Rational Resources 3.0.2 [Sep 24, 2024]

[JadeOfMaar]

@EimajOzear You shouldn't need to update "RR_TankswitchForSquad.cfg" (which is still important) but copy the two config files highlighted in that commit:

• GameData/RationalResources/CRP/zTankTypes.cfg
• GameData/RationalResourcesParts/CRP/TankTypes.cfg

You also should have NF Propulsion installed. The subtypes are setup not to appear without that mod.

[EimajOzear]

11 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@EimajOzear You shouldn't need to update "RR_TankswitchForSquad.cfg" (which is still important) but copy the two config files highlighted in that commit:

@JadeOfMaar That sorted it, thanks! I didn't even touch the RR Parts gamedata file! (Doh!)

[Gilph]

Hi, just updated from a older version of RR. Have a few questions.

Stock tanks dont use EC because they dont have boil off enabled. I believe I saw this earlier. Is that true?

My ISRU has both Hydrolox and LH2+OX choices, and Methalox and LCH4+Ox choices. You had verified earlier that they are the same, so why do I have 2 choices for the same output. Did I overinstall a patch with too many options??

 

thanks

Edited December 19, 2020 by Gilph

[PocketBrotector]

1 hour ago, Gilph said:

Stock tanks dont use EC because they dont have boil off enabled. I believe I saw this earlier. Is that true?

This is really a question for the CryoTanks thread, I think. Stock tanks have boil-off and can be refrigerated with EC, but it is toggled off by default; you can enable it in the right-click menu. 

1 hour ago, Gilph said:

My ISRU has both Hydrolox and LH2+OX choices, and Methalox and LCH4+Ox choices. You had verified earlier that they are the same, so why do I have 2 choices for the same output. Did I overinstall a patch with too many options??

This sounds like one set of converters is from CryoTanks and uses stock Ore, and the other is from RationalResources and uses Water or similar. The outputs might be the same but the inputs are likely different.

[Gilph]

15 hours ago, Gilph said:

Stock tanks dont use EC because they dont have boil off enabled. I believe I saw this earlier. Is that true?

 

14 hours ago, PocketBrotector said:

This is really a question for the CryoTanks thread, I think. Stock tanks have boil-off and can be refrigerated with EC, but it is toggled off by default; you can enable it in the right-click menu. 

Hi, thanks for the response. I'm using 1.8.1 and most versions are still at 1.8.1 levels.

In the VAB, it looks like all versions of tanks that are not stock (CryoTanks, RR, SpaceY) will have a select tank option. If I pick one that has boiloff like Hydrogen, I'll see an insulation EC cost and an option to to enable/disable cooling. The stock tanks only have an option to "Select RR Fuel" and no choice to enable/disable cooling and no EC cost. It looks like that menu  is from a RR patch, and the patch may be overwriting the other menu for only stock tanks. Will play around with it a little more.

Update: It was the RR_TankswitchForSquad.cfg file in Extras. Once I removed it, all the tanks now look the same in the menus, including stock. Now, I have to update all of my vessels that have stock tanks but contain things that can boil off in flight to enable cooling. Thank goodness it's only a few.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Gilph

[Gilph]

Hi, my issue didn't really go away, so I made an executive decision to not use CryoTanks. The boiloff mechanic and different ISRU are complications that I don't really need or want, even though the tanks are awesome.

I replaced the tankswitchforsquad.cfg and now have just the option for RR fuels for the stock tanks. I'd like the same functionality for the NFLV and SpaceY tanks, which does not have the RR fuel options in the menu. How would I create/change a cfg file to apply those options to those other tanks?

Thanks

[PocketBrotector]

1 hour ago, Gilph said:

Hi, my issue didn't really go away, so I made an executive decision to not use CryoTanks. The boiloff mechanic and different ISRU are complications that I don't really need or want, even though the tanks are awesome.

I replaced the tankswitchforsquad.cfg and now have just the option for RR fuels for the stock tanks. I'd like the same functionality for the NFLV and SpaceY tanks, which does not have the RR fuel options in the menu. How would I create/change a cfg file to apply those options to those other tanks?

Thanks

Looks like that patch makes changes to parts based on their manufacturer name. In the case of NFLV, the manufacturer is Post-Kerbin Mining Corporation, so try creating a config file with the following:

@PART:HAS[#manufacturer[Post-Kerbin?Mining?Corporation],!MODULE[ModuleB9PartSwitch],@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]]:NEEDS[B9PartSwitch,RationalResources,!ConfigurableContainers/Parts,!ModularFuelTanks]:BEFORE[RationalResourcesSquad]
{
	refVolume = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
	@refVolume += #$RESOURCE[Oxidizer]/maxAmount$
	!RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {}
	!RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {}
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleB9PartSwitch
		moduleID = RRStockSwitch
		switcherDescription = RR Fuel
		switchInFlight = True
		baseVolume = #$../refVolume$
	}
}

If that works, you can do the same for SpaceY by changing "Post-Kerbin?Mining?Corporation" to whatever manufacturer name is used for SpaceY tanks (substitute spaces with "?"). 

