flights and non revertable real flights was actually something I suggested for the KSP main program some time ago, so it is very welcome as well, to have it implemented in form of a mod.

Only problem that sporadically appeared is, that it may happen that the "Warp To" function misses its exit point (making the time warp continue running and losing yourself several days of gametime, till you manage to manually stop the time warp)

[Senior Slaphead]

Currently rebuilding my bloated mod collection for another career run on Twitch and this looks like the cherry on top...

[shand]

Glad you're enjoying the mod The way the inventory system was developed was to make subassemblies not take substantial time to affix onto a larger craft. Simply build the subassembly ahead of time, "scrap" it, and then use it in a new build. The parts from the subassembly will add nearly negligible time to the total build time for the craft. Alternatively, if what you're adding on is very inexpensive (like a small satellite onto a prebuilt launcher) you can "edit" the constructed launcher and add the satellite in (should save more time than scrapping the subassembly).

I had not thought of build and scrap - but that makes sense thinking about it - given the part reuse ect ect.

is there any benefit to not completely building something before scrapping it - does none complete progress impact or only complete?

my one querry/suggestion/thing im not overly enthussed by - launchpad refurbishment. i feel it is currently too long. i have noticed that it is proportional to the size of the vessel that used it last. my suggestion would be instead to have it setup-time for the next launch. to put it a bit clearer: the size of the launch shouldnt have a huge influence on postlaunch refurb... its just a slab of concrete til the next launch is in place, but it would make sense for it to take twice as long to move a rocket onto the pad if its bigger.

other than that i do immensely enjoy your mod - getting to the stage of setting up my first moon bases (mun closely followed my min). taken me 100 days to get to the moon! (but then i was also greatly enjoying fineprint missions)

[magico13]

is there any benefit to not completely building something before scrapping it - does none complete progress impact or only complete?

but it would make sense for it to take twice as long to move a rocket onto the pad if its bigger.

First question: You can scrap a partially completed vessel and will gain some of the parts in your inventory, but otherwise there isn't much of a benefit. The shorter times for using the same parts in mutliple builds requires the build be completed entirely to count, so it's usually better to build them all the way. Other people may have their own views on the subject, since I don't honestly get to play a whole lot, so there may be some gameplay reason why you may want to scrap something early.

Second thing: That's actually the suggested feature I mentioned is currently delayed Some people want there to be time before launch, some want it afterward. I plan on making both options, but it's pushed back for a little while. I personally double the mass requirement for reconditioning, but I wouldn't blame people if they turned it off entirely. It's something I added in after a user suggested it.

Maybe I'll double the mass by default and reduce simulation costs next update. I've been feeling that simulations may be too costly to use frequently, especially in orbit around distant planets.

[Nori]

First question: You can scrap a partially completed vessel and will gain some of the parts in your inventory, but otherwise there isn't much of a benefit. The shorter times for using the same parts in mutliple builds requires the build be completed entirely to count, so it's usually better to build them all the way. Other people may have their own views on the subject, since I don't honestly get to play a whole lot, so there may be some gameplay reason why you may want to scrap something early.

Second thing: That's actually the suggested feature I mentioned is currently delayed Some people want there to be time before launch, some want it afterward. I plan on making both options, but it's pushed back for a little while. I personally double the mass requirement for reconditioning, but I wouldn't blame people if they turned it off entirely. It's something I added in after a user suggested it.

Maybe I'll double the mass by default and reduce simulation costs next update. I've been feeling that simulations may be too costly to use frequently, especially in orbit around distant planets.

I like the idea of the time delay before. If you are going to make some changes there would it be too hard to have a user configurable option that sets a maximum amount of time the reconditioning could take?

As shand said, it is just a slab of concrete so even the largest rockets shouldn't make it take more time to "fix" than rebuilding the whole thing (which I can imagine taking months).