[12.1.4] Kerbin Side Remastered - The Life Aquatic [v2.0.0][2022-12-18]

[ColdJ]

I can see the next step. Dig long trench, place structural fuselage that has been made a static (because it has the right colliders so you can travel through it) in trench, cover pipe in a runway static made to look like all grass. And Voila, underwater secret sub passageway to a sub dock that you can rise up into, that only something the size of a Kerbal can exit at land height.

[Caerfinon]

Current Status:

• Seems Issue #8 has reared it's ugly head in KSP 1.11.2 under KK  v1.8.2.1 Issue reopened
• Looks like time for a site redesign on this mission. [sigh]

[Caerfinon]

Version v1.0.6 for Kerbal Space Program 1.12.2 Released on 2021-08-25 now on SpaceDock

Fixes

• Issue #8 Hydrothermal Vent KK static not present in KSP 1.12.1

  • problems affects KSP 1.11.2 as well
  • Hydrothermal Vent site redesigned

• v1.0.6-RC1 changes

  • hides wreck parts in VAB/SPH
  • makes universal spawn points in Coast Guard bases invisible

• Also of note, the Panocean Canal works on my KSP 1.12.2 instance.
• Small triumphs. 

[theonegalen]

On 7/20/2021 at 5:33 PM, NipperySlipples said:

I love this. These missions are fun, add lots more to do to the game and are well designed  and feel different with each repeat. In my hardcore playthrough they REALLY help flesh out the early game and provide  a wonderfully fun source of income.  

Took me a few hours to build 16 custom harbors in KK, spread them out around my customized JNSQ game and setup the co-ordinates in the groups config.  Easy given how much I got out of it with these new missions. I really appreciate the effort you took into making it so configurable. 

The dive sites were harder to adapt. Needed to setup all the waypoints after finding a new home for all the KK sites and anomalies. That took me the better part of a day. 100% worth it though. (and gave me a chance to over decorate the crap out of the areas around some of them with more statics) -   Having done all this i have a few small suggestions. 

Im not sure its possible in a contract config ,but to make this extremely easy to configure to custom planets/ rescaled systems  it would be nice if the dive  site waypoints were automatically created relative to the KK dive site co-oridinates . something like dive1lat = SiteLocationLat  - offset.  This way we would only have to set up harbor location and Observer location. 

in the same vein multiplying the rewards by a distance factor could be helpful, so if using a rescaled  system or another planet pack the rewards are more worthwhile without changing each contracts config.  

Also the starting KUMA dive certification, on a rescaled system it wants to dive to a reasonable depth (like 300m) and then the second part of the certification requires you to leave your vessel and touch the sea floor with a scuba-kerbal.  However  the sea floor might be a  lot deeper than the 300m point your supposed to leave the sub at assuming your not on standard kerbin. I know the mod is just meant for stock and I'm using it in a way not (yet) intended but you may want to consider an optional depth check rather than the sea floor for the first dive. (like 500m or something) . better yet have it be dive to the sea floor or X depth whatever comes first. 

In JNSQ I wasn't able to complete the dive certification (and unlock the other contracts) until I was able to dive to around 1000m  with pressure limits (and rational bouyancy/pressure mod)  which was either very hard or very slow (just letting the kerbal sink the 700m).  

with your JNSQ-GAP and now this in my JNSQ game my biggest problem is that I'm not sure I'm ever going to leave kerbin. Thanks for all your work!

Hi, would it be possible to get your configs which adapt this to JNSQ?

[Caerfinon]

8 minutes ago, theonegalen said:

Hi, would it be possible to get your configs which adapt this to JNSQ?

An adaptation of this for JNSQ is on my radar but it's a few projects back in the queue. If you'd like to start working on it that is OK by me, and I'd be happy to provide any help I can.

[Daniel Prates]

You know  @Caerfinon in my many, many years of KSP I experimented with most, maybe all ballast, boats, ships and submersible parts packs, some were good, some meh, some I liked but were discontinued .... 

Right now I am unsure as what to use that feels 'right' for underwater parts + ballast/dive controls. So I am here thinkin, why should I do the thinking, if caerfinon for sure has thought already about the thinking part? I doubt you are going through all this trouble if you don't feel  happy about the parts and dive controls you are currently using.

So... what are they?

[Caerfinon]

15 minutes ago, Daniel Prates said:

So... what are they?

The latest two are;

@ColdJ's Working Underwater Light - which introduces a ballast system and underwater engines and RCS based entirely on repurposed stock parts.

