Jump to content

[1.8.1-1] [PLEASE FORK ME] Kopernicus & KittopiaTech

Thomas P.

By Thomas P.
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Annoluce

Annoluce

Posted
Posted
On 18/9/2017 at 2:33 PM, Sigma88 said:

if you don't experience the issue with only kopernicus, but need to istall EVE/SVE/SVT it means it's either a bug of those mods or an incompatibility issue between those mods and kopernicus.

if that's the case I'm not familiar enough with those mods to give you support, so you might want to try asking the devs of those mods.

 

BUT

 

@Galileo already told you it's a SVT issue and that he will fix it when he has time, so I'm not sure what more I can do for you

Hey Sigma, there is nothing that you can do form me, nothing more than the awesome stuff you already do modding! Indeed, it is a SVT issue, since Kopernicus installed on vanilla KSP works just fine. After installing EVE/SVT the sun textures are corrupt. Hope it will be fixed soon...

On 18/9/2017 at 12:35 AM, Galileo said:

This is an SVT issue not a kopernicus one. I'll fix it when I have time

Thanks Galileo. Hope you fix it soon, as it is great to have all the wonderful mods and the sun together!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas P.

Thomas P.

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Hello everyone,

I released Kopernicus 1.3.0-7 on Github. In case you are interested in a changelog, here is one: 

* Added a contractWeight option to configure the amount of contracts generated for the body
* Added events to the loader, based on KSPs GameEvents API
* Display a warning if Kopernicus fails to load
* Display ModuleManagers nCats if Kopernicus fails to load
* Solar Panels now select the star they should track based on the ec/s they could generate, even if it is blocked by something
* Fix various smaller issues
* Added better error messages to some parts of the loader
* Added a manual tracking override to the solar panels
* Added PSystemBody constructors to most of the Loaders

Have fun!

P.S: With this version I am putting my backport for 1.2.2 on hold. The reason is that we added so many things that use the 1.3.0 API (especially celestialBody.displayName), that it would be an even bigger pain to change that every time I make a release.
The latest version that works on 1.2.2 will be 1.2.2-11 which has the features of Kopernicus 1.3.0-6

Edited by Thomas P.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The White Guardian

The White Guardian

Posted
Posted

@Thomas P. would it be possible to make a small change to HazardousOcean? I propose the following alteration:

Current: 

foreach (Part part in vessel.Parts)
     part.temperature += heatingRate;

Proposal: 

foreach (Part part in vessel.Parts)
     part.temperature += heatingRate * Time.deltaTime;

For those that don't follow:

Spoiler

"foreach (Part part in vessel.Parts)" -> for each part 'part' (the second 'part' will refer to the part HazardousOcean is currently patching, the first 'part' is a class - a type of data, in this case it stores the part information such as the fuel amount for fuel tanks) in vessel.Parts (all parts on the active vessel)

"part.temperature += heatingRage" -> the temperature of the currently selected part will be increased by the heating rate at this altitude, taken from the float curve

Currently HazardousOcean adds the 'heatingRate' to the temperature of a part one per frame, which isn't that constant. (Update{} method -> executed once per frame)

 

Let's imagine a HazardousOcean-planet with a heatingRate of 2K at 5000m. On a potato computer, with 10 FPS, parts would heat with: 10 * 2 = 20 Kelvin per second, but on beast computers, smashing KSP with 120 FPS, parts would heat with: 120 * 2 = 240 Kelvin per second.

Potato: 20 Kelvin per second

Beast: 240 Kelvin per second

 

As you can see the difference is massive. Multiplying the heatingRate by 'Time.deltaTime' (the time in seconds between the current frame and the last) would scale this down to be universal across computers of all strengths.

