[WIP][1.8.x] SSTULabs - Low Part Count Solutions (Orbiters, Landers, Lifters) - Dev Thread [11-18-18]

[SpeedShot7]

Are there any RO configs for some SSTU parts like the Orion capsule? Also, there's an issue where the fuel for the Orion Service Module fuel doesn't load when launching the craft.

[captainradish]

8 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

The selectable mount sizes are all calculated dynamically based on configuration values, and depend on bot the mounting area on the engine (e.g. how much space it takes to mount) and on the mountable area of the mount itself (e.g. the flat area where the engine sits).

Does the mount in question visibly look like it would fit for the motor at 1.25m?

In the end -- you can always click the 'clear mount' button to remove the mount entirely, and then use whatever model you desire from stock/SSTU parts.

I'd say yes, as the Merlin 1a has the same mount and a larger engine.

On a side note, I actually started checking out what's included in this and I came to the conclusion that I can remove BOTH Tarantes AND Bluedog from my install. I'm not going to deny that those two packs are both wonderful and quite detailed, but really the only thing I can build from either that I regularly used that I can't from SSTU is an Atlas-style rocket (1.5 stage to orbit) and honestly, I'm not really sure I can't. I've been really experimenting in sandbox and have managed to build a passable N1, a quite reasonable Soyuz, and a pretty much dead-on Apollo. Really, the only glaring thing Bluedog has on you is the Gemini stuff (2-manned capsules and accessories) and small landers.

This pack is uncanny in what you can do with it. There's even a fair chance it'll supplant Station Parts Expansion. What would be the icing on the cake would be if you could use the station parts alongside Roverdude's OKS mod. I haven't played much with that so far, but as far as I can tell these parts have stock functionality only ATM.

EDIT: They DO increase the base habitability, so there's that. They need to be combined with OKS parts and, unfortunately, OKS parts generally work better. Still, since OKS/MKS are really intended for permanent stations, the SSTU parts do have a niche.

I love the station parts and REALLY love the DOS-style station cores and parts. Being able to build seven space stations that actually look different is uncanny. I love the different solar panel designs. This pack is awesome and I really wish I had discovered it long ago.

Edited August 21, 2019 by captainradish

[Gremillion]

I'm running 0.11.49.161 with 1.6.1 and RSS/RO + RealFuels to fix the negative tank mass issue, but it doesn't seem to have worked. Still getting negative tank masses. Right now I've got a patch that prevents tanks from being negative mass (thanks again for that, @Starwaster), but I figured I'd mention it here.

Any known fixes to get the tank masses back on track?

Great mod, love it to death!

[Shadowmage]

4 hours ago, Gremillion said:

and RSS/RO + RealFuels

I do not support RO/RSS, and any such fix will have to come from them (or through requests from their team for additional hooks into SSTU code).

As far as I'm aware the issue had been resolved in SSTU, and RO merely needed to update their patches to implement the fix (the same patch/fix I provided to someone via PM a few days back).

 

14 hours ago, SpeedShot7 said:

Are there any RO configs for some SSTU parts like the Orion capsule? Also, there's an issue where the fuel for the Orion Service Module fuel doesn't load when launching the craft.

As per my previous response, I do not support or endorse RO.  Please ask in the RO thread.

On 8/16/2019 at 10:16 PM, SpeedShot7 said:

Here's the log from when I did it recently. I'm thinking the issue is TU.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j76n_r-HhxJ8eeh_Vj9G5OYlYKk41TVJ/view?usp=sharing

From your log -- there is an issue loading ModuleManager.

 AssemblyLoader: Exception loading 'ModuleManager': System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException: The classes in the module cannot be loaded.
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.Assembly:GetTypes (bool)
  at System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at AssemblyLoader.LoadAssemblies () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

Without ModuleManager, pretty much none of the rest of SSTU or its dependencies will load or work properly.  You'll need to resolve whatever is causing that error.

Second, I cannot support RO installs.  Please see if you have the same issue on an otherwise stock + SSTU install, and I will gladly provide assistance for that.  Otherwise please report the error to the RO team.

[jinnantonix]

Artemis Program in RSS.  SSTU Merlin engines and tanks used in the SLS Block 1B, and SSTU lander pod, fuel tanks and SuperDRACO engines used in the Advanced Exploration Lander and transit vehicle.  SSTU pods used for the logistics module and MHM.  SSTU Orion capsule and service module.

 

[Starwaster]

@Shadowmage re the mass issue, I thought the most recent SSTU already patched itself appropriately? Isn't that what these lines do? (the one for mass and the other for cost?)

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/blob/master/GameData/SSTU/ModIntegration/RealFuels/RF.cfg#L8-L9

I'm didn't do anything other than install the latest SSTU (complete reinstall) and it was working fine so I didn't think anything particular had to be done on RO's side. Or is that not so?

