[1.0.5 - Alpha 6] Dang It! (12 september 2015)

[Maars]

G'day marty g,

I started using the mod 'recreationally' and never paid much attention to the mtbf and the other jazz. Basically you could call me a dang it action noob, lovin the drama of an engine failing during landing or having to fly a crippled atmospheric plane back to an airstrip.

Anyways, i play the mod and you dont yet. Yet still you were able to answer my query in an intelligent, concise way. I take my hat off to you sir and say thank you kindly.

The rcs engines i use on the probes are the little radial monopropellant engines, not any rcs thrusters. This can get fun as my lil green dudes now have to design a new probe, start paying attention to the mtbf and actually start thinking a little.

Thanks again for the altruistic reply!

Btw i see you launch from kerbourne, nice to see a fellow hometowner

Edited February 12, 2015 by Maars

[Spacepetscompany]

So what's the latest?

[Coffeeman]

I've been slowly working towards 0.6 . It will include official support for MCE, and support for Procedural Parts. Additionally, except a few more immersion tweaks and a new wheel FailureModule.

[mfkdso]

Is there a way to disable the red tint? Whenever I mute the alarm, it keeps the tint.

[Coffeeman]

Is there a way to disable the red tint? Whenever I mute the alarm, it keeps the tint.

You can disable tint globally in the settings menu in the space center.

EDIT: Per part? Not at the moment. Might add in the future.

[RoverDude]

@Coffeeman - quick query for you!

SpareParts is a CRP resource. We're currently converting all of CRP to the standard of 1L units (vs 5L).

The new (proposed) CRP spec for this is:

RESOURCE_DEFINITION

{

name = SpareParts

density = 0.00378

flowMode = NO_FLOW

transfer = NONE

isTweakable = true

unitCost = 12.6

}

Timetable is 1.0 since most of us have to completely refactor our mods anyway. Taniwha will also be moving EL over to 1L units, so this would be the last one in the production chain not in the new measurement standard (other than stock, which we can't change anyay).

Can you please confirm whether or not you are ok with this change? Trying to sort all of this out no later than the 22nd.

Thanks!

[Ippo]

...

Well, I'm not Coffeeman, but it should be ok as far as I know

[RoverDude]

Hey Ippo

And awesome - thanks!

[Esoteric1]

In light of the Recent SLS Booster tests, Omar Biyrouti on Facebook was recreating it, and i had a thought. Would it be possible with this mod to make the surface tests actually useful? As in " Perform stress test on mk1 capsule to increase crash tolerance from 6.0m/s to 7.0m/s." Or "Run test on fully loaded solid fuel booster to reduce chance of breakage." Would this be possible with your mod?

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

I found this little mod called Kerbal Inventory System (on Curse, it doesn't have a forum page yet). Since that mod adds tools and inventory for Kerbals, it would be very compatible with this mod, so I'd suggest looking into it, or at least keeping it in the back of your mind.

[Ippo]

In light of the Recent SLS Booster tests, Omar Biyrouti on Facebook was recreating it, and i had a thought. Would it be possible with this mod to make the surface tests actually useful? As in " Perform stress test on mk1 capsule to increase crash tolerance from 6.0m/s to 7.0m/s." Or "Run test on fully loaded solid fuel booster to reduce chance of breakage." Would this be possible with your mod?

It's not currently possible with the framework we have. Maybe one day.

I found this little mod called Kerbal Inventory System (on Curse, it doesn't have a forum page yet). Since that mod adds tools and inventory for Kerbals, it would be very compatible with this mod, so I'd suggest looking into it, or at least keeping it in the back of your mind.

Thanks for reminding me In truth, Daishi and I were thinking about integrating tools with KIS (meaning that you'd also need to pick up the correct tool, like a wrench). Then we got a real life to the knee...

[WuphonsReach]

I found this little mod called Kerbal Inventory System (on Curse, it doesn't have a forum page yet). Since that mod adds tools and inventory for Kerbals, it would be very compatible with this mod, so I'd suggest looking into it, or at least keeping it in the back of your mind.

You mean this link to KIS (Kerbal Inventory System)?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/113111-0-90-Kerbal-Inventory-System-%28KIS%29-1-0-0

I've been avoiding this mod because of the issue with being able to carry around SpareParts. Maybe KIS helps fix the issue.

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

You mean this link to KIS (Kerbal Inventory System)?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/113111-0-90-Kerbal-Inventory-System-%28KIS%29-1-0-0

I've been avoiding this mod because of the issue with being able to carry around SpareParts. Maybe KIS helps fix the issue.

I couldn't find it when I looked for the mod yesterday! I suspect the forum page just got made.

This mod, however great, does need a little work. My humble suggestion is to make KIS a dependency, and then use spareparts through that. It would, however, require the user to put them in the pod's inventory, but that adds to the challenge.

As for me personally, my biggest issue with this mod is the need to train engineers for it. Kerbals level up through the stock game. I'd very much suggest using that, or at least making it an option.

Also, if there is a way to prompt failures (a test button in the mod's toolbar or if it can be done, an option in the Alt+F12 menu), it would be a great way to test the mod, and to enjoy playing with it in sandbox mode.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Z3R0_0NL1N3

[cantab]

From a quick look at KIS, I'd say I'd rather not see Dang It! depend on it. It seems like a lot of complexity which means potential bugs, and a lot of extra capability which can mean an "easier" game.

[Ippo]

From a quick look at KIS, I'd say I'd rather not see Dang It! depend on it. It seems like a lot of complexity which means potential bugs, and a lot of extra capability which can mean an "easier" game.

Don't worry guys, there's not a chance in hell I'm working on Dang It! any sooner than may or even june, by that time who knows what mods are out there

[Coffeeman]

@All: Sorry I've dissappeared, school snuck up on me.

@RoverDude: Sounds good to me. I'm not the clearest on how resources work. Should I be changing this for the next version, or wait for 1.0? Do I need to update the repair costs?

@Z3R0_0NL1N3: I love the idea of KIS, and I would love to see this long-term, but for now I'll stick with @Ippo on the fact that we probably shouldn't set that up as a dependency at the moment. I would be open to abstracting the take SpareParts mechanics enough to allow either (wouldn't want to end up like Enterprise FizzBuzz, so it's something I want to hear from you guys about.)

@Esoteric1: I think this is a great idea! I've added it to the issue tracker.

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

@Z3R0_0NL1N3: I love the idea of KIS, and I would love to see this long-term, but for now I'll stick with @Ippo on the fact that we probably shouldn't set that up as a dependency at the moment. I would be open to abstracting the take SpareParts mechanics enough to allow either (wouldn't want to end up like Enterprise FizzBuzz, so it's something I want to hear from you guys about.)

Okay, maybe not a dependency, but it should at least be optional to use KIS. But I will say again that I dislike the leveling system for Kerbals. That should also be on optional addition. I think, as another option/idea, the Kerbals should level up using the stock system, and only the Engineers should be able to use SpareParts to fix failures.

[RoverDude]

@Coffeeman/Ippo - new CRP launches with 1.0

Basically they go from 5L to 1L units. That's about it

[Coffeeman]

Okay, maybe not a dependency, but it should at least be optional to use KIS. But I will say again that I dislike the leveling system for Kerbals. That should also be on optional addition. I think, as another option/idea, the Kerbals should level up using the stock system, and only the Engineers should be able to use SpareParts to fix failures.

@Z3R0_0NL1N3: I wholly agree. Implementing the Engineer restriction (not replacing the traits system, but perhaps only allowing engineers to train) is immediately applicable. @Ippo what do you think about this? I'm also in the boat with you that KIS is great.

- - - Updated - - -

...

Sounds good! I'm still wondering, there isn't anything I need to change for this, is there?

Edited March 17, 2015 by Coffeeman

[Ippo]

My implementation of the leveling system predates the stock one. After that I never got around to remove it, that's it.

[Coffeeman]

My implementation of the leveling system predates the stock one. After that I never got around to remove it, that's it.

Personally, I like the limitations of having to train Kerbals for SPECIFIC repairs, but perhaps a little spiffing of the UI is in order. What I was suggesting at this point is that maybe we should limit training of the mechanic and engineer traits to Kerbals defined as engineers.

[cantab]

A thought I had is to map Mechanic > Engineer and Electrician > Scientist, or otherwise make some repairs require a scientist rather than putting it all on the engineer. Scientists aren't much use in the stock game, so giving them some use in Dang It! would help.

Oh, and another request: Can it be possible to remove the glow from a failed part? I don't want to turn glow off outright because it helps me identify which part has failed, but often my response is to ignore the fault and then I have a red glowing part on all my screenshots.

Edited March 17, 2015 by cantab

[Coffeeman]

A thought I had is to map Mechanic > Engineer and Electrician > Scientist, or otherwise make some repairs require a scientist rather than putting it all on the engineer. Scientists aren't much use in the stock game, so giving them some use in Dang It! would help.

I never thought about this. That's a very good idea.

It's something that we would want to talk to users about. My other concern is that the current trait system (Ippo's) has you pay to level up, and that's something where if we switched to the stock system, you would have to go to Joel to repair SAS systems... :/

[cantab]

Just to throw out some possibilities:

Stock levels and stock levelling only. Means what you describe, needing to train kerbals by flight to fix stuff.

Stock levels with paid Dang It training. From a DI point of view acts like at present, but it messes with the stock game a bit, you could get a highly-trained engineer without them leaving Kerbin.

Dang It levels with paid training. Closest to existing DI behaviour I think, the main change being tying into the stock jobs.

Dang It levels with paid training *and* a cap from the stock levels. This could be interesting, the toughest of both worlds, to fully train a Kerbal in DI requires levelling them up in stock and paying them in DI. An advantage could be that you could reasonably make the stock level needs quite low, eg Level 2 in stock is enough to get max level in DI.

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

Personally, what makes the most sense to me is having two options. I know some people will like having to train their engineers, but for me, that feels counter to the stock feel of the game. So, like with many mods, there can be a "stockalike" version using the stock level. (I personally like to think that by the flight, the engineers gained engineering training, even if it is just how to operate in zero gee.) I am aware of how using flights to level engineers may seem problematic, so here is where the augmented mode comes in. This would use the mod's leveling system in some way--or yet more options--like what @cantab said above.

However you chose to implement it, I feel that there should be a stockalike mode. For me personally, I often forget to do anything much with my kerbals, and having to remember to train them seems more cumbersome.