This would also make the HazardousOcean curve easier to use - instead of the somewhat confusing 'temperature added per frame' for the Y of the floatCurve, users would get 'temperature added per second', which would work a lot nicer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HebaruSan

HebaruSan

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, The White Guardian said:

"foreach (Part part in vessel.Parts)" -> for each part 'part' (the second 'part' will refer to the part HazardousOcean is currently patching, the first 'part' is a class - a type of data, in this case it stores the part information such as the fuel amount for fuel tanks) in vessel.Parts (all parts on the active vessel)

"part.temperature += heatingRage" -> the temperature of the currently selected part will be increased by the heating rate at this altitude, taken from the float curve

Currently HazardousOcean adds the 'heatingRate' to the temperature of a part one per frame, which isn't that constant. (Update{} method -> executed once per frame)

This also allows time warp to be exploited to circumvent "difficult" planets like @Galileo's Thalia:

Spoiler

 

Presumably the stock code to dissipate heat is scaled properly, so time warp drastically increases the cooling/heating ratio.

Edited by HebaruSan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The White Guardian

The White Guardian

Posted
Posted
Just now, HebaruSan said:

This allows time warp to be exploited to circumvent "difficult" planets like @Galileo's Thalia:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Presumably the stock code to dissipate heat is scaled properly, so time warp drastically increases the cooling/heating ratio.

Good call, since Time.deltaTime ignores time warp it should be multiplied by the current time warp as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites
symmeclept

symmeclept

Posted
Posted (edited)

It seems GPP doesn't like the latest release (1.3.0-7). I get the message that Kopernicus didn't load. Tried with my normal, heavily modded game, and with a clean KSP install; same result.

Here are the logs. I'm also posting this in the GPP forum.

Edited by symmeclept
The missing link
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galileo

Galileo

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, symmeclept said:

It seems GPP doesn't like the latest release (1.3.0-7). I get the message that Kopernicus didn't load. Tried with my normal, heavily modded game, and with a clean KSP install; same result.

Here are the logs. I'm also posting this in the GPP forum.

GPP works perfectly fine with the latest kopernicus. I ran it all morning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheKurgan

TheKurgan

Posted
Posted (edited)

Looks good here too Galileo.

I'm scared.... I'm getting ZERO nullreferenceexceptions... with 102 mods. Checking to see if Exception Detector is malfunctioning again LOL.

NM... there is one from Infernal Robotics... ole faithful :P

 

LOL GPP BETTER work, I have a $250,000,000 ship out there!!

Career mode... no cheats.... funded by "The Gold Standard"

Edited by TheKurgan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gilph

Gilph

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi, running with GPP also.

I have a scanner around Gratian with three NF solar panels.  It chose Grannus to track, even though there was 0 EC generated.  When I manually switched to Ciro, I got about 2 EC. It did not autoselect the choice that gave the best EC. Will post some logs after my really long ion burn.

Thanks

Edit1: logs are here

Scenario: Vessel was in orbit around Gratian. It auto selected Grannus for the three small NF solar panels. The Sun Exposure was higher for Grannus, but it produced 0EC. Manually switching to Ciro had a lower Sun Exposure, but generated 2 EC

Also, the Status field seemed to be reporting the status as if I were tracking Grannus, even after I switched to Ciro.

Please let me know if there is anything else needed

Edit2: Restarted the game and checked the Thalia vessels. They also seem to be tracking Grannus by default, even though they are very close to Ciro

Edited by Gilph
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheKurgan

TheKurgan

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Gilph said:

Hi, running with GPP also.

I have a scanner around Gratian with three NF solar panels.  It chose Grannus to track, even though there was 0 EC generated.  When I manually switched to Ciro, I got about 2 EC. It did not autoselect the choice that gave the best EC. Will post some logs after my really long ion burn.

Thanks

I had the same problem in the stock solar system with GPP Secondary installed... set to Auto it wanted to track Grannus... which is really really really far away... I had to go to all my relays and scansats and set them to track the sun.

I dunno if the issue is with GPP or Kopernicus. 

I'm sure the important guys will figure it out :wink:

edit: Some seemed to work fine on Auto (it correctly tracked the sun) others tried to track Grannus, eventhough the sun wasn't obstructed.

Edited by TheKurgan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galileo

Galileo

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, EricL said:

contractWeight? Where does that go? Under Properties?

In the body node

1 hour ago, TheKurgan said:

I had the same problem in the stock solar system with GPP Secondary installed... set to Auto it wanted to track Grannus... which is really really really far away... I had to go to all my relays and scansats and set them to track the sun.

I dunno if the issue is with GPP or Kopernicus. 

I'm sure the important guys will figure it out :wink:

edit: Some seemed to work fine on Auto (it correctly tracked the sun) others tried to track Grannus, eventhough the sun wasn't obstructed.

The auto function does not work properly. It still seems to track Grannus for whatever reason. Setting the panels to track Ciro is easy enough, but I feel your pain. Apparently, this is also the issue when you just add a second star to the stock system too according to sigma88. We will need to make some proper bug reports and post them in the issues section on github. The goal was to have the panels select the star that provided the most ec/s but I think the signals got crossed and it's choosing the star that provides the least ec/s :/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HebaruSan

HebaruSan

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Galileo said:

I think the signals got crossed and it's choosing the star that provides the least ec/s :/ 

Nah, it's just picking the last one in the list, whatever that happens to be (probably appears random from the user's point of view):

https://github.com/Kopernicus/Kopernicus/blob/master/src/Kopernicus.Components/KopernicusSolarPanel.cs#L162-L167 

                    Double energy = __distMult * _efficMult;
                    if (energy > maxEnergy)
                    {
                        maxFlowRate = __flowRate;
                        maxStar = star;
                    }

The maxEnergy variable is supposed to govern which star is used, but it's never set (other than being initialized to zero). So every star with energy greater than zero in turn is chosen as the best one. In a loop that finds the min or max, the 'max' or 'best' variable that you compare against needs to be set every time a match is found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sigma88

Sigma88

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Maelstrom Vortex said:

Since updating to most recent Koppernicus, (only change) rate of mem leak crashes has doubled in periodicity from 3 hours to 1.5, no other changes made other than mod update. Wondering if anyone else has seen a similar pattern? 16 GB ram here.

If kopernicus is the cause it will be evident from the logs

Click the nyan cat in my sig and follow the instructions for a bugreport

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Maelstrom Vortex

Maelstrom Vortex

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

If kopernicus is the cause it will be evident from the logs

Click the nyan cat in my sig and follow the instructions for a bugreport

Mmm.. not necessarily. Koppernicus adds a lot of functions and it may be WAD but still consume more memory. But I will watch the logs. Problem is with memory leak crashes is that you may not get error reports if things are working normally. This isn't a bug report yet, this is an initial observation and I'm checking if anyone else has had this experience or if it's been isolated to me.

In summary, I haven't fully qualified a problem yet, just checking for secondary validation of a potential issue.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UntoldForce

UntoldForce

Posted
Posted

I have a heavily modded Dark Multiplayer (DMP) server for a few friends. We recently decided to try adding a Kopernicus + Extrasolar Solar Planets Beyond Kerbol. This seems to have disabled asteroid spawning entirely. I recognize that Kopernicus employs some sort of alternative asteroid spawning mechanic, but I'm no expert at it. Could anyone explain to me how to revert to the normal asteroid spawning mechanic, or point me to a thread that could help me? Thank you in advance. If you need any additional information about the mods that we're running, I'd be happy to provide a mod list. I just know that asteroids stopped entirely after Kopernicus + Extrasolar was installed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sigma88

Sigma88

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, UntoldForce said:

I have a heavily modded Dark Multiplayer (DMP) server for a few friends. We recently decided to try adding a Kopernicus + Extrasolar Solar Planets Beyond Kerbol. This seems to have disabled asteroid spawning entirely. I recognize that Kopernicus employs some sort of alternative asteroid spawning mechanic, but I'm no expert at it. Could anyone explain to me how to revert to the normal asteroid spawning mechanic, or point me to a thread that could help me? Thank you in advance. If you need any additional information about the mods that we're running, I'd be happy to provide a mod list. I just know that asteroids stopped entirely after Kopernicus + Extrasolar was installed.

You need to check with the extrasolar guys to ask if they removed asteroids on purpose.

If you post your modulemanager cache file we might see what kind of asteroids are spawned in your system

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kerbinidiel

Kerbinidiel

Posted
Posted

hi,

I never used Kopernicus... i have a question

if i create a new solar system with only a sun, kerbin and mun... the game will require less performance from my computer?

or the performance required are the same i i use a stock system or a planet pack with more planets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...