Jump to content

[1.10.1+] Contract Configurator [v1.30.5] [2020-10-05]


nightingale
 Share

Recommended Posts

There's a lot of noise with those different errors - I need to know what happened first (as most of those would be caused by other problems). If you have an uncorrupted save (from just before this started happening, are you able to send the log from doing a save there?). If not, send a log and the save file (as I'll need to compare what's in the save file to the load/save errors that are happening).

Just tossing it out there in case it saves a lot of bug hunting; the first error says Tourism_Moons. I'm using the New Horizons planet pack, which makes Kerbin a moon of a gas giant, but removes Kerbin's own moons and puts them elsewhere in the solar system. Any chance that's what's upsetting it?

Failing that; log from an old save. Gave it a simple load/change scene/manual save sequence. (Spoiler; CC only appears in one line where it's acknowledging the assembly. No other entries.)

And a persistent.sfs from after CC had generated an error (I use quite a stack of mods, apologies if this makes it unloadable). It doesn't seem to be doing any harm to the rest of the save.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just tossing it out there in case it saves a lot of bug hunting; the first error says Tourism_Moons. I'm using the New Horizons planet pack, which makes Kerbin a moon of a gas giant, but removes Kerbin's own moons and puts them elsewhere in the solar system. Any chance that's what's upsetting it?

Ohhhh, like the old Alternis. I didn't realize there was one out there like that. It's been in the back of my mind while doing those contract packs, but I'll have to verify. I doubt it's balanced for that scenario, but it... probably should work.

Failing that; log from an old save. Gave it a simple load/change scene/manual save sequence. (Spoiler; CC only appears in one line where it's acknowledging the assembly. No other entries.)

I meant a log from a save where you could reproduce the original issue. :)

And a persistent.sfs from after CC had generated an error (I use quite a stack of mods, apologies if this makes it unloadable). It doesn't seem to be doing any harm to the rest of the save.

404 - no file.

Yeah, most important is a log with all the errors that you had above... context and order will be very important here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bah, looks like my web host doesn't want to serve sfs files... :rolleyes:This cunningly renamed sfs.txt should work!

I can't pinpoint the time at which it started to happen, sadly, so I can't give you the original error log - but I'll grab the next one that generates an error and post it :)

Hmmm.... it definitely is due to the fact that Kerbin has no moons. It's a bug in the contract pack, so it'll get handled under ContractPack-Tourism#12. In the meantime you can use the following module manager config to delete it:

@[COLOR=#333333][FONT=Consolas]CONTRACT_TYPE[[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#333333][FONT=Consolas]Tourism_Moons]
[/FONT][/COLOR]{
@[COLOR=#A71D5D][FONT=Consolas]maxSimultaneous = 0[/FONT][/COLOR]
}

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah. I'll try out the dev version when I get home. Still a bit new to this. Editing the .craft seemed only natural, as I have been doing it to ensure the vessels spawn with engines roaring and the BDArmory modules pre-activated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try the dev version here. It was never really intended for vessels in flight, because it doesn't really work in stock KSP (they'd just go nose down and crash). I have no idea if you need to do the two-contract stuff or not, but with the new version it *should* work now (limited testing). Let me know how it goes, and if it doesn't work send me the full contract and I'll play with it a bit.

Erm, I'm not sure if there is something special I need to do with the dev version. I replaced the .dll and now my contracts are not working right. Spawned vessels do not appear, or at least do not stay. The Target Destroyed parameters complete immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm, I'm not sure if there is something special I need to do with the dev version. I replaced the .dll and now my contracts are not working right. Spawned vessels do not appear, or at least do not stay. The Target Destroyed parameters complete immediately.

Nothing special, it means my flying fix needs some more work. I'll get back to you on this one. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nightingale, how do you feel about an addition to the Waypoint generator that would allow you to specify a parameter after the completion of which the Waypoint location is generated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nightingale, how do you feel about an addition to the Waypoint generator that would allow you to specify a parameter after the completion of which the Waypoint location is generated?

Already supported. In the WaypointGenerator behaviour provide the parameter attribute (with the name of the parameter that is a prerequisite for displaying the waypoint). And it's always generated up front - just invisible until the parameter in question completes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm, I'm not sure if there is something special I need to do with the dev version. I replaced the .dll and now my contracts are not working right. Spawned vessels do not appear, or at least do not stay. The Target Destroyed parameters complete immediately.

Yeah, I think I'll be rolling back most of my changes. You can hack something together with an ORBITING vessel < 70000 km, but anything where the semi-major axis ends up too low it just insta-dies when the vessel is spawned. I think the hack you figured out with the decoupler is actually the best bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Already supported. In the WaypointGenerator behaviour provide the parameter attribute (with the name of the parameter that is a prerequisite for displaying the waypoint). And it's always generated up front - just invisible until the parameter in question completes.

