totm nov 2017 [1.3.0] Community Database of Module Manager Patches for Stock KSP

[westamastaflash]

"Add Attachment Nodes to Solar Panels" breaks some mod parts, particularly when the mod part has nodes already. Probably should be modified to specifically fix the stock solar panel parts only.

[Alshain]

14 hours ago, westamastaflash said:

"Add Attachment Nodes to Solar Panels" breaks some mod parts, particularly when the mod part has nodes already. Probably should be modified to specifically fix the stock solar panel parts only.

You will have to ask @Enceos about that.  It's his patch and to be honest, I'm not entirely sure what it is trying to accomplish

[Enceos]

14 hours ago, westamastaflash said:

"Add Attachment Nodes to Solar Panels" breaks some mod parts, particularly when the mod part has nodes already. Probably should be modified to specifically fix the stock solar panel parts only.

Define "breaks" please. I'm using a patch without the attachment restriction in my game and I never encountered any problems.

Spoiler

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

More patches from this league:

Spoiler

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleWheelBase]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleRCSFX]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleRCS]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableRadiator]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf

 

Edited April 16, 2017 by Enceos

[westamastaflash]

6 hours ago, Enceos said:

Define "breaks" please. I'm using a patch without the attachment restriction in my game and I never encountered any problems.

  Reveal hidden contents

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size0, srf
}

 

When this patch is in place: In this mod, the Gondola parts will only attach at one node to a parent part, and then no other parts will allow themselves to be attached. The parts contain a ModuleDeployableSolarPanel module, but also have 4 nodes *and* are surface-attachable.

Without the patch, things attach just fine to all the nodes.

 

 

Edited April 16, 2017 by westamastaflash

[Enceos]

@westamastaflash I also have Heisenberg. Use the version I posted, without attachment restriction to avoid the problem.

[westamastaflash]

3 minutes ago, Enceos said:

@westamastaflash I also have Heisenberg. Use the version I posted, without attachment restriction to avoid the problem.

Thank you! I must have had an older/different version. 

@PART[*]:HAS[#node_attach[*],@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]
{
    %node_stack_root = #$node_attach$
    @attachRules = 1,1,0,0,1
    @bulkheadProfiles = size1, srf
} 

Edited April 16, 2017 by westamastaflash

[Jarin]

On 4/14/2017 at 8:19 PM, Jarin said:

So I, uh, borked something (and I didn't even add that new script yet), and now I'm getting over a hundred MM errors on load; looks like a lot of it is in tweakscale, but all I get from the loading screen is error totals. Is there a log to get details of MM load errors somewhere?

@Alshain any idea what to look at here? Google searches are failing me.

[Alshain]

7 minutes ago, Jarin said:

@Alshain any idea what to look at here? Google searches are failing me.

If it isn't related to a patch here, you should ask in the MM thread or possibly Tweakscale thread.  I don't know how to troubleshoot those.  Sorry

[Jarin]

5 hours ago, Alshain said:

If it isn't related to a patch here, you should ask in the MM thread or possibly Tweakscale thread.  I don't know how to troubleshoot those.  Sorry

That... is a really good idea. <.<

(just take it as a complement that you're a visibly knowledgeable authority on the topic of MM scripts, so I missed the obvious action here)

[toric5]

@PART[*]:HAS[@Module[ModuleDockingNode]:HAS[~snapRotation[True]]]:FINAL

this shoud, in theory, target all docking ports that DONT have snaprotation, correct? (the mm wiki says ~ is the oppisite of #, similar to @ and !)

[nathan1]

@Alshain The patches that duplicate stock structural parts for other sizes (e.g. duplicating the 1.25m 6-way hub to 2.5m, etc) don't update the bulkheadProfiles for the parts, so the parts don't show up correctly when filtering by cross-section.

[pwhk]

// Swap Crew report and EVA report biome-dependence in space low
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[crewReport]]:FINAL           { @biomeMask = 23 }
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[evaReport]]:FINAL            { @biomeMask = 7  }

When one finds it is silly to get out to get all the biome science

Note that if you apply this patch mid-game the old biome EVA reports won't get deleted.

Edited April 22, 2017 by pwhk

[fourfa]

3 hours ago, pwhk said:

// Swap Crew report and EVA report biome-dependence in space low
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[crewReport]]:FINAL           { @biomeMask = 23 }
@EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[evaReport]]:FINAL            { @biomeMask = 7  }

When one finds it is silly to get out to get all the biome science

Note that if you apply this patch mid-game the old biome EVA reports won't get deleted.

Just want to point out that this creates a huge buff to very early career science returns (before the expensive astronaut complex upgrade which allows EVA in flight), when science is still comparatively hard to get.  Is that intentional?

I'd probably agree on philosophical grounds that the crew report makes more sense as a detailed planetary observation than the EVA report.  But I would personally go so far as to call this swap (in my usual Hard mode rules, where building upgrades are ruinously expensive) cheating.  Cheating myself out of the enjoyable challenges of early career.

