totm may 2024 [1.12.x] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

[jd284]

10 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

@jd284 - try what I just checked in.

(Actually - hold off a second...)

(ok now try!)

Both commits throw an exception during OnAwake. Seems like maybe part.vessel is null there?

EXC 22:02:48.868] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
        USITools.ModuleLogisticsConsumer.OnAwake ()
        PartModule.Awake ()
        UnityEngine.GameObject:SetActive(Boolean)
        ProtoPartSnapshot:Load(Vessel, Boolean)
        ProtoVessel:LoadObjects()
        Vessel:Load()
        Vessel:Update()

BUT! If I move the initialization of lastCheck to FixedUpdate instead of OnAwake and use "vessel" directly instead of part.vessel, everything is fine! Logistics keep updating while the converters catch up, the container doesn't empty, and Bob is happy that we'll never again run out of coffee on the Moon.

Thanks a lot for the quick fixes!

I guess that means local logistics only work for parts with USI converters during catch-up though.

[RoverDude]

7 minutes ago, jd284 said:

Both commits throw an exception during OnAwake. Seems like maybe part.vessel is null there?

EXC 22:02:48.868] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
        USITools.ModuleLogisticsConsumer.OnAwake ()
        PartModule.Awake ()
        UnityEngine.GameObject:SetActive(Boolean)
        ProtoPartSnapshot:Load(Vessel, Boolean)
        ProtoVessel:LoadObjects()
        Vessel:Load()
        Vessel:Update()

BUT! If I move the initialization of lastCheck to FixedUpdate instead of OnAwake and use "vessel" directly instead of part.vessel, everything is fine! Logistics keep updating while the converters catch up, the container doesn't empty, and Bob is happy that we'll never again run out of coffee on the Moon.

Thanks a lot for the quick fixes!

I guess that means local logistics only work for parts with USI converters during catch-up though.

Let me noodle a way around that.

[RoverDude]

@jd284 - give the current one a go

[jd284]

9 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

@jd284 - give the current one a go

Sorry I don't see any changes since an hour ago, did you push them?

[RoverDude]

2 hours ago, jd284 said:

Sorry I don't see any changes since an hour ago, did you push them?

yup

[CausticTeapot]

On 3/23/2017 at 0:21 PM, Bombarier said:

@CausticTeapot I noted that as well, but in my science save with experience enabled save, when the freshly minted 5* uber-red ass's get their first deployment, they immediately turn into 0* squaddie.

So that bit is pretty realistic 

 

... I never went further than hiring them, thanks for pointing that out.  

 

On 3/23/2017 at 5:49 PM, TauPhraim said:

Are you using a planet pack ? If so, a fix is coming (hopefully).

But I don't get the problem with sandbox: you *want* kerbals to be less than 5 stars there ?

I usually do science mode, as I'm not really a fan of the contracts/money supply, but full sandbox is boring because none of the experiments have any purpose there.  Along with that, I like having to level up my kerbals, it gives something minor back for me to do without being too tedious (IMO), and gives a bit more focus in the early stages of a save (or when gearing up for kolonys).  

[Gilph]

6 hours ago, Deus Zed Machina said:

That sounds cool! Version 1.0 of what I'm calling Aristaeus is already nearing completion, but an example craft would certainly help me figure out whether or not I'm doing this right.

This was my original. A bit overdone, as it can do a round trip. It had over 4000 dv, It also has 4500 fertilizer to supply the orbital stations, and plenty of hab for 4.

Here is my smaller one, good for only one way. 400 day hab time for three Kerbals and only 1000 fert, Needs a small refuel and fert refill to return, but I have ISRU working at Ike and fertilizer also being produced. 

Hope this helps.

[Caithloki]

I seem to be having issues with PL, I saw comments on LL saying it is not updating. I currently have a craft that I have tried with and without pilots, different tanks, different planets but no matter what it does not push the water to the PL. This is the craft, as you can see it has the pop up storage on the side that I have working on my main base, it has pushed all those resources in the list, but with this one it will not work even with a full tank of water. Is there something I am doing wrong?

If more info is needed then in this pic I just ended a livestream with this craft and other iterations before it, all of which would not push water to PL, its under the same username I use here.

Edited March 25, 2017 by Caithloki

[TauPhraim]

I tried Ground Construction and must say it feel cooler and more solid than EPL  Now all that is needed is in-situ DIY spawning. What's the status/plan on this ? Can we help somehow ?

 

@Caithloki I could not find this vessel easily in the latest 3 hours video  But the usual/obvious problem would be you now need to manually turn on PL on the resource storage part.

[jd284]

9 hours ago, RoverDude said:

yup

Huh, so you did, but somehow neither online nor in cmdline client did the changes show up till now.

In any case though, that version still works fine for me. Logistics works during converter catch-up and everything is well. Thanks!

[IT Luddite]

Thanks for the great work.

I've found a problem that the Non Automatic drills do not mine ore.

I've logged an 'issue' and included updated part files that fix it. The fix seems to work fine on my Minmus base.

[RoverDude]

10 hours ago, Caithloki said:

I seem to be having issues with PL, I saw comments on LL saying it is not updating. I currently have a craft that I have tried with and without pilots, different tanks, different planets but no matter what it does not push the water to the PL. This is the craft, as you can see it has the pop up storage on the side that I have working on my main base, it has pushed all those resources in the list, but with this one it will not work even with a full tank of water. Is there something I am doing wrong?

