Rhedd

@ShotgunNinja I'm just playing around to see how things work, and I added this just for fun: // SUPPLIES Rule { name = Supplies resource_name = Supplies rate = 0.25 // 1 per-day interval = 5400.0 // 0.25 days degeneration = 0.03125 //32 uses, 8 days on_pod = 10.0 breakdown = true // trigger breakdown event instead of death warning_message = $ON_VESSEL$KERBAL had to eat $HIS_HER soup with a fork danger_message = $ON_VESSEL$KERBAL simply cannot survive without toilet paper // no fatal_message because breakdown message is generated automatically relax_message = $ON_VESSEL$KERBAL can finally brush $HIS_HER teeth low_message = Supplies are getting low on $VESSEL$NEWLINE<i>Important items are being rationed</i> empty_message = There are no more supplies on $VESSEL$NEWLINE<i>Life is becoming very uncomfortable</i> refill_message = $VESSEL has been resupplied$NEWLINE<i>The crew rejoices</i> } It works as intended, but the first thing I noticed is that the planner screen in the VAB gives a "life expectancy" for Supplies instead of a "time to instability" like it does for Quality of Life, even though breakdown = true. I assume that has something to do with the wrong message being applied when there is a resource_name = X in the rule? Very minor, but I thought I should mention it. I hadn't noticed until just now that in the in-flight ship details screen EVERYTHING says "perpetual". Glad to hear that's fixed already! I also noticed that your default profile doesn't define waste_ratio for anything. So kerbals are pooping out 100% the mass of the food they take in? Wow!

@ShotgunNinja Next roadblock! I tried to add "modifier = breathable" to the stress rule (because it's not so bad if you can get out, walk around, and take a deep breath). It didn't work. Stress accumulated normally on the surface of Kerbin. I assume that's because a rule can only have one modifier, so stress can't have "modifier = qol" and " modifier = breathable" at the same time? If so, I wish it could.

@ShotgunNinja Again, thanks for the info. Please do add the ability to add required/bonus resources to the greenhouse module. It's pretty awesome that that's the only thing I've run into so far that I want to do but can't (but I'll keep trying! )

@ShotgunNinja Thanks for all the quick answers! That helps a lot. I like the idea of "comfort". Oh, and no, the O2 didn't seem to be scaled on load. Now, I downloaded the pre-release just as it came out, so if there's been any released changes that means I have an old version, but no, I ended up with a ship with single-digit O2 levels and they didn't last long! I don't have another ship in orbit, but I do still have the blueprint for it, so I can test it again and see exactly what happens. Got a few more questions for you, mostly about the greenhouse works... I assume "resource_name = food" is the resource the greenhouse outputs. I was looking into adding a water resource. I see that the greenhouse has a single resource to use as a "waste bonus". Is it possible to add additional bonus resources, or even better, to add a resource that's mandatory (like water)? How is that "bonus" applied? Also, what does "waste_rate" do, exactly? Does that define the rate at which the greenhouse uses up the waste resource? It says it's "waste produced by 3 crew members". I assume that means the greenhouse is using waste at the same rate 3 kerbals produce it? Keep up the FANTASTIC work!

And this is why we love you! Seriously fantastic attitude! TAC-LS is/was great and I've used it for ages, but it's so nice to be able to build a life support system that's PERFECT for me. I had a lot of fun yesterday tweaking the stress system to be just the way I like it. (I thought a single kerbal stuck in a coffin-sized box without company or outside communication would go crazy long before the 60 day mark, and you know what? That's cool, because I can just change it to suit me!) So on to the feedback... Firstly, you said you wanted to know how well an old save works with the new system. Not surprisingly, not well at all. I had a save with a couple of docked vessels in orbit that used the older Kerbalism. When I loaded it with the new pre-release, the monitor window reported food/water/electricity as all "perpetual", but as has already been reported, my kerbals ran out of oxygen almost immediately. It's not a big deal, though. I wouldn't really expect something like this to be backwards-compatible with already launched ships. It's just the price of progress. I have some questions about file tweaking. It looks like the profile CFGs must be in the proper "Profiles" folder. Is this correct? Also, to get the stress system working the way I like it, I had to make changes directly to the "settings.cfg" because I don't see a way of changing those values via a separate MM cfg file. Both of these things are workable, but they can get a little messy when you update since I'm having to make changes directly within your mod's file structure. That means every time you update and I replace the Kerbalism folder in GameData, I have to make sure to backup/restore or re-edit all of the files that I've changed. It works, but it's not going to be very convenient in the long run. On the subject of resource definitions, I take it from your notations that the resource defs MUST be in the Profiles folder at the moment (in the pre-release), and Kerbalism can't yet pull them from Community Resource Pack? So what happens when a profile defines a resource with the same name as a CRP resource? Are they interchangeable then? What if they have the same name but different values, does everything become a mess? Hopefully the final release version (tomorrow!?!) will fully integrate with CRP and make this question moot, but I'm still curious. One last little question. A bit of math taught me that the "very bad thing" happens (like death from suffocation) when an accumulator reaches 1.0. At what values do you get the other warnings if no warning_threshold / danger_threshold / fatal_threshold is defined in the rule? Oh, ONE more question... Entertainment. Is it possible somewhere to change the interface name of things like that? It's not a big deal, but I'd prefer for it to be called something like "amenities", because in general I think it encompasses things like beds, kitchens, open spaces, and exercise equipment, while "entertainment" makes me think it refers to things like plasma TVs, radios, and (zero-G?!) ping-pong tables.

Great to hear, thanks!

Neat, thanks! Just so you know, though, you have the Lieutenant rank names backwards on the SpaceDock page. They're fine in the mod itself.

Ooh, I see, thanks! And glad to hear that the teleporting will be fixed soon. I really find this mod fun. Even when it doesn't matter in the slightest, I really enjoy looking at my satellite and knowing it'll come down 360 years from now! Also, any reason to have to fly supply missions to a space station makes me happy.

That confused me. Is there some other mod we should be using along with this one to get more accurate decay? I noticed yesterday, by the way, that when I was orbiting very close to another vessel that I had almost exactly matched velocities with, if I increased the game speed to anything more than one arrow the other ship would start teleporting a few hundred meters every second or so, and not always in the same direction! That doesn't happen without this mod installed. Any idea why?

@Nereid I can give your more information about that ship deformation bug, Nereid, and I bet you'll be able to reproduce it 100% of the time, too. I spent the better part of today tracking down which of my huge collection of mods was destroying my ship on reload, and I was really surprised when it turned out to be Nanogauges! To see the bug simply build any vessel that has at least one piece attached to another, but the important thing is that you then click on the "Tool:Move" button in the upper left and move a piece so it intersects another one. Then launch and use Hyperedit or some other means to get the vessel in orbit (the bug won't appear unless you are "launched"). Leave the vehicle and go back to the space center, enter the tracking station, and go back to your vessel. The piece you edited with "Tool:Move" will have popped back to its original location... or worse. I've seen the pieces move and explode spectacularly, and I've also seen them just push everything else out of their way, bending and warping the alignment on all the other pieces. When I went back to an orbital shuttle of mine it looked like a paper airplane some kid had crumpled up in his hand. Not pretty. Anyway, hope you can fix this. It's 100% consistent, but it only seems to affect pieces that have been moved like that.

Yep, I've run into it before, but it was easier to deal with than when I was trying to make sense of this new unfamiliar code. I already had Notepad++, so I tried it found that it solved the problem, so I felt pretty silly. I had already edited the complaint and question out of my post before you answered, but thank you for your help!

@ShotgunNinja I'm super-excited to start testing the new customizable version! Thanks!

@sarbian Ah, thank you! I thought the values were multiplicative but then they weren't behaving that way so I was confused. Turns out it was because of my syntax being bad. I was using an old hotrockets .cfg as an example, and it had the mach and density curves broken up into separate emission{} sections, so I thought that was the way it was done. Obviously that .cfg wasn't working as intended, either! Thanks again for your patience in helping me with this.

@ShotgunNinja I can't tell you how excited I am by your plans to make Kerbalism a sort of open framework for life support systems of almost any description! I'm really impressed by how you listened to people complaining that this mod wasn't tweakable enough, and instead of getting annoyed you went the extra mile (and then some!) to design a system that might just make EVERYONE happy. I'm so impressed by what you've revealed of your plans, and I can't wait to get my hands on the final product!

Still not having a ton of luck with those tiny density increments. So how do two different emission curves interact? For instance, what happens when I have the following... emission { mach = X 1.0 } emission { density = X 0.0 } At the point at which mach and density are both "X", what is the emission value?

Thank you, I'll try using that! EDIT: After looking at this float curve business for a couple of minutes, I think I now understand why I was having every problem I've ever had. Thanks!!

I guess I'm silly not to have realized that starting the emission at mach0.0001 might solve the problem. I assume it would? Of course, then I guess I wouldn't get any pre-takeoff smoke, so that won't work either. Would mixing a mach curve with a density curve that cut everything off at 0.0 density work? While we're on the subject, why is it that varying emission by density is so inaccurate compared to density readings something like MechJeb/RPM/Nanogauges gives you? If, for instance, I set up a curve to start at density 1.0 and end by density 0.999, it will fade out at around 1200meters, even though MechJeb reports the atmospheric density at that height to be around 0.8 atmos. It doesn't seem to matter at all how I set the fadeout density, it won't even start to pay attention until after about 11-1200m. Just wondering why, and if there's a better tool to use to judge atmo density for Smokescreen effects.

@KaiserSoze Like that? Type an @ symbol and a popup should appear. Keep typing the name you want and click on it when it comes up in the popup box.

I got the most recent firespitter.dll by just downloading the most recent total firespitter package straight from GitHub. Still have no idea where to find it by website or download site, but it does say it's for 1.1.2 on GitHub. Regardless, updating Firespitter, IFS, Tweakscale, and redownloading SpaceY which says it's for 1.1.2 now, even though the version didn't change, DID fix my problem. I doubt all that was necessary but that's what I tried and it works now. (My tanks were the wrong size, too, and now they're fine.)

I've run into a bug that I strongly suspect isn't new, but I'm reporting it just in case. When you use mach speed to control emissions, it works fine until the spacecraft leaves the atmosphere, at which time the emission suddenly restarts. (I assume mach has gone to -1 or something, and smokescreen doesn't know what to do with it?) It causes me trouble with launch smoke effects, because I either have to control it with air pressure, which isn't sensitive enough at ground level, or mach speed, which means the stage must be jettisoned below 70km unless I want smoke in outer space.

And where in the heck do you get a new version of Firespitter? (I've got horrible texture fighting since 1.1.2, as well.)

Thank you @Jacke and @sarbian for your help and info on my OR problem. I think I've figured out a simple way of doing what I want without needing such a thing at all, so it's all good. I love how helpful this community is!

@Jacke, I would've thought that the missing @ was a mistake in my post, not in what I did earlier, but it wasn't working, so I tried it. I've now tried everything I could think of, carefully documenting each try, and here are the results: (Note the two things I'm testing for are very similar in name- "Kerolox-Lower-F1" and "Kerolox-Lower".) @PART[*]:HAS[@PLUME[Kerolox-Lower-F1]]:FINAL ............. WORKS @PART[*]:HAS[@PLUME[Kerolox-Lower]]:FINAL ............. WORKS @PART[*]:HAS[@PLUME[Kerolox-Lower-F1] | @PLUME[Kerolox-Lower]]:FINAL ............. NOTHING WORKS @PART[*]:HAS[@PLUME[Kerolox-Lower-F1]|@PLUME[Kerolox-Lower]]:FINAL ............. FIRST CASE WORKS, SECOND DOES NOT So now I'm totally lost. But hey, I learned one thing I didn't know before! MM seems to care about spaces. >_>

I actually made it sound more complicated than I need it to be! Your information is great, Jacke, and thanks for taking the time to explain it. I'm sorry I didn't make the problem clear and save you some typing. A plain old inclusive OR is fine for what I want, since there will never be a time that the part has more than one of the choices, and it wouldn't hurt anything if it did! I've tried | , because I saw it used in a different context, but I couldn't get it to work so I assumed it didn't in this case. Sorry for being dense, but where exactly where would I put the | ? So what I believe I tried was... @PART[*]:HAS[@PLUME[firstthing] | PLUME[secondthing]] The first thing worked, but the second didn't, if I'm remembering correctly. (I've tried too many things to remember, now!:P)

Clever solution, but it won't really work, because although I gave a two-part example, what I really want to do is apply the same long bunch of code to a whole LIST of things without having to write it all out for every one of them. I take it your response means that there isn't a simple OR syntax for this? I'm really surprised, it seems so obvious.