[1.10.1+] Contract Configurator [v1.30.5] [2020-10-05]

[nightingale]

Just now, NathanKell said:

@nightingale uh...so Le Station is actually the capsule, and the station (still in orbit) is named something different?

Sorry, I used a bad example, it was from when the two vessels were still docked in that particular contract, which makes it extra confusing.  If I'd taken the screenshot at the proper time, it would've said "Le Capsule".

That's actually a whole other discussion.  By default, if a tracked vessel loses parts (decouple, undock, "oops") or gains parts (dock, grapple) it will continue to be tracked as the same vessel (even if it changes name due to being "taken over" by another vessel ID on undock).  Since the tracking actually goes one level lower than vessel ID and takes a hash of connected part IDs, it will remember which "section" of the super-vessel is the one being tracked.  Anyway, digressing - the point is that I think that is fine for the default behaviour, but is there a need to add some flags to change that behaviour?  Things like no longer tracking it if the vessel id changes, or possibly instead displaying the name that is stored away deep in a ModuleDockingPort somewhere.

[NathanKell]

@nightingale that makes sense, yes.

As to the original question, I would tend towards showing the vessel that meets the VPG. That's the thing that matters, after all...

[severedsolo]

1 hour ago, nightingale said:

So how should I make this work?  Try to force showing the active vessel?  Or show the vessel that meets the VesselParameterGroup.vessel condition?  If I do the latter I can add some sort of text (or note, but notes suck because they start minimized, and users won't look at them) to indicate the vessel tracked is not the current vessel?

Hmm, I think forcing the active vessel will create problems elsewhere.

The real problem there is that the parameters look like they are on the same heading, rather than being sub-headings (stock limitation I guess).

Why not make any parameters sitting under the VPG explicitly say the vessel they are looking for, so: "Le Station: At least 2 Kerbals" - that way it's clear what the player is looking for, and maybe the actual "Vessel" bit could be hidden?

 

[nightingale]

@NathanKell & @severedsolo - I decided to keep showing the tracked vessel, and when there is a vessel being track and it is not the active vessel, the text changes from "Vessel: X" to "Tracked Vessel: X".

@severedsolo - your suggestions has a couple problems.  First it's technically difficult.  Second, I don't know how that would look if there's a half-dozen child parameters that have the "Le Station" prefix.

[severedsolo]

39 minutes ago, nightingale said:

your suggestions has a couple problems.  First it's technically difficult.  Second, I don't know how that would look if there's a half-dozen child parameters that have the "Le Station" prefix.

Fair enough. I may add a note to my contracts, but I must admit people haven't really mentioned it. Now if I could get people to realise you can set a vessel type in flight, I'd be golden.

 

[chrisl]

13 hours ago, nightingale said:

@chrisl - good news and bad news.  Was able to figure out and fix the undock thing.  Is this on 1.1 yet, or are you guys still back on 1.0.5?  If it's the latter, I'll provide an unofficial back-port, because I'd really like another test on this one since undocking is nasty and different for claw vs. docking ports and also impacted by vessel setup.

Bad news is, I wasn't able to reproduce the rendezvous thing - that worked as expected for me.  Any more insight you can provide on that would be good, otherwise I may have to resort to giving you a hacked up DLL with extra debug (there isn't much in Rendezvous).

My game is still on 1.0.5 since I'm guessing we're still a few weeks from having RO and RP-0 released for 1.1  I'm just about primed to run another test with this contract but I'll wait for the "unofficial back-port".  That way I can test both parts again.

I don't have any ideas yet why the Rendezvous didn't seem to work correctly for me but when I run this next test, I'll pay close attention (plus the logs) so hopefully we'll see something. 

[code99]

Hey, ill be direct, this mod cuts my FPS down in half in KSC and on launchpad. 

 

From 130 fps constant im down to 60-70 when using this mod. Just to make sure, i tried the game with just this mod enabled and im having the fps issue. 

I have a beefy gaming rig and all my drivers are up to date. 

 

Im on KSP 1.1. 

[nightingale]

17 minutes ago, code99 said:

Hey, ill be direct, this mod cuts my FPS down in half in KSC and on launchpad. 

 

From 130 fps constant im down to 60-70 when using this mod. Just to make sure, i tried the game with just this mod enabled and im having the fps issue. 

I have a beefy gaming rig and all my drivers are up to date. 

 

Im on KSP 1.1. 

What contract packs do you have installed?  What's the performance look like if you get rid of all of them?  I'm suspecting it's all due to contract generation, is a nasty piece of work that is scheduled for a total re-write.  But before I write that off as the problem, need to be sure there isn't something else going on there.

[code99]

Im getting 120+ fps in vanilla KSP. As soon as i add Contract Configurator my fps gets cut in half. 

