Frostiken Posted August 24, 2022 Share Posted August 24, 2022 (edited) Man I'm getting deeper into the tech tree and some of these engine ratings really stop making sense and hurt the game. Notably, aerospike engines. There's no reason for them to be ignition-limited. Ignition limits made some sense on lifter engines because of the amount of power in them, but an aerospike is, like, the opposite of fragile. Given the nature of aerospikes and their use in-game, having ONE ignition makes them basically worthless. They aren't actually lifter engines. Terrible. There's also a lot of engines that really do need more ignitions just by nature of their intention, for example, the Mk.2 Expansion has some chemical engines for spaceplanes/SSTOs. Obviously a single-ignition limit makes them worthless for SSTO, but, alas, the formula has rendered them purposeless. I love the idea and for the most part I find the concept functional, but when you run into situations - like with Aerospikes - where the feature essentially makes them worthless, I have no choice but to disable the feature Edited August 24, 2022 by Frostiken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of nowhere Posted August 24, 2022 Share Posted August 24, 2022 2 hours ago, Frostiken said: Man I'm getting deeper into the tech tree and some of these engine ratings really stop making sense and hurt the game. Notably, aerospike engines. There's no reason for them to be ignition-limited. Ignition limits made some sense on lifter engines because of the amount of power in them, but an aerospike is, like, the opposite of fragile. Given the nature of aerospikes and their use in-game, having ONE ignition makes them basically worthless. They aren't actually lifter engines. Terrible. There's also a lot of engines that really do need more ignitions just by nature of their intention, for example, the Mk.2 Expansion has some chemical engines for spaceplanes/SSTOs. Obviously a single-ignition limit makes them worthless for SSTO, but, alas, the formula has rendered them purposeless. I love the idea and for the most part I find the concept functional, but when you run into situations - like with Aerospikes - where the feature essentially makes them worthless, I have no choice but to disable the feature first, you can make them high quality for 2 ignitions. second, an engineer can service the engines to restore their ignitions and time. this helps with some designs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordcirth Posted August 24, 2022 Share Posted August 24, 2022 (edited) 12 hours ago, Frostiken said: Man I'm getting deeper into the tech tree and some of these engine ratings really stop making sense and hurt the game. Notably, aerospike engines. There's no reason for them to be ignition-limited. Ignition limits made some sense on lifter engines because of the amount of power in them, but an aerospike is, like, the opposite of fragile. Given the nature of aerospikes and their use in-game, having ONE ignition makes them basically worthless. They aren't actually lifter engines. Terrible. There's also a lot of engines that really do need more ignitions just by nature of their intention, for example, the Mk.2 Expansion has some chemical engines for spaceplanes/SSTOs. Obviously a single-ignition limit makes them worthless for SSTO, but, alas, the formula has rendered them purposeless. I love the idea and for the most part I find the concept functional, but when you run into situations - like with Aerospikes - where the feature essentially makes them worthless, I have no choice but to disable the feature The formula looks at the total thrust, and the ratio of ASL to VAC Isp, so it ID's the aerospike as a first-stage lifter engine. You should be able to write an MM config that overrides the rated ignitions for aerospikes; something like: @PART[toroidalAerospike]:NEEDS[FeatureReliability]:FOR[KerbalismDefault]:FINAL { @rated_ignitions = 5 } This might not be quite correct syntax. Edited August 24, 2022 by lordcirth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerbnub Posted September 1, 2022 Share Posted September 1, 2022 Does anyone know what the Tranquilizing Vortex (TV) does? It says it relieves stress, but turning the TV on in the SPH has no effect on the stress duration in the planner. I also don't know what it's supposed to cure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of nowhere Posted September 1, 2022 Share Posted September 1, 2022 2 hours ago, kerbnub said: Does anyone know what the Tranquilizing Vortex (TV) does? It says it relieves stress, but turning the TV on in the SPH has no effect on the stress duration in the planner. I also don't know what it's supposed to cure. it cures stress. it reduces stress, by a tiny tiny amount. the planner in the VAB/SPH isn't always reliable. but the effect is so tiny, if you have a minimalistic ship you probably won't even notice it. the TV works if you have a luxury ship with all comforts. in those conditions, an average kerbal will accumulate roughly 3% stress per kerbal