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

[Hyomoto]

I play my KSP with nearly 80 mods

Every time I read something like this I wonder, what mods? I have twenty myself, but eighty? That sounds like every mod possible you are using.

[rosenkranz]

Have you made sure the mouse cursor isn't hovering over any of the KCT windows? Unfortunately there's a bug with stock KSP (since 0.24) that causes time to stop advancing when the KSC locks are activated (which shouldn't be related at all and I'm very frustrated about it). I have to enable those locks because of another bug in 0.24 that causes windows to get clicked through to the buildings behind them. I'm very unhappy with the GUI changes Squad made in 0.24 and then subsequently ignored my bug report about, only to later realize were a big issue and (possibly) haven't realized that they weren't issues prior to 0.24.

I'm not sure that is actually a bug. Hovering over the time warp at the bottom of the screen gets the same effect and is actually quite helpful at keep you from over warping. Click the high warp (last or next to last arrow) and you see it start but time doesn't actually pass until you hover off it and stop instantly as soon as you hover back over it so as to give you more fine control over long warps.

I use this all the time to warp to just after sun rise for launch (since i don't like launching at night if i don't have to).

[magico13]

Don't know if you saw this the first time I posted but this bug is still in the new DLL:

I saw it and appear to have forgotten about it. I'll take a look at that tonight and see if I can fix it. Is the build time estimate you quote the one in the editor after reverting the flight? Might be as simple as manually calling an update of that when the editor loads but after the persistence is loaded.

[Nori]

Every time I read something like this I wonder, what mods? I have twenty myself, but eighty? That sounds like every mod possible you are using.

heh.. I have close to 80 as well and it most certainly isn't all mods. I'm missing a lot of bigger ones and quite a few smaller ones. Some mods I use are tiny and very specialized however, like enhanced navball or editor extensions.

[severedsolo]

I saw it and appear to have forgotten about it. I'll take a look at that tonight and see if I can fix it. Is the build time estimate you quote the one in the editor after reverting the flight? Might be as simple as manually calling an update of that when the editor loads but after the persistence is loaded.

Yes thats the one, when you click the "revert to editor" button it shows up there.

[rosenkranz]

Every time I read something like this I wonder, what mods? I have twenty myself, but eighty? That sounds like every mod possible you are using.

I've got 48 here. But most are backgournd, like FAR, DRE, KCT, ect. I've only got 3 mods that actually add parts.

[magico13]

What's this? A wild 0.25 has appeared!

Magico13 used update. It's super effective!

Enemy 0.25 has been defeated!

I figured the betas were stable enough, which undoubtedly means that something will go horribly wrong now. Here's an excerpt from the changelog:

v1.0.3.0 (10/17/14)

- Update for KSP 0.25

- Added ability to simulate at any time (currently requires the exact UT)

- Made Build List viewable in the editor

- Added confirmation dialog when scrapping vessels

- Bug fix to ensure effectiveCosts can't be less than 0

- Unified GUI appearance throughout scenes

- Workaround for starting in air when launching from Tracking Station

- Added basic Kerbal Alarm Clock support. If enabled, alarms will be automatically made for the next thing that is set to complete. Updates when the Build List is open

- Fixed some bugs with tech nodes, some of which may have been present before 0.25

- Halved reconditoning times by default (50 tons instead of 25) and made simulations much less expensive

Download is in the usual places. I removed the beta link for the time being (it will eventually be located in the development thread, to keep this one tidy). When I eventually get around to doing some of the changes on simulations I will request your testing aid. For now, go wild!

[DivisionByZero]

Yeah! Thanks for this!

[theonegalen]

Huzzah! That little extra bit of realism.

I hope you're looking forward towards 0.90.0 and how KCT could interface with the announced upgradable buildings.

But I also hope that you take some time away from modding once you get a stable release and just play the game for a while. I'd rather you not get burned out just on our account.

[tygoo7]

Is it possible to add a time that it takes to repair buildings? Right now it's just instant in stock and I don't think that is realistic. Great mod btw!

[FunkyUncle]

Thanks for the work on getting it ready for .25. Love the mod...

[magico13]

Umm, so I just looked at the KerbalStuff stats for the first time since the 0.25 release and I'm not sure if this is a bug in kerbalstuff or not...

If that's real, then holy f***! Welcome to all the new people!

If not, then aww But still, KCT has done better than I ever expected with its modest userbase of several hundred to a thousand. I used to get excited when it hit 200 or 300 on a download in the pre-release days

Edit: Just checked the KerbalStuff dev thread and it looks like it's a bug, darn

Edited October 19, 2014 by magico13

[Nori]

Umm, so I just looked at the KerbalStuff stats for the first time since the 0.25 release and I'm not sure if this is a bug in kerbalstuff or not...

http://i.imgur.com/Y8lC77d.png

If that's real, then holy f***! Welcome to all the new people!

If not, then aww But still, KCT has done better than I ever expected with its modest userbase of several hundred to a thousand. I used to get excited when it hit 200 or 300 on a download in the pre-release days

Edit: Just checked the KerbalStuff dev thread and it looks like it's a bug, darn

Well if you are interested in how I ended up using your mod it went something like this.

