[1.3.0] Kerbalism v1.2.9

[goldenpsp]

17 minutes ago, panarchist said:

That's kind of snarky.  I mean, it's true that it's ShotgunNinja's mod, but I don't think the poster was trying to be rude so much as direct.

@Gotmachine - the mod is licensed with a public-domain license and all of the source is on GitHub.  If you don't like the direction it's being taken in, fork it and create your own - or enlist others to help you create another fork.

It was meant to be.  I can't speak for @ShotgunNinja but in general almost all modders make mods for themselves and are kind enough to share them with the community.  I know that if I ever got around to making a mod (have an idea, just haven't tried yet) I wouldn't really care whether other people liked it as I wasn't making it for them.

I will concede your post is far more useful 

[podbaydoor]

2 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

it fits with the purpose of the mod : time as a resource

That's a really solid insight into why this mod is so good. Having a distinct sense of time is important both for the role-players and the realism-seekers.

@ShotgunNinja That's some science overhaul you're proposing! I for one agree that science in stock has a grind-y feel and "land -> right click -> instant science" is pretty unsatisfying. At some point, though, you're basically asking for a different game and maybe the best a KSP mod can do well is be a lightweight improvement that plays well with stock. Notice how realism overhaul is always broken or glitchy? It's because it's fighting stock and trying to be a different game. Basically I'm trying to say that @Gotmachine raised a number of really good points.

Maybe the best design choice here (both game-wise and software-wise) is to make a "Shotgun's science overhaul" mod. That might make it easier to finish the core Kerbalism mod for 1.2, which it sounds like people will be really happy about. I too appreciate how much time you're putting into this, but would also like to get back to my career save even if it means the grand vision isn't finished.

Also I'm not sure why you want to continue developing your own substitute for stock telemetry. No one here has expressed dissatisfaction with stock and it's going to mean more work for you.

18 minutes ago, panarchist said:

 If you don't like the direction it's being taken in, fork it and create your own - or enlist others to help you create another fork.

You can always setup a dev environment, give Unity your email, and learn the nuances of the KSP API for a week, but anything you can solve that way you can solve using a fraction of the effort and time when you have a good dev and constructive community input.

[Gotmachine]

@goldenpsp At least I'm saying something in relation with the topic, thank you for your intervention.

I'm a big fan of this mod, I really enjoy what @ShotgunNinja is doing and I think Kerbalism is the the best gameplay mod out there that actually try to make the game more interesting and not turn it into something else. I actively play with this mod and wanted to share my impressions and give a feedback about the new features, and suggest what I think would be nice to have. Nobody has to feel offended.

@ShotgunNinja stated multiple times what he disliked and wanted improved in the stock science system. I have a feeling that what I suggested and said is more or less what he is trying to do and that he need some kind of "science data system" on top of the stock system. I would love to hear more from him about what he want to do with this science revamp, and my intervention was more a question than a critic.

Plus, so far everything in this mod is highly configurable and tweakable, so no need to fork it 

[podbaydoor]

1 minute ago, Gotmachine said:

Plus, so far everything in this mod is highly configurable and tweakable, so no need to fork it 

Or just keep making it possible to turn off each module within this mod, that works too. I just know @ShotgunNinja is reading this thinking http://xkcd.com/1172/.

[ShotgunNinja]

@Gotmachine, @podbaydoor

Most of the things I'm adding seem complex but in reality are quite minimalistic: a button here, a line in the planner there. They seem complex because I'm explaining a lot of implementation details and general brainstorming here. They are complex to implement, but I try to hide that complexity from the user.

The life support aspect of this mod wasn't touched since version 0.9.5, where the profiles were introduced (that was like, 6 whole months ago). So it was the focus of this update. This is the summary of changes: they all make perfect sense to me.

• unified the default and realism profile in one, and simplified how they are managed
• adapted the stock ISRU to be more focused on life support
• added a 'pressure' system that is just a simple extension to quality-of-life
• made the scrubber actually 'scrub co2'
• the living space is determined from parts volume
• added a configurable slot to pods and greenhouses, that can store modules/resources
• made the supply container resources configurable

Looking at the list, is quite a lot of things. But I will not be touching the life support aspect anytime soon, potentially ever again.

The science system is something that I personally want to play with, and the core of it is the collection and transmission over time. I believe that 'relatively simple' change will improve the gameplay a lot, and that's why I want to try it. But to try it, I have to make it first. The other things are just accessories, some of them designed to go around some subtle problems. I through about making it a separate mod, but I have so much infrastructure already done here in this mod that I can leverage. It will be A LOT more work to make it a separate mod, with no real benefits. Also it need to be made NOW because if I do it LATER it will break savegames. And I want to avoid rebalancing everything again TWICE. 

Signal need to stay because I need to be in control of data structures and algorithms to obtain my goals with the data transmission in background. People seem to like the CommNet system, I cannot judge because personally haven't really tried it yet (in fact I haven't had time to play this game since KSP 1.0.4...)

Anyway, all individual features can be disabled. If you don't want Science or Signal  you just set a flag to false in your settings. You can disable even more features by creating a custom profile. With no rules using the 'pressure' modifier, for example, the whole pressurization system disappear from the game. Same for most other things.

[Jacke]

5 hours ago, podbaydoor said:

Notice how realism overhaul is always broken or glitchy? It's because it's fighting stock and trying to be a different game.

Realism Overhaul includes a large number of dependent mods to be a total conversion mod set to convert the Kerbin system into the Sol system and all that entails.  Whenever KSP changes in a significant way (most version changes) those dependent mods have to be updated to mature working versions before RO itself is updated.  Having so many dependent mods works for RO (and is likely the only way to make such a transformation) but it's why other mods try to limit their dependencies.

[kerbiloid]

Greetings!

The kerbonauts from time to time need to visit Kerbin.
The scientific data are to be delivered to Kerbin.
Maybe an Unseen University] virtual Academy of Science is supposed to be on Kerbin.
Which collects, sorts and consumes scientific data.

Anomaly experiments. "x-files" type of  scientific data.

 

Free arts. Like a science, but arts.
Space tourism == spectacularity. Spectacularity causes arts.
Arts need studio (a scientific lab but named "studio"). Studio produces artworks (i.e. just a lab producing a kind of scientific data tagged as "artworks").

As labs can be by purpose: astronomical, biological, medical, physical, material, etc,
so art studios (the same labs) can be distinguished by fields:

- Art studio, sculpture studio, film studio, literature club: different kinds of experiment data.
The more unusual visual conditions, the higher is productivity. Any new biome (a biome with auroras gives bonus), several celestial bodies in a close proximity.
So, a Jool system is more efficient than far from any planet, as there is a variety of object to depict.

- Dance studio. Different gravity - different choreographic experiments.
Also some influence of conditions from the previous point for inspiration.

The more healthy and happy Kerbals present in studios, the higher is their artistic productivity.

An anomaly in close proximity (Mun arc, monolith, so on) gives large bonus.

Maybe with a virtual Academy of Arts. The same like Academy of Science, but collects and utilizes the "art experiments" data.

(I'm absolutely far from arts, so maybe this is naive.)

 

Tourism. Like a science, but tourism.
Hotels, restaurants and attractions (a scientific lab but named "hotel", "restaurant" or "attraction")
Hotel/attraction/restaurant produces positive impressions (i.e. just a lab producing a kind of scientific data tagged as "positive impressions").
The more healthy and happy Kerbals present in hotels and attractions, the more positive impressions.
(Of course, for hardcore gourmands and downshifters, there can be specific hotels, the more crampy and starving they are, the more "positive impressions").
An anomaly in close proximity (Mun arc, monolith, so on) gives large bonus.
An art studio connected to a hotel gives large bonus.
A kind of hotel: hermit's hut. The farther - the better.
Probably, a virtual Touristic Agency - just to collect and utilize the "impressions" kind of "scientific data".

Virtual "arts" and "tourism" look like a cheap way to force a player to build not only scientific outposts, but orbital and lunar hollywoods, disneylands and las-vegases
without any real changes in game mechanics: all they need is any presenting Science system.

 

As in sandbox mode Science is mostly fictional, a virtual "Market" where you can convert scientific, artistic and touristic data into KSP credits or just new resource - Money,
which you can exchange to some another resource.
So, Academy of Science converts "scientific" data into "Scientific Treasures" (say 5 astronomical data + 3 biological data + 1 material data + 4 medical data → 3 Scientific Treasures).
Academy of Arts converts, say 3 paintings data + 4 sculptures data + 10 movies data + 1choreographic data → 2 Artistic Treasures.
Touristic Agency converts "positive impressions" into "Touristic Treasures".
Then you can sell then in Market. Of course, all Academies and Market are just dialog windows, not KSC buildings.

Edited November 8, 2016 by kerbiloid

[ShotgunNinja]

@kerbiloid Hey  that is a tad bit beyond what I have in mind. I am thinking more of stuff like the ALFMED experiment on the 'light flashes' experienced by people when outside the earth magnetopause. Experiments that could be interesting and even educational, vaguely inspired by reality.

[nosscire]

On 11/7/2016 at 11:45 AM, ShotgunNinja said:

Transmission
Data is flagged for transmission home, then it is sent home over time, even in background. A big refactor of how distance influence transmission speed is in progress. Also A* pathfinding is going to be used, with the cost function defined by EC required (or transmission speed, haven't decided yet). For these reasons and others, the signal system stay.

 

If the signal system stay, is that the case for controlling crafts as well? And if so, are you making any changes to that aspect?

The signal system was in my opinion the weakest part of the previous release, because it did not include any means of controlling your craft out of range or our of LOS. Now, I understand that this is the whole point, but in Kerbalism there's no way to work around the problem.

RemoteTech solves the issue by giving you a flight computer that allows you to pre-program instructions. Stock now solves it by not completely taking away your control methods, but instead limiting them, which to me "simulates" what it would be like to have pre-programmed a computer (kind of anyway).

I like both these solutions, and wouldn't mind either of them in Kerbalism, but I do believe there must be some kind of soltuion for this. The other option would be that KOS is essentially required, but myself any many others think that KOS lands a bit too far on the side of "Work" compared to "Fun"

Got any plans for this that you care to share, or is this still work in progress?

 

Thanks for your awesome work, I'm really hyped for the next version!

[ShotgunNinja]

@nosscire Partial control is not a bad idea as a poor-man flight computer, and the full/zero throttle controls are on a different group so you can disable everything except those. It would be trivial to implement: one line of code need to change. I could add it as an option in Settings, actually. Also there is already another option to allow full control even when not linked: just the data transmission is disabled, that may work too for some users.

I need signal because, at the bare minimum, I need to simulate 'bandwidth' and to choose a path among the network based on that, instead of distance. That's the thing that is really required by the science system as data size will matter more than in stock. I have always in mind the New Horizons probe fly-by of Pluto, that captured data for a few hours and then transmitted it over months (it is still transmitting I think).

Control itself can be unsterstood as something that is present when bandwidth is above a small threshold, and my intention is to implement it in this way. So let's say when the bandwidth drop to less than 100 bit/s, the vessel will be considered unlinked. And of course when all paths are occluded by a celestial body, bandwidth is zero.

[Nansuchao]

6 minutes ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@nosscire Partial control is not a bad idea as a poor-man flight computer, and the full/zero throttle controls are on a different group so you can disable everything except those. It would be trivial to implement: one line of code need to change. I could add it as an option in Settings, actually. Also there is already another option to allow full control even when not linked: just the data transmission is disabled, that may work too for some users.

I need signal because, at the bare minimum, I need to simulate 'bandwidth' and to choose a path among the network based on that, instead of distance. That's the thing that is really required by the science system as data size will matter more than in stock. I have always in mind the New Horizons probe fly-by of Pluto, that captured data for a few hours and then transmitted it over months (it is still transmitting I think).

Control itself can be unsterstood as something that is present when bandwidth is above a small threshold, and my intention is to implement it in this way. So let's say when the bandwidth drop to less than 100 bit/s, the vessel will be considered unlinked. And of course when all paths are occluded by a celestial body, bandwidth is zero.

Well, IRL too, some big data as the pics from New Horizon needs months to be transmitted due to the low energy capabilities of the RTG and the antennae, while there are simple data as the telemetry from the Voyager probes (yes, they're still alives) that are almost instantaneous. It all depends on the kind of data and the kind of antennae

[nosscire]

29 minutes ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@nosscire Partial control is not a bad idea as a poor-man flight computer, and the full/zero throttle controls are on a different group so you can disable everything except those. It would be trivial to implement: one line of code need to change. I could add it as an option in Settings, actually. Also there is already another option to allow full control even when not linked: just the data transmission is disabled, that may work too for some users.

So, you are saying that you could implement a setting that allows you to either completely shut down controls when low bandwidth, or give a "stock-alike" option where you regain some control in all situations?

If I understood you correctly, that sounds like a brilliant solution, that will please both the hardcore crowd that want to play around with writing KOS-scripts, as well as people like me who's head hurts looking at KOS

[ShotgunNinja]

@nosscire Yes, I even looked and it seem that KSP 1.2 added a new control lock type called 'PARTIAL_SHIP_CONTROLS', so if I use that instead of ' ALL_SHIP_CONTROLS' it should limit the same stuff that stock limit with partial control. So I'm adding a new option in Settings called UnlinkedControl that specify what should happen when an unmanned vessel lose signal:

• none: can't be controlled at all
• limited: partial control, exactly the same as stock 
• full: doesn't limit control at all, so signal loss only influence data transmission

 

@Nansuchao We can assume telemetry/control data is trivially small in size, in comparison with science data. As long as the bandwidth is greater than a very small value (to be determined), it can be controlled. Below that value instead we assume the signal-to-noise ratio has dropped to such lows than control is lost. We could even use zero as threshold value, but then you'll never lose control from distance alone. What I would like is to allow control at great distances, but not infinite. And to move the influence of distance from control, focusing it instead on data transmission speeds.

[Gotmachine]

Okay, maybe I overreacted a bit. I'm reading again and again what you said about the "science revamp" and I'm not sure I fully understand everything :

On 07/11/2016 at 0:45 PM, ShotgunNinja said:

Sensors
Sensor is a module that is associated to a Data definition, and has a specific sampling rate. Sensors collect that data over time, even in background, and store the results in the vessel HardDrives. Even if they are called sensors, these will be used for all experiments too.

Labs
A lab is simply some part that can be configured to store one or more Sensors, using the Configure module. I'm going to convert a lot of parts in labs: the goo canister? an early game biologic lab; the material bay? a material science lab; the mobile lab? a lab, you get how it works. Then it is trivial to also add other interesting things such as a sensor slot in advanced probe cores, and other things of that nature.

For example, the goo canister would become a "bio-lab" containing a "bio-sensor". Once in the right situation (defined by the data definition associated to the bio-sensor), let say "landed on a body", I can activate it. Over time, it collects data, even in the background. But is there still a limit to how much data in this particular situation can be acquired ? At what rate is the data generated ? Is it still useful to bring back the data, or do you plan to make this a requirement only for the "samples" resource ? And also, how to handle situation changes (like space high/space low) if they happen with an activated sensor ?

It would be nice to have manned requirements for late-game sensors, or maybe a big boost to the data amount when a sensor is used in a manned lab. Something that make late game progression dependant on long manned missions.

Also, does that mean that we will get 3 "lab sizes" (the canister, the material bay and the lab) and we choose what sensor we put in ? What will happen to the other stock experiment parts ?

About "samples" being a generic resource, does that mean that it will yield the same amount of science regardless of the planet/body multiplier ? How will you retain the "data" associated with each sample if it's a generic resource ? This said, maybe that the idea of making generic, abundant, heavy samples is something interesting.

Edited November 9, 2016 by Gotmachine

[ShotgunNinja]

@Gotmachine I'll elaborate a bit on it. A sensor sample some specific 'data' from its current situation (that can be the same as in stock, and/or with custom condition). For each situation, there is a limited data-set you can collect overall. The rate of sampling is determined by the sensor: you could do it very fast (eg: instantly, or a few seconds) or very slow (eg: months). When an active sensor 'cross' into another situation, it simply switch to collecting data for that situation. Not all situations are valid for each type of data, this is described in the data definition.

A lab is just a part that can contain N sensors among a set of available ones. You configure it in the VAB before launch. The sensors available to select are unlocked over time as you discover new technologies. A condition 'vessel is manned' is planned, even with trait specified (eg: scientist). It make sense for me too.

The stock 'sensor-like' parts (eg: thermometer, barometer, etc) will just have a single Sensor module collecting the respective data, I do not plan to change them much.

