JupiterJaeden
-
Posts
27 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by JupiterJaeden
-
-
21 hours ago, king of nowhere said:
Just a short notice; i discovered that there is a bug with radiations at high time warp that makes shielding ineffective. now i am limited to x1000 during storms. And i am in a time of high solar activity, i spend more time in a storm than out.
this, and other problems related to radiations, are slowing me down greatly. the duna-dres 600 day transfer would take a few minutes at high time warp in stock game, but i've been at it several days and i'm still 300 days away.
and i don't dare try any of the time-speeding mods because they may trigger the warp bug. and last i checked, they weren't even updated for the last version.
it may take me a while for another update.
I think I remember seeing something about the x1000 limit being due to a mod conflict? There was something about it on the Kerbalism wiki, you should check it out. I think it was on the section that had to do with resource processing but I don't remember exactly.
-
Probably Module Manager lol
-
5 hours ago, PiPaLiPkA said:
Is there any actual documentation on Kerbalism I've spend ages looking and can't find any?
https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki
You can also probably ask for help on the forum thread:
-
3 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:
time control or persistent thrust: can you provide some links? (bolded to attract attention)
i was about to ask for some mode like that in the future anyway, since at some point i will have to send a dolphin back from eeloo. And ion engines powered by solar panels at eeloo, for a 10 km/s burn... yep, i'd rather not do it normally.
as for time control, my poor pc already goes at 1/3 regular time when controlling the main ship. really, i checked the in-game timer with an external chronometer, 31 real seconds to 10 game seconds.
Kos: i only have the faintest training about programming. stuff like editing a saved game file is the apex of my skill.
part welding: no thanks. I don't know how many krakens it would attract, but i'd rather not find out. and there's still plenty of parts i wouldn't be able to join, like the over 100 solar panels, the approximately 80 engines, the 50odd rcs... joining a handful of greenhouses and some fuel tanks is not worth the risk.
All of these mods are at least listed on CKAN, but a couple of them don't support automatic install (you can still install them through CKAN they just won't update automatically I think).
But if you don't use CKAN (why?) here are some direct links:
Time control:Persistent thrust:
TAC fuel balancer:
Also, the thing about time control is that when you use the slow-motion mode it reduces the rate at which the physics engine is trying to calculate physics frames, which can help performance. You can also try adjusting the physics delta-time (time control lets you do this with a convenient in-game GUI but you can also do it through the stock game settings in the main menu). The higher the physics delta-time, the more the game prioritizes physics frames over drawing game frames (so the physics engine will run faster but your FPS will suffer). Lowering the physics delta-time has the reverse effect (slower physics engine, higher FPS).
You could probably also use time control and persistent thrust together, but I have NOT tested this. Even if it doesn't work, there shouldn't be any game-breaking consequences as long as you quicksave before testing it. -
Hey, I have a few mod recommendations that might make your life a bit easier.
Time control OR persistent thrust: To make those long burns easier. With time control, you can also slow down time which puts less stress on the physics engine for when you are handling tons of parts and what not. In-game time goes slower but your computer will run a lot better. Time control actually has a bunch of features that allow you to basically take complete control of time in the game, but you don't have to touch most of them. I haven't actually used persistent thrust but I've heard it can help with the long burns as well. Instead of allowing faster physics warp like time control does, I think it just allows you to calculate "thrust" in an abstract way using normal time warp (i.e. instead of actually doing the physics simulation, just gradually change the orbit over the course of normal time warp while calculating consumed fuel and whatnot).TAC fuel balancer: This mod makes resource transfer so much easier. You can basically use it to transfer any resource between any compatible tanks on the same vessel, and to balance a resource between several tanks as well. Kerbalism actually uses a few pseudo-resources that do show up in the TAC FB menu so just make sure not to touch these. It also allows you to transfer Lf+Ox together in the correct ratio. Whenever stock resource transfer functionality breaks, I turn to TAC FB because it works way better and is way more customizable.
kOS: I have no idea if you are into programming at all but if you want to be able to better automate tedious things you can try this mod. kOS does actually add a few parts that you need to use it though, but I think there is another mod that will add kOS functionality to all stock probe cores and command pods so you don't need the new parts.
