Nori

Heh, I named it that because I initially tried adding the count there, but that of course didn't work.

I think there is way to much science to be had on Kerbin. All of the KSC "biomes" are pretty ridiculous given how much science you can get for a bit of work. Despite having played the game since 0.16 I did not know that there was 2 biomes for most of the KSC buildings. I play on 50% science with contracts at 25%. Also have Kerbal Construction Time to work as a science sink if needed. I feel like it is at a pretty good spot now.

Thanks. So theoretically this should work? DATA { type = List<CelestialBody> orbitedmoons = HomeWorld().Parent() == Sun ? HomeWorld().Children() : HomeWorld().Parent().Children().Where(cb => cb.IsHomeWorld() == false) moonorbitedcount = @orbitedmoons.Where(cb => cb.HaveOrbited()) } REQUIREMENT { type = Expression expression = @/moonorbitedcount.Count() >= 1 }

If only it was that simple. To verify I toggled SAS off but it was still screwed up. Here is a picture of a engine without a alternator: Picture with SAS toggled off: Picture of another engine with a alternator: It honestly wouldn't be much of a issue in the base game, but in a modded game...

TL;DR: EC/s seems to go down when you have a alternator engine. So in my main heavily modded game I launched a ship and was really surprised when much of my EC charge wasn't showing up. Started looking into it and discovered something really weird. I can't believe I'd be the first to notice this, but didn't see anything. All of the following pictures are of a vanilla 1.0.4 install. Here is a picture of a four part test ship, 2 solar panels, a lander pod and a battery. Notice the panel shows a flow of 1.38EC/s which is reflected in the Resources list. In the next picture the only change is that there is now a skipper engine on the bottom. It isn't activated nor is there any fuel. Lastly, the previous ship when left for a while ended up losing even more EC/s I'm super confused as to why when I add a engine my EC/s gets cut by as much as half. Seems to only happen with engines that have alternators. Am I missing something? Has it always been this way and I'm just now noticing? I haven't tested these specific setups in space, so I don't know how that would change things. But my other install did have a ship in space showing odd numbers.

As strange as it may seem to say, the game just isn't complex enough to have really dynamic balance (like steel body vs aluminum vs xyz and so on). So in the end I think a lot of stuff will come down to personal preference.

It is hard to not look at mass when mass, size and crew capacity are pretty much the only differentiation between pods. I suppose you can add crash tolerance on that. I rarely will consider it since I try not to crash. Interesting info on the Apollo and Mercury. Definitely does look like they modeled after those pods. Sadly many of the extra features the Apollo CM has aren't on the Mk1-2, like integrated parachutes, advanced navigation, integrated heatshield, significant life support and various other things. Though that really just goes back to there isn't a lot to differentiate between pods. The last point I would make is that as you said, KSP isn't real life and when it comes down to it, squad needs to (and in many cases has) balance for gameplay. If you can take 3 MK1 pods to get the same number of crew and save 1.6t then there is a balance issue. I could get behind the MK1-2 being heavier overall, but an additional 1.6t is a little much IMHO. Yeah love that show! Garibaldi is one of my all time favorite characters.

Anyone figured out the randomly leaving Mun orbit bug? Just had to turn on infinite fuel temporarily because it launched a manned pod out of sonnah at 3500m/s. Took almost 3k deltav to return.. Maybe the new Kopernicus version?

Would there be anyway to check this to see is xyx is true on all of them? DATA { type = CelestialBody orbitedmoons = HomeWorld().Parent() == Sun ? HomeWorld().Children() : HomeWorld().Parent().Children().Where(cb => cb.IsHomeWorld() == false) } So say HasLanded() == true, but for each one? I'm guessing it is similar to my other question about applying stuff to a list. If that doesn't work maybe you could help me figure out what to do. I have a series of contracts and I want them to be more or less completed in order. So I have requirements of complete x contract. The issue though is if someone were to install the pack in a existing game some contracts may not fire if someone has visited a certain body. So my idea was to add another any requirement that if they have done x with any of this list of bodies, then it returns true.

That's true. But lets look at a different example. 3 Mk1 pods would weigh 2.4t vs the Mk1-2's 4t. Granted crash tolerance is lower. If you want similar crash tolerance look at the mk1inline, 3 of those would weigh 3t.. Still 1t lighter despite having more total surface area. Another good example is the Mk1 lander can vs the mk2. 0.6 for 1 kerbal, 2.5 for 2. You may say the MK1 Lander is too light as is, but consider that 2 MK1 pods are still 0.9t lighter than 1 MK2 lander. "Balance" is pretty much all over the place...

I think he is more frustrated with the major changes lately and wants to wait for a more "stable" version before going all out.

You definitely can. I can provide the actual files too if wanted. I actually tried to follow your MM style. Tantares is a real beast though. So many parts to look at and try to fit in places. That's why I started small with just the command pods.

Yeah figured. Since 1 would become .5, then .25, .125 right? More just wanted confirmation of the rough numbers. If it is more than 2 that's great cuz it'll give me some breathing room. I actually had a mission setup to go to Jool, but the transfer there was going to be 2+ years (New Horizon moves Jool a bit). So bare minimum was 4 years. My supplies would have been close.. Decided to wait for the science results from another mission to unlock the first greenhouse.

Quick (I think) question. I'm trying to plan out a long mission (maybe 5 years) and just got the greenhouse unlocked. Am I correct in my calculations that the greenhouse (base level one) basically doubles available supplies? Since 1 supply turns into 1 mulch which turns into 0.5 supplies. Or am I missing something?

Don't mean to be a nag, but was wondering if you had any ideas here. Could I just define something in a DATA node or will that not translate over to VesselIdentifier?

Yeah I do want to have multiples be available. I mean when you consider a transfer to a outer planet could take years... So yeah I don't think that would work either, thus the unique value per contract instance. And yes, I am stalking this thread.

Well I'm willing to provide the configs I've done... For instance, if you go to this spreadsheet I've laid out all of the tantares control pods (plus a few other pods) and then the second tab has all of the changes I made. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LmxqtedVEelWKrStBAapaLnH0cSaq60dH6apLsL841w/edit?usp=sharing My balance file is about 560 lines long for just Tantares.

Yeah my thoughts exactly. I mean the game started with 1.25m parts and I think a lot of the design elements of the game were made with that in mind. Going 18x that..