year. Which is more or less what the TV cures. individual kerbals have different levels of stress resistance, within some random variability. If a kerbal is above average, he can stay indefinitely on a ship with best comfort and TV without ever getting stress. a kerbal below average will still grow stress over time, even with TV. So, it's very unlikely to make a difference in most missions. Still, it consumes very little power and it costs nothing to leave it on, so unless you have limited fuel supply, you should still use it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilicofresco Posted September 5, 2022 Share Posted September 5, 2022 (edited) Hi everybody! I've not been playing for a while, so I must've missed it... but how did we get at the point that the old Hitchhicker Storage Container costs more than 310000? I just installed the latest version of KSP, the 3.16 version of Kerbalism and loaded an old savegame coming from one year ago or something like that. Is it a bug or a feature? What does the double price xxxx + yyyy mean? Thanks! Edited September 5, 2022 by Basilicofresco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of nowhere Posted September 5, 2022 Share Posted September 5, 2022 4 hours ago, Basilicofresco said: Hi everybody! I've not been playing for a while, so I must've missed it... but how did we get at the point that the old Hitchhicker Storage Container costs more than 310000? I just installed the latest version of KSP, the 3.16 version of Kerbalism and loaded an old savegame coming from one year ago or something like that. Is it a bug or a feature? What does the double price xxxx + yyyy mean? Thanks! it's certainly a bug, but i don't know anything more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilicofresco Posted September 7, 2022 Share Posted September 7, 2022 On 9/5/2022 at 1:10 PM, king of nowhere said: it's certainly a bug, but i don't know anything more I discovered that it's caused by the automatic upgrades: the RDU adds 275300 to the basic cost and the TV adds 33500. After unlocking the Advanced Exploration in the tech tree the price of the Hitchhicker Storage Container change from "√4,000.00" to "√37,500.00 + √33,500.00". After unlocking the Advanced Science Tech in the tech tree the price of the Hitchhicker Storage Container change to "√312,899.00 + √33,500.00". It's just odd that I cannot avoid these expensive upgrades if not needed. What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of nowhere Posted September 7, 2022 Share Posted September 7, 2022 1 hour ago, Basilicofresco said: I discovered that it's caused by the automatic upgrades: the RDU adds 275300 to the basic cost and the TV adds 33500. After unlocking the Advanced Exploration in the tech tree the price of the Hitchhicker Storage Container change from "√4,000.00" to "√37,500.00 + √33,500.00". After unlocking the Advanced Science Tech in the tech tree the price of the Hitchhicker Storage Container change to "√312,899.00 + √33,500.00". It's just odd that I cannot avoid these expensive upgrades if not needed. What do you think? they should not cost that crapton of money. 275k for an upgrade of a part costing 4000 by itself? maybe it's supposed to be a one-off cost to purchase the upgrade, but for some reason it's being counted incorrectly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilicofresco Posted September 8, 2022 Share Posted September 8, 2022 I checked, it's not a one-off cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinite_monkey Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 Is Kerbalism supposed to be compatible with Tarsier? I found this closed issue on github, so I guess Kerbalism shouldn't interfere with Tarsier (except of taking time for data transmission). However, every picture I take seems to be the same experiment "Space Telescope". No science gain for pictures of different bodies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostiken Posted September 11, 2022 Share Posted September 11, 2022 I just noticed a flaw in Kerbalism's life support. Greenhouses consume water, but the water is lost forever. Which makes no sense. The water is still there, it's just locked inside the plants. The water would be recoverable two ways - first, Kerbal digestion of the plant matter. Second, you can make a slurry and break down the inedible parts of the plants. However, instead, all water into a greenhouse is lost forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cxg2827 Posted September 11, 2022 Share Posted September 11, 2022 13 hours ago, Frostiken said: I just noticed a flaw in Kerbalism's life support. Greenhouses consume water, but the water is lost forever. Which makes no sense. The water is still there, it's just locked inside the plants. The water would be recoverable two ways - first, Kerbal digestion of the plant matter. Second, you can make a slurry and break down the inedible parts of the plants. However, instead, all water into a greenhouse is lost forever. Check this: Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapata21 Posted September 20, 2022 Share Posted September 20, 2022 hello! I would like to add habitat and radiation protection to some parts as well as volume etc, how do I configure it? thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DangerNoodle Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 I would like to share some changes/additions I've made to a few .cfg files. These include: SSPX.cfg: - Changed cupola-greenhouse-125-1 from 1/90 to 1/6 of kerbalism greenhouse - Added custom greenhouse module for aquaculture-375-1 SSPX_Science.cfg: - Added a patch to change the analysis speed of some labs UniversalStorage2.cfg: - Added support for the US2 sabatier reactor part, scaled accordingly Patches-Experiments.cfg: - Changed a line to enable kerbalism to add lab experiments to all labs and not just the stock lab Patches-HardDrives.cfg: - Changed a line to enable the patch to correctly add hard drives to labs Detailed explanation: SSPX.cfg: The cupola greenhouse has 1/12 as many individual plants as the greenhouse-375-1, wich is 2x as good as the default kerbalism greenhouse. The fish tank is different from all the others. I decided it gets 4x kerbalism greenhouse ("kg") / 2x 375-1 greenhouse food production. It is now some sort of direct Waste-converter, as i imagine some fish species can use the biomatter contained in waste more efficiently than just extracting the wastes nh3 Uses 2 Kerbals worth of Waste as fish-fodder, plus algae from integrated tanks that are as effective as 1x "kg" in both input and output The fish however only consume/produce 1.75 Kerbals worth of co2/o2 while ingesting 2 Kerbals of food per day (not actual biomass of a Kerbal, the amount of food eaten by one per day) I suspect growing lifeforms exhale a lower percentage of their ingested carbon as co2, than fully grown individuals of their kind, because at least some of that carbon needs to be integrated into their bodies for growing. SSPX_Science.cfg: The large labs can fit more scientists, and house more and also probably more modern equipment, so they should be realistically abe to analyse samples faster. UniversalStorage2.cfg: There was no config for the sabatier reactor so I added one that is scaled in the same vein as the other parts, using its mass in relation to the kerbalism ECLSS Patches-Experiments.cfg: The line in question effectively adds lab experiments to parts with a kerbalism laboratory module, but only targets the stock lab for whatever reason, despite other lab related patches targeting all parts with lab modules Now all modded labs too get lab experiments Patches-HardDrives.cfg: The line in question adds a hard drive modules to all parts with a stock lab module, but that stock lab module got removed two files above. I've changed the filter module to the kerbalism lab module instead. Here are the modified files in a MediaFire folder: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/nmlv2kvi1ucp2/Kerbalism_edited_files I've marked all my changes with a comment with my user name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelatthetomb Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 Does anyone know a way to get Strategia's "Science from New Biome" reward strategy, To Boldy Go, to work with Kerbalism? Because Kerbalism seems to intercept the science, Strategia never gives the reward, whether it's auto-science done through the Kerbalism window or the old-style science popup you get on some experiments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordcirth Posted September 24, 2022 Share Posted September 24, 2022 5 hours ago, DangerNoodle said: I would like to share some changes/additions I've made to a few .cfg files. These include: SSPX.cfg: - Changed cupola-greenhouse-125-1 from 1/90 to 1/6 of kerbalism greenhouse - Added custom greenhouse module for aquaculture-375-1 SSPX_Science.cfg: - Added a patch to change the analysis speed of some labs UniversalStorage2.cfg: - Added support for the US2 sabatier reactor part, scaled accordingly Patches-Experiments.cfg: - Changed a line to enable kerbalism to add lab experiments to all labs and not just the stock lab Patches-HardDrives.cfg: - Changed a line to enable the patch to correctly add hard drives to labs Detailed explanation: SSPX.cfg: The cupola greenhouse has 1/12 as many individual plants as the greenhouse-375-1, wich is 2x as good as the default kerbalism greenhouse. The fish tank is different from all the others. I decided it gets 4x kerbalism greenhouse ("kg") / 2x 375-1 greenhouse food production. It is now some sort of direct Waste-converter, as i imagine some fish species can use the biomatter contained in waste more efficiently than just extracting the wastes nh3 Uses 2 Kerbals worth of Waste as fish-fodder, plus algae from integrated tanks that are as effective as 1x "kg" in both input and output The fish however only consume/produce 1.75 Kerbals worth of co2/o2 while ingesting 2 Kerbals of food per day (not actual biomass of a Kerbal, the amount of food eaten by one per day) I suspect growing lifeforms exhale a lower percentage of their ingested carbon as co2, than fully grown individuals of their kind, because at least some of that carbon needs to be integrated into their bodies for growing. SSPX_Science.cfg: The large labs can fit more scientists, and house more and also probably more modern equipment, so they should be realistically abe to analyse samples faster. UniversalStorage2.cfg: There was no config for the sabatier reactor so I added one that is scaled in the same vein as the other parts, using its mass in relation to the kerbalism ECLSS Patches-Experiments.cfg: The line in question effectively adds lab experiments to parts with a kerbalism laboratory module, but only targets the stock lab for whatever reason, despite other lab related patches targeting all parts with lab modules Now all modded labs too get lab experiments Patches-HardDrives.cfg: The line in question adds a hard drive modules to all parts with a stock lab module, but that stock lab module got removed two files above. I've changed the filter module to the kerbalism lab module instead. Here are the modified files in a MediaFire folder: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/nmlv2kvi1ucp2/Kerbalism_edited_files I've marked all my changes with a comment with my user name. Nice. It would probably be easier to maintain a fork of the git repo, though - that's exactly what git is for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DangerNoodle Posted September 24, 2022 Share Posted September 24, 2022 (edited) Quote Nice. It would probably be easier to maintain a fork of the git repo, though - that's exactly what git is for. Might aswell do this Edited September 24, 2022 by DangerNoodle Proper Quote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heliotrope Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 I tried doing a space station in orbit to study samples. However it seems to study to a certain amount, then fill up the hard drive. Once it fills up it stops the laboratory from studying anymore, transmits the rest of the data, and doesn't restart. So I have to *manually* transit the data from my space station every single time it fills up. Since it only has 500 mb capacity and the samples are about 8gb, this is obviously bad. Does anyone have a fix? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of nowhere Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 11 hours ago, Heliotrope said: I tried doing a space station in orbit to study samples. However it seems to study to a certain amount, then fill up the hard drive. Once it fills up it stops the laboratory from studying anymore, transmits the rest of the data, and doesn't restart. So I have to *manually* transit the data from my space station every single time it fills up. Since it only has 500 mb capacity and the samples are about 8gb, this is obviously bad. Does anyone have a fix? strange, i normally don't have this problem. I'd duggest to just add a few more probe cores to the station to increase the hard disk space; they are lightweight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungling Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 (edited) im having an issue with Kerbalism where science transmission rates can plummet to 0.1b/s even though im fully within range of the KSC/relay probes and am having no power issues (science mode, max upgraded facilities) example: interplanetary probe sent to Duna was still within transmission range during the transfer (and at Duna too) with 90-100% connection strength but the transmission rate just dropped to 0.1b/s effectively rendering the probe useless Edited September 26, 2022 by bungling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Dry Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 @bungling which level is the Tracking Station? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungling Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 @Gordon Dry "max upgraded facilities" its max level (level 3) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhatALovelyNick Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 4 hours ago, bungling said: im having an issue with Kerbalism where science transmission rates can plummet to 0.1b/s even though im fully within range of the KSC/relay probes and am having no power issues (science mode, max upgraded facilities) example: interplanetary probe sent to Duna was still within transmission range during the transfer (and at Duna too) with 90-100% connection strength but the transmission rate just dropped to 0.1b/s effectively rendering the probe useless Do you use 3.16 kerbalism? Do you use JNSQ or another scaled system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungling Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 1: yes 2: no i did see the post that said 3.16 has a comms problem but im worried if i downgrade to 3.15 something might break 1 minute ago, WhatALovelyNick said: Do you use 3.16 kerbalism? Do you use JNSQ or another scaled system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.