Hmm, Kerbal Construction Time? What's that? Lets see takes time to construct rockets? Uh no thanks. Sounds meh.

But then I came back later and actually read the whole thread; tried it out and realized how amazingly well designed this mod is. When I first ran across it I thought it was a simple rockets take time to build. But it is so much more than that.

Thank you for making this and continuing to update it.

[Gfurst]

If that's real, then holy f***! Welcome to all the new people!

Well thank you, I feel most welcome indeed.

Sorry that is actually a bug, but as far as I'm concerned, this is a must have feature that should have been included in stock.

Keep up the good work and do call for help when needed.

[severedsolo]

I'm surprised you didn't get more traffic in the early days. Scott Manley mentions you in one of the early episodes of Interstellar Quest (thats how I found you). I guess people were put off by the WIP tag (although I don't know why, it worked amazingly.)

In other news... not really sure if this is a bug, or me "breaking" the simulation. While simulating, I tried to launch a shuttle type craft. Now, by design it only had enough fuel to get suborbital. The idea was, it releases the payload, the payload circularises itself and the shuttle comes back to Kerbin.

Anyway, long story short I simulated this. The launch and separation went fine, switched to the payload once undocked, then circularised. As a result of this, it went outside the 2.5km physics range. I then tried to switch back to the main craft. Boom. The shuttle exploded, and the log said that it had crashed into Kerbin. (at 75km I might add).

To be fair, I'm not exactly sure that simulations should allow craft switching, but was wondering if this was by design (ie the "computer" simulating couldn't handle it) or a bug. No logs to hand right now, but if you want some give me a shout it's easily reproducable.

Edited October 20, 2014 by severedsolo

[magico13]

@severedsolo

That's definitely not intended behavior (but would be a somewhat entertaining method of handling things). If it happens again, send me the logs. If it doesn't then it was probably just some freak accident. Originally you couldn't do vessel switching at all, but I enabled it because otherwise you couldn't switch from EVA'd kerbals or between vessels that you're trying to dock. Or when you drop a payload you'd either control the payload or the main ship, but couldn't switch to the other one. In the end, convenience won out over "realism" or whatever that would be considered (reduced functionality for gameplay purposes?).

Do you happen to remember which video he mentions this in? I've watched all of IQ (I think... might have missed one or two) and don't remember it being mentioned. It may have been before I had taken over for Ekku Zakku (so, around January/February) in which case I likely wouldn't have been paying too close of attention.

Someone should get Scott Manley to use this in a future video/series We do have at least one KSP-TV streamer who regularly uses KCT (OverloadUT. Gonna shamelessly plug his videos because I enjoy them a lot. He does streams on Monday nights at 10 EST. Tell him I sent you ) and I've seen several other modders in this thread/the dev thread who have at least tried it out.

[severedsolo]

As I said it is reproducable, I've done it a few times (the shuttle took alot of work). It's a bit late here but I'll post the log tomorrow if I get time. It may even be mod conflict, I'll have to experiment a little bit. I kind of liked it, I thought it was quite realistic, I felt i was cheating a little bit trying to switch anyway.

IQ - I believe it was Episode 11. Ekku Zakku mentions it on the orignal thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59704-WIP-*EXPIRED-THREAD*-Kerbal-Construction-Time-see-new-thread-for-latest-version?p=813060&viewfull=1#post813060 (I kind of came through the long way the first time, as I googled "Scott manley construction mod" or something to that effect.

He doesn't mention it by name, but does mention there is a mod that makes building take time.

Edited October 20, 2014 by severedsolo

[Hyomoto]

I have a question which I'll eventually find out the answer too, but as far as the SPH goes, it seems like the craft you land with should be able to be placed back into the SPH Storage. I really shouldn't have to reassemble that craft, it would definitely make reusable craft even more beneficial because they could have a quick turnaround. Maybe something like having a craft automatically be rebuilt when it is recovered. It makes sense to do turnaround maintenance and refueling, but that usually takes only a few hours on a slow day.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Hyomoto

[magico13]

I have a question which I'll eventually find out the answer too, but as far as the SPH goes, it seems like the craft you land with should be able to be placed back into the SPH Storage. I really shouldn't have to reassemble that craft, it would definitely make reusable craft even more beneficial because they could have a quick turnaround. Maybe something like having a craft automatically be rebuilt when it is recovered. It makes sense to do turnaround maintenance and refueling, but that usually takes only a few hours on a slow day.

Semi-implemented as-is because everything will get recovered meaning the total time for a "new" ship is substantially reduced (compared to brand new, never before used parts its 1/10 of the time, so a 4 kerbal day build becomes a 2.4 hour build [<1/2 a kerbal day]). I (eventually) plan on adding the ability to just refuel and relaunch a vessel without waiting times (or severely reduced wait times) but use the ship as-is (so no new parts can be added, all damage is kept). It's just not a high priority and since I don't have loads of time anymore it'll be a while.

Current priority list:

1) Vessel rollout time instead of reconditioning

2) Max reconditioning time

3) Revamped simulations

4ish) Contracts (regarding simulations and other things, like build a vessel worth X BP and launch it)

5ish) Improved recovery mechanics

And then somewhere mixed in is support for the ScrapYard, which is not currently updated to 0.25 and the KCT version for it doesn't work yet. That'll need a good chunk of time that I don't want to actually spend (especially because it doesn't add a whole lot in terms of new features to KCT and requires a major rewrite). Revamped simulations will probably take the same amount of time, has a big end-user effect, and is more interesting so there's a good chance I might work on that first.

[magico13]

I don't generally double post, but I figured this question would be better served in its own post (maybe even its own thread)...

Would anyone be interested in a KCT Lite version? Without upgrades (or likely simulations or the inventory/part tracking system) basically just what KCT was like in the early days (Pre-PreRelease 3) where you click the launch button, the vessel is placed on the pad, and you can't control it until the timer's up.

I'd basically have to rewrite it (though I think I still have the source from back then, so maybe not) but it's so simple in comparison that it wouldn't be that difficult to do. Most people in this thread probably like the full KCT version, but I can see how it might be a bit too complicated if you just want a simple feature.

KCT Lite would be the NEAR to the FAR that is KCT, serving as an entry level, no fuss version that adds the core features without the extra complicated GUIs and all that.

The reason I bring this up is this post (trimmed a bit):

... but with the whole inventory system/start construction system and upgrades system, it's a little too complex for me, when I just want to get the rocket out the door and launch it as soon as I press the button labeled "Launch".A large part of the game for me is just building stuff and launching it fly, I don't want to have to click 10 buttons to see it fly, I don't want to add it to a queue of "waiting to be built", I want to hit launch, then see it on the launchpad.

[Hyomoto]

For me? No.

The way I thought KSP would end up working was you would buy parts. You remember the part counter from pre-0.24 right? It used to say 999 because you didn't have to pay to unlock them or anything. I figured you'd queue up parts you wanted to build and have them available. That would mean that the parts you recovered would be worth more because you wouldn't need to pay to have them manufactured. So really, what you built here is pretty close to how I thought the game would work. Since 0.26 I guess is supposed to have Kerbals that progress in experience, it wouldn't surprise me to see the ability to upgrade the KSC as well (or did they mention that and I forgot?). So no, I think what you built is pretty good. The upgrades are little straightforwards and basic, but it's very functional and integrates surprisingly well into the game.

[Noio]

Would anyone be interested in a KCT Lite version...where you click the launch button, the vessel is placed on the pad, and you can't control it until the timer's up.

Not me. To my mind, the build pipeline and inventory management is core to the whole experience.

...A large part of the game for me is just building stuff and launching it fly...I want to hit launch, then see it on the launchpad.

I'm not sure KCT can provide much that's meaningful to this kind of player. If your ideal flow is 'click build and go' why use a construction-time mod? This seems like a fundamental conflict, and it confuses me why such a player would opt in to KCT. Even I have days where I just want to click and go, but I have a different save for that, with KCT off.

[magico13]

I'm not sure KCT can provide much that's meaningful to this kind of player. If your ideal flow is 'click build and go' why use a construction-time mod? This seems like a fundamental conflict, and it confuses me why such a player would opt in to KCT. Even I have days where I just want to click and go, but I have a different save for that, with KCT off.

The context of the conversation was that contracts in KSP have ridiculously long time limits and that KCT provides a purpose for time. It seems to me that they want a progression of time, but want the process to be extremely simple/seamless without a bunch of fumbling around with GUIs, which I can respect.

KCT Lite would still let you go manage other missions, but the ship would be placed right on the pad and would be uncontrollable. If you wanted to just click launch, see the ship on the pad, and launch with some time passing, there'd be a button to do so. If you wanted to put it on the pad to build and then go manage your Duna colony until it's complete, you could do that too.

It would still provide a value to time (and prevent spam of rescue missions and require planning) but in a simpler, more integrated into vanilla KSP form.

[Noio]

I think I see where you're going, but I suspect that people would find it frustrating to have unusable rockets locking up the launchpad.

[magico13]

I think I see where you're going, but I suspect that people would find it frustrating to have unusable rockets locking up the launchpad.

And that's when we sell them the idea of using full KCT for the build list Those people would likely enjoy full KCT more, since that implies more advanced planning requirements.

Part of the idea is to get people to try out what construction times can really do to your gameplay experience, without the initial learning curve that full KCT requires (which I am led to believe can be a bit confusing/intimidating at first for some people. I am the absolute worst person to ask about it). If they like it and want more capabilities then they can move up to full KCT, if not then they haven't spent a bunch of time trying to figure out a mod that they don't want to actually use. And there may be some people who just want a simple, no nonsense, basic version.

For instance, I prefer playing with NEAR rather than FAR because I don't want to worry about aerodynamic failures or mach effects but can't stand stock aerodynamics. I still get better aerodynamics but dumbed down for gameplay. It feels somewhat more natural/integrated to me.