What I mean is to not generate the waypoint upfront. The use case I have in mind is that I could send a rover to a planet and once it lands at that moment I could generate a waypoint at the vessel's location and another random one near it so that the rover would be required to drive to a nearby waypoint and prove its functionality no matter where you land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think I'll be rolling back most of my changes. You can hack something together with an ORBITING vessel < 70000 km, but anything where the semi-major axis ends up too low it just insta-dies when the vessel is spawned. I think the hack you figured out with the decoupler is actually the best bet.

All right. Thank you very much for investigating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I mean is to not generate the waypoint upfront. The use case I have in mind is that I could send a rover to a planet and once it lands at that moment I could generate a waypoint at the vessel's location and another random one near it so that the rover would be required to drive to a nearby waypoint and prove its functionality no matter where you land.

Ah, I see. The biggest issue with that is the expressions get run at contract generation time, so the only way to set/create a waypoint with the rover coordinates at an arbitrary time is with a custom behaviour (ie. C# code). Otherwise the other option is to split it into two contracts, and have the second contract with a super-high weight and autoAccept turned on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I see. The biggest issue with that is the expressions get run at contract generation time, so the only way to set/create a waypoint with the rover coordinates at an arbitrary time is with a custom behaviour (ie. C# code). Otherwise the other option is to split it into two contracts, and have the second contract with a super-high weight and autoAccept turned on.

I see. That also answers my question as to why not have an Expression-based parameter. I think I'll just keep things as is. Thank you very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see. That also answers my question as to why not have an Expression-based parameter. I think I'll just keep things as is. Thank you very much.

Actually an Expression based parameter *could* be possible... but only if you have a specific use case that can't be better met in another way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually an Expression based parameter *could* be possible... but only if you have a specific use case that can't be better met in another way.

I had something in mind, but I can't for the life of me remember what it was. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New release, download now!

Contract Configurator 1.5.4

  • Added new extended PartModule mode to PartValidation parameter.
  • Added new methods for determining engine thrust and ISP in expressions.
  • Added additional validation to WaypointGenerator.RANDOM_WAYPOINT_NEAR (thanks Xaegr).
  • Minor changes to VesselSpawner.
  • Fixed issue with VesselNotDestroyed firing for EVA Kerbals boarding a vessel (thanks Cooper42).
  • Fixed Pow() and Log() expression functions to work correctly with types other than double (thanks NathanKell).
  • Fixed major issues with CanResearchTech requirement (thanks NathanKell).
  • Fixed holes where expressions could modify underlying KSP lists (thanks Whyren).
  • Experiments from unsupported science mods won't show up - preventing them from showing up before the right tech has been unlocked.
  • Added Asteroid Day experiment to experiment list (doesn't change behaviour, just quiets a warning).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New release, download now!

Contract Configurator 1.5.4

  • Added new extended PartModule mode to PartValidation parameter.
  • Added new methods for determining engine thrust and ISP in expressions.
  • Added additional validation to WaypointGenerator.RANDOM_WAYPOINT_NEAR (thanks Xaegr).
  • Minor changes to VesselSpawner.
  • Fixed issue with VesselNotDestroyed firing for EVA Kerbals boarding a vessel (thanks Cooper42).
  • Fixed Pow() and Log() expression functions to work correctly with types other than double (thanks NathanKell).
  • Fixed major issues with CanResearchTech requirement (thanks NathanKell).
  • Fixed holes where expressions could modify underlying KSP lists (thanks Whyren).
  • Experiments from unsupported science mods won't show up - preventing them from showing up before the right tech has been unlocked.
  • Added Asteroid Day experiment to experiment list (doesn't change behaviour, just quiets a warning).

No contracts are showing up with the most recent update.

I take it back its not your mod I started a new career without it and I have not contracts. Took mods away and still no contracts at all. Strange and frustrating bug.

Edited by sp1989
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here you go https://www.dropbox.com/s/pcybc65bdg6owx6/KSP.log?dl=0 Are you sure you want that one? The one I posted above is the file I get out of the unity folder. Thats the one modders usually ask for.

You're thinking of output_log.txt, the entire contents of Player.log (the one you posted) is:

Initialize engine version: 4.6.4f1 (99f88340878d)
GfxDevice: creating device client; threaded=1

And KSP.log is easier to read, but has some information missing in a few uncommon cases, so I personally prefer it. But I'll accept either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're thinking of output_log.txt, the entire contents of Player.log (the one you posted) is:

Initialize engine version: 4.6.4f1 (99f88340878d)
GfxDevice: creating device client; threaded=1

And KSP.log is easier to read, but has some information missing in a few uncommon cases, so I personally prefer it. But I'll accept either.

Ahhhh ok I've always wanted to know the difference! You've got both of my logs now. Please help lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...