 

32 minutes ago, Gotmachine said:

About "samples" being a generic resource, does that mean that it will yield the same amount of science regardless of the planet/body multiplier ? How will you retain the "data" associated with each sample if it's a generic resource ? This said, maybe that the idea of making generic, abundant, heavy samples is something interesting.

Mmm, that's a good point, didn't think about this. Maybe instead of a resource, I have to do it directly in a SampleContainer module, where I can store some meta-data about each sample. Then the mass can be implemented using the IModuleMass interface.

 

[seeingeyegod]

On 11/7/2016 at 3:33 AM, Red Iron Crown said:

Nor is it helpful to pester for a release date when the volunteer making and maintaining this mod is obviously still active and working on it. Please be patient, it will be done when it is done. 

I'm being patient, just curious, geez. I myself have only ever asked the question once so stop accusing me of pestering. It doesn't serve a purpose other than making me feel unwelcome in this forum.

Edited November 9, 2016 by seeingeyegod

[nascarlaser1]

Is there a way to take away the life support side of things, and then for me to combine whats left into usi? (for personal uses only.) I like UIS life support better (less death) but I like the radiation, need for crew transfers, etc. included in this mod.

[kraden]

20 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

 

Mmm, that's a good point, didn't think about this. Maybe instead of a resource, I have to do it directly in a SampleContainer module, where I can store some meta-data about each sample. Then the mass can be implemented using the IModuleMass interface.

This would basically work like a sample return bay in real life, right?  I really like the way this is sounding.

[Nansuchao]

1 hour ago, nascarlaser1 said:

Is there a way to take away the life support side of things, and then for me to combine whats left into usi? (for personal uses only.) I like UIS life support better (less death) but I like the radiation, need for crew transfers, etc. included in this mod.

Sure, just disable it in your config.

[kraden]

2 hours ago, nascarlaser1 said:

Is there a way to take away the life support side of things, and then for me to combine whats left into usi? (for personal uses only.) I like UIS life support better (less death) but I like the radiation, need for crew transfers, etc. included in this mod.

I think there is a link on the front page for incorporating USI.

Extra Profiles and Patches near the bottom of the first post.  

Edited November 10, 2016 by kraden

[pslytely psycho]

Just popped in to see what was happening with one of my essential mods.

Now after reading everything new, I'm positively salivating on my keyboard.

This and KCT are two that I must have to make the game feel 'complete.' Yours gives consequence, and those absolutely beautiful magnetic fields.  Jeb got radiation poisoning on my first flight. Had to cut it short and return him home quickly to save him. You made what was normally in the past, a routine flight into a tense nail-biter. 20 out of 10! Kudos!

KCT removes the 'insta-build' that I find jarring. Launching five rockets in a day just doesn't feel right.

These two have become must haves.

Thank you very much.

[APlayer]

I just wanted to say how much I LOVE this mod!

Thanks, ShotgunNinja, your add-on ranks number two on my must-have list, just after MM. 

Also thanks for mentioning my Profile in the OP - it is a honor for me!

Keep up the great work, and I can only totally agree with all of the people patiently waiting for the 1.2.x version to be released!

[SiCaRiO31]

Hi! quick question: are you planning on introducing something like KCT on Kerbalism?

[panarchist]

On 11/7/2016 at 3:10 PM, goldenpsp said:

It was meant to be.  I can't speak for @ShotgunNinja but in general almost all modders make mods for themselves and are kind enough to share them with the community.  I know that if I ever got around to making a mod (have an idea, just haven't tried yet) I wouldn't really care whether other people liked it as I wasn't making it for them.

I will concede your post is far more useful 

Yeah, modders in general are more patient than I would be in their shoes.  It's always worth remembering to be kind and considerate when dealing with people who put in dozens or hundreds of hours for free to make something cool/fun.  Speaking of, thanks @ShotgunNinja for continuing all the great work on this mod.  I use it in one of my two saves, and I absolutely love the radiation belt visualization and other features.  Outstanding work.

Also, echoing the comments of others, nearly everything in this mod can be tweaked and/or disabled, Kerbalism is far more flexible than most mods in that regard.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing the new features, and to the next release!

[Deimos Rast]

just reading this page...yes please! Everything sounds great!