[1.3.0] Kerbalism v1.2.9

[Drew Kerman]

4 hours ago, lajoswinkler said:

This mod will never become stock

This mod should never become stock. I don't think people realize what they are asking for when they say this. You really want to wait months for new features instead of days or weeks?? Any mod that gets integrated to stock will also get stuck with waiting for the entire game to be updated. Perish the thought!

5 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

Guys I'm in 'feature-lock' until I get a stable version out. What @Drew Kerman said gives me an idea about how the new CME blobs will interact with signals, to improve on the current blackout model. For the sun disturbing the signal, what is the reason: rarefied plasma extending around the sun? gravitational effects? Please elaborate.

Sorry didn't ever mean to say I wanted this in the next version, just getting some discussion going on about it. Like I said, I didn't research anything I figured someone who knew better would speak up if it's not a real thing to be concerned about. So I just did a quick search and here's a video from JPL with some basic details. I seem to be correct that the sun can cause some serious interference with signals passing nearby, it's not just being unable to see the target during solar conjunction. I think it would be a reasonable mechanic to lower the data rate to simulate signal corruption (packets are dropped a lot so it takes longer for intact packets to come in and build out the data set). It would take more research to determine when such situations would occur tho - as in not only distance of the transmission to the sun but also the sun's current activity as simulated by Kerbalism.

[naidis]

Is there a patch for KSP 1.2.1?

[diomedea]

10 hours ago, Drew Kerman said:

... Like I said, I didn't research anything I figured someone who knew better would speak up if it's not a real thing to be concerned about. So I just did a quick search and here's a video from JPL with some basic details. I seem to be correct that the sun can cause some serious interference with signals passing nearby, it's not just being unable to see the target during solar conjunction. I think it would be a reasonable mechanic to lower the data rate to simulate signal corruption (packets are dropped a lot so it takes longer for intact packets to come in and build out the data set). It would take more research to determine when such situations would occur tho - as in not only distance of the transmission to the sun but also the sun's current activity as simulated by Kerbalism.

You are indeed correct there are interferences; and true, the issue isn't limited to solar conjunction either. Any body able to radiate energy actually is a source of noise, just because thermal energy follows Wien's law and the radiated energy spectrum encompasses the bandwidth used for communications. And the max rate for data follows Shannon/Hartley, where Signal to Noise ratio is central. Also, even while highly directive, real antennae used for deep-space communications can't filter out all of the background interference coming from outside the main lobe, a real antenna gain has some nulls but hard to make all sources of noise fall in them. It is definitely possible to correctly simulate noise coming from Sun in KSP, and even noise from other warm bodies though a bit more complex.

[APlayer]

3 hours ago, naidis said:

Is there a patch for KSP 1.2.1?

This has been asked many times, mentioned in the OP and literally discussed over the last at least three pages, probably many more...

No, there is not, but @ShotgunNinja said that it is almost done.

 

[Japcsali]

On 2016. 12. 01. at 9:17 PM, ShotgunNinja said:

 Moving forward, I have some more plans long-term:

• waste heat management

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does this mean that Kerbalism won't be compatible with the interstellar mod?     
Or will there be an option to turn of this part of the mod?

[Nansuchao]

1 hour ago, Japcsali said:

Does this mean that Kerbalism won't be compatible with the interstellar mod?     
Or will there be an option to turn of this part of the mod?

Actually Kerbalism isn't compatible with Interstellar Extended. They do not clash together, however the background processing doesn't works for the KSPI-E reactors.

[nightstalker101s]

ShotgunNinja, I really love the layout of this mod (from reading about it) and it is the last mod on my list left to install. Im really excites about the work youve done and are doing and wanted to say thanks in advance! I get more excited everyday because everyday without this mod is one day closer to having it XD!

Btw, I am assuming this doesnt support S.N.A.C.K.S. I am right, correct?

[ShotgunNinja]

@nightstalker101s You can run this togheter with any life support mod, including Snacks!, by simply setting the Profile to 'none' in Settings.

[Yemo]

7 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@nightstalker101s You can run this togheter with any life support mod, including Snacks!, by simply setting the Profile to 'none' in Settings.

Would it be possible to make this automic? Eg if Kerbalism and TAC Life Support is intalled, that the resource management (Food, Oxygen?) of Kerbalism deactivates itself automatically and that part of life support is "taken over" by TAC life support (Food, Oxygen, Water). That would simplify a lot and reduce (install) issues, for those who really appreciate Kerbalism but are simply to accustomed to TAC life support and the integration for planet bases and so on, which it provides.