@Angel-125's WIP mod SunkWorks - provides a ballast system with dive control parts that convert stock tanks into ballast. Also includes Scuba gear and suits that improve kerbal swimming abilities. 

Also of note, the Mods Ballistanks, SinkEmAll, and Moist! have recently been updated to KSP 1.12.2 versions.  

So you have a lot to choose from.

Personally I use some of the Working Underwater Lite engine parts and the SunkWorks ballast system and scuba diving equipment. Just fits my play style, but the other mods work as well.   

 

Edited September 23, 2021 by Caerfinon

[Daniel Prates]

3 hours ago, Caerfinon said:

The latest two are;

@ColdJ's Working Underwater Light - which introduces a ballast system and underwater engines and RCS based entirely on repurposed stock parts.

@Angel-125's WIP mod SunkWorks - provides a ballast system with dive control parts that convert stock tanks into ballast. Also includes Scuba gear and suits that improve kerbal swimming abilities. 

Also of note, the Mods Ballistanks, SinkEmAll, and Moist! have recently been updated to KSP 1.12.2 versions.  

So you have a lot to choose from.

Personally I use some of the Working Underwater Lite engine parts and the SunkWorks ballast system and scuba diving equipment. Just fits my play style, but the other mods work as well.   

 

So basically everything huh?  those are pretty much all the mods still around.

What about surface parts? Many verisons ago we had so much good stuff, SM marine for instance. They are all dead by now huh? (Edit: OMG I was not aware of sunkworks; it look very promising!)

Edited September 23, 2021 by Daniel Prates

[Caerfinon]

4 minutes ago, Daniel Prates said:

What about surface parts?

SunkWorks has some prototype surface parts as it plans to have modular ship construction as a component.

Most of the old surface parts are either abandoned or at a KSP 1.10 level. I never really invested time in them as I wasn't interested in naval recreations of military ships. Those would be a lot of trial and error to see if they still functioned.

I mostly use the USI Exploration Pack "Otter" sub parts, that @ColdJ and I have done some patching to adapt to both Working Underwater Light and SunkWorks. Lately I've been playing around with the SunkWorks hulls to prototype surface recovery ships and am looking forward to when the rest of the deck pieces are released.

[Daniel Prates]

18 minutes ago, Caerfinon said:

SunkWorks has some prototype surface parts as it plans to have modular ship construction as a component.

Most of the old surface parts are either abandoned or at a KSP 1.10 level. I never really invested time in them as I wasn't interested in naval recreations of military ships. Those would be a lot of trial and error to see if they still functioned.

I mostly use the USI Exploration Pack "Otter" sub parts, that @ColdJ and I have done some patching to adapt to both Working Underwater Light and SunkWorks. Lately I've been playing around with the SunkWorks hulls to prototype surface recovery ships and am looking forward to when the rest of the deck pieces are released.

To me surface parts seem to be relevant to "life aquatic" because of the need to travel easier to the actual dive site. 

[Caerfinon]

2 minutes ago, Daniel Prates said:

because of the need to travel easier to the actual dive site

I do maintain a KerbalX hanger where I add useful vessels surface and submersible.  -> https://kerbalx.com/hangars/137753

[Daniel Prates]

So .... TOTM huh?

Congrats!

[Caerfinon]

4 hours ago, Daniel Prates said:

Congrats!

Thanks, I'm as surprised as anyone.   

[WindupHero7]

Is there a way to limit the seabed depth where salvage missions spawn? Sunkworks deepest dive suit allows 700m depths, but on all my salvage missions so far the plane sinks to <800 as soon as I get close. If it's too deep for me to reach on EVA, I can't add any parts to dock with it (or preferably, raise it to the surface so my salvage ship can crane it out of the water)

[ColdJ]

3 minutes ago, WindupHero7 said:

Is there a way to limit the seabed depth where salvage missions spawn? Sunkworks deepest dive suit allows 700m depths, but on all my salvage missions so far the plane sinks to <800 as soon as I get close. If it's too deep for me to reach on EVA, I can't add any parts to dock with it (or preferably, raise it to the surface so my salvage ship can crane it out of the water)

Sunkworks purposely adds pressure limits through a Module Manager patch. Normally if your game is set to the default difficulty you can reach there as a Kerbal. So either you need to disable the patch by changing it from a .cfg to a .txt (look through the folder structure and you will find the patches, just open them with a text viewer like Notepad to read and find the right one.) Or use my mod "Working Underwater Light" instead. Due to the way they changed swimming in KSP after 1.10.1, you will need a minimum craft like my Marine command chair to dive quickly. My mod gives Kerbals a ballast system for the Kerbals to make them heavy enough to sink. You increase or decrease in the Kerbals interface. Adjustable ballast tanks and parts for making stock based submarines.

https://spacedock.info/mod/2749/Working Underwater Lite

[WindupHero7]

Thanks for the point towards the configs. I've just upped the atmospheric suit to handle the pressure at 1200 meters.

