Jump to content

allista

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,208

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by allista

  1. allista
    ISRU patch and all the parts but the DIY Kit itself. MKS provides its own resource conversion path and its own workshops. Teaser! Teaser! Orbital Assembly Line (sketch)
  2. allista
    Except that MKS haven't updated its bundled GC yet.
  3. allista
    Ok, but the older dlls are still loaded, eating resources. Nevermind. It's stock, but its signature has apparently changed at some point. Still, as others do not have the problem, I argue that something's wrong with the installation. Something trivial, I'd say. Share the KSP_Data/output_log.txt, please.
  4. allista
    First of all, I see several different ModuleManager.dll -- that's bad; install the latest and keep only one .dll of MM. Second, what version of GC and AT_Utils do you have. This exception often arises as KSP changes its API from version to version. Try to reinstall GC from SpaceDock (it already has AT_Utils included).
  5. allista
    It shouldn't have: with CC resources are stored in parts as usual, so any mod that is concerned with transferring them should work OK.
  6. allista
    Yea, right, thanks It's not that simple. Look at the actual model. The problem is not some scale, but the arbitrary placement of model pieces. If it can be like this, it can be anything -- for all I know, some parts could easily be placed in a neighbouring universe. So I need the general solution. After all, the drill is rendered as one piece somehow.
  7. allista
    Yep. In the same shared folder on Dropbox as usual. It looks like installation problem. Share you output_log.txt please, then I can tell more.
  8. allista
    Thanks for the report; fixed it. The cause was not the position of the docking node transform, but rather its orientation, which has changed in KSP since I last made docking ports Couldn't reproduce this. No matter what I did with the kit in editor (detached, reattached, left detached and played with other parts before attaching it again...), it has always shown the correct hint in flight. Did you enabled it in GC's main window afterwards with the "Show Deploy Hints" button? There's too many mods to install to try, sorry. Could you try to make a vessel that has a similar problem, but with minimal amount of non-stock parts? This would help me in that I won't have to guess which part causing this effect. Anyway, I have a pretty good idea of what's causing it. We have similar problem with any vessel that has a stock drill part. The algorithm I use to calculate ship dimensions does not, for some reason, recognize the fact that the parts of the drill are bones-animated; and sees them as separate meshes placed here and there in space... so the calculated size of a drill is, well, huge. like some 50m across, or more. I've uploaded the next nightbuild with the docking port fix and some other minor fixes.
  9. allista
    I'm afraid I can't. All my mods use the same library to handle UI and its style. Changing it will cause many things in more complex, hand-tailored interfaces to go awry. Besides, KSP's style is a huge waste of screen space. Look at TCA's control panel and try to imagine it with KSP's style. Usability here is a greater concern than the looks.
  10. allista
    There's an invisible docking port at the top, working for all stock sizes. Not marked in any way yet, so if you happen to flip the box, you'll have to find it
  11. allista
    !!! Ground Construction 2.0 Beta !!! You can grab the nightbuild in the usual place: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/m3pkpgxpo9dbd40/AABq5MCRI-JDmQJiZyh-ZUTla?dl=0
  12. allista
    Read this post with the explanations, please: I'm working on this problem, but basically -- no time warp when deploying a kit.
  13. allista
    Well, the thing you ask has considerably different mechanics: one thing is to spawn a new vessel in space at designated location/rotation/speed and so on; quite different is to spawn it and immediately dock to a node instead of a container. There's also a matter of some restrictions: judging by an unloaded .craft file I should be able to tell if it's feasible to dock the root part to anything, like if it has an available stack node and if so how it is oriented; and how to ensure the spawned thing does not intersect with anything already present in the area (currently this is solved by the physically growing container). I'm sure there's much more problems that will became apparent if I start to work on this. But I like the idea on the whole. So I'll seriously consider it: https://github.com/allista/GroundConstruction/issues/35 That's simple: "!" means NOT. And the KolonyTools is the MKS (its .dll is called so). So the patch is applied IF you do NOT have MKS installed.
  14. allista
    No way I'd do it! But space docks that will build ships from DIY kits right in orbit are also on their way. So in the end you'll be able to both produce a kit and build from it anywhere, in any combination. Like make kits on a metal rich asteroid base, then land them on the surface to build bases; or make kits on the surface, than launch them to an orbital docks and build ships there. Or even make a full cycle shipyard that builds and launches ships from raw materials... *Looked at what I've just wrote and shuddered at the scale of it. One step at a time
  15. allista
    That was on-planetary Land program in Navigation Tab (the first one in the column of tabs to the right). I wouldn't recommend you to use it on suborbital trajectories; only in normal VTOL flight above the ground.
  16. allista
    No. It's just that the DIY Kit is an actual craft that has to be spawned like any other. It doesn't matter if it has a single part or a whole hundred of them
  17. allista
    1. Do you mean "land while hovering over the surface" Land, or the "land from an orbit" Land? 2. A fair point, gameplay-wise. But TCA is an auto-pilot after all; its whole purpose is to be better that an unskilled pilot. Roleplaying-wise, I really don't see why its functions should depend on anything but the technology level. After all, if I seat on a driver seat of a, say, Tesla and tell it to drive me home, it would 200% perform the task better than me, considering I don't even have a drive license
  18. allista
    There is, but unfortunately not a straightforward one. You need to create a text file named GameData/000_AT_Utils/000_AT_Utils.user and place the following there, setting the colors to your needs: StylesConfig { //available colors: normal (meaning white), grey, red, dark_red, green, dark_green, yellow, dark_yellow, cyan, magenta EnabledButtonColor = green ActiveButtonColor = yellow InactiveButtonColor = grey ConfirmButtonColor = green AddButtonColor = green CloseButtonColor = red DangerButtonColor = red } It's a shame I haven't had the time to make it more user friendly, but it is as it is for now. Note, that these color settings will affect all of my mods, not only TCA.
  19. allista
    Progress of on-site DIY Kit production development... More tests are required, but it would seem the basic problem of spawning of an arbitrary ShipConstruct (read .craft file) in space is solved: And on the surface, too. Notice the launch while flying and wildly rotating. Not an easy feat, I tell you
  20. allista
    1. I have already implemented this You can grub the nightbuild to see for yourself The kit will show a green "shade" -- a rectangle on the surface that shows its full-grown size. Height is not shown, but it usually doesn't matter. 2. Ah... I see. The default packing distance in KSP is 300m (unpacking -- 200m); so when the vessel isn't focused and you have moved further than that, the vessel is packed, meaning it becomes just a physical point with the appearance of the vessel; it does not receive fixed updates, and that's where the kit grow happens. So again, the physical animation is the cornerstone of all the problems here. I'm thinking over the possible solutions, but so far don't see an easy way...
  21. allista
    I can spare you some trial and error if you share the output_log.txt from the unsuccessful game run. Bear in mind that the "docking port" on top would be just a PartModule, not the actual visible part. It will be a possibility to dock to the container; docking ports would just stick to its top node, that's all.
  22. allista
    1. If you're not using USI/MKS or some other mod that makes "wireless" resource transfer possible, you have to actually dock the workshop to the material kits storage. The simplest is to use KAS for that. Note, that you do NOT need to dock with the DIY Kit. 2. Resource converters convert only those things that they're configured for. GC adds an explicit MM patch for the stock converter, so it can produce mat.kits. No other converters are supported at the moment. 3. Use Configurable Containers (another one of my mods) to ship mat.kits in whatever container part you like. 4. GC should be on CKAN, was there from the start. What KSP version do you have?
  23. allista
    Ah, perfect! I have honestly never anticipated this The thing is, the deployment is an actual physical animation. Each frame a kit grows a tiny bit, pushes against surrounding colliders and is moved by the force this generated. That's why the process should be slow. When you speed it up, Kit's size begins to jump by much larger steps, so it literally kicks itself into the air (or into vacuum in your case). I'll have to think carefully about how to circumvent this. Because building this kind of stuff is what GC is really for. But in my tests I obviously never have build anything that large Thanks four the report! EDIT: BTW, the main reason for this physical deployment, as was discussed above, is the need to ensure that no physical object gets inside the construction space. You don't want to launch that base of yours to see it explode due to the "collision" with a rover that you forgot to move a little but further away...
  24. allista
    It's not that simple with the docking port: the craft for the new DIY Kit has to be generated programmatically, and that's one thing to make a vessel consisting of a single part, and another -- to make part joints, calculating corresponding positions/rotations. Also keep in mind that the kit itself has dynamic dimensions; so a size 1 docking port would probably not be enough to lift some 20t of cargo, while it would be too big for a smaller box. I'll certainly explore the possibility of attaching something to the box. Or maybe I just add the docking port directly to it's top node, making it of appropriate "size" to couple with corresponding stock ports. *as for the night builds, I'm puzzled: the hangar has not been altered with respect to current stable version, and in any case it has never behaved like that. So I still think it to be an installation problem. Look at the loading process in the output_log, see what's happening in there...
  25. allista
    Good question. Frankly, I was going to leave this a challenge. There are two hatches: the front one allowes pulling the box away with a tag, while the top allows to claw and lift it; the rest is up to the user. I can try to make an animation that will actually push the kit from within the assembly space, but I'm not sure this'll work. Also, I somewhat remade the model, so the hatches now open away from the assembly line, not to the side. So one can use a П-shaped rover with a crane in the middle, like the one in your own screenshots. But that have to be a big rover!
×
×
  • Create New...