[karst45]

I tought about something. how will it manage career mode? but more specifically the "rescue mission" Since those mission have an kerbal in space wont he asphyxiate before you can save him/her?

 

[podbaydoor]

Seems like rescue mission Kerbals are immune to Kerbalism's rules. As soon as you get in load range of a stranded Kerbal you get notifications about food/air. I think the life support clock starts as soon as said Kerbal goes EVA.

[ShotgunNinja]

@Yemo I can't do that because it is legit for the player to use a profile (that let's say, add a radiation rule) together with a third party 'life support' mod (such as TAC-LS). In any case, it is really as simple as changing 'Profile = default' to 'Profile = none' in Settings.cfg.

@karst45 Kerbals from resque missions are detected and ignored for all mechanics. Then when you get in range of the vessel to resque, some supply resources are 'gifted' (including monoprop) and all mechanics start to apply.

[APlayer]

On 12/4/2016 at 4:02 PM, nightstalker101s said:

[...] Btw, I am assuming this doesnt support S.N.A.C.K.S. I am right, correct?

 

23 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@nightstalker101s You can run this togheter with any life support mod, including Snacks!, by simply setting the Profile to 'none' in Settings.

 

16 hours ago, Yemo said:

Would it be possible to make this automic? Eg if Kerbalism and TAC Life Support is intalled, that the resource management (Food, Oxygen?) of Kerbalism deactivates itself automatically and that part of life support is "taken over" by TAC life support (Food, Oxygen, Water). That would simplify a lot and reduce (install) issues, for those who really appreciate Kerbalism but are simply to accustomed to TAC life support and the integration for planet bases and so on, which it provides.

@nightstalker101s, @Yemo of course you guys can use my "Realism without Life Support" profile, not to self-advertise. 

[Yemo]

12 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@Yemo I can't do that because it is legit for the player to use a profile (that let's say, add a radiation rule) together with a third party 'life support' mod (such as TAC-LS). In any case, it is really as simple as changing 'Profile = default' to 'Profile = none' in Settings.cfg.

I dont really understand why there could not be a default behaviour when starting a new game with both installed. And then players could switch manually when they want something different than the default "integration". If every two mods which could be played together needed a "simple" profile change to interoperate, it would take hours of clicking and reading up to set up a decently modded ksp install. Every time something changes (ksp patch, new mod installs, etc.). Default compatibility/integration makes ksp modding work.

[APlayer]

46 minutes ago, Yemo said:

[...] If every two mods which could be played together needed a "simple" profile change to interoperate, it would take hours of clicking and reading up to set up a decently modded ksp install. Every time something changes (ksp patch, new mod installs, etc.). Default compatibility/integration makes ksp modding work.

Well, this has some charme, doesn't it? 

But seriously, most decent mods work well together, there was a lot of effort put into that, and what @ShotgunNinja said is not a ' "simple" profile change' but rather a configuration in a file designed specifically for this, configurations.

Kerbalism is really customisable, which is one of the reasons why it is my favorite mod. If you're looking for help on how to configure it, I'd be glad to help, too.

[Yemo]

4 minutes ago, APlayer said:

Well, this has some charme, doesn't it? 

But seriously, most decent mods work well together, there was a lot of effort put into that, and what @ShotgunNinja said is not a ' "simple" profile change' but rather a configuration in a file designed specifically for this, configurations.

Kerbalism is really customisable, which is one of the reasons why it is my favorite mod. If you're looking for help on how to configure it, I'd be glad to help, too.

I can configure it for my personal use.

But if there is no automatic compatibility, I can not recommend it eg for use with my mods. And as TAC is the proven standard life support for years and kerbalism is the newcomer, I ll have to stick to TAC only, when I would really prefer to recommend using both.

 

edit: It would have some charme if people would start reading threads, but in reality, it just creates support issues.

Edited December 5, 2016 by Yemo

[APlayer]

7 minutes ago, Yemo said:

I can configure it for my personal use. [...]

I am sorry, then, I must have misunderstood.

7 minutes ago, Yemo said:

[...] But if there is no automatic compatibility, I can not recommend it eg for use with my mods. And as TAC is the proven standard life support for years and kerbalism is the newcomer, I ll have to stick to TAC only, when I would really prefer to recommend using both. [...]