Edited April 22, 2017 by fourfa

[shoe7ess]

Hey everyone, I had a question,

I use KWRocketry in my install and it allows you to add graduated power responses to their engines, so naturally I want to add it to all of my liquid engines. I unfortunately do not know how the ratio works out in acceleration or deceleration time (in other words why most of the configs that come with KW are 1.3+ for acceleration except for one of the largest engines which has it around 0.3 for acceleration and what the basepoint is for "instant" power response, so I'm using 1.3/1.5 for everything). I've been doing a lot of troubleshooting with MM configs I've been working with that will not work and starting the game takes about 15 minutes so I thought I'd ask here before I spend too much time with it if this config should work:

 

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX],@PROPELLANT[!SolidFuel],@ModuleEnginesFX[!useEngineResponseTime]]:FINAL
	
	@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]
	{
		useEngineResponseTime = True
		engineAccelerationSpeed = 1.3
		engineDecelerationSpeed = 1.5
	}

basically want it to all engines that don't use solid fuel, and not override the existing kw rocketry configs (hence the !solidfuel and !useengineresponsetime).

I use a plethora of other mods, so I always use the ":FINAL" tag to make sure it gets added last but this hasn't worked in a few cases I'm still working on.

Any help/advice is more than welcome!

Thanks

[Alshain]

@shoe7ess Your search markup is a bit off.  It think it would be:

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]:HAS[#useEngineResponseTime[False]],!PROPELLANT[SolidFuel]]:FINAL

 

[shoe7ess]

1 minute ago, Alshain said:

@shoe7ess Your search markup is a bit off.  It think it would be:

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]:HAS[#useEngineResponseTime[False]],!PROPELLANT[SolidFuel]]:FINAL

 

I wanted a way of filtering out the KW engines completely, so that's why there was no True/False set for useEngineResponseTime, I don't want this config file editing the engine response times set by the KW patch. So wouldn't the [False] allow it to overwrite any occurrence where it reads true?

[Alshain]

7 minutes ago, shoe7ess said:

I wanted a way of filtering out the KW engines completely, so that's why there was no True/False set for useEngineResponseTime, I don't want this config file editing the engine response times set by the KW patch. So wouldn't the [False] allow it to overwrite any occurrence where it reads true?

Ah, I see in that case I believe this may be what you want.

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]:HAS[~useEngineResponseTime[]],!PROPELLANT[SolidFuel]]:FINAL

EDIT: Wait, that is inverted.  Give me a sec.

EDIT 2: Nope I was right the first time, that is all parts that do not have useEngineResponseTime

Edited May 2, 2017 by Alshain

[shoe7ess]

2 minutes ago, Alshain said:

Ah, I see in that case I believe this may be what you want.

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]:HAS[~useEngineResponseTime[]],!PROPELLANT[SolidFuel]]:FINAL

EDIT: Wait, not that is inverted.  Give me a sec.

EDIT 2: Nope I was right, that is all parts that do not have useEngineResponseTime

Ahhh, I still have ways to go in the more intricacies of the power of Module Manager, but this should help with a few other MM patches I can't get working which have similar setups.

Thanks for your help man, and for the hour plus of debugging this would have taken me before I inevitably would have come here asking for the answer anyway haha

[Alshain]

Just now, shoe7ess said:

Ahhh, I still have ways to go in the more intricacies of the power of Module Manager, but this should help with a few other MM patches I can't get working which have similar setups.

Thanks for your help man, and for the hour plus of debugging this would have taken me before I inevitably would have come here asking for the answer anyway haha

Well, I haven't tested it, but I think that should be pretty close.  Beyond that, you might post it in the MM thread.  I think it gets more attention than this one from people experienced at writing scripts (I still fumble about in it too)

[shoe7ess]

1 hour ago, Alshain said:

Well, I haven't tested it, but I think that should be pretty close.  Beyond that, you might post it in the MM thread.  I think it gets more attention than this one from people experienced at writing scripts (I still fumble about in it too)

Well I'll give it a test and report back shortly.I have another script that's given me hell for awhile now so I may head over to that thread after I test this out if that issue still needs fixing, but regardless of the outcome, I appreciate you taking the time to help.

 

Edit: Unfortunately this did not seem to work. Now I have 4 MM patches I need working and am starting to run out of ideas. I thought no operator means an insert, yet that doesn't work for most of my patches, and even adding :FINAL does nothing. Either the MM patches don't work or they are being overwritten by other MM patches and I have no idea how to make an MM patch load last besides :FINAL. Onto the main MM thread.

Edited May 2, 2017 by shoe7ess

[Nicias]

Is it possible to increase the distance from which an engineer can repack parachutes with a MM patch?

[Alshain]

21 minutes ago, Nicias said:

Is it possible to increase the distance from which an engineer can repack parachutes with a MM patch?

It doesn't look like it has an interaction range modifier.  It's unfortunate they made that part of the ModuleScienceExpirament class instead of part of the base PartModule class.  The only think I could tell you to do is make a suggestion to Squad asking them to move it up so it can be applied to all parts.

Edited May 3, 2017 by Alshain

[Nicias]

1 hour ago, Alshain said:

It doesn't look like it has an interaction range modifier.  It's unfortunate they made that part of the ModuleScienceExpirament class instead of part of the base PartModule class.  The only think I could tell you to do is make a suggestion to Squad asking them to move it up so it can be applied to all parts.

Do you know if there is a mod that does this then? Or any other way of automatically resetting them?

[linuxgurugamer]

What would you think about a mod which combines all of these into a menu.  The idea would be that you can select which items you want, and the next time you restart the game, those items would be active

[Alshain]

2 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

What would you think about a mod which combines all of these into a menu.  The idea would be that you can select which items you want, and the next time you restart the game, those items would be active

It's a neat idea, but I think as a mod would be unnecessary.  There is no real need for it to be run in-game, you could do it as an application instead.