I actually already have your mod installed along with Sunkworks- would you say they are incompatible? I like Sunkworks auto-trim gadget and the ability to turn any resource tank into a ballast tank- it lets me use Procedural Wings to make shapely keels without needing to clip ballast tanks in all over the place.

Edited October 16, 2021 by WindupHero7
Adding more info

[ColdJ]

6 hours ago, WindupHero7 said:

would you say they are incompatible?

No, I use them together all the time. When I made my mod, Sunkworks wasn't ready yet. Also they hadn't mucked up the swimming and buoyancy of the Kerbals. I prefer having dedicated ballast tanks myself and generally 2 (1 front and 1 back , centred for up and down and left to right.) are all you need to balance and make neutral buoyancy for a sub. They are inside the craft so don't ruin the visual. For a ship you just put 1 above the centre keel. Only suggested mine because the only patch is to add the ballast system to the Kerbals. It still annoys me that in 1.10.1 it only took 17 units of ballast to sink a kerbal and now so much more.

[Caerfinon]

On 10/15/2021 at 10:15 PM, WindupHero7 said:

Is there a way to limit the seabed depth where salvage missions spawn?

Currently with Contract Configurator there is no way to determine the depth of a location using the waypoint generator. I can currently randomly select a water location.

The location type expression only has LON/LAT and Biome information in it.  I could probably do something to ensure the location was a) always on water and b) check that the location was always part of the shores biome.  This would limit the depth ranges some. But I'd have to tinker with the code to see it that was possible.  I have raised Issue #16

I myself play at norrmal difficulty settings so I never encountered this issue as I can dive to any depth successfully.   

[LudificorPayne]

So... I am looking at ways of minimising/removing kscharbor. I am not sure if it's a hard dependency or part of the overall intended "package".

I am considering:
A) removing the contents of its folder
B) removing the pieces via the konstructs build system or:
C) moving the pieces underground.

I guess a similar question could be extended to removing/hiding the ksc extensions from one of the GAP dependencies if they're seperate from KSC harbor.

I really like your contracts, in fact this very mod has inspired a week long period of researching, designing and testing various submarines and mods to create them.

That being said, KSCharbor is at odds with my sensibilities and upon investigation, repairing it seems a lot of effort for something I can skip with water launch sites or VesselMover. (As well as having no guarantee it wouldn't disrupt your mod if it is coded to specifically interact with these konstructs.)

Any advice? Should I just ignore it?

[ColdJ]

4 hours ago, LudificorPayne said:

Any advice? Should I just ignore it?

As it appears to have no statics of it's own, you can just remove KSC Harbour from GameData. As long as the mod that it gets it's statics from is still installed you will be able to use them for custom creations of your own. Each of the .cfg files in it are just to let KK know where to place things.

 

[Caerfinon]

6 hours ago, LudificorPayne said:

Any advice? Should I just ignore it?

Originally KSC harbor and Water Launched Sites was going to have dedicated missions associated with them. Neither of these harbors currently have the missions active, however two anomalies from Water Launched Sites do have dive missions. You can remove KSC Harbor without impact to the contract pack,  however, you may want to keep Omega's Stockalike Structures if CKAN tries to uninstall it. 

I should really get KSC Harbor changed to a suggestion rather than a requirement in CKAN.  

[LudificorPayne]

Just removed harbor, no immediate issues although I'm just testing in sandbox at the moment to get everything playing nice. Much appreciated.

[Raptor22]

Do you plan on making a version of this for JNSQ, similar to how you made the JNSQ-KSRGAP Flight Contracts?

[Caerfinon]

9 hours ago, Raptor22 said:

Do you plan on making a version of this for JNSQ, similar to how you made the JNSQ-KSRGAP Flight Contracts?

It's on the radar. Time to devote to the project, however, is a little limited right now. 

[Beetlecat]

Hey, @Caerfinon -- did I see you mention somewhere you had configs to swap the Otter Submersible's ballast tanks to work with Sunkworks? I suppose I could just make them regular fuel tanks and let SW handle the rest...