[Shadowmage]

14 hours ago, Starwaster said:

@Shadowmage re the mass issue, I thought the most recent SSTU already patched itself appropriately? Isn't that what these lines do? (the one for mass and the other for cost?)

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/blob/master/GameData/SSTU/ModIntegration/RealFuels/RF.cfg#L8-L9

I'm didn't do anything other than install the latest SSTU (complete reinstall) and it was working fine so I didn't think anything particular had to be done on RO's side. Or is that not so?

That is what I thought as well (that the SSTU included RF patch handled everything needed), however I recently had someone contact me through PM regarding the issue in an RO install;  I told him to patch those lines again (e.g. set the 'subtractMass = false'), which resolved his issue.  I figured the same thing was happening here (even though the entire situation is illogical).

Really though -- its RO related, so, I have no clue, and really don't feel like spending any further time or effort on it.  It works when I install RF alone (or at least did when I tested the solution), which is where my support obligations end.

(nothing personal; just so very sick of all of the RO support issues that get brought to this thread)

Edited August 22, 2019 by Shadowmage

[Starwaster]

I found at least part of the problem is that they’re cloning SSTU tanks before SSTU’s compatibility check so I’m going to go do a PR to fix that today. 

[Shadowmage]

15 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

they’re cloning SSTU tanks before SSTU’s compatibility check

Ahh, yep, that'd do it.  Likely the RO patch is running in a FOR[RealismOverhaul] block, which is alpha-sorted before the FOR[SSTU] block of my internal RF patch.  Hence the cloned tanks would not have the updated config values from the SSTU patch.

[RedParadize]

OMG. have you seen the KSP2 trailer. Of course its not in game footage but it seems pretty cool. The colony part is something I have wished for a long time. Hope you gonna mod on that Shadowmage because looks like we will get these premade fuel tanks again.

 

[Starwaster]

47 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

OMG. have you seen the KSP2 trailer. Of course its not in game footage but it seems pretty cool. The colony part is something I have wished for a long time. Hope you gonna mod on that Shadowmage because looks like we will get these premade fuel tanks again.

 

yeah I hope so too but that might be asking too much given the frustration he's experienced with KSP1....

[RedParadize]

Redoing your work is never fun. But they said they re-coded from the ground up so they might be less frustration. Its a different team. They seems to have more experience than Squad when they started.

I will buy KSP2, no doubt and no regret.

Edited August 22, 2019 by RedParadize

[Shadowmage]

50 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

OMG. have you seen the KSP2 trailer. Of course its not in game footage but it seems pretty cool. The colony part is something I have wished for a long time. Hope you gonna mod on that Shadowmage because looks like we will get these premade fuel tanks again.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

yeah I hope so too but that might be asking too much given the frustration he's experienced with KSP1....

 

Whether or not I do mods for KSP2 will depend entirely on if they have fixed the largest engine-level issues that KSP1 has.  Notably:

• Performance dependent upon part count -- part count should not be a limiting factor for any sort of reasonable design (10k parts or so; at which point you likely hit poly/rendering limits)
• Floppy Unity RigidBody Joints -- should not be something players are subject to.
• Wheel Colliders being terrible -- absolutely will not get involved in that terrible mess.  No working wheel-collider = no purchase.  (By working, I mean does not have arbitrary limits on rigidbody orientation, # of wheels, and doesn't do any silly 'dynamic' adjustment garbage; e.g. functions just as the Unity-4 wheel colliders did, but with improved friction model).
• Garbage Collection Stutter -- Why people have put up with this for so long is beyond me.  Had I known it was a thing with KSP1 I never would have bought that game either.  Drives me absolutely crazy every time it lags.

If they haven't fixed those issues, I likely won't even be buying the game.

And if they -have- fixed those issues, there really won't be much of a need for SSTU's primary goal (lowered part-count for performance).  I may still do some modding for 'modular' parts, perhaps some KerbalFoundries type stuff if not in the stock parts, and likely a full implementation of part-recoloring, but probably nothing complex to the extent that I'm currently maintaining.

Either way, we have a long ways to go before we'll know more.  They say 'releasing in 2020', but that is likely winter of 2020 knowing how marketing drones term things.

[RedParadize]

Given what we see in in game footage floppy Unity rigidBody will be a thing again. Trough it seem that on the second launch was not floppy so they might just do both to show the difference. Anyways, it should be something that can be adjusted. Wheel collider should be fixable.

As for SSTU, it vastly surpassed its original goal. I would find it hard to play KSP without SSTU even if the part count problem was not a issue. Stretchable tanks looks better and are easier to play with. Engine stack too. All of it make it easier. If anything, I would hope they inspire themself from SSTU.

Forgot to say, they retained the weird part look of KSP1. Trough not on the new stuff, there is hope.

Edited August 22, 2019 by RedParadize

[Jimbodiah]

KSP is not just part reliant but also the number of craft/stations you have in a savegame is a complete killer. Whenever I get a nice infra-structure set up around 3-4 planet the game is just unplayable with ships shaking apart or just exploding when loading in. I'm amazed they actually use never-ending text files as running configs for parts and their locations.

MemGraph is essential unless you like the game freezing every few seconds, and even with memgraph it's still a nuisance. 

Then the internals (kerbal avatars) that form a serious load for some reason. I tend to play with internals disabled as the more kerbals you take the more load the game produces.

Then the whole thing about KSP being so reliant on single-core processing power with the GPU just sitting there doing literally nothing.


In short, the whole game is a piece of $#!^ in a technical perspective. It's only bearable as it's the best game in existence for me from a game-play perspective.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Jimbodiah

[RedParadize]

9 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

In short, the whole game is a piece of $#!^ in a technical perspective. It's only bearable as it's the best game in existence for me from a game-play perspective.

Exactly. There is hope on that side. The KSP2 trailer probably costed more than KSP game original development. They have more technical resource and fund. I am a bit sad they retained Unity trough...

[Shadowmage]

5 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

The KSP2 trailer probably costed more than KSP game original development.

Yeah, they definitely put some resources into it from the little bit that I watched.  I mostly skimmed it though, as trailer footage really doesn't interest me that much (now, real gameplay footage on the other hand....).

6 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

I am a bit sad they retained Unity trough...

Nothing wrong with Unity per-se; most of the issues KSP1 experienced with Unity were due to their (incorrect/incomplete) use of it, their refusal to update to newer engine versions, and their insistence on using features not intended for their design (e.g. the built-in WheelCollider was entirely unsuitable for use in KSP, and they should have written their own rather than using VPP which was merely built on-top of the terrible Unity WheelCollider).

Unity is perfectly cable of being a top-tier game engine, but only if properly utilized and implemented.

 

[RedParadize]

Yeah, to their defense Squad were indie developer with limited experience and knowledge. But I would bet my hand that new dev saved as much as they could. Producer are there to push for economy. I still hope that they aim high.

[Jimbodiah]

Really hoping a fresh start from the ground up will get rid of the key issues. But yeah...

[GabeD416]

On 7/22/2019 at 10:07 AM, Shadowmage said:

Thx for the link; apparently that is just taking me to the dropbox home page.  Not sure it uploaded properly?

Hey sorry for the super late response, I moved and was without internet for a month. I'm still having issues with the f-1b and rs-68's exhuast coming out despite the throttle being at zero when using cormorant aeronology. If you're still willing to take a look at my log I'd be wicked appreciative, this link should work hopefully: https://www.dropbox.com/s/forth6evh5i0vbx/KSP.log?dl=0

 

[The-Doctor]

@Shadowmage wasn't there a config that would enable stock parts to be disabled? I'd really like that if it still exists in the mod

[jinnantonix]

Artemis Program in RSS.  SSTU parts used in nearly all components.  The Advanced Exploration Lander is modified from the prototype replacing the SuperDRACO engine with the SSTU AJ10-190 to allow multiple firing in the re-usable components.

 

 

[Jimbodiah]

Re KSP issues:

This is a video of KSP2 gameplay (pre alpha). Same wobbly joint and resulting self-destroying vessels as ever... Guess they really didn't learn a single thing.

No KSP2 for me it seems.
 

Spoiler

 

 

Edited August 26, 2019 by Jimbodiah

[Shadowmage]

On 8/23/2019 at 8:19 PM, The-Doctor said:

@Shadowmage wasn't there a config that would enable stock parts to be disabled? I'd really like that if it still exists in the mod

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/blob/master/GameDataDisabled/SSTU-OptionalPatches/Stock/PartRemoval-Stock.cfg

Note:  As this was one of my personal patches, it has not been updated in quite some time, and will be missing many of the reworked stock parts.

 

24 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

This is a video of KSP2 gameplay (pre alpha). Same wobbly joint and resulting self-destroying vessels as ever... Guess they really didn't learn a single thing.

Yuck.  Sad.

25 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

No KSP2 for me it seems.

Me either if they continue down that path.  I'm not interested in wobbly rockets, and especially not interested in the poor performance that per-part joints will induce.  In short:  All of the bad things that I hated about KSP1 craft construction.

[RedParadize]

Give them a chance. Will see. Anyways KSP on its own never have been much, it always have been about mod. I do not think I played it more that 10h stock.