toadicus Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share Posted December 11, 2014 Can I do it? Probably. Squad's API doesn't actually expose that directly. I can probably get around it via some trickery with config nodes, and could certainly get around it with reflection, but the former is messy and the latter is arguably naughty.Could I make it pretty without using a third party library like KSPAPIExtensions or JSIPartUtilities? Again, probably. More likely, I'd add a dependency to one of those.Would it have balance implications? Yes... and that's the problem and probably why Squad didn't expose it. If you could change a jet engine to draw liquid fuel evenly from all the tanks (like ALL_VESSEL), it'd certainly make designing jets a lot easier! Fuel loading would be a linear variable instead of a quadratic one that and that's a significant aid in intuitively grokking the process. So, since this is a game now, ostensibly you should have to pay for that somehow. Maybe the part should get more expensive, or heavier, or (more realistically) maybe all of the connected fuel tanks should get heavier. Then I'm responsible not only for making that happen but for getting it done in a way that starts and stays fun at various levels of career play.I'm not saying I won't do it. It sounds like a fairly cool idea and I think it could be a fun lever to pull. But, I think it's probably out of scope here, both for technical reasons and game balance reasons. If you have a vision for the concept, shoot me a PM and I'll mull it over and see if I think I have time for another project.I know that's not the answer you wanted, and that's sad. But, it's an honest answer that I hope you can appreciate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 16, 2014 Author Share Posted December 16, 2014 TweakableEverything has been updated to version 1.6! This update brings compatibility with KSP 0.90, an actual use case for the TweakableCrossFeed module I wrote long ago, and some incidental-but-potentially-far-reaching changes behind the scenes for TweakableEVA.CHANGELOG:v.1.6 [2014-12-15]* Updated for KSP 0.90.* TweakableDecouplers: Added ModuleTweakableCrossFeed and defaulted to "false" to prevent potentially-undesirable crossfeed behavior.* Changed the way TweakableEVA is applied to make the process more configurable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffreyCor Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 Yes! Another of the must haves updated Hurray Toadicus! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobotsAndSpaceships Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 I'm having a really big issue with KW right now, it says all my fairings have zero ejection force, and another non KW problem, whenever I place solar panels using symmetry and then activate them via action groups, one side disappears. I can't delete this mod, since it triggers the kraken when I try to launch, and I can't use any mod decouplers or solar panels. What do I do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hazens1 Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Feature request.After seeing someone make a MM config to adjust chute deployment speeds I thought maybe that would make a great parameter to be added to Tweakable Everything. This way one could have a quick deploying emergency chute and a slow deploying landing chute without having to make multiple copies of the same parts to accomplish 2 deployment speeds for the same chute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 17, 2014 Author Share Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) http://i.imgur.com/QCvB8n0.pngI'm having a really big issue with KW right now, it says all my fairings have zero ejection force, and another non KW problem, whenever I place solar panels using symmetry and then activate them via action groups, one side disappears. I can't delete this mod, since it triggers the kraken when I try to launch, and I can't use any mod decouplers or solar panels. What do I do?I can't duplicate either of those problems. Can you give me some details about your installation (what KSP version, what TE version, are you trying to upgrade an existing save, other mods installed, especially mods that are not official 0.90 compliant if you're running 0.90, etc.) and a log file (Windows: \path\to\KSP_win\KSP_Data\output_log.txt; Linux: ~/.config/unity3d/Squad/Kerbal\ Space\ Program/Player.log; Mac: ~/Library/Logs/Unity/Player.log)?KW Fairings correctly show their negative ejection force:http://pbrd.co/1xrs3eKThese solar panels deployed just fine using an action group:http://pbrd.co/1xrs81YFeature request.After seeing someone make a MM config to adjust chute deployment speeds I thought maybe that would make a great parameter to be added to Tweakable Everything. This way one could have a quick deploying emergency chute and a slow deploying landing chute without having to make multiple copies of the same parts to accomplish 2 deployment speeds for the same chute.Good idea! I'll get on it. Edited December 17, 2014 by toadicus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobotsAndSpaceships Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 (edited) I actually figured something else about the solar panel problem out, it only happens after I revert a flight to launch. I was actually able to workaround the KW problem by mounting tiny KW SRBs inside the fairings in order to push them away. Sorry to bug you about that one. I couldn't find the unity file in my logs (I'm on mac .25) I'm logged into this computer as the admin too. Here's my gamedata: http://imgur.com/a/BDauxEDIT: fixed the KW issue for good with a few .cfg edits. Edited December 18, 2014 by RobotsAndSpaceships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passinglurker Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 (edited) Would it be possible to make a probes SAS level and corresponding cost tweakable? or like tweakable engines would the technical