Some part welding mod: Since I have never tried anything requiring an absurd number of parts, I've never actually needed to use one of these. But I've heard part welding mods can work wonders when you are dealing with large numbers of the same part. For example, you could probably combine each column of greenhouses into one part. I have no idea if this plays well with Kerbalism or not, but it seems like it could help with the large part count issues. I don't know of any mod that allows you to weld together parts on an existing vessel, so this would require you to restart the mission, so I only recommend it if you choose to do that.
-
On 9/2/2020 at 2:03 PM, Tokamak said:
I'm still trying to get MechJeb and TCA to play nicely with each other, and still having a few issues. Or rather, one issue. I don't know if there is workaround, or if this would have to be added, or if I'm just doing something wrong. TCA is an awesome enough mod (Thank you!) that I'm willing to get fiddly if needed.
TCA prevents MechJeb from changing the craft's orientation. Most of the time I can solve this by turning off all of the navigation options (Level, Stop, Anchor, etc) and turning off "Stabilizer" and "VTOL Assist" in "Advanced Settings" does the trick, but sometimes MechJeb just rotate the craft. I know it's TCA because disabling TCA instantly fixes the problem. But in some instances TCA still totally prevents other mods from rotating the craft, even with all of those functions disabled..
What I'm trying to accomplish is some way to have TCA _only_ balance engine thrust and gimbaling and not craft orientation. Is this possible? I figure I might be missing something, or there might be some technical reason why this isn't feasible.
(Additionally, I just checked and it also interferes with RemoteTech's Flight Computer, meaning I can't use TCA if I want to do a burn on an unbalanced craft with a non-negligible time delay.)
The short version is: Can I tell TCA to *totally* let other mods manage actual rotation, and have TCA only deal with balancing thrust. At which job it is *amazing*.
--
Completely skippable aside:
Just because someone is likely to ask, the reason why I use MechJeb even though TCA has some functionality overlap is that TCA's advanced functions like landing seem to work very well on VTOL aircraft, but appear to be really not optimized for my use-cases. An example being that its landing function does nice careful soft landings like you'd want for a VTOL aircraft, that drink up fuel like crazy with rockets, but usually I need a fuel-efficient hoverslam/suicide burn, which seems not to be what TCA was designed for. Hence using MechJeb.
TCA is *AMAZING* at balancing an unbalanced craft. It's also good with functions like hovering, slow gentle landings, and other things that drink up rocket fuel like crazy but are great with jets, or when you have a lot of extra fuel.
Did you ever figure this out?
-
34 minutes ago, Gotmachine said:
Far from it. The code that handle comms was rewritten nearly from scratch for Kerbalism 4
The commit you linked was a quick and dirty fix in the middle of that rewrite, after that I rewrote the RemoteTech support entirely (it was either that, or dropping it altogether).
It should be possible to backport the new 4.x comms implementation to 3.x, but even assuming you know you way around C# code, this isn't a trivial task.Those aren't minor, and the 3.x support code is borked in many ways (and TBH, the whole 3.x comms implementation is an ugly mess). That's why I rewrote it from scratch.
Also note that while I tested that new code a bit, it hasn't been extensively playtested (so it is likely to have bugs), and there is also a complete lack of support configs for correctly balancing the RT antennas data rates (like what we have for stock CommNet).If you don't know programming / C#, there is way too much for you to learn before you can do that by yourself... This is quite a lot more complex than making a KSP config file.
Plans, yes. Time and motivation, no, unfortunately.
Ah okay, I didn't realize that the whole comms code was rewritten. Nevermind then.
I do actually know some C# programming, I was more asking how the KSP modding stuff works. But I can see that's not going to work.
I might just accept the bugs for now and use them together anyways, or maybe I'll just drop RemoteTech. Or I might just look for some other mods that do similar things as Kerbalism.
In any case, I'll definitely keep an eye out for the 4.0 release. Thanks for the answers!