This is on a new fresh game. All i do really is click new game, career and the moment i get to KSC my fps drops to 60-70. Only mod enabled is Contract Configurator, nothing else.

[nightingale]

3 minutes ago, code99 said:

Im getting 120+ fps in vanilla KSP. As soon as i add Contract Configurator my fps gets cut in half. 

This is on a new fresh game. All i do really is click new game, career and the moment i get to KSC my fps drops to 60-70. Only mod enabled is Contract Configurator, nothing else.

There's a biome check thing that runs in the background to grind out some biome information when you first start a new game (you should see it working on the three planets with water biomes in the log).  If you wait for that to finish, what does the FPS go back up to?  I may need to tweak that to run "slower", or actually try to do that in a thread if that is what's causing it.

[code99]

I dont think its that but then again im no modder and might be wrong.

The moment i get to KSC when i start a new game my fps sticks at 9 frames for a few seconds, i assume its loading/checking something. When it finishes it goes to 120+ in vanilla and 60-70 with CC installed.

To be honest I havent waited more than a minute or two after it got past the initial 9 fps, atltho i dont think your biome check would last more than a minute ? 

 

EDIT: Actually now that i think of it, I am not 100% sure it sticks at 9 fps initially in a vanilla game ... i need to check that. 

Edited April 22, 2016 by code99

[nightingale]

1 minute ago, code99 said:

I dont think its that but then again im no modder and might be wrong.

The moment i get to KSC when i start a new game my fps sticks at 9 frames for a few seconds, i assume its loading/checking something. When it finishes it goes to 120+ in vanilla and 60-70 with CC installed.

To be honest I havent waited more than a minute or two after it got past the initial 9 fps, atltho i dont think your biome check would last more than a minute ? 

 

EDIT: Actually now that i think of it, I am not 100% sure it sticks at 9 fps initially in a vanilla game ... i need to check that. 

The biome check is expensive and runs in the background.  Yes it can easily last more than a minute.

[code99]

4 minutes ago, nightingale said:

The biome check is expensive and runs in the background.  Yes it can easily last more than a minute.

Ok, ill add CC in my game and let the game run for a bit, lets see what happens

EDIT: Ok, it seems to stabilize after a short bit. I think i rushed to the conclusion that there is something wrong with the mod. I'm actually investigating an issue im having with FPS as per this post: 

Sorry to have bothered you

Edited April 22, 2016 by code99

[Bombaatu]

I have the same issue as @code99 but in my case it didn't settle down after 5 minutes. WIthout CC I get 20-30 fps - not great but playable. Would be more without EVA/scatterer/SVE/etc. However, with CC it drops down to single digits and doesn't recover - only in career mode (as one would expect with a contract mod).

[nightingale]

2 hours ago, Bombaatu said:

I have the same issue as @code99 but in my case it didn't settle down after 5 minutes. WIthout CC I get 20-30 fps - not great but playable. Would be more without EVA/scatterer/SVE/etc. However, with CC it drops down to single digits and doesn't recover - only in career mode (as one would expect with a contract mod).

Log please.

[chrisl]

On ‎4‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 8:38 PM, nightingale said:

@chrisl - good news and bad news.  Was able to figure out and fix the undock thing.  Is this on 1.1 yet, or are you guys still back on 1.0.5?  If it's the latter, I'll provide an unofficial back-port, because I'd really like another test on this one since undocking is nasty and different for claw vs. docking ports and also impacted by vessel setup.

Bad news is, I wasn't able to reproduce the rendezvous thing - that worked as expected for me.  Any more insight you can provide on that would be good, otherwise I may have to resort to giving you a hacked up DLL with extra debug (there isn't much in Rendezvous).

Was there a custom "back-port" you wanted me to use during my testing of this contract in 1.0.5? 

[nightingale]

15 minutes ago, chrisl said:

Was there a custom "back-port" you wanted me to use during my testing of this contract in 1.0.5? 

Sorry, forgot to make that build for you.  Here you go - Contract Configurator (dll only) for 1.0.5 with just the one extra fix.

[Bombaatu]

6 hours ago, nightingale said:

Log please.

As requested, along with system specs & CKAN file of installed mods.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Ki0FTD375CS3BmY2RSSFg1NlE

EDIT: I looked at the logs and saw several errors from JoolBiomes. Remembering your post from above, I removed both JoolBiomes & EveBiomes, along with Toolbar, Kerbal Engineer & a few others. Got 60 FPS in career mode. Re-installed CC, along with Contract Pack: Bases & Stations & Contract Pack Clever Sats. Went into same game, got 35-40 FPS. Quite playable but still a significant performance hit. The logs & CKAN files can be found in the folder "Second Run" in the above Google Drive folder.