[Gilph]

On 12/20/2020 at 7:34 PM, PocketBrotector said:

Looks like that patch makes changes to parts based on their manufacturer name. In the case of NFLV, the manufacturer is Post-Kerbin Mining Corporation, so try creating a config file with the following:

@PART:HAS[#manufacturer[Post-Kerbin?Mining?Corporation],!MODULE[ModuleB9PartSwitch],@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]]:NEEDS[B9PartSwitch,RationalResources,!ConfigurableContainers/Parts,!ModularFuelTanks]:BEFORE[RationalResourcesSquad]
{
	refVolume = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
	@refVolume += #$RESOURCE[Oxidizer]/maxAmount$
	!RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {}
	!RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {}
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleB9PartSwitch
		moduleID = RRStockSwitch
		switcherDescription = RR Fuel
		switchInFlight = True
		baseVolume = #$../refVolume$
	}
}

If that works, you can do the same for SpaceY by changing "Post-Kerbin?Mining?Corporation" to whatever manufacturer name is used for SpaceY tanks (substitute spaces with "?"). 

Well...that did not work very well.

After some reverse engineering, reading of release notes, and mod version control,  I put my CryoTanks back, deleted the boiloff dll, removed the CryoTank patch for the ISRU, and got back to normal. There were too many MM functions I'm not familiar with yet.

Thanks for your help, @PocketBrotector

[Gilph]

Hi,

Been experimenting with the RR Parts and not using the patched stock ISRU. I have a miner/converter vessel on Minmus that is drilling Hydrates (14%) and has four Box B large and two small Box A converters. It's a Hydrolox fueled lander. I land with almost no fuel left, drill Hydrates, convert to water, and make Hydrolox to fill the tanks to bring up to refueling station in orbit.

When the vessel has focus, I set up the converters that the four large ones are Hydrates splitters, and the two small ones are Hydrolox makers. With this setup, my Water is always empty because i cant keep up with the Hydrolox consumption, so my Hydrolox runs a bit slower. My Hydrates show a small net increase in storage from the drilling.

When I warp three days and return to the vessel, I expected to see my Hydrates tanks a bit fuller, my water tanks still empty, and a certain increase in Hydrolox. What I actually see is the Hydrates filling up as expected, my Water tanks half full, and my Hydrolox tanks less than expected. It appears my Water->Hydrolox conversion is not working as expected after a warp.

Is there any tips or tricks to consider? I know that MKS has a catchup process that needed certain tank capacities to hold like 12 hours of materials to properly convert during a warp. Is it the same here also?

Thanks

[Brigadier]

The OP mentions removed resources, such as Dirt, and then the line "But a provision exists to allow such resources to not be purged. "

What provision is that, exactly?  I've searched through the topic for "Dirt" but can't find any further reference to this and nor does the GitHub wiki reveal to what this might refer, except perhaps the RationalResourcesEasy mode.

RoverDude's latest addition to MKS, called WOLF, is a mid to late game mechanic that abstracts materiel production and transport.  Unfortunately, it's dependent on Dirt.  Since I already have RR installed alongside my early stage JNSQ career, can I restore Dirt (and only Dirt) to the resource pantheon or should I remove RR?

P.S. It's a bit of a shame that Dirt is removed in RR (for understandable reasons).  It would be nice to see MKS aligned to CRP.

[JadeOfMaar]

@Gilph The stock converter catch-up mechanism has always had certain shortcomings. Calculations and resource levels will always get weird to whatever degree when you timewarp. What you're experiencing is probably nothing new. Presumably, MKS's own mechanism doesn't work too different (the stock ISRU system was made by RoverDude) and so would be prone to the same problems under warp. I hope my answer helps.

@Brigadier MKS is aligned to CRP. After all, RoverDude is one of the stakeholders, and the CRP is where nearly all popular modded resources are defined. I'm fine with the concept of Dirt, however, I feel that it's largely redundant with Ore since it is equally as OP (you can get nearly everything out of both, and both are present in huge amounts on any type of world), and WBI Classic Stock shares he Rock resource but not Dirt. My use of the Rock resource imposes certain restrictions but also certain advantages.

The provision you're looking for is undocumented but it exists. Save this as a new config anywhere in GameData.

Spoiler

@GLOBAL_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Dirt]]:NEEDS[KolonyTools]
{
	Tag = Spared
}

 

 

[Brigadier]

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

The provision you're looking for is undocumented but it exists.

Thanks, I thought I was completely missing something in the wiki.

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

My use of the Rock resource imposes certain restrictions but also certain advantages.

I'm sure it does, and no disrespect.  I'm not advocating for either approach because both are based on solid ground (pun intended, moving on ).  Seriously, you have a great track record and I enjoy many of your contributions to KSP, but right now, I'm stuck in a Catch-22 if I want to take full advantage of the new MKS elements.  If I wanted to experiment, I could create a new instance of KSP with just MKS but I would eventually want to merge it with a JNSQ/RR save and run into the same problem.

The fundamental problem is that there are just too many excellent, well conceived mods from which to choose.  What's a player to do ?

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

MKS is aligned to CRP

My mistake.  It was an assumption that since Dirt appears only in MKS, it was an outlier.  Apologies to RoverDude.

Edited January 5, 2021 by Brigadier

[Gilph]

2 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Gilph The stock converter catch-up mechanism has always had certain shortcomings. Calculations and resource levels will always get weird to whatever degree when you timewarp. What you're experiencing is probably nothing new. Presumably, MKS's own mechanism doesn't work too different (the stock ISRU system was made by RoverDude) and so would be prone to the same problems under warp. I hope my answer helps.

@JadeOfMaarHi, thanks for the response. I did some testing by increasing the resource tanks in the front of the chain (Hydrates->Water->Hydrolox) and doing some 10 day warps. That alone cut it in half, from 90 days to 45 days to fill up the Hydrolox tanks. I think I figured out the math on the effective rates during the warps, so it all looks good.

Is it OK to feel a totally exaggerated sense of accomplishment to fill up my LFO lander tanks using  Kerolox B conversion and not Kerolox A?

Edited January 5, 2021 by Gilph

[RoverDude]

2 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Gilph The stock converter catch-up mechanism has always had certain shortcomings. Calculations and resource levels will always get weird to whatever degree when you timewarp. What you're experiencing is probably nothing new. Presumably, MKS's own mechanism doesn't work too different (the stock ISRU system was made by RoverDude) and so would be prone to the same problems under warp. I hope my answer helps.

@Brigadier MKS is aligned to CRP. After all, RoverDude is one of the stakeholders, and the CRP is where nearly all popular modded resources are defined. I'm fine with the concept of Dirt, however, I feel that it's largely redundant with Ore since it is equally as OP (you can get nearly everything out of both, and both are present in huge amounts on any type of world), and WBI Classic Stock shares he Rock resource but not Dirt. My use of the Rock resource imposes certain restrictions but also certain advantages.

The provision you're looking for is undocumented but it exists. Save this as a new config anywhere in GameData.

  Reveal hidden contents

@GLOBAL_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Dirt]]:NEEDS[KolonyTools]
{
	Tag = Spared
}

 

 

Just to be clear, CRP makes no provision of what you do with a resource, merely establishes it's existence.  There are even handy game configs to reduce your resource multipliers.  So 'Dirt' 'Rock' 'Ore' etc. by their nature are not OP - that's purely the domain of the bits that use them. 

And the bits that use them should be free to make reasonable assumptions.   The original design concept of how stock resources were built, and what CRP builds on, are that all configurations are additive, and it will always gun for the most optimistic, with priorities starting at the biome, then body, then global level.   The idea being that it's better to have too much of something (since there are ways to scale that in the mod or config or planetary/biome overrides) than have things vanish unexpectedly.   

[JadeOfMaar]

1 hour ago, Brigadier said:

I'm stuck in a Catch-22 if I want to take full advantage of the new MKS elements.  If I wanted to experiment, I could create a new instance of KSP with just MKS but I would eventually want to merge it with a JNSQ/RR save and run into the same problem.

The problem doesn't exist anymore with that patch. Resources can be changed mid-game. An existing save that was lacking Dirt will have it now.

48 minutes ago, Gilph said:

Is it OK to feel a totally exaggerated sense of accomplishment to fill up my LFO lander tanks using  Kerolox B conversion and not Kerolox A?

Totally OK.

[RoverDude]

Also to solve some of the mystery on stock converters.  As you warp things will move in chunks - the max being about a four hour chunk in a single game tick.  So as long as you have enough storage to handle the ins and outs of all of your resource chains to accommodate that, the resource converter system is pretty solid

[Brigadier]

2 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

Resources can be changed mid-game. An existing save that was lacking Dirt will have it now.

