[1.12.x] KRASH - Kerbal Ramification Artificial Simulation Hub (simulation mod for KSP) - Cost settings have been change

[linuxgurugamer]

59 minutes ago, Raphaello said:

This is what we do already now. The solution I'm looking for is something that would enable anyone to choose to install RP-1 from CKAN and an updated version of KRASH would be installed automatically (or not if the user chooses so as this is a recommended mod, not a dependency) from CKAN.

I thought that it would be possible for you to release "new" version of KRASH (0.5.26.2 or 0.5.29.99 for example) which would only be valid for 1.3.1. I'm not sure if this is possible though.

 

That's a bit problematic, it would most likely involve my having to do 6 releases, first the ClickThroughBlocker, ToolbarController & KRASH for 1.3.1, waiting until it gets indexed and then doing it all again for 1.5.1

The other possibility would be for me to create a new version of KRASH, with a different name, for 1.3.1,along 1.3.1 version of the  ClickThroughBlocker and ToolbarController, and then adding them all to CKAN with a different name for 1.3.1, etc.  

Or I go through it and re-enable the stock toolbar code.  I'll see if I can change all the #if false to something which will allow it to be recompiled with the stock toolbar code, but that's going to take a few days to get it done and tested

 

 

[Raphaello]

Thanks a lot, really appreciate your support!!!

Maybe ckan expert @HebaruSan knows a magic solution to the problem?

[linuxgurugamer]

59 minutes ago, Raphaello said:

Thanks a lot, really appreciate your support!!!

Maybe ckan expert @HebaruSan knows a magic solution to the problem?

I've already asked him, waiting for a reply

[linuxgurugamer]

On 12/9/2018 at 4:46 PM, Raphaello said:

Thanks a lot, really appreciate your support!!!

Maybe ckan expert @HebaruSan knows a magic solution to the problem?

I just released an updated version of KRASH for 1.3.1, version 0.5.26.1 it's on Spacedock and CKAN should also have it later today

 

[Brimarx]

A big thank you to Linuxgurugamer and all the hard work maintaining that giant list of mod and keeping the community alive! This is very much appreciated

[linuxgurugamer]

Ok, CKAN updated so it now has 0.5.26.1 as the newest one for KSP 1.3.1, and 0.5.29.3 as the newest one for 1.5.1.

No changes in the 1.5.1 release, the 0.5.26.1 has all the latest changes EXCEPT for the ClickThroughBlocker and ToolbarController

[linuxgurugamer]

New release, 0.5.29.4

• Fixed cfg window not showing up

[Agustin]

6 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

New release, 0.5.29.4

• Fixed cfg window not showing up

only for 1.5.1?

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, Agustin said:

only for 1.5.1?

For now, I'm going to have to rebuild it again for 1.3.1 (which is also going to force me to do yet another rebuild for 1.5.1), will get to that tomorrow morning.

The bug isn't that significant, it just means the cfg window in the spacecenter doesn't show up

[linuxgurugamer]

New release, 0.5.26.2, for KSP 1.3.1

• Fixed cfg window for the RP-0 aka KSP 1.3.1 build

Once this version is indexed by CKAN, I'll push out another to get 1.5.1 current

[Agustin]

Spacedock says 0.5.26.2 is for 1.5.1
It is confusing.

[linuxgurugamer]

Oh nuts, I'll fix that

Spacedock is fixed

Edited December 12, 2018 by linuxgurugamer

[linuxgurugamer]

CKAN updated with 0.5.26.2, I've fixed that version on Spacedock and just uploaded 0.5.29.4 for 1.5.1

I've tested the 0.5.26.2 on a test 1.3.1 system, so this is finally all done

 

[BlackHat]

IS the purpose if this mod strictly to do tests of crafts/parts so you can adjust/tweak them to build them correctly?

Or does it allow the testing of parts/crafts to increase reliability of them in conjunction with the scrapyard/KCT/Oh Scrap?

[Beetlecat]

2 hours ago, BlackHat said:

IS the purpose if this mod strictly to do tests of crafts/parts so you can adjust/tweak them to build them correctly?

Or does it allow the testing of parts/crafts to increase reliability of them in conjunction with the scrapyard/KCT/Oh Scrap?

Only the first, as it reverts at the end of the test flight, and I believe the failures may be turned off during these test flights. Actual increments of reliability will have to be done with *real* flights.

[BlackHat]

17 hours ago, Beetlecat said:

Only the first, as it reverts at the end of the test flight, and I believe the failures may be turned off during these test flights. Actual increments of reliability will have to be done with *real* flights.

Ok, nice to know. I was going to try KCT and KCT recommended this mod too. I thought maybe KRASH did the "increments of reliability".

[pap1723]

Thanks for the support for RO/RP-1 @linuxgurugamer!

Is it possible to have a custom config that sits in a different folder, but that KRASH recognizes for simulation amounts?

[linuxgurugamer]

21 hours ago, pap1723 said:

Thanks for the support for RO/RP-1 @linuxgurugamer!

Is it possible to have a custom config that sits in a different folder, but that KRASH recognizes for simulation amounts?

Not without some extra work, sorry

[TaggedYa]

@linuxgurugamer @pap1723

Why not just push a config for RP-1 into the regular data folder with the rest of the standard configs.  Then we could just click the appropriate button and are good to go.  If the basic code is reading the configs and making buttons for each it shouldn't require any work on lgg's part at all.  Nor should it require a bunch of jumping through ckan hoops.

On a different subject: I am looking at trying to make a cost function that charges by real time expended not game time so that time warp doesn't result in exponential cost explosion and we can actually simulate long missions.  Is that something you would be amenable to?

TaggedYa

 

 

[TaggedYa]

On 12/13/2018 at 2:35 PM, BlackHat said:

IS the purpose if this mod strictly to do tests of crafts/parts so you can adjust/tweak them to build them correctly?

Or does it allow the testing of parts/crafts to increase reliability of them in conjunction with the scrapyard/KCT/Oh Scrap?

@BlackHat

In my book it's greatest use is for the iterative process to design MechJeb assent profiles for PEG.  By the time you get that right you will have found all of your staging issues. :-)

You increase part reliability when just starting with a new part by research.  Right click the part and find the research button on the info window, usually toward the bottom.  It will open a window where you can hire research teams to do daily increases.  I tend to only use the cheapest teams.  All you get for more money is time savings.  I usually am not in all that great a hurry.

TaggedYa

[razark]

Is there a way to get this and Kerbal Launch Failure to play well together?  I find it rather unproductive to have a failure occur during a simulation, and it costs funds (and real world time). 

I found some discussion of this same sort of problem with the TestFlight mod but didn't find a solution, so if someone can point me to an answer, I'd be grateful.

[danielboro]

7 hours ago, razark said:

Is there a way to get this and Kerbal Launch Failure to play well together?  I find it rather unproductive to have a failure occur during a simulation, and it costs funds (and real world time). 

I found some discussion of this same sort of problem with the TestFlight mod but didn't find a solution, so if someone can point me to an answer, I'd be grateful.

@linuxgurugamer

considering there are a number of fail mods but only 1 sim mod (at the moment)

can KRASH show some flag oder mod can read to indicate its in sim mode and pass the buck over to the fail mods?

[linuxgurugamer]

Are you sure that the funds are deducted in KLF?  KRASH essentially does a revert, so any fund deducted should be restored (not counting the sim cost)

[razark]

26 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Are you sure that the funds are deducted in KLF?  KRASH essentially does a revert, so any fund deducted should be restored (not counting the sim cost)

I'll admit I didn't look carefully to see exactly what was deducted, but I actually meant the sim cost.  It doesn't seem useful to me to pay to see a failure simulated if I'm seeing what my rocket can do under normal conditions.

[linuxgurugamer]

6 hours ago, razark said:

I'll admit I didn't look carefully to see exactly what was deducted, but I actually meant the sim cost.  It doesn't seem useful to me to pay to see a failure simulated if I'm seeing what my rocket can do under normal conditions.

Ummm, well, you are running a simulation, it costs money and time to run a sim on a computer. If you don't like that, then just don't use the mod, and play by your own rules regarding reverts