[1.4.1] Kerbal Construction Time 1.4.0.69 (2018-03-24) - Unrapid Planned Assembly

[undercoveryankee]

Quick question, and I'm sorry if its been asked/answered elsewhere, but I just started using the MKS/OKS and Extra-planetary Launchpad combination, and I haven't gotten far enough to learn how EPL works, is it compatible with KCT? I suppose I mean, does KCT govern the construction of craft made with EPL?

They ignore each other. EPL uses the its own build-time calculations for off-world builds, based on the facilities at the base and the stats of the kerbals there, whether you have KCT installed or not. EPL with a good facility is faster than KCT's defaults; I think that makes sense, because if you're making RocketParts on site you've already waited for parts to be produced, and if you're shipping RocketParts you've already benefited from Kerbin-side suppliers there.

[UnanimousCoward]

Quick question, and I'm sorry if its been asked/answered elsewhere, but I just started using the MKS/OKS and Extra-planetary Launchpad combination, and I haven't gotten far enough to learn how EPL works, is it compatible with KCT? I suppose I mean, does KCT govern the construction of craft made with EPL?

I came across an MM config buried in the depths of the Extraplanetary Launchpads thread which aims to bring EL build times in line with KCT build times:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59545-0-90-Extraplanetary-Launchpads-v5-0-1?p=1506649&viewfull=1#post1506649

Haven't got far enough in my career game to test it out yet, though.

[magico13]

I came across an MM config buried in the depths of the Extraplanetary Launchpads thread which aims to bring EL build times in line with KCT build times:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59545-0-90-Extraplanetary-Launchpads-v5-0-1?p=1506649&viewfull=1#post1506649

Haven't got far enough in my career game to test it out yet, though.

Note that there was a recent change in the naming of the primary .dll for KCT from "Kerbal_Construction_Time" to "KerbalConstructionTime", so you'd have to update the MM config accordingly.

[vardicd]

I have just discovered, if your building a craft and make edits to it, and your edits exceed the limits of the facility level you are constructing from, and you don't notice before you click save edits, it erases the craft completely, and you lose all construction progress.

[UnanimousCoward]

Note that there was a recent change in the naming of the primary .dll for KCT from "Kerbal_Construction_Time" to "KerbalConstructionTime", so you'd have to update the MM config accordingly.

Cheers for the info...

[magico13]

I have just discovered, if your building a craft and make edits to it, and your edits exceed the limits of the facility level you are constructing from, and you don't notice before you click save edits, it erases the craft completely, and you lose all construction progress.

Unfortunately a few other people discovered that not too long ago as well. The good news is that it's already fixed in the latest dev version. The bad news is that it's still an issue in the release version.

[Errol]

I have just discovered, if your building a craft and make edits to it, and your edits exceed the limits of the facility level you are constructing from, and you don't notice before you click save edits, it erases the craft completely, and you lose all construction progress.

You know, if you don't upgrade the VAB all the way and try to build too many craft at once this might happen:

In which case, I would say a loss of all progress is warranted, and your fault.

=P

[Astraph]

For some reason the mod does not work in career mode for me... I have no setup screen when I first enter the KSC and the rockets are built instantly the moment I click "launch" in VAB/SPH. Curiously enough, research takes time to complete, so this part is working as designed... Sandbox works totally fine, was devastated to see my first rocket take 170 days to build

I'm running a 32-bit game (finally made it work) with a rather large pack of mods installed. Are there any compatibility issues I should be aware of?

[magico13]

For some reason the mod does not work in career mode for me... I have no setup screen when I first enter the KSC and the rockets are built instantly the moment I click "launch" in VAB/SPH. Curiously enough, research takes time to complete, so this part is working as designed... Sandbox works totally fine, was devastated to see my first rocket take 170 days to build

I'm running a 32-bit game (finally made it work) with a rather large pack of mods installed. Are there any compatibility issues I should be aware of?

In your sandbox game, don't forget to upgrade your build times (or turn them off in the settings)

As for career mode, that's pretty strange. I'm probably going to need to see your output_log.txt file to figure anything out (if you love me you'll turn on the KCT debug mesages in KCT's settings window first). I don't know of any incompatibilities, per se, but I know that Kerbanomics has an issue that breaks KCT (and several other mods) when it goes wrong.

[Astraph]

Actually the game crashed upon entering the VAB at one point; all internal textures did not load, causing the game to crash, well... Instantly. This first happened with Outer Planets Mod and seemed to disappear after I removed it... But well. Here's the output log.

http://www.filedropper.com/outputlog_4

If nothing else helps, I can always make a clean reinstall and then spend that hour or so for ATM to do its job...

[magico13]

Well, I think I found the problem. It's an old issue that I thought was fixed by the developer disappearing and no longer updating their mod, but alas, Tarsier Space Tech is the cause.

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at TarsierSpaceTech.TSTProgressTracker.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ScenarioModule.Load (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ScenarioRunner.AddModule (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ProtoScenarioModule.Load (.ScenarioRunner host) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ScenarioRunner+	.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

Edit: Incidentally, it's in the same vein as the issue that breaks KCT caused by Kerbanomics. In both cases, the OnLoad encounters an error and stops processing ANY of the remaining OnLoads in any other mods, which breaks any mods that need to read data from the save file. Unfortunately, I don't know of any way to protect KCT from that, but I might be able to find a way.

Edited January 21, 2015 by magico13

[VladP53]

Hi magico13,

Your plugin is really rocks. Now there no chance to complete first ten missions in one day and it's pretty good.

So far i have one feature request in mind:

Separate vessel construction by different stages (based on separators) and build stages in parallel.

This will significantly reduce construction time for huge rockets with many stages and side-boosters.

Also editing one stage could not affect building of others.

Also with new "change root" (0.90) functionality, it would be possible to assemble launch vehicle aside payload; so you can schedule many launch vehicles to build for future flights.

[magico13]

If I'm understanding what you're suggesting properly, then why don't you unlock a second build rate and build your launcher/payload separately, then scrap one of them (for instance, the payload), edit the other (launcher), and then add those parts to it (so add the payload to the launcher). Totally doable with the current system, it just requires some planning.

Also, you can then build a bunch of standardized launchers, store them, then just build payloads as necessary and edit the launchers onto them (or scrap a launcher before building the payload and use the inventory parts to build the whole thing at once).

Let me know if you need any help with it, and watch that you don't accidentally go over the launchpad/VAB limits in edit mode since there's a bug that will cause you to lose everything if you try to build it.

[NihilRex]

The recovered parts piece of this makes standardizing boosters so much more efficient. Even without your scrapping method.

[M251Speed]

I think what was requested would be a way to put a subassembly into the build list. I think the best way to implement would be some kind of check to see if a subassembly(or at least the parts) is present when the player goes to "integrate" the payload and booster. There might need to be a processing delay while the booster is prepped to accept the payload so that the player can't spam the system and get ridiculously short build/integration times. If you couldn't tell, I've mulled over something like this because it is a feature that I myself have been wishing for. I do however trust whatever judgment you have magico, and I sincerely thank you for your hard work on this mod, it's one of my must-haves.

[magico13]

Many times the subject of treating subassemblies separately has come up, but it's never been worth the complete rewrite needed, especially since it would end up working virtually identical to the current system. In fact, it would penalize you guys more than the current system since the current system doesn't care about the connections between parts.

For any examples I'm going to assume the subassembly is a launcher, but it would work identically for a payload.

If you want to mass produce subassemblies, you are more than welcome to! Load up the editor, go to the subassembly tab, click the one you want to build and it will put it in the editor (no need to switch around root parts). Then build as many as you want. When they're done, scrap them for parts (thus adding them to the inventory). Now, when you build new ships use that subassembly and it'll pull those parts out of the inventory. The jump in time will likely be small compared to that of the pure payload, especially if the payload isn't using any parts from the inventory.

Alternatively, if you've already built the payload as well, then scrap a subassembly, edit the payload using the edit function, then add the subassembly to the payload in the editor (making sure to pull new parts from the inventory), and build that. It'll take less time than scrapping both (but make sure you "edit" the more expensive one and attach the cheaper one).

Not to sound like a jerk, but these features have existed for many, many months. If I treat subassemblies differently then the part inventory will have to care about connections, which means a lot more work for less freedom and otherwise identical performance. KCT won't be getting any sort of feature like this, but whose to say it won't end up in KCT2 some day (where undoubtedly people will ask for a less restrictive system )

Edit: Also, the more standardized you make things the more you reuse identical parts, meaning each subsequent build gets shorter (per the part tracker after 4 builds the time to build a part is half the original time, 16 builds makes it a quarter. The part inventory essentially adds 100 free builds)

Edited January 23, 2015 by magico13

[Red3Tango]

[bug Report]

v1.1.2

When running a simulation, the timer runs out and a small box appears and all control of the game is lost.

The output_log.txt file is spammed with this:

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at KerbalConstructionTime.KCT_GUI.DrawSimulationCompleteFlight (Int32 windowID) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUILayout+LayoutedWindow.DoWindow (Int32 windowID) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

  at UnityEngine.GUI.CallWindowDelegate (UnityEngine.WindowFunction func, Int32 id, UnityEngine.GUISkin _skin, Int32 forceRect, Single width, Single height, UnityEngine.GUIStyle style) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

(Filename:  Line: -1)

Steps I have used to re-create this:

1) with a fresh install of KSP, installed KCT, removed NASA pack (so only KCT and Squad are in the GameData folder)

2) select a root part, capsule, probe, etc

3) simulate in orbit around Kerbin (80km)

4) warp till default timer (of 15 min) runs out

Edited January 23, 2015 by Red3Tango

[magico13]

It'll happen with any time warp, but it should be specific to Sandbox (no Funding instance available). I've got it fixed in the development builds already

[Red3Tango]

Yup I just checked that out too, effects Sandbox and Science mode (like you said no funding).

Thought I was going crazy because I tested in new Career, then when I went back into Sandbox it worked fine

Thanks for the quick reply though! Also good to know it doesn't effect Career.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Red3Tango

[magico13]

Yeah, if you load up a career save first then it should work for any save for the rest of the session. It's also fixed in any development build since #50 (which apparently was Dec 31st, I really need to get that update out)

[ziondragon]

I'm having the same issue as Astraph: When I first enter career mode the KCT prompt doesnt not show up and there is no construction time for the ships (they are built as soon as I hit launch in the VAB) here is my output log: http://www.filedropper.com/filemanager/public.php?service=files&t=b692bcb5bd9605a90c0b3d39db73541d

I have a bunch of mods installed and everything is 0.90

[CaelReader]

Is there a way to refuel a plane landed at the runway, rather than having to rebuild it each time?

[ziondragon]

I think I found the conflict, its with a mod called Kerbinside that adds bases to Kerbin, when I deleted that the mod seems to work

[magico13]

Is there a way to refuel a plane landed at the runway, rather than having to rebuild it each time?

This comes up a lot. The short answer is "I'm working on it". The long answer is "Check the forum threads for my previous responses". Something similar should be in the next release if I get it working correctly.

I think I found the conflict, its with a mod called Kerbinside that adds bases to Kerbin, when I deleted that the mod seems to work

I was just about to suggest that. It's the only thing that was looking like it had any issues prior to the game loading. It might be worthwhile to send the log over to them.

[seronis]

I have a few related requests:

1. if you have recovered parts in inventory you can have the cost of construction reduced by the value of that part

2. have a user configurable option for what percentage of the value of the part is actually credited (maybe you want 100% credit, maybe you only want 50% credit for part reuse)

3. have a user configurable option for recovery value of parts that are officially DESTROYED

Reason I want these options is so that I can configure easy/hard games that gradually allow me to manage part purchases as permanant costs. Once i buy a nose cone i wont get the money back for it, but i will be able to keep reusing that specific nosecone over and over until i do something kerbalish like crash it into the sun. Id thus like to be able to set the recovery price for items low (or nothing) but be able to sell destroyed pieces as scrap metal.