[1.12] Extraplanetary Launchpads v6.99.3

[taniwha]

Bluebottle: "mode" does (or should) imply optional (it certainly will be optional). Also, the "hard" really should be in quotes as it's more a "detailed" mode.

lukavago: Ah, good, I'm glad that's what it was. BTW, if you re-install USI and use the EL parts filter icon, you should get all the USI parts that use EL modules (pads, survey stations, etc).

[DStaal]

15 hours ago, lukavago said:

That doesn't make sense to me, since I've had USI installed for a while, but I figured what the hell, give it a shot. I uninstalled the USI stuff, and low and behold, everything is right where it's supposed to be. No idea what happened, but it works, so I'm happy. Thanks for the advice.

It's a very recent change - the last couple of days.  And, unfortunately, it didn't make it into the change notes.

There's a config file you can remove that does all the hiding, so removing it brings things back.

[RoverDude]

On 2/3/2016 at 6:58 AM, taniwha said:

RoverDude: I guess the recipes are working nicely for you. With your nudging, I'm sure hard-mode will get done eventually :).

Also, thanks for the reminder....

lukavago: If you have USI installed as well, USI will hide most of EL's parts. I'm not sure if it gets all of the tanks, though.

RoverDude(again): I just realized that there might be some fun with EL's part filter icon and USI. It flags all parts that have one of the EL part-modules attached as being EL, but it also checks for MetalOre/Metal/RocketParts (for tanks). Should I add a way to specify other resources, or do you think keeping USI storage and EL storage separate is a good idea?

Probably better to keep separate since all of mine use FireSpitter (and the resources are multi-use)

16 hours ago, lukavago said:

That doesn't make sense to me, since I've had USI installed for a while, but I figured what the hell, give it a shot. I uninstalled the USI stuff, and low and behold, everything is right where it's supposed to be. No idea what happened, but it works, so I'm happy. Thanks for the advice.

There's a file called EL_Parts.cfg - picking which support poison we want right now (I hid them because changing the EL recipes does not change the corresponding parts).

[lukavago]

Thanks for the helpful advice guys, I appreciate it. This weekend I'll have time to play around with my mod list and get everything working the way it's supposed to. I deorbited my first construction station so I can avoid conflicts when I reinstall, but it needed to be replaced anyway (not enough docking ports, power generation, storage, everything..... oops...) Looking forward to what I come up with this time.

[MatterBeam]

Hi.

I'm having problems with the productivity of my vessels.

I placed various level 1 engineers, scientists and one pilot in a vessel with 6 seats. In the settings file, I multiplied the productivity factor of all crewed parts to 4.

However, I still get subzero vessel productivity. Vessels do not get built.

http://imgur.com/gallery/L0qXrxZ

 

 

Edited February 5, 2016 by MatterBeam

[taniwha]

MatterBeam: Oh dear, with that productivity, you drew a very unlucky straw: all your engineers have just the right combination of stupidity, courage and badass to theoretically get 0 productivity, but thanks to how floating point works, you get that silly number. Bill Kerman is a member of that club.

There is a simple solution, though: since you've set the productivity factor to 4, the lab will be considered a full workshop and thus your engineers will need only 2 stars to become productive. Take them to Mun or Minmus and back :).

RoverDude: as I suspected, but I thought it best to ask.

[MatterBeam]

2 hours ago, taniwha said:

MatterBeam: Oh dear, with that productivity, you drew a very unlucky straw: all your engineers have just the right combination of stupidity, courage and badass to theoretically get 0 productivity, but thanks to how floating point works, you get that silly number. Bill Kerman is a member of that club.

There is a simple solution, though: since you've set the productivity factor to 4, the lab will be considered a full workshop and thus your engineers will need only 2 stars to become productive. Take them to Mun or Minmus and back :).

RoverDude: as I suspected, but I thought it best to ask.

So it's not a bug. Thank you! I was worried for a moment that I'd never get SimpleConstruction to work :0

[taniwha]

Indeed. I suggest taking a look at the graphs Kerbas ad astra made. The link is in the OP.

[MatterBeam]

2 hours ago, taniwha said:

Indeed. I suggest taking a look at the graphs Kerbas ad astra made. The link is in the OP.

Followed your suggestions and did two things:

-Bought four level 2 engineers with zero stupidity and zero courage.

-Increased the productivity multiplier for Mobile Processing Labs to 7x.

The result is exactly zero productivity. Just in case, I removed Jebediah (level 1 pilot) and skipped forward 3 years. Still stuck at 0% completed.

http://imgur.com/gallery/MNMhQsV

The Settings.cfg code:

KSExpSeatMap 
{
	SeatTasks 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		default = Workshop
	}
}
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]:HAS[#minimumCrew[>0]],!MODULE[ExWorkshop]]
{
	MODULE 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		ProductivityFactor = 4
		IgnoreCrewCapacity = false
	}
}
@PART[crewCabin] 
{
	MODULE 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		ProductivityFactor = 4
	}
}
@PART[MK1CrewCabin]
{
	MODULE 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		ProductivityFactor = 4
	}
}
@PART[mk4CrewCabin] 
{
	MODULE 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		ProductivityFactor = 4
	}
}

@PART[mk3CrewCabin]: 
{
	MODULE 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		ProductivityFactor = 4
	}
}
@PART[Large_Crewed_Lab]: 
{
	MODULE 
	{
		name = ExWorkshop
		ProductivityFactor = 7
	}
}
@PART[launchClamp1]: 
{
	@MODULE[LaunchClamp] 
	{
		@name = ExtendingLaunchClamp
	}
}
@EXPERIENCE_TRAIT[Engineer] 
{
	EFFECT 
	{
		name = ExWorkshopSkill
	}
}
@EXPERIENCE_TRAIT[Scientist] 
{
	EFFECT 
	{
		name = ExWorkshopSkill
	}
}
@EXPERIENCE_TRAIT[Pilot] 
{
	EFFECT 
	{
		name = ExSurveySkill
	}
	EFFECT 
	{
		name = ExWorkshopSkill
	}
}

Opened my KSP.txt file and found this error a couple hundred times:

[ERR 14:15:36.892] ExperienceTrait: Cannot add effect 'ExWorkshopSkill' as it does not exist.

[ERR 14:15:36.896] ExperienceTrait: Cannot add effect 'ExWorkshopSkill' as it does not exist.

[ERR 14:15:36.897] ExperienceTrait: Cannot add effect 'ExWorkshopSkill' as it does not exist.

Could I be missing a file?

Edited February 5, 2016 by MatterBeam

[taniwha]

You are not missing a file. It is ExConstructionSkill, not ExWorkshopSkill. However, yes, that very likely is the issue.

[MatterBeam]

5 minutes ago, taniwha said:

You are not missing a file. It is ExConstructionSkill, not ExWorkshopSkill. However, yes, that very likely is the issue.

Thank you very much!

[zagamaph]

HI, I'm having an issue when trying to build ships on the surface of other worlds. When I click finalize build, the craft appears on the launchpad and the root part immediately explodes. This leaves the newly built craft sans root part as a separate vessel  hovering over the launchpad and no longer affected by physics. Clicking release craft has no affect. The issue only occurs when below a certain altitude on planets and moons outside kerbin's sphere of influence. The launchpads work fine on Kerbin, Minmus and in space.  

Thanks for all your work on this mod! Hopefully my Von Neumman swarm shall take over the kerbol system soon...

[taniwha]

Which bodies? What certain altitude? If below 0m, explosions are to be expected.

I'm sorry, but your post is rather unhelpful due to the lack of specifics. Also, a copy of your KSP.log would help.

[CajunInABox]

Does USI/OKS remove the recycle feature from EL? I was trying to use the Pathfinder Stockyard in place of the EL recycler, and I couldn't get the recycler feature to work.

[MatterBeam]

16 hours ago, taniwha said:

You are not missing a file. It is ExConstructionSkill, not ExWorkshopSkill. However, yes, that very likely is the issue.

Tested, it works now.

[PTNLemay]

I've finally reached the Orbital Mass Detector in the tech tree (playing a career mode with this mod in it).  I don't have enough experienced engineers (nor the funds) to really start a serious off-planet base so for now all I'm doing is regular ore refining.  From what I understand the OMD can do regular ore scanning, but... does it have any advantages over the regular stock ore scanner?  (this one:  http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/M700_Survey_Scanner )  I did a test run scanning Kerbin, and it looked mighty impressive, but I couldn't figure out how to overlay the scanned areas onto the map view.  It looks like you can only view the scanned areas when you are directly over them, and... take note of them manually?  Or am I missing something in how you store the data?   Here's a screenshot of my prototype scanner in action.   Another funny thing, is it detecting the same amount of ore concentration on all of Kerbin?  Is that normal?

Edited February 6, 2016 by PTNLemay

[zagamaph]

I try to build something with my base using the orbital launchpad, when I click finalize build, the new vessel appears above the launchpad, it's root part explodes and the focus switches to the new vessel. It then hovers above the launchpad unaffected by physics. The issue occurs on the surface of Duna, Bop and Pol. It does not occur on the surface of Minmus or Kerbin. I tested the launchpad while flying above Pol to see if it had something to do with being on the ground and the issue continued until I reached about 5000m if I remember correctly. Here's a link to the Log File  https://www.mediafire.com/?46yyyx32pz13rih I attempted to use the launchpad about 13:02.52 on the log file. Here's a link to some screenshots of the issue occurring. http://imgur.com/a/llbSH 

 

 

[Tokay Gris]

One question:

I am experimenting with this mod. Great stuff, by the way!

I am trying to recycle some junk with resources still on it (using the large recycle bin) but do not have enough storage for those resources.

Since I am not so much interested in those resources (some RCS-fuel) and more interested in the metal, what do I do now?

It seems to hold there...

 

So, the question: Do I just need to wait longer? Or should I bring storage space for all the resources left?