Humm, let me elaborate on what I mean.

Kerbalism has default compatibility, you just have to use it correctly. As an analogy, when you're installing a program, there are some suggested settings, but to have anything useful you need to configure it to your preferences. The same goes about Kerbalism. It has some suggested settings, but for a proper experience you should configure it for yourself.

11 minutes ago, Yemo said:

edit: It would have some charme if people would start reading threads, but in reality, it just creates support issues.

I am not sure I got that right. Do you mean that I didn't read the thread? I indeed didn't read the whole, but I am following for quite some time now. If so, I must have misunderstood something.

Edited December 5, 2016 by APlayer
Clicked submit too early accidentally, finished post.

[ShotgunNinja]

@Yemo 

Let me explain my rationale better. Kerbalism is an environment simulator and a rule framework. The 'default' set of rules (and the parts that comes with it) are an extra, a showcase of what can be done with it. But you can write your very own 'life support' mod by simply authoring a .cfg file, what I call 'profiles'. That is why I want to avoid forcing the player to use one.

I could detect when TAC-LS is installed and force the profile to 'none'. I could do that, is trivial. However, what if a player want to create a profile to use togheter with TAC-LS? In that case he can't change it. Such profile may for instance just deal with radiation or quality of life, or anything else that he may deem legit to run together with TAC-LS.

[elpollodiablo]

17 minutes ago, Yemo said:

But if there is no automatic compatibility, I can not recommend it eg for use with my mods. And as TAC is the proven standard life support for years and kerbalism is the newcomer, I ll have to stick to TAC only, when I would really prefer to recommend using both.

There is a description in the OP with all the different configurations that have been made. APlayer is the one that made exactly what you are looking for:

http://spacedock.info/mod/880/Kerbalism - Realism without Life Support

Turns off the life support of Kerbalism and lets you use any mod you want for it.

 

On a different question: I'm patiently waiting for the release, but i got the KSP bug again recently and now can't hold myself off doing kerballed missions. So, if i use USI-LS now and then switch to the UKS Kerbalism Patch after the new version is released, will that cause any problems (provided i put all the necessary parts into place)? Like empty supply storages for instance? I don't think so but better safe than my frontier outposts dead

[Gotmachine]

20 minutes ago, Yemo said:

And as TAC is the proven standard life support for years and kerbalism is the newcomer, I ll have to stick to TAC only

Maybe you could reconsider, since Kerbalism LS is nearly the same as TAC-LS, with in my opinion a better implementation : consolidated interface, VAB planner, background consumption, global vessels panel management, timewarp events management, integrated waste recycling and greenhouses. And it seems that the next version will use a realistic resource set (oxygen + food + water) similar to what is used by TAC-LS. And as far as I know, integration with other mods is on par with TAC-LS.

[Yemo]

22 minutes ago, APlayer said:

I am sorry, then, I must have misunderstood.

Humm, let me elaborate on what I mean.

Kerbalism has default compatibility, you just have to use it correctly. As an analogy, when you're installing a program, there are some suggested settings, but to have anything useful you need to configure it to your preferences. The same goes about Kerbalism. It has some suggested settings, but for a proper experience you should configure it for yourself.

I am not sure I got that right. Do you mean that I didn't read the thread? I indeed didn't read the whole, but I am following for quite some time now. If so, I must have misunderstood something.

I appreciate the offer of help, I just did not communicate my issue properly.

The thing about the charme was just a remark about how non-automatic compatibility fast results in support requests from players in general.

 

@ShotgunNinja

I ll have to take another look. I would really like to make TAC + Kerbalism my default, the former for planetary base integration, the latter for added challenge. To have a really demanding experience.

3 minutes ago, Gotmachine said:

Maybe you could reconsider, since Kerbalism LS is nearly the same as TAC-LS, with in my opinion a better implementation : consolidated interface, VAB planner, background consumption, global vessels panel management, timewarp events management, integrated waste recycling and greenhouses. And it seems that the next version will use a realistic resource set (oxygen + food + water) similar to what is used by TAC-LS. And as far as I know, integration with other mods is on par with TAC-LS.

Oxygen + food + water would be great, hopefully using the same values as tac life support for consumption/stats? Because for the TAC values concerning those 3 resources, there are already compatibility patches in place. And I m really not in the mood to do them again for my mod, when there is no reason or benefit of rebalancing them again.

