Jump to content

inigma

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,315

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by inigma

  1. inigma
    Update: new logo is up.
  2. inigma
    20 second flight clearance with required stationary stop on the runway seems to work perfect. Nice manual trigger. Just wish I had some other way, but for now this works. Hopefully 20 sec is long enough to disqualify unintended flights, but short enough to not be worthy of a complaint by players intending to fly a GAP contract.
  3. inigma
    hmm, I'm running into a problem with Command Seat Kerbals. seems they are passing the EVA check as-is without exiting. How about a 20 second flight clearance countdown? Require that a player hold their plane perfectly still on the runway for 20 seconds, before flight clearance is granted and their mission begins?
  4. inigma
    The logic would follow that the craft would have to meet the contract's standard basic design requirements (which are what i have now), and the EVA has to be on the runway (which I want to add). EVAing a Kerbal on the runway should be enough of a specific player engagement to trigger a GAP definition. That, or the option was to have the player wait 30 seconds before getting clearance for takeoff from ATC - which would not make sense for early contracts since ATC is introduced later in the contract series.
  5. inigma
    I just had a brilliant idea. Instead requiring a flight to a waypoint (could be rather monotaneous), how about requiring for every GAP flight, a pref-flight check... essentially simply requiring a player to EVA a Kerbal on the ground (they don't have to load it back into the plane, but are welcome to). This would essentially trigger the definition completion, and then mark that particular flight as intending to complete the GAP contract.
  6. inigma
    She still flies. See link in my sig.
  7. inigma
    She still flies.
  8. inigma
    Hey this is my thread first, SpaceDock second. I therefore have a say in what the thread should be about. So... let's keep it to discussion of SpaceDock development, status, bugs, features, and the occasional awesome mod. Thanks. Please open new threads to talk about other topics than this. (moderators please don't merge threads into this official SpaceDock Development thread without considering the above - if not, it can cause confusion, continuity, and derailment issues).
  9. inigma
    Well, this weekend I didn't work on vessel definitions, but I did fiddle with the starting contracts, and submitted a commit! Join SSI is required to open the GAP tree. It only requires a 10% starting funds membership fee. No need to ferry Inigma anywhere. No parts given. Four new contracts were developed to sell the prototypes separately, and obviously with starting funds alone, you won't be able to acquire all of them. The Tour Bus contract was bumped to give 3500 funds per tour, making it a nice way to make early funds and purchase more parts or make a science car, or a glider, or even this - a sounding rocket! And I found that after balancing the prototype market contracts, the progression works well with stock tree and modded tech trees. In fact, I was having so much fun with this setup and freedom of choice, that I decided to just go with it as the new GAP starting contract progression. I also removed the Command Seat requirement for Wright Glider and replaced it with a Control Surface requirement, meaning you have to have at least movable aerodynamic parts (aka elevons) before Glider shows up. It made more sense, and prevented Glider from showing up before Tour Bus (I'm a stickler for proper chronology). Now Tour Bus shows up, but if you decide to purchase the glider prototype package, you can skip straight to gliders. This has fit nicely into the modularlization of GAP I committed a few changes back in the dev version of GAP. In light of all these changes, I've pushed cargo and all downstream releases up a level to 1.3 and higher, and instead will be releasing 1.2 as a progression revamp rebalance, and bug fix release. I want to prove this design is stable before going all out on enhancements, although I have an itch to include in 1.2 a BD Armory required contract to rescue Scott Kerman from being held hostage at KSC Island.
  10. inigma
    After the polls closed, I am happy to announce that SpaceDock now adopted its official logo, designed by sharksharkco: I have updated the OP, feel free to update your signatures if you want to use a logo for SpaceDock in them.
  11. inigma
    Thanks for the offer. I have forwarded your offer to the team. for evaluation here: https://github.com/KSP-SpaceDock/SpaceDock-Project/issues/25
  12. inigma
    I was testing starting conditions and I think I might go with a simple flat fee of 1000 funds (or free) and separate all part giveaways into optional vendor contracts requiring funds for prototypes tied to percentages of a player's starting funds. This would at least give the player the starting option to invest early cash into making a tour bus from which to make money to grind funds to acquire additional parts to make a Wright type glider if so desired. This way all players are forced to join SSI and thus be drawn into the context of GAP contracts (which then unlocks their availability) but not have to accept any part bundles unless they want to pay for them separately through the SSI prototype market. I'm still undecided if I should require a member fee yet. Depends on whether anyone would be hostile to the idea of paying funds to acquire access to contracts.
  13. inigma
    Dev Update: Now that SpaceDock is stable, time for me to focus on GAP. With that, Contract Configurator 1.9.6 is out, and with it comes some delicious enhancements. To Do: 1. Better Vessel Parameter Group definitions to prevent rogue missions from completing or failing contracts unintentionally. This is the core reason for the outstanding bug reports so far, and I'm halfway tempted just to burn through it and release 1.1.3 before leaping with ideas into 1.2. 2. I have a plan to completely re-do the starting contract: Join SSI. With CC 1.9.6 I can now charge players a hefty membership fee to join SSI (thinking at least half of their starting funds). I have in mind to offer also a bailout loan via SSI Loan contract, giving a player with little to no funds their starting funds back with a 25% interest due in 30 days. Also other economic contracts to sell the player other low tech parts to get started doing GAP contracts in stock KSP. 3. I might need to completely re-think my releases. 1.2 is turning out not to have anything to do with Cargo. Ha. Unless I can sprint to the end after all the above.
  14. inigma
    Vessel destruction is command pod destruction I think as I have a hard time triggering it otherwise. With multiple command pods, its possible to survive a crash, lose one pod, full of kerbals, and not another. So unless I'm checking for all kerbal deaths, it's currently not possible to limit it to the craft kerbals. At VPG define, you could associate existing kerbals to that craft, so when called in a KerbalDeaths parameter, only those Kerbals would count. So essentially KerbalDeaths would allow an attribute for a vessel, but only validate against the kerbals that were in that vessel at craft definition. It could also be useful as a work around to allow contract modders to include a player's own pilot for various other requirement checks. Since we can't know who a players pilot is on contract accept, it should be logically possible to create a list of Kerbals in a veseel at vessel define.
  15. inigma
    Hello. Quick question @nightingale Currently this kerbal safety check is too broad, allowing dead kerbals anywhere in the universe to fail this contract, even if the player is not intending to work it actively: //Recovery Parameter - Craft & Kerbal Safety Check PARAMETER { name = All type = All title = safely PARAMETER { name = VesselNotDestroyed type = VesselNotDestroyed title = without destroying your craft vessel = @/craft } PARAMETER { name = KerbalDeaths type = KerbalDeaths title = or killing anyone countMax = 1 } completeInSequence = true disableOnStateChange = true } Is there a way to limit KerbalDeaths to only a VPG vessel's Kerbals?
  16. inigma
    The SpaceDock team reports SpaceDock.info is now live and fully operational. CKAN should be able to pull now from SpaceDock without issue. The team is celebrating now in #spacedock at this accomplishment. Awesome work by all, and thanks to all who helped get this project up and running!
  17. inigma
    updated team link on OP SpaceDock Team: https://github.com/KSP-SpaceDock/SpaceDock/wiki/SpaceDock-Team
  18. inigma
    NecroBones, you donation sniper you. i got second!
  19. inigma
    OP updated with Paetron donation link.
  20. inigma
    happy to report that support@spacedock.info is working and banners are fixed! start uploading your banners! OP updated
  21. inigma
    Nope. Will not be able to do so. Not without a herculean re-write and adding many lines of code.
  22. inigma
    it's fixed now.
  23. inigma
    NecroBones can you submit a GitHub for this. I don't think we have one yet. I'll update the OP guys to reflect that support@spacedock.info is not receiving email.
  24. inigma
    Thanks KasperVid for the support! On behalf of the SpaceDock team, we are happy to carry on the work that KerbalStuff started, and we appreciate Squad's support as we continue the development and stabilization of this new service. If we need anything specific, we'll reach out privately. Thanks for being there for us! You guys are amazing and we are only honored to be able to serve this incredible community. Sincerely, The SpaceDock Team
  25. inigma
    I forgot. My bad. That's just fine!
×
×
  • Create New...