Not my experience so far.

I copied the code and pasted it into a new .cfg file saved under the GameData folder.  Restarted KSP and loaded my sandbox save.  No Dirt shows up under WOLF.  Taking the Surface Scanning Module to the runway and under the PAW > SCAN Resources shows Dirt[Surf]: No Data .  This appears to be normal.  Can't rescan since it's already been done.

Started a new sandbox save and scanned KSC from the runway.  Dirt shows up under WOLF with No Data shown for all SCAN Resources in the Surface Scanning Module's PAW.  I suspect I need a different scanner.  I do see Alumina, Karbonite, Regolith and Spodumene listed higher in the PAW, not under SCAN Resources.

I cheated my way to the Surface Scanning module in the tech tree in my career save to be sure that I could find Dirt (I didn't have much to lose).  It appears that as long as one hasn't WOLF-scanned a biome before the patch, Dirt will show up after the patch.  So, there's a bit of a caveat.

I'm not advocating for any further resolution on your part since I now have a path to incorporate WOLF without sacrificing a save and this isn't really a RR problem.  You have stated that Dirt is completely removed in the OP.  You've been very accommodating, thank you.

Edited January 5, 2021 by Brigadier

[EimajOzear]

On 10/6/2020 at 11:57 AM, JadeOfMaar said:

@hemeac Resources are placed at known planets according to their chosen templates. Then resources placed by the RNG are removed in a pseudo-final pass :FOR[zRationalResources]. That leaves non-configured planets with no resources as if CRP itself was not installed. GPP and GEP have resources placed in a would-be template system that preceded RR. They are tagged (by OhioBob and at his request) that RR does not override them when installed together. So as you said, " GEP and GPP support is out of scope." I'm happy with the Grounded support too. I'll accept that.

Sorry to reply to an old comment, but I am trying to use GPP and RR together. RR seems to overwrite the effects of GPP's resource configs, but the GPP configs work fine without RR. However, I would like to use your RR parts in GPP, is there any way for this to work? I have tried uninstalling RR and keeping RR parts, but then RR parts causes an exception with the B9 reconfig due to the absence of the RR mod (I think?).

[JadeOfMaar]

@EimajOzear The quick and dirty would be to delete the commands to delete untagged resources. The long way around is to tag every instance of planetary and biome resource that have GPP planet names in them, which I could do as part of an update. Due to my having to quickfix something some time ago, I chose to place the B9 tank definitions in RR and not RR parts, and RR parts is not meant to be use-able standalone so I wouldn't have looked out for that exception.

[EimajOzear]

17 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@EimajOzear The quick and dirty would be to delete the commands to delete untagged resources. The long way around is to tag every instance of planetary and biome resource that have GPP planet names in them, which I could do as part of an update. Due to my having to quickfix something some time ago, I chose to place the B9 tank definitions in RR and not RR parts, and RR parts is not meant to be use-able standalone so I wouldn't have looked out for that exception.

Your first suggestion worked like a charm, thank you kindly!
While we're on the subject, is deleting the resource distributions as defined in GPP_Resources a painless way to de-clutter the resource lists? There are many resources such as metallic ore, gypsum, dirt, etc which I never use and would rather not be there.

[JadeOfMaar]

@EimajOzear Deleting GPP's configs would allow for CRP's RNG to fill back in, and all planets would get the typical random blends of most of the same resources. But if you do this and don't delete the bit that I pointed you to in RR, which removes untagged resource placement, you should end up with the GPP planets having nothing but Ore.

GPP's resource configs are structured where each resource has its own file so you could remove all Gypsum by deleting GPP/GPP_Resources/Res_CRP/Gypsum.cfg

[WLLP]

I am having some trouble with b9 part switcher. There seems to be something about duplicate nuclear engines. I took a photo of error message if that helps. And I will try to track down the log. I am fairly certain it’s something with the RR parts mod as removing it seems to fix it.

[Brigadier]

9 hours ago, WLLP said:

 And I will try to track down the log. I am fairly certain it’s something with the RR parts mod as removing it seems to fix it.

The log is easy to find, check here for more guidance on how to report a problem:

 

[WLLP]

Alright, some KSP logs, hot off the presses:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1DcPnmDxYbb9xG9BTki_IiXL6GfNCsuQ1?usp=sharing

[hemeac]

@WLLP, The parts are from Missing History and going through the logs, it looks like it is an incompatibility between Kiwi Tech Tree and one of the extras from Kerbal Atomics: KerbalAtomicsLH2NTRModSupport.  As for the Xenon error that you are getting, that is an issue with my fuel tank upgrades and Configurable Containers.  You will want to use the patch linked here: