[1.3.0] Kerbalism v1.2.9

[JeffreyCor]

On failures happening at the beginning of a part's life as you put it, will there be research or something to reduce the likelihood of this? Not looking forward to having to having to repair newly launched ships or make them wait around in orbit before using them. I want to have a better R&D team for quality assurance than that

[Fraz86]

@Terensky My mistake. I assumed CryoTanks used FOR[CryoTanks], and I didn't have a chance to test it because CryoEngines wasn't updated to 1.0 yet. I would recommend simply changing CryoTanks to zzz_CryoTanks in my patch (no need to use FINAL or create additional FOR passes e.g. zzzzz_Kerbalism):

// Power requirements for ZBO (zero boil off) tanks cut to 25%
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:AFTER[zzz_CryoTanks]:NEEDS[zzz_CryoTanks]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]
	{
		@CoolingCost *= 0.25
	}
}

 

Edited May 4, 2016 by Fraz86

[Gotmachine]

3 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

  Shielding mass reduced to 1 ton/unit
  Food mass reduced to 10kg/unit
  Oxygen mass reduced to 4kg/unit
 Rebalanced part masses and costs

Great ! Looking forward to this, these values seems much more in line with the stock game balance.

3 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

 I rebalanced reliability quite a bit for 0.9.9.5: much lower malfunction rates, a new 'aging' curve that prefer failure at the start and end of lifetime instead of in the middle, engineers can inspect components to give a clue on its state, and highlightings of broken parts.

About the unmanned/antenna problem, another suggestion : increase EC consumption instead of reducing range would be more coherent with the "non-blocking" malfunction guideline. Seems you discarded the "parts malfunction one after another" idea, still think it would be great to include some proactive way to do redundancy and get ride of the "timewarp completed, I have now 30 parts to repair in EVA" gameplay. But I will hold my tongue until I see how the rebalance affect things.

A quick suggestion about part categories : I would prefer all oxygen and food tanks to be in the "fuel tanks" section, even if the title is somewhat wrong, this were I naturally go when I think about containers and consumables.

[ShotgunNinja]

@Gotmachine Malfunction is broken right now. That wasn't the intended gameplay for sure. I'll see how it behaves after the changes.

To make it more playable (will not fix vessels already launched however):

@PART[*]:FINAL
{
  @MODULE[Malfunction]
  {
    @min_lifetime = 432000.0
    @max_lifetime = 21600000.0
  }
}

 

Edited May 3, 2016 by ShotgunNinja
temp fix

[kyrcant]

I really like this mod, although I haven't started using it yet, because I'm in love with RemoteTech.  I would very much like to see this mod made so that players can disable functions, either by splitting up the different functions into separate files, and deleting them, or in some kind of menu.  

IMHO, I would keep the life support, need for exercise and living space, and radiation protection.  I would not use the comms part - that's already been done by remote tech, and I don't really see how or why we need to redo what's already been done.

Yes, I realize the next version will have RT compatibility.  SUPER!    The idea of having constant malfunctions on satellites using RT is horrifying.  

Another idea - relating to malfunctions.

Most satellites that survive launch and orbital maneuvers will last a good long time.  See Voyager.  Spirit & Opportunity.  

I think the failure should not be related to time, but to Acceleration.  Anything up to 1G is safe, 1-4G is a slight risk, but beyond that it gets dangerous.  Yes, it makes re-entry a poodle, especially for probes on Eve.  Space probes and ships are very well hardened against cosmic rays, other radiation, etc.  Acceleration is a much more real danger.  Also, over-heating for electronics.   Try sending a probe to Mercury or Moho without radiators!

Edited May 3, 2016 by kyrcant

[BoPET]

Is this mod compatible with USI\Planetary Bases Inc?
Or CO2 Electolysis\Sabatier reaction from Interstellar techs?

[ExiledViking]

@ShotgunNinja I'm assuming you missed my earlier post…

Have you considered a secondary "active" shielding type i.e. ESA's SR2S project, as a higher tech method for longer endurance missions?

Further, your thoughts on linking QoL breakdowns to a Kerbals' personal stats?

Thanks.

[ShotgunNinja]

@ExiledViking I did :-) Active shielding can be a late-tech, solve some problems with radiation & planet packs and could make use of the 'high-tech' food containers (that are going to be phased out anyway). Noted and put on the todo list.

[Kaboose]

@ShotgunNinja This is looking like an amazing mod and I am having fun with it thus far. The major changes I would like to see have already been brought up by others before, particularly the malfunctions and the ability to see your active connections (some visual cue like Remotetech has to make it very clear a relay network is running smoothly). I am still tweaking my designs to see what the ideal payload - cost ratio is now that I have to factor in heavier supplies like food and shielding but I am defintely excited to see where this mod will go. Do you by any chance have a rough idea/schedule for when you might be ready with the next version?

Thanks again for this mod! 

[ShotgunNinja]

@Kaboose I'm a little busy with work but the new version should be ready by sunday at last.

[dboi88]

1 minute ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@Kaboose I'm a little busy with work but the new version should be ready by sunday at last.

Awesome! Can't wait

[cicatrix]

Hmm, I've got the information about Sunday, thanks, but can I get some further clarification (pardon me if I missed it in one of the previous posts).

After the latest update CKAN marked Kerbalism and CRP as mutually exclusive and incompatible. Since many other mods I use depend on CRP, I faced a tough either/or choice and I had to discontinue using Kerbalism. 

So, the questions are:

Will the upcoming update be compatible with CRP?

if not, what will be the consequences of using both these mods at the same time? 

[Revenant503]

@cicatrix I don't think that restrictions still there..at least my 1.1.2 Installs CKAN doesn't list any conflicts attached to CRP

Also back in the old days of KSP 1.1 (wow 2 weeks ago) I was using CRP and Kerbalism...you'd only really have the potential for trouble if you had another mod that used food or oxygen resources (which were the conflicting resources).

Its potentially more of a thing now because you've got people potentially using Kerbalism and TAC or USILS together, but I'm hoping shotgunninja is doing some magic with the resources if you use another LS mod

Edited May 4, 2016 by Revenant503

[cicatrix]

4 minutes ago, Revenant503 said:

@cicatrix I don't think that restrictions still there..at least my 1.1.2 Installs CKAN doesn't list any conflicts attached to CRP

Have you tried updating CRP via CKAN?

[ShotgunNinja]

@cicatrix The consequences are either Kerbalism or the mods using CRP get the wrong parameters for the resources: density, costs, etc., depending on order of load of the .cfg files. (CRP get loaded first).

0.9.9.5 will ship with a default profile that reproduce the current behaviour. That profile will be defining the resources, so in fact the profile will be incompatible with CRP. But others will be provided, for now: Barebone (only quality-of-life) & Snacks (mimic snacks, mostly as an example).

If you run without a profile, you only get background resources simulation and an ui to monitor/plan your vessels EC consumption.

You can also just make your own profile (its very easy), for example you could make one that not only is compatible with CRP but actually REQUIRES it. Or you could make one that mimic another life-support mod.

Here is the Snacks profile, to see how it looks like:

Spoiler

// Something similar to Snacks!, made using this framework


// ============================================================================
// Rules
// ============================================================================


Rule
{
  name = snacks
  resource_name = Snacks
  waste_name = 
  rate = 1.0 // 1 per-day
  interval = 21600.0 // 1 day
  degeneration = 0.0625 // 16 meals
  on_eva = 1.0
  on_resque = 50.0
  
  warning_threshold = 0.1
  danger_threshold = 0.8
    
  warning_message = $ON_VESSEL$KERBAL has no more snacks left
  danger_message = $ON_VESSEL$KERBAL want a snack, badly
  relax_message = $ON_VESSEL$KERBAL has got a mouthful of snacks now
}


// ============================================================================
// Add resources in pods
// ============================================================================


@PART[*]:HAS[#CrewCapacity[>0]]:FINAL
{
  RESOURCE
  {
    name = Snacks
    amount = 50
    maxAmount = 50
    @amount *= #$/CrewCapacity$
    @maxAmount *= #$/CrewCapacity$
  }
}


@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KerbalSeat]]:FINAL
{
  RESOURCE
  {
    name = Snacks
    amount = 1
    maxAmount = 1
  }
}


// ============================================================================
// Customize greenhouse
// ============================================================================


@PART[Greenhouse]:FINAL
{
  @MODULE[Greenhouse]
  {
    // change food resource
    @resource_name = Snacks
  
    // change waste resource
    @waste_name = 
    
    // change ec rate for the lamps
    @ec_rate = 1.0    
    
    // change waste rate
    @waste_rate = 
    
    // change harvest size
    @harvest_size = 1000.0
    
    // change growth rate
    @growth_rate = 0.00000011574
  }
}


// ============================================================================
// Customize resource containers
// ============================================================================


@PART[InlineFoodSmall|InlineFood125_2|InlineFoodBig|kismfoodsm]:FINAL
{
  @RESOURCE[Food]
  {
    @name = Snacks
    @amount *= 10.0
    @maxAmount *= 10.0
  }
}


!PART[RadialOxygenSmall|RadialOxygenBig]:FINAL {}


// ============================================================================
// Define resources
// ============================================================================


RESOURCE_DEFINITION
{
  name = Snacks
  density = 0
  unitCost = 0
  flowMode = ALL_VESSEL
  transfer = PUMP
  isTweakable = true
}

 

 

[nosscire]

@ShotgunNinja That config looks awesome. I could easily make a config that works as I want it. Will you also release a full wiki or similar for how to use it? I'm a bit confused about this part:

  rate = 1.0 // 1 per-day
  interval = 21600.0 // 1 day
  degeneration = 0.0625 // 16 meals

What does each of those do? I assume that the rate is how many units they use each time they eat, and the interval is how often. But then what would degeneration mean?

 

Also, was this the update that will allow us to use Kerbalism together with RemoteTech? If so, will this also tie into the Kerbalism UI, or will Kerbalism just show all ships as having no connection?

 

Thanks for this brilliant mod, and i'm happy you decided to make it more modular. You can never please everyone, but in this case you can just tell people to bloody fix it themselves if they complain

[ShotgunNinja]

@nosscire Thanks for your interest. I am definitely adding some documentation to the wiki about this, after the release:
  rate: consumption per-second, or per-interval if interval is > 0
  interval: if > 0, the time between consumptions in second, else it indicate that consumption is continuous
  degeneration: the rate per-second at which the 'property' of the kerbal degenerate when there isn't a resource
  some temporary documentation about this

 

From 0.9.9.5, if the user do not use a profile that explicitly enables the signal mechanic or RemoteTech/AntennaRange is detected, that mechanic is disabled. This mean all vessels are assumed to be linked, no Antenna module is loaded at all, the Signal panel from the Planner is removed and the Signal icon in the Monitor is removed.

 

Quote

You can never please everyone, but in this case you can just tell people to bloody fix it themselves if they complain

You got it  But really, it just emerged a pattern in code. All kerbal-related mechanics were doing similar things, under the hood, and I just made that data-driven.

Edited May 4, 2016 by ShotgunNinja
documentation was a bit obsolete, updated

[nosscire]

That's good documentation.

 

Regarding the "low_threshold". If I understand it correctly, that would be when you get a warning that a resource is running out. Is that only set in absolute numbers, or can it use something like 10 resource * amount of kerbals on-board for example?

Using your stock resources with 1 a day as an example, 30 food would be quite allot for one kerbal, but quite low for a mothership of 6 kerbals.

Eagerly looking forward to the release, already planning on how my setup will work  (will be a bit more compatible with CRP to allow me to use all the parts I want)

[dlrk]

2 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@nosscire Thanks for your interest. I am definitely adding some documentation to the wiki about this, after the release:
  rate: consumption per-second, or per-interval if interval is > 0
  interval: if > 0, the time between consumptions in second, else it indicate that consumption is continuous
  degeneration: the rate per-second at which the 'property' of the kerbal degenerate when there isn't a resource
  some temporary documentation about this

 

From 0.9.9.5, if the user do not use a profile that explicitly enables the signal mechanic or RemoteTech/AntennaRange is detected, that mechanic is disabled. This mean all vessels are assumed to be linked, no Antenna module is loaded at all, the Signal panel from the Planner is removed and the Signal icon in the Monitor is removed.

