[1.5.0 <-> 1.8.1] Kerbalism v3.2

[lajoswinkler]

2 hours ago, Drew Kerman said:

This is interesting because I don't know what Kerbalism was trying to achieve here by getting in the way of NF

I've reported the problem on this thread, first. Nertea isn't sure what's going on.

 

[baldamundo]

Is there a way (maybe a config file to edit?) of setting up default settings for Kerbalism's automation feature? E.g. so I could set it so the power cells on all my craft are set to automatically activate when power gets low, rather than having to set it manuallly for each craft at launch?

[Cheesecake]

32 minutes ago, baldamundo said:

Is there a way (maybe a config file to edit?) of setting up default settings for Kerbalism's automation feature? E.g. so I could set it so the power cells on all my craft are set to automatically activate when power gets low, rather than having to set it manuallly for each craft at launch?

You can use smartparts for this.

 

[mdapol]

17 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

@mdapol It's probably doable, maybe we can put this in the tooltip that appear when you hover on the file/sample in the file manager.

We will look into it when we can, there are many more urgent issues to deal with at the moment.

Putting this in https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/issues/488
 

Thanks, I appreciate it. In the meantime I’d like to look into it myself. Could someone tell me where in the Kerbalism code it handles the current experiment result messages?

[The-Doctor]

@N70 Good day, so I noticed non of the drilling parts allow mining of xenon, or atmospheric extraction, how do I produce xenon using kerbalism? This is crucial for my gameplay which is dependent on ion drives. Also I'd like to point out something weird I've noticed, the drill says no ground contact despite being inside the asteroid.

Also something also says a producer has incoherent behavior at high warp, what causes this?

[baldamundo]

Is anyone else having issues with the background simulation of science experiments? It does seem to be working to some extent, but they regularly seem to end up taking orders of magnitude longer than the planner says they should. At first I was just having problems with e.g. ensuring they have enough power etc to run continuously, but I'm pretty sure I've got all that sorted now, and the experiments still don't seem to be running the way they should.

[John Nowak]

6 hours ago, baldamundo said:

Is anyone else having issues with the background simulation of science experiments? It does seem to be working to some extent, but they regularly seem to end up taking orders of magnitude longer than the planner says they should. At first I was just having problems with e.g. ensuring they have enough power etc to run continuously, but I'm pretty sure I've got all that sorted now, and the experiments still don't seem to be running the way they should.

Yeah, I commented on that here on August 6th. Once you get the gravimetric experiment it becomes pretty obvious that background processing needs to be almost 20x as fast as it is. 

[Gotmachine]

14 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

I noticed non of the drilling parts allow mining of xenon, or atmospheric extraction, how do I produce xenon using kerbalism?

 

There is no setup for that in the default Kerbalism config. Anyway, Xenon "mining" doesn't exist. Xenon is produced  by fractional distillation of Nitrogen and Oxygen, which is indeed something we could add to the converters.

14 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

a producer has incoherent behavior at high warp, what causes this?

Unsupported / partially supported stock / mods resource producers. See https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki/TechGuide-~-Background-Simulation

@John Nowak @baldamundo What is very likely happening is that you don't have enough drive space to store the full experiment result and less transmission bandwidth than the rate at which data is generated by the experiment(s).

The way to detect that is if that your drives will be full while you are transmitting. The usual solution is to put bigger antennas.

We are aware that you can't know what the antenna data rate is before using it (in the editor / planner), we will add that feature at some point.

[afafsa]

20 minutes ago, Gotmachine said:

 

There is no setup for that in the default Kerbalism config. Anyway, Xenon "mining" doesn't exist. Xenon is produced  by fractional distillation of Nitrogen and Oxygen, which is indeed something we could add to the converters.

Unsupported / partially supported stock / mods resource producers. See https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki/TechGuide-~-Background-Simulation

@John Nowak @baldamundo What is very likely happening is that you don't have enough drive space to store the full experiment result and less transmission bandwidth than the rate at which data is generated by the experiment(s).

The way to detect that is if that your drives will be full while you are transmitting. The usual solution is to put bigger antennas.

We are aware that you can't know what the antenna data rate is before using it (in the editor / planner), we will add that feature at some point.

If this is the case, then I think there are serious balance issues with the mod. I already have to cover every square inch of my probes with batteries, and even the late game antennas can't handle the data volume of a single scan.

Powering a manned science base through a night on Minmus required such a complicated power arrangement that it slows the game to a crawl. Nuclear power would be mandatory if it wasn't for the fact that it has broken compatibility with Near Future electrical.

This is a great mod, but it needs some work on balance and optimization.

Edited August 18, 2019 by afafsa

[Gotmachine]

@afafsa Kerbalism is an order of magnitude harder than stock, that's an assumed fact. Especially for manned missions.

This said, I personally find science a bit too hard for my tastes. In the game settings I usually put the science reward to 200% (stock "basic" settings) and increase antenna bandwidth (in the kerbalism section).

As for compatibility with Near Future electrical , we use our own converters for the nuclear reactors. It's barebones (no heat management) but functional.
I suggest removing the "Dynamic Battery Storage" plugin, as anyway it won't work when Kerbalism is present and might cause issues (under investigation).
We are fully aware this isn't very satisfying and will probably revisit NFE support at some point as we have (vague) plans for our own heat management system.

[The-Doctor]

1 hour ago, Gotmachine said:

@afafsa Kerbalism is an order of magnitude harder than stock, that's an assumed fact. Especially for manned missions.

This said, I personally find science a bit too hard for my tastes. In the game settings I usually put the science reward to 200% (stock "basic" settings) and increase antenna bandwidth (in the kerbalism section).

As for compatibility with Near Future electrical , we use our own converters for the nuclear reactors. It's barebones (no heat management) but functional.
I suggest removing the "Dynamic Battery Storage" plugin, as anyway it won't work when Kerbalism is present and might cause issues (under investigation).
We are fully aware this isn't very satisfying and will probably revisit NFE support at some point as we have (vague) plans for our own heat management system.

Kerbalism isn't hard at all, no idea why it Is to anyone, even with life time radiation, I sent crews to minmus and back a lot and when they got poisoned I cured them with the RUD, it's easy to pack enough supplies on a ship to not need to do any isru or use any water recycler or anything, in fact if anything kerbalism needs to tone down these parts, maybe increase food and water consumption or add a mode that does this cause for players like myself the game is very very easy, as I've played with it for years

[afafsa]

The issue isn't the difficulty, I actually think it's pretty solid balance. The issue is that a Mun or Minmus base is on the far end of what you can engineer for without the instability issues becoming extreme. I've done two crewed Duna missions with the mod and I spent so much time debugging weird behavior that I put the game down for months afterwards.

I personally love the engineering challenges of Kerbalism, even if the balance can get kind of wonky (power and science, mainly). I don't even bother with stock anymore, I just wish I could actually fly my missions without my computer catching on fire.

[subyng]

I've noticed that losing/regaining a commnet connection with Kerbalism can sometimes cause significant stuttering and high memory usage, forcing me to restart after maybe 30 minutes of play time. Would seem like there's some kind of garbage buildup related to Kerbalism's commnet implementation.

Edited August 18, 2019 by subyng

[baldamundo]

13 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

 

@John Nowak @baldamundo What is very likely happening is that you don't have enough drive space to store the full experiment result and less transmission bandwidth than the rate at which data is generated by the experiment(s).

The way to detect that is if that your drives will be full while you are transmitting. The usual solution is to put bigger antennas.

We are aware that you can't know what the antenna data rate is before using it (in the editor / planner), we will add that feature at some point.

Cheers for the answers. How is transmission rate calculated when using the mod alongside RemoteTech?

[roulbs]

Is there any way to just disable the hard drive space mechanic of the mod? I have a bug where it seems like every probe core/cockpit I've used doesn't have enough space for most experiments. I can't even get a surface sample. 

Edited August 19, 2019 by roulbs

[John Nowak]

20 hours ago, Gotmachine said:

@John Nowak @baldamundo What is very likely happening is that you don't have enough drive space to store the full experiment result and less transmission bandwidth than the rate at which data is generated by the experiment(s).

The way to detect that is if that your drives will be full while you are transmitting. The usual solution is to put bigger antennas.

 

Good thought, but no. I'm comparing the Science produced by the same satellite in orbit around Kerbin when it is loaded and when it is in the background. 

[The-Doctor]

How can I restore stock isru and fuel cells but keep the rest of the updates? @Gotmachine @N70  these are the slight tweaks I'd like to make to my gameplay. Basically, how do I remove everything besides life support and radiation? How do I remove the science changes and isru changes? 

Edited August 19, 2019 by The-Doctor

[N70]

Please don't ping me over every little thing.

[N70]

I do plan to make a life support mod for KSP 2.

[Gotmachine]

4 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

How can I restore stock isru and fuel cells but keep the rest of the updates

You can't. Read this as for why : https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki/TechGuide-~-Background-Simulation

Now, is what you want is a simple system with basic Ore > everything converters, that can be achieved by making a custom configuration pack, replacing the default profile processes with stockalike ISRU. I think that the SIMPLEX config packs does something like that, but I don't think it is updated against recent versions of Kerbalism.

@subyng @afafsa We definitely have performance issues. And bugs. We are trying to improve the situation, but Kerbalism's codebase is huge and the result of many contributions from many different people that aren't around anymore.

Edited August 20, 2019 by Gotmachine

[The-Doctor]

I edited the default config and simply removed all isru and fuel cell code, now it's much better imo

[subyng]

52 minutes ago, Gotmachine said:

You can't. Read this as for why : https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/wiki/TechGuide-~-Background-Simulation

Now, is what you want is a simple system with basic Ore > everything converters, that can be achieved by making a custom configuration pack, replacing the default profile processes with stockalike ISRU. I think that the SIMPLEX config packs does something like that, but I don't think it is updated against recent versions of Kerbalism.

@subyng @afafsa We definitely have performance issues. And bugs. We are trying to improve the situation, but Kerbalism's codebase is huge and the result of many contributions from many different people that aren't around anymore.

I would love to contribute to optimizing performance. This mod is fantastic and deserves to run smoothly! Are there any already identified areas where there are memory bottlenecks?

Edited August 20, 2019 by subyng

[DR_RDR]

On 8/15/2019 at 11:36 AM, lajoswinkler said:

I've reported the problem on this thread, first. Nertea isn't sure what's going on.

 

On the Kerbalism disabling NF reactor control, my impression from the patches is that this is a feature, not a bug.  Kerbalism needs to use its own fission module so that the planner can include that electricity generation in its calcs.  Beyond that, in my game I saw it also disables heat generation from the reactors.  While Kerbalism does add radiation to reactors, taking out heat mgmt made reactors way OP for me.

[Gotmachine]

7 hours ago, DR_RDR said:

On the Kerbalism disabling NF reactor control, my impression from the patches is that this is a feature, not a bug.  Kerbalism needs to use its own fission module so that the planner can include that electricity generation in its calcs.  Beyond that, in my game I saw it also disables heat generation from the reactors.  While Kerbalism does add radiation to reactors, taking out heat mgmt made reactors way OP for me

The current patches are indeed not great. I intend to do something about it, we have an open issue here : https://github.com/Kerbalism/Kerbalism/issues/461

[DR_RDR]

One other patch item for Station Science I've been meaning to mention.  When I look at my Quark(?) experiments in the planner from KSC, they always say Missing Quarks, even when I have more than enough power for the Cyclotron (ie no battery drain).  But it runs fine when the ship is in focus.

I suspect that this is because the planner isn't picking up the production of StnScience specific resources like Quarks, Eurekas, etc. I had wanted to try adding basic EC -> Quark production to Kerbalism (based on the drill's module,  I did this successfully with some other resources), but I didn't get the chance to try before my playthru bricked.  I think it's a straightforward fix, but.I can't try it out myself anymore...

Has anyone else noticed this behavior?  If it's not just me, hopefully my line of thought makes sense to the brains behind Kerbalism.