nightingale

New release, more sane rewards to be found here! ContractPack-Tourism 1.5.1 Added a minAltitude parameter on the sub-orbital flight to make it more clear (thanks Deimos Rast). Added loading tip. Fixed reward of hotel/casino tourist contract (thanks CaptKordite).

New release here, mostly a cosmetic update - but a very pretty one! Special thanks to @rough93 for letting me use his logo! ContractPack-RemoteTech 2.1.3 New logo (thanks rough93). Added loading tip.

New release, download is here! Strategia 1.3.0 Added basic support for ResearchBodies (strategies for unresearched bodies are unavailable). Combine popups triggered with the same text/purpose. Made contracts work better with Contract Configurator 1.15.x. Added loading tip. Fixed To Boldly Go not awarding bonuses when the science reward slider isn't set to 100% (thanks Smu). Fixed minor issues with currency popups.

New release, download here! The orbit/waypoint disabling is fairly basic (you can't select by contract), and doesn't affect the stock contracts (I may look at it for a future release). Let me know what you guys think! Contract Configurator 1.17.0 Mission Control remembers the last visited tab when you open it, and takes you there. Added Tracking Station buttons for filtering orbits/waypoints from contracts. Added support for adding loading tool tips. Better support for Kolniya/Tundra orbits - will error if the orbit would exit the SOI. Also added CelestialBody methods to determine if the body is allowed to have Kolniya/Tundra orbits. Fix for contracts not being offered on a brand new save until at least one stock contract is offered (thanks to all the RP-0 users who reported this). Fixed issue where parameter completion data wasn't correctly copied to newly created vessel on undock/decouple (thanks linuxgurugamer). Fixed DraftTwitchViewers support. Fixed issue with using Enter button to go to Mission Control (thanks Deimos Rast). Fixed agent for stock satellite contracts. Fixed issue with sortKey in child contract groups (thanks pap1723).

@pap1723 - At a glance your vessel stuff looks good. Can you provide a save from right before docking and I'll take a look? As to the child group thing - I've fixed that check so that it works properly for the next release.

I don't know what causes it to do that, but I believe it's a stock bug versus something Strategia does. I just tried and I can't reproduce it right now (but I used to see that all the time, but not nearly that bad). I'm fairly certain that I reproduced it without Strategia too. I can't tell since you didn't record the cursor, but I mostly saw it when the cursor was between the strategy columns. The various building interiors are just overlays on top of the space center - so it's possible that there's something messed up with the z-levels (but not sure why the on mouse-over type event would screw that up). I'll do some more digging and see if I can reproduce this again.

Then please provide a screenshot.

Screenshot and logs. Rep is between -1000 and 1000 (but can also be displayed as a percentage). So I don't really know what you mean.

Send you a PR with the fix (but just for the one contract, I assume you have the same issue in others). I don't have a good way to make it more transparent, although the DEBUG log message gives a *slight* hint as to the problem: [DEBUG] ContractConfigurator.ExpressionRequirement: Contract CleverSatCore: requirement Expression was not met. [DEBUG] ContractConfigurator.ContractType: Cancelling contract of type CleverSatCore (Put a new Satellite in orbit of Kerbin): Failed on contract requirement check.

@Vonnmillard - It mimicks the stock system where if you have sufficient negative rep, you can't be offered any exceptional contracts. @severedsolo - This sounds like a bug (like a contract requirement check throwing an exception, or just failing incorrectly). Can you send me a log with debug turned on?

@Parallax59 - This is the error that is the cause of your problems: [EXC 10:09:55.782] MissingMethodException: Method not found: 'FinePrint.Utilities.CelestialUtilities.GenerateOrbit'. Contracts.Contract.Generate (System.Type contractType, ContractPrestige difficulty, Int32 seed, State state) Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContract (Int32 seed, ContractPrestige difficulty, System.Type contractType) Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContract (System.Int32& seed, ContractPrestige difficulty) Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContracts (System.Int32& seed, ContractPrestige difficulty, Int32 count) Contracts.ContractSystem.RefreshContracts () Contracts.ContractSystem+<UpdateDaemon>c__Iterator81.MoveNext () That's the stock contract system falling over (which is why it thinks you haven't done certain contracts - it's failing to load them. From previous posts, I've heard of this being caused by old versions of DMagic Orbital Science (which I see you have installed). So I'd update that (and any other mods that need updating - Orbital Decay appears to be spewing errors too). @linuxgurugamer - I want to implement something quick for filtering out waypoints/orbits in the tracking station, but it shouldn't take too long. Probably looking at a release Sunday or Monday.