implications make this outside the mods scope? Edited December 19, 2014 by passinglurker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbas_ad_astra Posted December 19, 2014 Share Posted December 19, 2014 Feature request.After seeing someone make a MM config to adjust chute deployment speeds I thought maybe that would make a great parameter to be added to Tweakable Everything. This way one could have a quick deploying emergency chute and a slow deploying landing chute without having to make multiple copies of the same parts to accomplish 2 deployment speeds for the same chute.Good idea! I'll get on it.I think hazens1 is talking about my SlowChutes patch. (I wanted make to deployment more gentle by slowing down deploymentSpeed by a factor of 100.) I would have used your TweakableEverything modules as the basis for making deployment speed a tweakable parameter (instead of uniformly adjusting them for all parts), for exactly the reason that hazens1 says, but I'm glad to see the expert take an interest. I would suggest making the tweakable option show up as "Deployment time" increasing from a default (and maybe minimum -- the default chutes snap open pretty quickly, so I don't see much need to make them open even faster) value of 1 to a maximum of e.g. 100 (enough to reduce the G-shock of deployment to more reasonable values, as I discovered during testing my own patch), as opposed to making users reduce "speed" from 1 to 0.01. It seems to be better to me from a user-interface perspective.Also, if TweakableChutes will work by replacing ModuleParachutes with ModuleTweakableParachutes (assuming this module will behave the same as your other tweakable things), it would conflict with RealChutes, because RealChutes works by (among other things) replacing all ModuleParachutes with RealChuteModules, so whichever mod went first would prevent the other from working. (Probably the same reason that your TweakableGimbal conflicts with HoneyFox's.) Nothing horrendously game-breaking, but worth mentioning in the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 20, 2014 Author Share Posted December 20, 2014 (edited) I have TweakableParachutes coded and working; I'll consider inverting the slider to make it easier to use (I'm finding that the bottom end of a tweakable slider is very unreliable). I allow manipulation of the semi-deployment speed also, though it doesn't need much changing and is already rather slow. I'm also trying to come up with alternate names; because of the way tweakables abbreviate things, anything with "deployment" in the name won't get to the next word. Tweakable* works by adding a "helper module" to parts with specific modules, not by replacing those modules themselves. My TweakableGimbals conflicts with Honeyfox's for a few reasons; IIRC our modules had the exact same name at one point, but it goes farther than that as well. TweakableParachutes won't conflict with RealChutes; RealChutes will apply its patches anyway, and TweakableParachutes will not apply its patches if RealChute is installed (:NEEDS[!RealChute]).Would it be possible to make a probes SAS level and corresponding cost tweakable? or like tweakable engines would the technical implications make this outside the mods scope?It looks like that should be pretty straightforward to implement on its own. What's slightly less straightforward is making sure I don't let you tweak the value to something better than the best probe you've developed so far... but I ought to be able to sort something. Edited December 20, 2014 by toadicus Added response to PassingLurker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffreyCor Posted December 21, 2014 Share Posted December 21, 2014 It looks like there is a conflict between tweakable reaction wheels and tweakscale. With tweakscale the reaction wheels don't keep their setting when normal sized and upsized reverts to 0 on all forces. If the tweakscale configs are removed so the parts aren't addressed by that mod the tweaks from this mod works properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbas_ad_astra Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 I have TweakableParachutes coded and working [...] I'm also trying to come up with alternate names; because of the way tweakables abbreviate things, anything with "deployment" in the name won't get to the next word. Thanks for clarifying how your stuff works. For the option name, how about "opening" or "fullopen/halfopen"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 22, 2014 Author Share Posted December 22, 2014 Would it be possible to make a probes SAS level and corresponding cost tweakable? or like tweakable engines would the technical implications make this outside the mods scope?It looks like that should be pretty straightforward to implement on its own. What's slightly less straightforward is making sure I don't let you tweak the value to something better than the best probe you've developed so far... but I ought to be able to sort something.I've got a prototype of this working; needs more testing but initial results are positive. It looks like there is a conflict between tweakable reaction wheels and tweakscale. With tweakscale the reaction wheels don't keep their setting when normal sized and upsized reverts to 0 on all forces. If the tweakscale configs are removed so the parts aren't addressed by that mod the tweaks from this mod works properly.I don't usually play with TweakScale, but I had it installed and noticed a bit of wonkiness with that a couple of days ago. I'll try to narrow it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffreyCor Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 I wouldn't either if given a choice, but some mode designers have insisted on making their mod require it so if wanting to use that then kinda stuck Thought it would be good to let you know though. Removing tweakscale support from those parts is a fine solution in my book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardocki Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 (edited) The latest version is causing a graphical glitch with the decouplers. In the VAB, the decoupler particle effect plays on a loop for every decoupler I add to the scene. I reverted to ver. 1.5 and the problem went away.Edit: I should add this is happening in KSP 0.90 for Windows 32-bit. The issue exists even with no other mods installed. No difference whether I install manually or with CKAN. Edited December 27, 2014 by gardocki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 27, 2014 Author Share Posted December 27, 2014 Please get me a log; I'm using the latest version myself and do not have that issue. Windows: \path\to\KSP_win\KSP_Data\output_log.txt; Linux: ~/.config/unity3d/Squad/Kerbal\ Space\ Program/Player.log; Mac: ~/Library/Logs/Unity/Player.logI'll take a look! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xobotun Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 (edited) I've read several pages backwards and found no mentions on my bug: when I add any decouplers in VAB either in SPH, they behave very odd: they create effects as if they decouple every second. There's also blank icon on the staging order thing in the right bottom corner.Well, and the most important and bad thing: stack decouplers (I haven't checked this on radial ones) literally fall through the ship as if I forgot to connect them somehow to lower stage. Ah, and if I go EVA, poor Jeb jumps out of his landing can and lies on the ground with emotionless face, and my camera remains centered on the spaceship...This may be a combination of KSP plugins, but when I remove TweakableEveything, everything becomes OK.. I'm running Windows x64, 0.90 KSP x32, TweakableEveything 1.6 and bunch of other mods. I hope this will help, your mod is great![EDIT1]: Well, I've read several pages, but I forgot about the last one:)Yes, downgrading to version 1.5 works, but it isn't what we want, right?Well, it says this:[Exception]: MissingMethodException: Method not found: 'ToadicusTools.Tools.InitializeTweakable'.[Log]: stackDecoupler added to ship - part count: 2[Log]: stage count is: 1Wait a minute, I'll figure out how to attach files.[EDIT2]: I haven't figured out how to upload files here, so there will be two links:output_log.txt for 1.6 versionoutput_log.txt for 1.5 version <-- working fine!I hope this will help. Edited December 27, 2014 by Xobotun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaseDrifter Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 ^Sounds a lot like an issue I brought up in the VOID thread a little while ago.#358 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xobotun Posted December 27, 2014 Share Posted December 27, 2014 (edited) Thanks for a cool mod! I've seen it somewhere, but forgot its' name.[EDIT]: Well, I have installed it. I haven't even noticed that it's another toadicus's plugin!Bad part: there's something wrong with ToadicusTools.dll _and_ TweakableEverything. As you said, without TE everything works perfectly.So I have decided to comment all the TweakableDecouplers.cfg and everything is OK, except the decouplers aren't tweakable.Thanks! Edited December 27, 2014 by Xobotun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 27, 2014 Author Share Posted December 27, 2014 Please give the current version of ToadicusTools a try: [zip] [tar.gz] [tar.xz]ToadicusTools got updated with VOID's recent update, and I believe I inadvertently broke API-compatibility with the current version of certain modules in TweakableEverything. This version should fix it; please let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 28, 2014 Author Share Posted December 28, 2014 TweakableEverything has been updated to version 1.7! This version brings not one or three but two new modules: TweakableParachutes and TweakableSAS! These modules allow the configuration of parachute deployment times and upgrades to SAS levels, respectively. TweakableSAS only makes sense and therefore only operates in career mode, and restricts your upgrades to probe SAS levels unlocked by your tech progress.CHANGELOG:v.1.7 [2014-12-27]* New module! TweakableParachutes allows configuration of parachute deployment times.* New module! TweakableSAS allows upgrading of 'old' probe cores to use newer autopilot programming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlonic Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 ... upgrades to probe SAS levels unlocked by your tech progress.Oh thank you soooo much for this "probe software patch", I really wished this in stock 0.90, let the probe design rules over the tech again Yay ! ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudgetHedgehog Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 So, once we've unlocked higher level probes and not before, we can then use lower level level ones but upgrade them to the higher level ones? That sounds.. pretty neat, actually. Will be fun to see it in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toadicus Posted December 28, 2014 Author Share Posted December 28, 2014 So, once we've unlocked higher level probes and not before, we can then use lower level level ones but upgrade them to the higher level ones? That sounds.. pretty neat, actually. Will be fun to see it in practice.Correct; so for example once you research the HECS core, you can upgrade the OKTO core to Level 1. The only core not helped by this is the Stayputnik, because it completely lacks a ModuleSAS to upgrade, solidifying our longstanding suspicions that it sucks and is useless.Oh thank you soooo much for this "probe software patch", I really wished this in stock 0.90, let the probe design rules over the tech again Yay ! ^^Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superfluous J Posted December 28, 2014 Share Posted December 28, 2014 And in a swoop you instantly fix everything everybody (else seems to) hate(s) about Stayputnik and OKTO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts