Jump to content

nightingale

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,137

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by nightingale

  1. nightingale
    Will do, forgot to do that today. On mobile for a bit, so may be a couple days before I am able.
  2. nightingale
    I get a lot of support requests - humor me.
  3. nightingale
    Please don't cross post the same issue on multiple threads.
  4. nightingale
    Please confirm you're using Contract Configurator 1.5.0. If you are, then please provide a log that covers the time period where the contract disappeared.
  5. nightingale
    Hmmm, unless DMagic has changed something, it sounds like you're using the wrong scanner. You should be using the Multispectral sensor for a biome scan.
  6. nightingale
    They are either from the SCANsat or SCANsat Lite contract packs. Anyway, wrong thread, but the first thing I'd check is if what's reported on the contract matches what SCANsat reports (if you have the whole thing mapped but it says 1% on the contract, then it's a Contract Configurator issue). If they're in alignment, then it's a SCANsat issue. In that case you'd be best off asking in the SCANsat thread, although the most obvious things to me would be out of power (you said it's not the case), orbital inclination (how polar is it?), and altitude (30 km and 95 km both seem really low to me, but it's been a while since I've personally used it).
  7. nightingale
    Not really. As Yemo points out, I already have that functionality. When I say "technically challenging", I don't mean that I don't know how to do it - just that I have to be careful how it's done. It needs to be careful to put things in the right state when a user either loads up a save or when starting a new game. Right now it takes the simplistic approach of disabling whatever needs disabling on game start and never looking back.
  8. nightingale
    Yeah, the support for disabling of contracts is intended for developers who want to replace stock contracts. It's a little bit more challenging technically speaking, but I'll consider supporting that in-game for stock contracts in-game (since it makes sense to have it all in one spot). Actually it opens up an ugly can of worms if I don't support it. Suppose you have a contract pack "Some Guy's Part Testing" (not to be confused with sumghai). This contract pack removes the part testing contracts, and replaces them with something different. If you disable this contract pack, ideally one would expect it to work as if it wasn't installed in that save (ie. stock part testing contracts should come back). So the easiest way is to just give the end-user control (which means a little bit more work for them in re-enabling them in a new save).
  9. nightingale
    Yup, that's exactly it - there was a time when it defaulted all the craft to be pointing straight up (because I mainly tested it with rockets, and assumed that SPH craft would've worked "correctly"). So odin_spain would've had to rotate the craft to make them look right. Ideally he should go fix the .craft files - not sure how many he would have to fix though. This could be a bug, but I'd like some more information. Could you provide: A save file (this will list the contracts active/offered/pre-loaded) The contracts the "unexpected" vessels are from (if you can figure it out). A log from when the vessels spawned (if available).
  10. nightingale
    You most likely need to progress in the tech tree a little bit, the requirements to start seeing contracts for RemoteTech are: Have a power generator unlocked (ie solar panels) Have an Antenna unlocked (the one in the start node is fine) Haven't already created a CommSat network for the body in question (this is mainly for people adding it to existing saves).
  11. nightingale
    Sorry, it's been pushed to the back burner for a while, there's been lots of bugs and performance issues to deal with. Things are clearing up, so should be working on it soon. The issue is in the GitHub tracker, but don't have the link handy as I'm on mobile at the moment. EDIT: The GitHub issue is [#221]. Feel free to follow that issue if you want to know when it gets updated.
  12. nightingale
    Congratulations on the release!
  13. nightingale
    For pure contract packs without any code at all, I tend to just use 1.0.99 as the "max" ksp version.... a few less mods to worry about when a new KSP version comes out. I'm very tempted to change contract packs to 1.99.99 and mods other than Contract Configurator to 1.0.99.... as CKAN right now doesn't have a good way of handling updating the .version file aside from re-releasing the mod entirely.
  14. nightingale
    You could use defined vessels to make them mutually independent: // Use this in the Pioneer contract PARAMETER { name = VPG type = VesselParameterGroup define = Pioneer PARAMETER { name = IsNotVessel type = IsNotVessel vessel = Sputnik } // Add other vessel parameters here } // Use this in the Sputnik contract PARAMETER { name = VPG type = VesselParameterGroup define = Sputnik PARAMETER { name = IsNotVessel type = IsNotVessel vessel = Pioneer } // Add other vessel parameters here } Another option is to put the contracts together in a child contract group with maxSimultaneous = 1, that way the player can only accept one at a time (might be a better option is you have a LOT of these that you want to make independent).