[APlayer]

9 minutes ago, Yemo said:

I appreciate the offer of help, I just did not communicate my issue properly.

The thing about the charme was just a remark about how non-automatic compatibility fast results in support requests from players in general. [...]

Ah, sorry, then it must be me. I am not a native speaker and may miss minor but important details.

[ShotgunNinja]

@elpollodiablo The rule framework changed, all those third-party profiles will have to be rewritten.

Also, changing the set of rules for an existing savegame may lead to undesired results. The exact issues depend on what changes in detail. Pods will probably get the resources however.

 

@Yemo I got an idea. You could make and ship a profile with your mod, that add some rules you deem appropriate (and to run together with TAC-LS, eventually). Then from my side I will add a way for a third-party mod to force some settings (such as profiles and features), so the user doesn't need to change them manually when your mod is installed.

You may wonder, can this be done by simply MM-patching the settings node? It could in the past, but in next version I am messing with the KSP loading system and long story short, the user settings are parsed before MM apply the patches.

 

23 minutes ago, Yemo said:

Oxygen + food + water would be great, hopefully using the same values as tac life support for consumption/stats?

There is definitely water in the new 'default' profile, and also co2 poisoning and pressurization. The consumption rates I taken from real NASA data (about humans). I don't know if they match the TAC-LS ones, but is possible they are not that much different. The container capacities are calculated from the container volume, taking in consideration pressure/state when appropriate.

Edited December 5, 2016 by ShotgunNinja

[Yemo]

1 minute ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@elpollodiablo The rule framework changed, all those third-party profiles will have to be rewritten.

Also, changing the set of rules for an existing savegame may lead to undesired results. The exact issues depend on what changes in detail. Pods will probably get the resources however.

 

@Yemo I got an idea. You could make and ship a profile with your mod, that add some rules you deem appropriate (and to run together with TAC-LS, eventually). Then from my side I will add a way for a third-party mod to force some settings (such as profiles and features), so the user doesn't need to change them manually when that mod is installed.

You may wonder, can this be done by simply MM-patching the settings node? It could in the past, but in next version I am messing with the KSP loading system and long story short, the user settings are parsed before MM apply the patches.

 

Hm, that would work depending on implementation. Interestingly, a similar problem of Settings alterations was just discussed on the last few remote tech pages. Resulting in a revert from loading fixed settings files back to module manager patch recognition. Considering RemoteTech has some wide 3rd party modding/compatibility as well, not just from minor SETI mini mods, but most importantly from Realism Overhaul.

Well, if you plan to use the community resource pack Food/Oxygen/Water with the tac consumption rates/stats, I would simply alter my mm patches to trigger on kerbalism as well as tac life support. That could then also be simply done for all the other mods supporting tac life support food oxygen water rates/stats, eg UniversalStorage, all the base building mods, procedural parts, etc...

[ShotgunNinja]

@Yemo Here are the new consumption rates in the 'default' profile.

Food: 1.77 Kg/day (6.29 units/day)
Water: 2.42 Kg/day (2.42 units/day)
Oxygen: 0.84 Kg/day (595.74 units/day)

I'm using the same resource definitions as CRP.

 

11 minutes ago, Yemo said:

Interestingly, a similar problem of Settings alterations was just discussed on the last few remote tech pages. Resulting in a revert from loading fixed settings files back to module manager patch recognition. Considering RemoteTech has some wide 3rd party modding/compatibility as well, not just from minor SETI mini mods, but most importantly from Realism Overhaul.

In my case, the issue was to detect what features to enable from user settings and the profile choosen, and then to make those features available to be checked against in MM patches using NEEDS[] statements. I ended up adding a 'loader' in the KSP asset loading system, that is run before MM, and inject MM patches on-the-fly. So it work in this way:

• KSP start
• my loader start
  • parse settings node
  • parse choosen profile node
  • detect features to use
  • inject MM patches on-the-fly
• MM loader start
  • apply patches (including the ones I injected)

The patches injected are very simple, of the form '@Kerbalism:FOR[FeatureName] {}'.
Then any MM patch can do some conditional patching depending on the feature set, just with something like: '@ANY_NODE:NEEDS[FeatureName]'

Edited December 5, 2016 by ShotgunNinja