What part do you have on that vessel that is PL enabled?  Hard to see in the dark

3 hours ago, TauPhraim said:

I tried Ground Construction and must say it feel cooler and more solid than EPL  Now all that is needed is in-situ DIY spawning. What's the status/plan on this ? Can we help somehow ?

 

Need to talk to @allista on that one, but yeah GC is pretty solid. 

[Caithloki]

2 hours ago, RoverDude said:

What part do you have on that vessel that is PL enabled?  Hard to see in the dark

I cannot remember the exact name, but its the pop up storage, ive tried with the tanks as well that have PL as well.

[RoverDude]

13 minutes ago, Caithloki said:

I cannot remember the exact name, but its the pop up storage, ive tried with the tanks as well that have PL as well.

You still need a part to enable pushing or pulling from Planetary Logistics.  Either the Duna Logistics Center or Tundra Pioneer/Logistics Center for push/pull, or any of the new processing modules for push only.

[Caithloki]

Ah, thats the issue. Thanks for the info.

[fast_de_la_speed]

I seem to have this issue where when an mks part (I think the tundra pioneer module...) is on my space station, it forces the vessel type into a base. Any idea why it does this and is there a fix for it? it's not particularly serious, just a little annoying that i have to change the vessel type to a station every time i switch to it.

[DStaal]

1 minute ago, fast_de_la_speed said:

I seem to have this issue where when an mks part (I think the tundra pioneer module...) is on my space station, it forces the vessel type into a base. Any idea why it does this and is there a fix for it? it's not particularly serious, just a little annoying that i have to change the vessel type to a station every time i switch to it.

Every command part in the game specifies what type of vessel it commands.  The MKS parts are set to 'base'.  You could change that with an MM patch if you wanted - but note that it will mean you'll have the same issue on your bases instead.

Alternately, find another command pod that's a 'station' part, and make it the root part (or at least the first command part) of the station.

[jd284]

9 minutes ago, DStaal said:

Every command part in the game specifies what type of vessel it commands.  The MKS parts are set to 'base'.  You could change that with an MM patch if you wanted - but note that it will mean you'll have the same issue on your bases instead.

Alternately, find another command pod that's a 'station' part, and make it the root part (or at least the first command part) of the station.

I don't think it being a root part or not, or the order, even matters. I've had my space station changed to "base" because I docked a lander with Konstruction cradles.

I wish the game wouldn't change the vessel type at all after launch, there's just no good reason for it, and it's never changing it the right way either. (I made a ticket about that too.) Or at least never override something I changed manually.

[jd284]

Is there ever a reason to configure the Ranger hab to "Hab-Quarters"? It seems to me like that's always a worse choice, because the 16.8 months times the multiplier of 6.2 = 104 is already better than the 83.6 months of the quarters, even if you have no other multiplier parts, and if you do the multiplier is still always better.

Seems like something isn't properly balanced, either the multiplier is too high or the quarters too low.

[TauPhraim]

6 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Need to talk to @allista on that one

Do you mean you have plans to talk with him yourself about this some time ? Or do you consider the MKS integration complete, and we should request in-situ production ourselves directly to GC ?

[RoverDude]

4 hours ago, jd284 said:

Is there ever a reason to configure the Ranger hab to "Hab-Quarters"? It seems to me like that's always a worse choice, because the 16.8 months times the multiplier of 6.2 = 104 is already better than the 83.6 months of the quarters, even if you have no other multiplier parts, and if you do the multiplier is still always better.

Seems like something isn't properly balanced, either the multiplier is too high or the quarters too low.

What you are going to find out is that the ideal mix is a combination of some multipliers and some quarters.  They are like peanut butter and jelly.

3 hours ago, TauPhraim said:

Do you mean you have plans to talk with him yourself about this some time ? Or do you consider the MKS integration complete, and we should request in-situ production ourselves directly to GC ?

I've been chatting with him on it.  It's being discussed, and something I would like to see happen, but out of my hands unless I scare up some time to code it.

[jd284]

19 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

What you are going to find out is that the ideal mix is a combination of some multipliers and some quarters.  They are like peanut butter and jelly.

Oh yeah, I realized that, but somehow I thought multipliers stacked multiplicatively. Since they don't, the hab-quarters obviously benefits from an external multiplier a lot more than hab-commons.

[rspeed]

On 1/18/2017 at 7:47 PM, mavric1298 said:

I'm curious, is there anyone else using the latest release on a mac?  Tried a fresh install of ksp, fresh install of constellation from GitHub, and can replicate the error every time (pressing "b1 next bay" does nothing, pressing "b1 previous bay" causes instant crash).  Cleared the unity state from ~/library as well.  Any ideas?

I've been seeing the same issue for a while now, and it's 100% reproducible both from the VAB and in-flight.

I'm also on a Mac running 10.12.3 and (currently) 10.2.4b8.

No mods installed other than those required by UKS.

Here's the kicker: Installing USI-LS fixes it.

[DDay2021]

Anyone know of a reason that my 'Tundra' Industrial Refinery has zero efficiency for producing Refined Exotics or Chemicals?  It's part of a base that has all the raw materials, there is plenty of storage and power, and there are 4 - 5 star engineers onboard.

[Fury1SOG]

1 hour ago, DDay2021 said:

Anyone know of a reason that my 'Tundra' Industrial Refinery has zero efficiency for producing Refined Exotics or Chemicals?  It's part of a base that has all the raw materials, there is plenty of storage and power, and there are 4 - 5 star engineers onboard.

Do you have enough Machinery? The Refineries need Machinery onboard in order to operate.