  15. nightingale
    No photoshop, but tried this using both GIMP and the forum converter program: Used 'Agency_scaled.dds' - get the load failure on 'Agency_scaled', then the failure when it tries read the unscaled logo to make the scaled logo. Used 'Agency_scaled.truecolor' - No failure messages, but there's obviously a load failure as the scaled logo in game just appears as a question mark (presumably a placeholder image). EDIT: Just double checked, and the stock .truecolor images are indeed PNG, no idea why they use the weird file extension. Maybe I'll just rename mine too so people trying to mass-DDS convert won't get caught.
  16. nightingale
    This is why I'm tempted to move to a real documentation system like Doxygen... this way it could have an always-up sidebar/frame to make navigation so much easier. But I just don't think it's in the cards due to the effort required to set it up. In general, GitHub wiki has some serious limitations that make it a pain to work with (the TOC and breadcrumbs are generated by perl scrips that I had to write myself, for example). Huh, not sure how that happened, fixed now. I'll add a paragraph to give an explanation of how to read the tables.
  17. nightingale
    There could be many explanations, the most common one I've seen is issues with agency flags converted to DDS. Regardless, I'd need a log to do anything beyond guessing.
  18. nightingale
    Thanks you both for the feedback. For this item: Agreed, and documenting the 'type' elsewhere is the first step for this... hopefully I'll be able to expand this a fair bit to make it easier. - - - Updated - - - Also, severedsolo, I assume you've read this page? It has lots of examples (although the examples themselves are fairly basic). Is what you think you would want an expansion of that page, or something entirely different?
  19. nightingale
    I'd settle for some smarts around punting currently unused texture out of the local set until they are actually needed... but that AND a texture reduction pass would be absolutely fantastic.
  20. nightingale
    I've definitely seen and experienced that issue (it's usually a post in Contract Configurator saying "OMG I have no contracts". I don't have the exact error handy, but it's the unity error saying that the texture data can't be directly accessed from code, being thrown from stock code in the agency loader. So I'm amazed why it would work for you....
  21. nightingale
    Just to make sure I'm clear, are they just less frequent (3-4 seconds instead of every second) or also less pronounced (harder to measure, but is the "stall" for a shorter period of time or about the same). Additionally for you or anyone who is able to volunteer the time - how much is it affected by craft part count? I know this one can be hard to tell too since KSP in general can slow down lots with high part counts.
  22. nightingale
    Okay, quick survey for everyone who is doing or has done contract packs - what do you think about the Contract Configurator documentation? I ask because I'm going to very soon be doing a pass through the documentation to add the type information for each field (which is useful knowledge for writing expression, and in some cases is absolutely required knowledge). It's a pretty big job in terms of the amount of parameters, etc. so I may use the opportunity to clean stuff up a bit. So specific questions: What do you think of the one-big-page approach for the parameters/requirements/behaviours? Is it too busy? Would you prefer having one page per item (assuming that there's a proper sidebar/indexing to go with it). One concern I have is that the GitHub wikis aren't exactly searchable, so having lots of child pages may hide info - but maybe that's not a big deal. Is there major information that you feel is missing? What do you NOT want me to change? Do you like how the current documentation is basically a "sample" chunk of text that you can copy+paste in? Would you prefer if this was some sort of table? (I can't see being able to move away from providing samples, and don't want to document it twice... but still interested in opinions).
  23. nightingale
    Although I have to agree with AlonzoTG - it's much better when that kind of thing is clearly spelled out in the contract so the players don't have to guess at it.
  24. nightingale
    Yeah, just to give a little bit more background, I got a report from Yemo (of SETI) that helped narrow down what I thought were the original issues with the contract generation to issues with the CollectScience parameter (the one that says to actually run the experiments). I put in some fixes that should definitely improve that for 1.5.0. So if anyone is still having lag issues with 1.5.0, I'd like to hear about it. Also, can you let me know if it's better, worse or about the same as 1.4.2.
  25. nightingale
    Yeah, those warnings are leftover from my last round of debugging... they are still useful, but I'm hitting the limit of how much I can fix those. That being said there should've been some improvements in Contract Configurator 1.5.0. Can you confirm that's the version you were running? If not, can you update and let me know if that improves the issues you saw with the Temperature Scan experiments?
×
×
  • Create New...