linuxgurugamer

New release: http://spacedock.info/mod/52/Contract%20Pack:%20Rover%20Missions License: CC-BY_NA-4.0 Source included in file Please note that this REQUIRES Contract Configurator 1.9.2.1 to work properly Waypoint Manager is HIGHLY recommended. # RoverContracts This mod was originally released by whyren. He hasn't been doing anything with it, and I wanted to expand it. The following is his original text: Here is an Opportunity to seize the Spirit of rovers! Have I piqued your Curiosity? YuTu can send manned and unmanned rovers across the system and run them for years beyond their intended life span until the wheels crumble! This contract pack offers two new missions: 1. Rover Deployment: encourages you to send rovers to planets/moons where you don't have them. 2. Rover Expedition: Detects a location near your rover and requests whatever scientific experiments the rover is equipped with be completed at that location. The more capable the rover, the greater the returns. Take the mission as often as you want and enjoy the challenge and immersion of navigating and studying alien terrain! See it in action! http://imgur.com/a/3CFnK Requires Contract Configurator 1.5.3 or newer. Waypoint Manager is HIGHLY recommended. THANK YOU, nightingale, for your tireless work and patient help. The Rover Expedition has now been expanded with up to 5 waypoints which you have i to visit. And you don't know where they are until you are on the mission. There will soon be more science as well. As I get more science experiments listed, I'll release new versions ========================================================================= Donations are gratefully accepted. I use Patreon since Paypal seems to take a much higher percentage: https://www.patreon.com/linuxgurugamer

Just released the RoverContractsRedux: https://kerbalstuff.com/mod/1383/Contract%20Pack:%20Rover%20Missions%20Redux

I know that you can specify a minVersion in a ContractGroup, can you do that in a Contract_Type as well? i don't see it in the wiki

I'm pretty sure that sitmask is the situation, but I can't find anything which talks about how it is set. Pointers would be helpful. Thanks in advance

I saw the post, but I think they just wanted longer durations to allow for the possibility of that type of maneuver, not necessarily to have a contract for both. Anyway, no, there is no way to add deadlines or combine contracts. Ok, thanks Assuming you mean the distance at the time the contract is offered (that's when expressions are executed), then it is theoretically possible, but I'd need to add a function for it. Enhancement request. No, I was hoping to use it at the time of completion. As in the closer to the waypoint the experiment is run, the more science is returned. Anyway, while I'm disappointed in the results (no reflection on you), I am happy that at least I'm giving you better and more complete information for you to be able to at least identify the issues. Thanks for all your hard work. I'm going to release the Rover Contracts without the completeInSequence for now (after testing your possible solution) later today Looking forward to it. I know of at least one streamer who is eagerly waiting for it

I've been watching this with interest. Here are some results using the latest version: Startup menu Space Center Into MI and back to main menu DTL-DirectX 3252 3557 3922 OpenGL 2317 2548 2868 DirectX 3758 3972 3988 So, at least for heavily moddel installs, OpenGL is still the best way to go

Ok, I've just finished trying to get this completeInSequence working as you described. Doesn't work, at least for the second and third of the iterated parameters. Here is what happens: Start mission, all science (3 for the rover I'm using, including a thermometer) is shown properly in Contracts+ window. Waypoint manager shows the first waypont (screenshot 0) Got to waypoint (screenshot 1) Collected science (screenshot 2) Traveled to Waypoint 2 (screenshot 3) Collected temperature @waypoint 2 (screenshot 4) Got to Waypoint 3, look at the Contracts window (screenshot 5) If I remove the completeInSequence, the contract completes. With it there, it doesn't complete, even if I do another temperature scan. This is using the dev version of the dll, which I downloaded earlier today. Here is a link to the zip file with the contract and the images: https://www.dropbox.com/s/dink6mpjres4qtc/rover.zip?dl=0 Hope this helps --- On another note, this may be an enhancement request: I'd like to make the science reward dependent on how close to the waypoint the rover is. Is there a function which will return the distance from the waypont? Also, I noticed that waypoints which were generated in contracts which I then cancelled stayed in the Waypoint window. Will they go away eventually?

Whats the difference in these two parameters, they seem to do the same thing: situation = SrfLanded location = Surface Oh, and thanks for the update on 1.9.2 I tried this: VesselParameterGroup |- VisitWaypoint \- CollectScience (completeInSequence = true) and there one thing thing wrong with it: The second, I am not sure that you can do anything about, based on your earlier comments: Once I run an experiment, it goes green in the contracts window, and is green for all succeeding waypoints. Note that the "Collect science" line IS white until I run the experiment. Is there any way (either now or in the future) that you can come up with a way to unset an experiment, say, after it was transmitted? One other thing which may not be fixable and is not a high priority: In the mission control, where you select the missions, all parts of the mission are visible before selecting the mission, and even after the mission is selected, all parts are shown when you select it Good news is that the waypoints are working properly, and so is the WaypointManager and the stuff in the RandomWaypointNear. You even fixed something I didn't tell you about :-) which was that the waypoint manager was showing the generated waypoints in reverse order I'm still working on the completeInSequence --- On a different note, someone just asked me a question about my UnmannedContracts pack. Would it be possible to have some way to either combine contracts into one, or at least have some way to add their deadlines together? This specific question was about using slingshot maneuvers to have a single probe go to multiple planets. The deadline may be fine for a single destination, but when doing two contracts together, it may not be possible to complete in time.

Hmmm. I'll have to think about this, I understand what you are saying now.