-
Dude, you're insane. This is insane. INSANELY AWESOME! Can't wait to see if you are able to complete it or not.
-
On 12/14/2020 at 1:01 AM, Gotmachine said:
RemoteTech is unsupported in current (3.x) releases, and my advice is to not try to use both mods together. There are many bugs, and even that put aside, the balance is all over the place
We have fixed the RemoteTech support code in the in-development next major Kerbalism version (4.0), but there is currently no playable release of that version, and we have no ETA on a release.
If you want a realism oriented comms mod, I would suggest looking at RealAntennas which is available for stock and fully compatible with Kerbalism.
Hey Gotmachine,
I was looking more into this because I'm still super hyped to start using Kerbalism, and I noticed that you actually wrote a patch to get the RemoteTech support code working: https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/commit/95c8bcda9be538075c09974c6d622708c287287d?branch=95c8bcda9be538075c09974c6d622708c287287d&diff=unified
So this is obviously supposed to be a part of the 4.0 release, but I was wondering if there was some way I could build my own version of Kerbalism just with this patch? Normally this might be really impractical, but it's such a small patch that fixes like 2 minor bugs. The reason I'm asking you is because I would have no clue how to do this. Could you give me any pointers?Also, I'm curious now what you mean by the balance being messed up. On the github issues page, I could only find 2 relatively minor RemoteTech bugs (https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/issues/436), neither of which really seems to make the game unplayable in any way. Could you elaborate?
Thanks,
JupiterJaeden
EDIT: Also do you ever plan on updating MandatoryRCS? It seems pretty cool -
Does this work in 1.11? Does anyone know?
-
58 minutes ago, mcortez said:
I've submited the bug to github -- https://github.com/RemoteTechnologiesGroup/RemoteTech/issues/822
@N_Molson you can temporarily fix the issue by adding your own module manager patch with the info below, or simply modify the RemoteTech_Squad_Antennas.cfg and rename the part in there by adding the "5" to the name.
@PART[HighGainAntenna5_v2]:FOR[RemoteTech]
{
@MODULE[ModuleDeployableAntenna]
{
%name=ModuleAnimateGeneric
%allowManualControl = false
%actionAvailable = false
%eventAvailableFlight = false
%eventAvailableEditor = false
%eventAvailableEVA = false
}
%MODULE[ModuleRTAntenna] {
%Mode0DishRange = 0
%Mode1DishRange = 25000000000
%EnergyCost = 1.04
%MaxQ = 6000
%DishAngle = 0.12
%DeployFxModules = 0
%ProgressFxModules = 1
%TRANSMITTER {
%PacketInterval = 0.15
%PacketSize = 3
%PacketResourceCost = 20.0
}
}
%MODULE[ModuleSPUPassive] {}
}@PART[HighGainAntenna5]:FOR[RemoteTech]
{
@MODULE[ModuleDeployableAntenna]
{
%name=ModuleAnimateGeneric
%allowManualControl = false
%actionAvailable = false
%eventAvailableFlight = false
%eventAvailableEditor = false
%eventAvailableEVA = false
}
%MODULE[ModuleRTAntenna] {
%Mode0DishRange = 0
%Mode1DishRange = 25000000000
%EnergyCost = 1.04
%MaxQ = 6000
%DishAngle = 0.12
%DeployFxModules = 0
%ProgressFxModules = 1
%TRANSMITTER {
%PacketInterval = 0.15
%PacketSize = 3
%PacketResourceCost = 20.0
}
}
%MODULE[ModuleSPUPassive] {}
}I think you are using the wrong settings. According to this page (https://remotetechnologiesgroup.github.io/RemoteTech/guide/parts/#dish-antennas), the HG-5 High Gain Antenna is supposed to have a dish angle of 90 degrees and a range of 20,000 km.
EDIT: This part is now called "HighGainAntenna5v_2", it used to be called "HighGainAntenna5" (I think). But I'm pretty sure just "HighGainAntenna" refers to the Communotron HG-55, which matches the settings you put here. -
Related to the issue I posted about above, here is the log file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h9wN4o_7BHjIbudIMrxb1OE8BPUt2JfB/view?usp=sharing
I am running a fairly heavily modded game, so I wouldn't be surprised if a mod conflict is causing the issue. Although it seems other people are having the same issue, so maybe not. I looked through everywhere "trajectories" appears in the log file and it seems there are 3 interesting things:Line 3650: "[TrajectoriesBootstrap] ERROR: COULD NOT FIND TRAJECTORIES BIN FILE (Trajectories111.bin)! Ditching!"
Line 26665 (first appearance): "Cannot find a PartModule of typename 'TrajectoriesVesselSettings'" (this appears many times on many lines)
Line 42188 (and a few more): "Node 'TrajectoriesVesselSettings' found in loaded data, but 'LifeSupportModule' is defined in prefab.
Looking for TrajectoriesVesselSettings in other indices...
(Filename: C:\buildslave\unity\build\Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35)...no TrajectoriesVesselSettings module found on part definition. Skipping..."
-
11 minutes ago, SkyHook said:
Just posting here to Confirm, but after upgrading my save to 1.11, this mod fails to show up and causes an error messsage when loading craft files of "Unknown Module" for TrajectoriesVesselSettings. I am guessing this is because the mod simply fails to load with 1.11, more than anything.
I'm having the exact same issue. It's also probably worth noting that I'm using FAR, but I'm not sure if it's related.
I really hope this gets updated because this mod is amazing! -
Does anyone know how 1.10 mods are doing in this release? Any problems so far?
-
1 minute ago, Stone Blue said:
sorry.. you ninja'd my edit/correction
Lol sorry, I have browser notifications on so I can do other things while waiting for responses. Thanks for your answers. I think for now I'll just opt with using TAC FB. Although imo there really ought to be a lightweight mod that just has this functionality (and maybe the ability to perform more precise resource transfers in general) without doing anything else. Actually if I get into writing mods this would probably be the first thing I try.
-
Just now, Stone Blue said:
YES.
It treats docked craft as one vessell... if you do NOT want to transfer across docing ports, crossfeed slider/setting on docking ports is observed. (only need one side or the other to toggle, on docked ports)Wait, are you talking about TAC FB or PWB? I know TAC FB can do this, but can PWB provide a similar functionality?
-
2 minutes ago, Stone Blue said:
What functionality?
The difference between TAC & PWB, is TAC is *part centric*... lie, you can move fuel between parts, lock parts so they stay empty or full, or whatever amount you want... you can set parts to be "neutral", ie resources flow in/out, lie normal, if TAC wasnt installed... You can set them to only transfer *out*, or only *in*... when you transfer using TAC, your CoM can and will shift around willy-nilly....
PWB on the other hand, is like, *CoM* centric... it pretty much moves resources around your craft, and you have control over setting it up...
but it seems to focus on moving things around based on where CoM *should* be, or where you want it to be... This might favor aircraft and especially spaceplanes...
They sorta do the same thing, but TAC IIRC, doesnt really automatically balance or focus on your craft's CoM by shifting mass around... it *could* be used that way, I suppose...
Where as PWB is primarily shifting resources around to *specifically* keep your CoM balanced, or in a location you specifically want...
Not sure I explained that accurately or clearly... Its been quite awhile since i actually *played* KSP and used them, for much moar than quic testing while doing something else...
Hopefully, if I'm off, someone else will pipe up and correct me. vOvI mean the ability to manually transfer lf+ox together in the correct ratio across the same vessel and/or through a docking connection from one part to another
-
8 minutes ago, Stone Blue said:
Oooo.. I forgot Ship Manifest
I have mostly used and preferred TAC FB and PWB...
I would have suggested GPO Speed Pump, also, but it loos like it died with the 1.8+ Unity/NET change
Does PWB have this functionality? Because I think I want some of the other stuff that PWB has anyways, and I'd prefer to just install it instead of both it and TAC FB, which would probably conflict anyways
32 minutes ago, Caerfinon said:I use TAC Fuel Balancer in 1.10.1 it has the ability to transfer lf+ox at the same time under the "Rocket" button. You can also individually transfer Liquid Fuel or Oxidizer under their respective buttons.
I saw TAC Fuel Balancer earlier but I wasn't sure if it had this functionality, thanks for confirming!
-
On 11/19/2020 at 2:08 PM, KerbalKiller2000 said:
Nevermind - I downloaded the mod without all the dependencies installed. Better Time Warp does work as long as you have the mods Click Through Blocker and Toolbar Control. I thought I should put the links for these mods, so here they are:
Yeah, BetterTimeWarp does work on 1.10 but (at least for me) it has really terrible performance, like it ruined the performance of all of my launches. I found that TimeControl is a better alternative that gives you even more control over the physics simulation and time in general:
-
10 hours ago, Stone Blue said:
There may be moar, @JupiterJaeden but those are off the top of my head... vOv
Do any of these actually let you transfer lf+ox using manual resource transfer (i.e. across docking connections)? I looked through them all and none of them seem to be able to do this.
I would honestly be very surprised if there isn't a mod for this already as it seems like an obvious need, but I'm considering the possibility now that it just doesn't exist. Thanks for the list anyways though, I'm gonna go ahead and install the EVA fuel thing, the simple fuel switch, and the PWB fuel balancer for different reasons. But none of these appear to have the feature I'm looking for. -
8 hours ago, Gotmachine said:
RemoteTech is unsupported in current (3.x) releases, and my advice is to not try to use both mods together. There are many bugs, and even that put aside, the balance is all over the place
We have fixed the RemoteTech support code in the in-development next major Kerbalism version (4.0), but there is currently no playable release of that version, and we have no ETA on a release.
If you want a realism oriented comms mod, I would suggest looking at RealAntennas which is available for stock and fully compatible with Kerbalism.
Okay, thanks for the answer.
I saw RealAntennas mentioned on the FAQ page and I checked it out but it honestly seems too complex for me, I'm not looking for anything super realistic, mainly I just wanted comms to involve a little bit more challenge and planning than the "everything connects to everything" spaghetti networks that stock CommNet leads to.
For now I'll just keep using TAC-LS probably but I'll keep an eye on Kerbalism and I'll probably start using it when 4.0 releases. I can't wait for my kerbals to die in even more horrific ways! -
8 hours ago, Stone Blue said:
There may be moar, @JupiterJaeden but those are off the top of my head... vOv
Thanks, I will check these out!
I saw TAC Fuel Balancer earlier but I wasn't sure it actually had the functionality I was looking for. -
So, the Github page for Kerbalism appears to have some semi-contradictory statements on it.
The FAQ states:
"Q: Why don't you support RemoteTech any more?
A: We discontinued support for RemoteTech. It still has support code in Kerbalism, and it works to a degree, but you will get a warning message if you have RemoteTech installed."
Whereas the mod compatibility page states that RemoteTech 1.9.5 is supported but with the note:"Note : not yet, support will be back in 4.0 Code integration with the science data system, reliability configs."
My question is, can I use this mod with RemoteTech right now, in version 1.10.1, without it breaking? I'm willing to disable certain parts of either mods if necessary, because I would really like to try and use both mods together.
-
The title pretty much sums it up. Preferably I'm looking for a CKAN compatible mod, but I'll just manually install it if necessary.
EDIT: To clarify, I'm looking for something that lets you do this through manual resource transfer and across docking connections.
EDIT 2: To anyone in the future who comes to this thread looking for the same answer I was, just use TAC Fuel Balancer. It gives you the necessary functionality plus some nice stuff like the ability to more precisely control resource transfer involving more than 2 tanks. The Lf+Ox combination is under the "Rocket" tab in the TAC FB menu.
Lucy in the sky with deadly radiations: An attempt to make a grand tour using kerbalism
in KSP1 Mission Reports
Posted
Well that sucks, you could maybe try posting about it on the Kerbalism thread? Or opening an issue on Github? It's possible someone has had the same issue before and it might be fixable.