[1.3.0] Kerbalism v1.2.9

[diomedea]

20 minutes ago, baldamundo said:

Really great to see how much progress this has made since I last played it. Curious as to what compatibility with RemoteTech is like atm though - do I need to go into the configs and disable some stuff?

As to functionality, I found no issues playing with both Kerbalism (1.1.8) and RemoteTech (1.8.4) so far. However Kerbalism polls RT API very frequently to know if a connection is active, in a way that wasn't anticipated by RT devs. The result is, if you have verbose logging on, while in flight your log will be spammed by messages linked to the RT API function "HasAnyConnection" showing in log as "RemoteTech: Flight: <vessel#ID> HasConnection: True or False", as that is how the API was conceived to work. RT developers have already addressed this issue, so I expect it will be fixed on their side with the next release. IN the meantime, you need to avoid using verbose logging or your log file will grow hugely.

[OhioBob]

@ShotgunNinja, what's the procedure for getting Kerbalism support for Galileo's Planet Pack?  I suppose we'll have to write our own config file?  Is it best to package the config with GPP, or to have it added to Kerbalism?

[CatastrophicFailure]

5 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

@ShotgunNinja, what's the procedure for getting Kerbalism support for Galileo's Planet Pack?  I suppose we'll have to write our own config file?  Is it best to package the config with GPP, or to have it added to Kerbalism?

I've been mucking about with it myself. Someone already made a radiation config that seems to work, everything else is mostly innate, I think. I'll check on that config when I get home tonight and either link you the post or the cfg itself. @JadeOfMaar @Galileo Maybe this could be bundled into the pack?

[OhioBob]

1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

I've been mucking about with it myself. Someone already made a radiation config that seems to work, everything else is mostly innate, I think. I'll check on that config when I get home tonight and either link you the post or the cfg itself. @JadeOfMaar @Galileo Maybe this could be bundled into the pack?

Yes, I've got access to the config you mentioned.  Of course it is "unofficial".  I think we'd like provide official support by packaging a config with either GPP or Kerbalism.

[Whovian41110]

So does anyone know how much Life Support is the Mark Two crew cabin is supposed to have?

[Galileo]

24 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

I've been mucking about with it myself. Someone already made a radiation config that seems to work, everything else is mostly innate, I think. I'll check on that config when I get home tonight and either link you the post or the cfg itself. @JadeOfMaar @Galileo Maybe this could be bundled into the pack?

Well the thing is, we thought that cfg that was floating around was already made a part of kerbalism.. we thought GPP was already compatible because of that lol 

we will fully include support unless  GPP becomes compatible by default in kerbalism first

[Daniel Prates]

Maybe someone here can help me. 

I've been having issues with kerbalism latelly. After many attempts I think I am zeroing in the problem, which is, maybe I am not configuring correctly my defautl  profile. Lets see if that is it. 

This is what I have done last: downloaded a brand new clean vanilla, and patched up with nothing but TAClifesupport, kerbalism, and the kerbavlism+tac profile. Then I took the TAC profile, renamed it 'default inside the 'profiles' folder. Nothing more. I should be ready to go, right?

Except.... the 'confort' funcionts (is that how it is called? The one that makes your kerbal go insane if space and entertainment is not enough) do not appear to be activated, since in the vessel planner the corresponding kerbalism helper, the corresponding data do not show.

Also, the gravity ring part is missing from the build options. 

I was thinking that possibly it was disabled in the profile. But no, all commands in the TAC profile (which I renamed 'default') seem to indicate nothing is turned off - everything reads 'true'. Unless I am not interpreting correctly the default profile. 

What am I doing wrong?

[Tech_96]

Hello, can you help me? I have a problem, I use last version of KSP 1.2.2... e.t.c. With Kerbalism mode I begin a new game, and I encounter a problem: I landing on Mun and go EVA and after returning to the vessel I found that it uncontrollable. Pilot can`t do anything. Problem repeats every new landings. Game restart solved a problem. Is it bug, or I just don`t understand something, how can I fix it? Thanks in advance. P.S. Please sorry for my grammar.

[nosscire]

On 1/30/2017 at 0:20 PM, ShotgunNinja said:

On 1/23/2017 at 8:56 PM, TheDuck700 said:

There's also something else I wanted to add: Would it be possible to add other ways to get CarboneDioxyde and perhaps other resources as well? Right now it's only obtainable through breathing and it takes a long while, especially when trying to get some LiquidFuel through the Sabatier Process. To fill the first unlockable tank (FL-T100) it would take about 9 days for one Kerbal.
Perhaps add the possibility to have bacteria produce it? IRL we can produce multiple components through bacteria cultures, even insuline which we had to take from pigs only a few years ago, and it is fairly easy and common (I remember making microbiological cultures in high school) so I feel it would fit in the realism optic of the mod.