 

You got it  But really, it just emerged a pattern in code. All kerbal-related mechanics were doing similar things, under the hood, and I just made that data-driven.

ShotGunNinja,

The current version works with RT?

[Nansuchao]

41 minutes ago, dlrk said:

ShotGunNinja,

The current version works with RT?

No, the next will.

[Fraz86]

@ShotgunNinja I'd like to hear more about your plans for Kerbalism's default behavior when installed alongside CRP. If the default profile will use non-CRP resource definitions, why not have it overwrite the CRP resources? This would allow a default Kerbalism install to function correctly alongside CRP, and it would only cause problems if a player is using other mods that rely on the CRP definitions of Food and Oxygen. In my view, this conflict is relatively unconcerning, because anyone trying to use Kerbalism in combination with other mods that involve food and oxygen is almost certainly going to need a custom profile/compatibility patch anyway. Meanwhile, players who have CRP installed for other reasons (e.g., fuels) could just stick with the default profile.

[ShotgunNinja]

@Fraz86 The default profile does indeed define the resources, but the CRP ones have priority (because they are parsed first, the .cfg parsing order is alphabetical per-directory).
So you get the densities and costs of CRP resources.

I'm still unsure how to solve this, I think this refactor make the problem 'obsolete' in a certain sense (now only the profile conflict).
Meanwhile I don't want to switch to CRP resource definitions now because I don't want to break savegames.

After the next release, I hope to create a profile that requires CRP (especially if somebody send one to me ) and ship it with the mod, so people that want can just enable it.
At that point I can even consider making no profiles the default one, so this can be used by people that only want background simulation, or as a dependency for third party profiles.
I could even split this project in two, one for the engine proper and one for the profile + parts, and make the former a dependency of the latter...
As you may have guessed by now, I'm still trying to figure out how to best organize this.
 

[dboi88]

1 hour ago, ShotgunNinja said:

I don't want to break savegames.

As it's still in beta this wouldn't be a problem for me, don't let breaking save games ever stop you from taking the mod in any direction you see fit, especially while still in beta.

[ShotgunNinja]

@nosscire Somehow missed your last post...   Yes low_threshold is for the message about resources getting low on a vessel. The value is the proportion of amount against the capacity in the vessel. Likewise empty_* and refill_*. The warning/danger/fatal/relax_* instead refer to the 'property' per-kerbal (eg: starvation for food, etc...)

 

 

[Fraz86]

12 minutes ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@Fraz86 The default profile does indeed define the resources, but the CRP ones have priority (because they are parsed first, the .cfg parsing order is alphabetical per-directory).
So you get the densities and costs of CRP resources.

I'm still unsure how to solve this, I think this refactor make the problem 'obsolete' in a certain sense (now only the profile conflict).
Meanwhile I don't want to switch to CRP resource definitions now because I don't want to break savegames.

After the next release, I hope to create a profile that requires CRP (especially if somebody send one to me ) and ship it with the mod, so people that want can just enable it.
At that point I can even consider making no profiles the default one, so this can be used by people that only want background simulation, or as a dependency for third party profiles.
I could even split this project in two, one for the engine proper and one for the profile + parts, and make the former a dependency of the latter...
As you may have guessed by now, I'm still trying to figure out how to best organize this.

A couple points:

• It's possible to overwrite/modify CRP's resource definitions using ModuleManager, despite the fact that CRP is loaded first. I'd be happy to write a patch that does so, if you'd like.
• Count me as another player encouraging you not to worry about breaking savegames at this point. No one should reasonably expect such an ambitious mod to maintain perfect savegame stability this early after initial release (especially considering that many players are probably playing with the wrong resource definitions anyway, due to CRP loading first). If it's really important to someone, they can edit the save file. Just do whatever you think is best for your mod.