Ok, makes sense now. Thanks. Just for planning, I have a few people asking me about this pack: I assume the next version will be 1.9.2? Any ETA on a release date? Thanks

Normally, this is where you'd want to use disableOnStateChange = false, but there's not state change back to incomplete for the experiment ones. What you need to do is set it with VisitWaypointFirst, then CollectScience with completeInSequence = true. This will prevent the CollectScience from being able to fire unless you're at the waypoint. Since the ternary expression is using a boolean to get a boolean, you can just do: hidden = @/numWaypoints < 5 First, thanks, I'll check this out this evening I can't believe I did that with the hidden, all I can say is that I was tired at the time I'm not sure I understand your answer to #3. Not what to do, but how do do it. How do I set the state for an experiment to false?

Found the answer to this, which is totally uninitutive. Hit the Undo button in the editor window (the curved arrow pointing left)

It's not. This contract pack doesn't do multiple targets at this time. I would need to learn or be told some of the multple transfer windows before I could even think of doing them Thanks

I just updated the mod, it now has reasonable deadlines. I erred on the side of too long rather than too short. I looked at a dV map, got all the transfer times, doubled them and added 100 or so. Let me know if this is good enough

Wish I could, but I don't really have the time to do something like this. Modding KSP takes up what little free time I do have. It seems fairly simple, though, maybe someone else can take a stab at it: A simple version would do the following: Create a menu item to set the pre-update script, and post update script in a single dialog. Or maybe this can be added to the config screen Add hook (?) to run pre-update script before doing any updates Add hook(?) to run post-update script after doing updates

Thanks for the feedback. I'll take a look at it.

Ok. I've made a lot of good progress, but am stuck. Here are the issues: in the RandomWaypointNear, the parameter doesn't seem to work, I've tried a number of permutations. Probably as a result of the above, Waypoint Manager shows all waypoints, and on the map, will show them until they have been investigated Experiments seem to only be complete-able one time. After completing an experiment at the first location, it appears to be fulfilled when going to the next location This isn't a problem, just wondering if there is a better way: I'm using the following line to make sure that unused waypoints aren't shown at all: hidden = @/numWaypoints >= 5? false:true When in the middle of a contract, I see by using the alt-F10, that the parameter line looks correct, but it always says "deterministic = true". See the screenshot in the zip file which also has the contract for an example. The RANDOM_WAYPOINT_NEAR nodes in the posted contract show three different attempts to get the parameter to work, none of them do. Here is a link to the zip file which contains the rover contract and the 3 screenshots I took: https://www.dropbox.com/s/xkcdpmdy1do2cdu/RoverContract.zip?dl=0

Thank you

Done, & Thanks

Is there a plugin which would have CKAN run an external script before doing any changes, and then run another script after all changes are complete?

I'm not sure if this is possible yet: when generating a RANDOM_WAYPOINT, I'd like the name to be unique for each. I have a number of strings in a list, which I'd like to use for this Also. the "parameter =", would be useful if it could refer to a generated parameter name, so that a number of waypoints can be generated, each dependent on a different parameter. Finally, the nearIndex, would be nice if, instead of all the waypoints being near a single one, if each could be near the previous one. This isn't critical, for now I'm just putting in 5 RANDOM_WAYPOINT seconds, but would be nice if I could make that smaller.

I'm very embarrassed. I've been programming for more than 40 years. In that time, I've learned many lessons, one of which I totally forgot. I made a minimal contract, and immediately the syntax error I was doing was obvious. I'm sorry for the past several posts, all I can say is that I'm out of practice, having been in system administration for the past 10 years. Let me say that I went down the ITERATOR path after the problems with the massive script-built set of contracts, in the hope it would solve some of the problems I was having. Instead it caused a whole bunch of problem, mostly my fault. I would like to thank you for your patience and the answers, some of them were very useful. I would like to request that you continue to allow an expression for a name, for the following reason: If the names aren't unique, then there would be no way to reference it in the Random_waypoint_near section in the parameter = line Now that it compiles, I can test. The issues I raised on github were raised by a contract (which I can send you if you like) which did not do any iteration. I'll update them with the results from my next set of tests. LGG

I did post it earlier, but to make it easier to debug, I'm going to make a minimal contract to show the problem. I'll have it up later. If you don't want an expression for a name, then, inside an iterative parameter, there will be multiple names with the same value. I suppose it's ok, but can get confusing when debugging

Can you get it in CKAN? Let me know if you need help

I tried that: PARAMETER { name = Sequence type = Sequence completeInSequence = true PARAMETER { name = ReachState type = ReachState failWhenUnmet = true maxTerrainAltitude = 1000 } PARAMETER { name = PARAM1 @id type = All ITERATOR { type = int id = @/nums } PARAMETER { name = Sequence type = Sequence disableOnStateChange = false title = Investigate @/currentLocs.ElementAt(@../../id) hiddenParameter = Location @/currentLocs.ElementAt(@../../id) AllResearch and I got: ContractConfigurator.SequenceFactory: CONTRACT_TYPE 'RoverExplore', PARAMETER 'Sequence' of type 'Sequence': Error parsing title (Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56) Exception: Unknown identifier '@/Sequence/id' I'm curious about your suggesting the double .., since as I read this, with the ../ is the current paraneter, and one ../ is the immediate parent. The id is defined in the immediate parent. According to your docs: Identifiers created in a ITERATOR node are accessed as if they were a part of the parent node (by referencing them as @<identifier> within that node). You can see that I added @id to the PARAM1 and that didn't generate an error, but inside any of the child parameters, it doesn't seem to be accessable