Ok, but it's a doozy... Code is below. But the basic idea is to generate contracts that target planets with a SMA lower than Kerbin's (stole the idea from your remotetech pack). In stock this is 2 planets, in New Horizon I think it is 3. So this contract could theoretically be triggered a few times. Anyway, I was discovering that optional parameters get hidden if the parent is completed. So I decided I would setup to VesselParameterGroups. The first one is the basics of the contract. In this case, have min crew of 1, orbit for 60m with a maxApa of 2x the space threshold. Then once that is complete the next VesselParameterGroup triggers. Depending on the planet it will have a optional science collection and then a return home. If the planet has a surface it also shows a optional landing parameter with surface science collection. Ok, so back to why I was trying to use define/vessel. Since these are two seperate VesselParameterGroups I wanted to make sure that the same vehicle was completing them both. But since the contract could trigger for multiple planets I thought using the planet as a portion of the vessel name might be a nifty way to get around that. I did notice that there is a dissassociateVesselsOnContractCompletion option and that might work too. //--Inner Planet Orbit and Landing CONTRACT_TYPE { name = InnerOrbits group = FarExplorer title = Orbit and Explore @targetBody description = ... synopsis = ... completedMessage = ... agent = Experimental Astrophysics Group prestige = Exceptional targetBody = @/validTarget weight = 2.0 maxSimultaneous = 2 rewardScience = 8.0 rewardReputation = 16.0 rewardFunds = 40000 failureFunds = 20000 failureReputation = 8.0 advanceFunds = 20000 DATA { type = bool homeIsPlanet = HomeWorld().Parent() == Sun } DATA { type = double sma = @homeIsPlanet ? HomeWorld().SemiMajorAxis() : HomeWorld().Parent().SemiMajorAxis() } DATA { type = CelestialBody activeUniqueValue = true validTarget = AllBodies().Where(cb => cb.SemiMajorAxis() < @/sma && cb.IsPlanet() && cb.HaveReached() && cb.HaveLandedOn() == false).Random() } REQUIREMENT { name = Any type = Any REQUIREMENT { name = CompleteContract type = CompleteContract contractType = EscapeHomeWorld } REQUIREMENT { name = CompleteContract type = CompleteContract contractType = UMEscapeHomeworld } } REQUIREMENT { name = Any type = Any REQUIREMENT { name = CompleteContract type = CompleteContract contractType = FirstOrbits } REQUIREMENT { name = CompleteContract type = CompleteContract contractType = FirstLandings } } PARAMETER { name = innerorbit type = VesselParameterGroup define = "innerorbiter"+"@targetBody" duration = 60m title = Achieve orbit of @targetBody PARAMETER { name = HasCrew type = HasCrew minCrew = 1 } PARAMETER { name = Orbit type = Orbit maxApA = @targetBody.SpaceAltitudeThreshold() * 2 } } PARAMETER { name = innerhome type = VesselParameterGroup vessel = @innerorbit/define title = xyz notes = xyz123 completeInSequence = true PARAMETER { name = ForLanding type = Any optional = true notes = Optionally land and collect science. REQUIREMENT { name = Expression type = Expression expression = @targetBody.HasSurface() == true } PARAMETER { name = landing type = ReachState situation = LANDED rewardFunds = 30000 rewardReputation = 10 } PARAMETER { name = SurfaceScience type = CollectScience rewardFunds = 10000 rewardReputation = 5 location = Surface experiment = evaReport experiment = temperatureScan experiment = crewReport experiment = mobileMaterialsLab experiment = mysteryGoo recoveryMethod = RecoverOrTransmit } } PARAMETER { name = SpaceScience type = CollectScience optional = true rewardFunds = 5000 location = Space notes = Optionally collect several science experiements for a bonus. experiment = evaReport experiment = temperatureScan experiment = crewReport experiment = mysteryGoo recoveryMethod = RecoverOrTransmit } PARAMETER { name = ReturnHome type = ReturnHome } } BEHAVIOUR { name = AwardExperience type = AwardExperience parameter = ForLanding experience = 4 / @targetBody.Multiplier() } }

Like what? 20m parts? He might have to revamp camera controls at that point.

Can I do this as a vessel define? define = "moonorbiter"+"@targetBody" Just to make it so that the vehicle name is unique to a target body? Also, what would be the best way to grab that value for another part of the contract? Assuming it is the same contract. I thought I saw something in the docs, but not seeing it right now. ~edit: @VesselParameterxys/define looks to be it assuming they have the same parent node.

Dang, those look awesome! Gotta say, it is pretty crazy to see two 3.75m parts side by side and not sticking out. FYI: Your adapters and engines are awesome and just those make your pack worth downloading.

Ok, made a big pull request. Hopefully it helps ya out.

Sweet! You really got a great mod here. Just a FYI.

Would the following PARAMETER fail to show up if the target doesn't have a surface? Assuming there is a PARAMETER for say orbiting, would the contact be completable? Trying to figure out the best way to have a contract that could target a gas giant, but if it targets something with a surface it gets a landing PARAMETER as well. PARAMETER { name = landing type = ReachState situation = LANDED REQUIREMENT { name = Expression type = Expression Expression = @targetBody.HasSurface() == true } }