Not a bad idea. New processes are very easy to add, so you could start adding and testing some new one yourself. Then share these here or on github and I will probably include them in the next release.

What would the bacteria produce it from though? There would still need to be some source of carbon (and oxygen, but we got that covered). From what I can see, all the other processes seem to be "realistic-ish" in that it conserves mass, and don't create something from nothing.

I think it would make more sense to just be able to make CO2 from Ore. Ore already allow you to make Oxygen, and I don't think it's such a stretch that it could include some carbon as well, allowing for making CO2.

[ShotgunNinja]

Guys anybody can share a link to this radiation config for GPP?

@Galileo I can include the GPP radiation config, no problem (I got some other planet packs configs already included). You can also include it yourself if you think the celestial bodies are going to change (or more are going to be added), and/or if you want to author the radiation fields of your bodies.

@Daniel Prates Some features are turned on/off automatically based on the profile used. More precisely, based on the modifiers used by that profile. If  the one you are using doesn't use the comfort modifier in any rule, then the comfort mechanic is turned off. The gravity ring get disabled in that case, because it is a comfort provider and will have no reason to exist if there is no comfort mechanic. 

I had a look at the TAC profile you mention, and it seem to be using the comfort modifier. So there must be something going on here. Can you send me your log? You can find it in KSP folder, with the name KSP.log, and you can upload it somewhere and post a link here on the thread.

@Tech_96 It is a bug, that I can't reproduce on my install however. Questions: are you using mechjeb? what other mods are you using? can you send me your savegame?

[Tech_96]

2 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

 

@Tech_96 It is a bug, that I can't reproduce on my install however. Questions: are you using mechjeb? what other mods are you using? can you send me your savegame?

I use only KIS and Kerbalism, mechjeb I delete after first launch. https://yadi.sk/d/DglaYLKX3Cfzkt this is link for folder with my saves

Edited February 3, 2017 by Tech_96

[CatastrophicFailure]

1 hour ago, ShotgunNinja said:

Guys anybody can share a link to this radiation config for GPP?

Here ya go:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wp54jcbq31btwqg/radiationtest.cfg?dl=0

Not my work, a guy a few pages back cooked it up and deserves the credit, but best I can do on short notice. 

As long as you're there, if I want to add radiation to another planet, can I make a separate config or does it have to be pasted into this one?

[ShotgunNinja]

@CatastrophicFailure Thanks. If that was posted here before, i totally missed that!  

36 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

if I want to add radiation to another planet, can I make a separate config or does it have to be pasted into this one?

Just add a RadiationBody (and optionally a custom RadiationModel) definition in any .cfg file. As long as is inside GameData it will work.

[CatastrophicFailure]

3 minutes ago, ShotgunNinja said:

@CatastrophicFailure Thanks. If that was posted here before, i totally missed that!  

Just add a RadiationBody (and optionally a custom RadiationModel) definition in any .cfg file. As long as is inside GameData it will work.

Nice. Is there a primer anywhere on what the various "types" mean? (Ionosphere, irregular, etc...)

[ShotgunNinja]

@CatastrophicFailure These are RadiationModels. The ones you mention have been authored by me, for the stock bodies, and are available in general to use with other planet packs. However you can create new ones (!!), as these are just defined by a RadiationModel node in a .cfg file somewhere.

Here on the wiki there are the full specs of both RadiationBody and RadiationModel.

I think some people consider the distance-fields system I'm using as some kind of 'voodoo'..., maybe I should improve the documentation or write a tutorial. Anyway, feel free to ask for clarifications if you want to try create a custom model.

[APlayer]

3 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

I can include the GPP radiation config, no problem (I got some other planet packs configs already included). You can also include it yourself if you think the celestial bodies are going to change (or more are going to be added), and/or if you want to author the radiation fields of your bodies.

I believe Kerbalism should bring all patches itself, ideally, to reduce "patch clutter" on a global scale. Because it needs comparatvely many patches for comparatively little spread.

 

Example: Suppose a fictional world with those rules:

1. "Kerbalism" needs 100 patches / mod on average.
2. There are 2000 Kerbalism users.
3. There are 100000 users of mods that requires compatibility, with 11 mods / user.
4. Every Kerbalism install only "meets" 10 mods that require compatibility.

 

Scenario A - Kerbalism supplies all patches. 

• Kerbalism installs:
• 2000 Users * 50 Mods * 100 Patches = 1 * 10^7 RequiredPatches
• Non-Kerbalism installs:
• --- = 0 ClutterPatches

1 * 10^7 patches installed in this world, "Required to Clutter" ratio = 1:0

 

Scenario B - All other mods supply patches, Kerbalism does supply none.

• Kerbalism installs:
• (11 ModsPerUser - 1 KerbalismMod) * 2000 KerbalismUsers * 100 Patches = 2 * 10^6 RequiredPatches
• Non-Kerbalism installs:
• 11 ModsPerUser * (100000 Users - 2000 KerbalismUsers) * 100 Patches = 1.078 * 10^8 ClutterPatches

1.098 * 10^8 patches installed in this world, "Required to Clutter" ratio: 1:54.9

 

As you see, both numbers worsen by an order of magnitude in Scenario B. Of course this is a heavily simplified model and the numbers are likely very wrong, but a similar result happens with almost any numbers.

Feel free, no, please do correct me on any mathematical or logical errors I may have made.

Edited February 3, 2017 by APlayer

[ShotgunNinja]

@APlayer 

Your take on the matter is interesting, but the 'patch-clutter' there only cost a trivial amount of CPU time at KSP loading time, where they are parsed. Then MM test for NEEDS[] fail and everything proceed happily. (unless I am misunderstanding what you wrote... that could be possible).

But a part author should ideally add support himself because he can choose the terms (like, how far its antenna range should be, and similar) and also he is always on top of his own work and so the patch have lower chances to get obsolete as parts are added/removed/changed.

For planet packs, a similar consideration can be made: the author can choose the terms (of radiation, resource definitions, etc) and it is less likely that the patch is not updated when a celestial body is added/removed/change.

I already got 22 individual support patches included, that's a lot of mods to monitor for changes. A few can easily become obsolete without me noticing.

That being said, I reckon that this mod changed a lot during time and I have no problem including more support patches.

 

@Tech_96

Sorry buddy, I can't replicate the 'control loss after EVA' issue. I installed KIS, loaded your last backup save, loaded the Mun Lander vessel. EVAd out, EVAd in, control is here. Here's a video of the thing:

 

[APlayer]

@ShotgunNinja As a person who first learned programming on a calculator with 24kB of available RAM and a 6kHz CPU, I am inclined to optimize the last bits.  But you're right that an author should have full control over his mod, and if I think of it, it is more important than the minor optimization I propose. So just ignore my post.

[Tech_96]

Well, thanks a lot! I will try to find problem, or just suffer

[Drew Kerman]

I've not been able to find any information on the RTG decay support. There's a note in the change log that decay can be disabled in settings but I see nothing for that in the wiki or even in the settings file for the latest release. Anyways I don't want to disable it I'm just pointing out some missing info. Would like to learn more about how Kerbalism deals with RTG decay if NearFuture Electrical is installed as well as JDiminishingRTG - I did search up some posts saying JDiminishingRTG was not compatible but it seems NFE is? Again, couldn't find anything about this on the wiki (which is really great overall, BTW)

[ShotgunNinja]

@Drew Kerman NearFuture RTG module is fully supported, but JDiminishingRTG is not supported at all.

That entry in changelog refer to an option that was added in Settings to disable the NearFuture RTG decay simulation. Then later realized that it made no sense to be able to disable it (as in, the user can just not use decaying RTG in the first place if he don't want it). So it was removed ASAP in the following release.

[Climberfx]

Thinking on add support for this on my mod. I believe it is Tac LS (already have support for this one) or this on installation, not booth together. So, when i have this on my game, i need to remove TAC LS right?

[klugeh01]

It appears as though the chemical plant does not have a group assigned in its .cfg, so it doesn't show up in the VAB under any of the default groupings. I was able to find it by sorting on size category (advanced tab), but I haven't looked elsewhere.

[OhioBob]

18 hours ago, ShotgunNinja said:

Guys anybody can share a link to this radiation config for GPP?

@Galileo I can include the GPP radiation config, no problem (I got some other planet packs configs already included). You can also include it yourself if you think the celestial bodies are going to change (or more are going to be added), and/or if you want to author the radiation fields of your bodies.

The GPP config that's out there was done by a third party.  It's not official part of GPP.  The GPP development team (of which I'm a part), plans to produce our own config.  We'll decide later whether we want to include it in the GPP package or have it added to Kerbalism.  Must the config be in the Kerbalism folder, or can it be in the GPP folder?

[sidfu]

loss of control when u eva might be a control lock. u can try resettiing the lock in the  alst shift f12 menu