@linuxgurugamer - It's not really a stock bug, as the checks for invalid orbits are hardcoded into the stock contracts. The Kolniya orbit that KSP generates is a real Molniya orbit - it needs to have the highest possible eccentricity, and a period that matches the period of the celestial body. Because of that, the apoapsis is always the same (and in Mun's case, outside the SOI). So I've added calls to the stocks checks into the orbit generation code (your contract now errors as invalid). However, to allow you to fix it and still assign a random body, I've added new CelestialBody methods - CelestialBody.CanHaveKolniyaOrbit() and CelestialBody.CanHaveTundraOrbit(). You can use these to filter out bodies like Mun which no longer allow the Kolniya orbit.

It's possible (although I'd prefer to try to regenerate the orbit if it's "bad"). That being said, I haven't been able to reproduce it - so far it is correctly limited by the altitudeFactor (defaults to 0.8). The stock code should set the max apoapsis to SOI * altitudeFactor, which seems to be what I'm seeing. Do you have a save and/or screenshot with a bad orbit that I can take a look at?

@hargn - Not sure if the inheritance is something that I can easily support. As far as the orbit types, it just calls the stock functions, so they should work. @linuxgurugamer - As mentioned above, the KOLNIYA uses a stock function - so I'm about 95% sure that is a stock bug. But I'll take a closer look to make sure. @Deimos Rast - Well that's kind of silly, I never use that button. Anyway, fixed for next release.

Can you post a screenshot with some examples? As well, I'll need to see a KSP.log and a save file (preferably a non-RP-0 one but I'll take anything).

I'd argue that the cost of the crew capsule can be made irrelevant - as you can make some or all of that cost back depending on where you land it. But I did do a quick dump of costs and came up with this table: Part Cost Mass Seats Mass/Seat Mk3 Passenger Module 30000 6.5 16 0.406 MK2 Crew Cabin 4200 2 4 0.500 Mk1 Crew Cabin 550 1 2 0.500 Mk1 Lander Can 1500 0.6 1 0.600 PPD-10 Hitchhiker Storage Container 4000 2.5 4 0.625 Mk1 Command Pod 600 0.8 1 0.800 Mk3 Cockpit 10000 3.5 4 0.875 Mk2 Inline Cockpit 3500 2 2 1.000 Mk2 Cockpit 3500 2 2 1.000 Mk1 Inline Cockpit 1600 1 1 1.000 Mk2 Lander Can 3250 2.5 2 1.250 Mk1 Cockpit 1250 1.25 1 1.250 Mk1 Cockpit 1250 1.28 1 1.280 Mk1-2 Command Pod 3800 4 3 1.333 Mobile Processing Lab MPL-LG-2 4000 3.5 2 1.750 PPD-12 Cupola Module 3200 1.76 1 1.760 So the MK3 Passenger Module is the winner - but it's not a clear victory. Still, for your contract that's close to 4 extra tons you're looking to haul to orbit. If you do choose to factor in cost, then the MK1 Crew Cabin is a very clear victor. More solids! That's probably their biggest benefit - they are ridiculously cheap. When I read this I knew there had to be a problem, because there shouldn't be that much variability. Sure enough, it was using the wrong tourist count to figure out the contract reward. It's supposed to be roughly 30k / tourist. So your contract should've been offering around 1,170,000 funds. The hotel/casino are meant to be late game and non-grindy (the casino pays 4 times as much). So although I enjoyed the meta game of figuring out the launch costs to this level of detail... fixed for next release.

You'd probably be better off just playing career, cheating yourself lots of funds and upgrading all the buildings. Making the contracts give science instead of funds can be done with a strategy (forget the name). After that, just ignore funds.

Mods I Never Finished (and never may) I don't have much that I can report on in terms of what I'm currently working on (one project that is still under wraps, and a lot of bug fixes and boring stuff). But I do have a lot of stuff that has never been seen or talked about on these forums. So for today, I present to you nightingale's never-finished mods. These are mods that I had planned on doing, and in some cases even gotten a fair bit of work into, but never actually completed for various reasons. Full Contract This was the original "contract pack", before that term had even come around. This was the mod that I wanted to build when I started making Contract Configurator. The plan was that when Contract Configurator was complete, I would do the actual contract mod. It was intended to give a full KSP story/progression within career mode. There wasn't a ton of original ideas (analogs for today's space agencies, every word starting with "K"). The only thing that ever got done was this list of agencies. One neat thing that I was planning was to have 3 main agencies, and when you take the starter contract for one agency it locks you out of the others (giving 3 ways to play it). All in all, it aimed to do stuff that has since been done many times by other authors. So I'm unlikely to pick this one back up. Contract Pack: Space Objects This was intended to by my fourth contract pack after Tourism Plus. The idea would be to expand on the stock generated asteroids. I wanted to do generated comets (and I wanted to make them look nice) using a similar system. Killer asteroid redirect contracts would be a must. In the end though, I couldn't think of many more ideas, and hit technical difficulties on the asteroid stuff. I never made much headway, so I switched over to Field Research and never looked back. Contract Pack: The Joolean Encounter This is the only one on this list that has a chance of ever seeing the light. The idea is that this would be a sort of Anomaly Surveyor 2 (where the original has some 2001 tie-ins, this one would have 2010 tie-ins). It was intended to be more of a story based contract pack, and I'd spent a fair bit of time mapping out the story and working on some of the effects for the cut-scenes (yes, cut-scenes!). Of course the key moment of 2010 is when the monolith-builders compress Jupiter to start nuclear fusion. So naturally, I had to reproduce that in KSP: I also put some work into my holo-transmitter: All in all, it's hard to know what's going to click with the KSP playerbase. Although I do make mods for myself - I also want them to be successful. So it's hard to tell what level of interest there is in a story based contract pack (there doesn't actually seem to be that much, from what I've observed). So this one will likely stay on the backburner for some time yet. Anyway, as always if you like what you see, make sure to head on over to my Patreon page and check it out.

@hargn - The details don't appear to be in those config files (are you linking me to the correct branch?). That being said, from the error in the log, you still need to change it to reference the group when you use those variables:

@Bombaatu - It'll only show the group line for stock contracts that are offered/active (ie. it won't show empty groups). I don't know offhand what the trigger for getting rescue contracts in stock is.

@ExplorerKlatt is correct. You don't actually need to name the ship Discovery One - that's just what it will use internally to track it once it meets the child conditions.

@r1chardj0n3s - For this issue I'd need to see your KSP.log file covering one of the times when the contracts were lost.

@Nori - There's definitely examples where I've used it (see here). It will only throw that error if requiredValue is true (the default) and if the value is non-deterministic (ie. can't be generated at parse time at the main menu). Now, there's should be another error pushing you towards using SelectUnique() instead, but you may also want to consider using a DATA_EXPAND node for this one instead (which would remove the need for a title or uniquenessCheck). That would look something like this: DATA_EXPAND { type = CelestialBody validTarget = AllBodies().Where(cb => cb.SemiMajorAxis() < @/smamax && cb.SemiMajorAxis() > @/smamin && cb.IsPlanet() && cb.IsHomeWorld() == false) } REQUIREMENT { type = FlyBy targetBody = @/validTarget }

@RageMode, @RickKermen - I've raised #552 for the RP-0 issue. @hargn - Agree with @linuxgurugamer, will probably need to see the full contract config. In particular: CONTRACT_TYPE nodes within CONTRACT_TYPE nodes is not a thing. The other thing to note is you need to reference the contract group name in the variable when using it (so you probably want something like: @MyContractGroup:maxUnlockedTechLevel

@RobertJPowell - That info is perfect, I should have enough to reproduce. I'll let you know if I need anything more.