 

A little side question, but this is what I am testing anyway, so I will get the answer as soon as that problem is solved: If I recycle vessels and/or junk, I get metal, right? Or am I overlooking some container for "scrap metal"? In one tutorial vid it said something about scrap metal... But I don't seem to have any containers for that. Or is it "metal ore"? (But as I said, thats what I am testing anyway to find out. It would just spare me some time, is all.)

 

If it makes any difference, I am using this mod in combination with MKS/OKS and Karbonite. 

 

Thanks!

 

EDIT: Dang. It seems I need a smelter on that vessel... No way to store "scrap metal" and bring it to a smelter. Oh well.... 

Edited February 7, 2016 by Tokay Gris

[ss8913]

So.. survey stakes.  I've noticed that I can plop one survey stake and build pretty much anything on it.  Is that the way it's supposed to work or am I supposed to make a square area with 4 stakes?  If I do that, do they all need to have the same name?  Is it more correct to mark out a square of space with the stakes?  or do I just pound one stake and build on top of it?

[goldenpsp]

Just now, ss8913 said:

So.. survey stakes.  I've noticed that I can plop one survey stake and build pretty much anything on it.  Is that the way it's supposed to work or am I supposed to make a square area with 4 stakes?  If I do that, do they all need to have the same name?  Is it more correct to mark out a square of space with the stakes?  or do I just pound one stake and build on top of it?

That is pretty much it.  You can use multiple stakes for fancier setups, but I personally haven't ever bothered.

[ss8913]

1 hour ago, goldenpsp said:

That is pretty much it.  You can use multiple stakes for fancier setups, but I personally haven't ever bothered.

so.. just the one stake and let it ride... ok.

[taniwha]

For many cases, one stake will do the job. The default orientation will be similar to the launchpad, with the root node centered over the stake.

If you're worried about the bottom of the vessel colliding with the stake (very possible!), use two Origin stakes spaced far enough apart to avoid collisions: the root node will be centered over the midpoint between the two stakes. More Origin stakes will just give a little more control over the midpoint: it is the average of all Origin stakes (or all stakes if there are no Origin stakes).

When using multiple stakes, they must all have the same name. If they have been placed by the same kerbal, they will.

The stakes specify a point about 19cm above the ground, about halfway along the length of the stake.

Below is advanced usage, but it can come in very handy:

+X, +Y, +Z, -X, -Y, -Z Direction stakes allow control over the orientation of the vessel. Do note that it is quite possible to orient the vessel such that it will collide with the ground.

+X, +Y, +Z, -X, -Y, -Z Bounds stakes override the midpoint by stating where that face of the vessel's bounding box should be placed. If, for example, both +X and -X bounds stakes are present, then the vessel's bounding box (not the root part) will be centered over the midpoint of the two. The -Y face of the vessel's bounding box is its bottom (in the VAB, SPH needs confirmation).

When building on ground that is too steep for the slight clearance given by the 19cm height, I recommend using a -Y bounds stake uphill a bit, and a suitable mix of +/- X and Z stakes. You will probably need to use launch clamps in such a situation. EL can build them without trouble on survey sites, and the clamps will auto-extend the correct distance to touch the ground.

I hope that helps.

[colmo]

I'm not sure if I've mentioned it before, but how about a part that functions as a foundation for immobile structures?

The idea is that it would function like a launch clamp in the way it attaches to the ground (and is thus always upright if built using stakes, I think). The difference is that it would be a simple concrete block, which surface (or node?) attaches to the bottom of a structure (say, a simple ground station with tanks, comms and power). Once built, it's going nowhere. It may even need explosive demolition to remove later, if it isn't on Kerbin! It doesn't decouple and it doesn't generate power, because that would be cheating.

Its height is dictated exactly as a launch clamp's is, perhaps with a bevel at the cap to make it more accessible to Kerbals on uneven surfaces, which is rather the point of having it. Its area could be fixed, or there might be several different sizes (different scale factors reusing the same model and texture), or it might be procedural.

The advantage of such a part is to prevent the explosions caused by terrain clipping, an issue with KAS ground anchors, and it keeps everything nice and level. As it would require a considerable amount of ore, off-world building might take a while, so it's really only for permanent sites. The objects placed atop it can still be removed (using KIS, KAS, docking or explosive means!) and replaced by similar methods should the need arise. It could also serve as the foundation for a regular EPL launchpad.

The recipe for it would be simple, some sort of concrete resource made of processed ore and water.

Edited February 8, 2016 by colmo
more info

[taniwha]

Other than the lack of staging/releasing, that's pretty much how launch-clamps work right now: unless they think they are at KSC, the generators are disabled, as are the fuel pumps MFT adds.

That said, what you describe is on my TODO list.

[edit]Also, it looks like it would not be too difficult to implement code-wise, so it's just a matter of me getting some time to do up a model.

Edited February 9, 2016 by taniwha

[Bluebottle]

Oh, and congratulations on joining the staff... now you (presumably) get paid for your hobby!