 

EDIT 2: Aaaand never mind. System settled down after 2nd flight; fps raised back up to 55-60. Disregard.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Bombaatu
New info

[nightingale]

3 hours ago, Bombaatu said:

As requested, along with system specs & CKAN file of installed mods.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Ki0FTD375CS3BmY2RSSFg1NlE

EDIT: I looked at the logs and saw several errors from JoolBiomes. Remembering your post from above, I removed both JoolBiomes & EveBiomes, along with Toolbar, Kerbal Engineer & a few others. Got 60 FPS in career mode. Re-installed CC, along with Contract Pack: Bases & Stations & Contract Pack Clever Sats. Went into same game, got 35-40 FPS. Quite playable but still a significant performance hit. The logs & CKAN files can be found in the folder "Second Run" in the above Google Drive folder.

 

EDIT 2: Aaaand never mind. System settled down after 2nd flight; fps raised back up to 55-60. Disregard.

Yup, so all boils down to that biome thing.  Raised #503 to make some improvements.  At a minimum I'll make it so that it only runs for people who have a mod that uses the data it generates (think that's only Field Research right now).

[Jansn67]

Quote

Exception occured while loading contract 'CleverSat.CleverSatCore': System.Exception: No ContractRequirement with type = 'CelestialBodyCoverage'. at ContractConfigurator.ContractRequirement.LoadRequirement (.ConfigNode configNode) [0x00000] in :0 at ContractConfigurator.ConfiguredContract.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in :0

Suddenly i got this error after restart.

[Mikey_B1974]

Received this exception after upgrading RemoteTech to the Pre-release: build-develop-519

Exception occured while loading contract 'RemoteTech.RT_KerbinRelay_4sat':
System.Exception: No ContractRequirement with type = 'CelestialBodyCoverage'.
  at ContractConfigurator.ContractRequirement.LoadRequirement (.ConfigNode configNode) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at ContractConfigurator.ConfiguredContract.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

Contract Configurator: Version 1.10.4

RemoteTech: build-develop-519

ContractPack RemoteTech: 2.0.2

From the RemoteTech thread it seems its been happening since RemoteTech prerelease 'build-develop-509'.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Mikey_B1974
Deleted Link that was inserted by mistake, when I just wanted to name a version of RemoteTech.

[nightingale]

2 hours ago, Jansn67 said:

Suddenly i got this error after restart.

Did you update to the develop build of RemoteTech?  I've had this issue reported lots.

2 hours ago, Mikey_B1974 said:

Received this exception after upgrading RemoteTech to the Pre-release: build-develop-519

Exception occured while loading contract 'RemoteTech.RT_KerbinRelay_4sat':
System.Exception: No ContractRequirement with type = 'CelestialBodyCoverage'.
  at ContractConfigurator.ContractRequirement.LoadRequirement (.ConfigNode configNode) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at ContractConfigurator.ConfiguredContract.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

Contract Configurator: Version 1.10.4

RemoteTech: build-develop-519

ContractPack RemoteTech: 2.0.2

From the RemoteTech thread it seems its been happening since RemoteTech prerelease 'build-develop-509'.

I'll look into what broke, but if the RemoteTech folk changed something I may have to wait until they do an official release.  In the meantime, I'm going to have to throw this out there:

 

All RemoteTech pre-release builds are unsupported and will break stuff in Contract Configurator.  If you want to use a RemoteTech pre-release, don't use it with Contract Configurator.

EDIT: I couldn't confirm what exactly changed from skimming their changelog (RemoteTech is going through a heavy development phase right now), but can confirm it just needs a recompile to fix it.  But I won't do that because that'll break anyone on a release build of RemoteTech.  Once they release their next release build I'll release a Contract Configurator update.  Meanwhile, if you want to play with pre-release RemoteTech and Contract Configurator, you'll have to compile Contract Configurator yourself from source.

Edited April 24, 2016 by nightingale

[chrisl]

23 hours ago, nightingale said:

Sorry, forgot to make that build for you.  Here you go - Contract Configurator (dll only) for 1.0.5 with just the one extra fix.

I finally managed to complete a full test run using the dll you provided.  I've got a number of screenshots and savegame files, plus a full log from just after parameter 1 completes to splashdown.  But I can confirm that the change you made in this dll seems to have resolved the issue.  This time when I undocked, the "crewCapsule" ID switched to the actual capsule instead of remaining with the same ID as the "spaceStation".  So I was able to complete the contract without hacking anything.  I can provide the screen shots and such if you still want to look at them, but it looks like it's fixed now.

[nightingale]

20 minutes ago, chrisl said:

I finally managed to complete a full test run using the dll you provided.  I've got a number of screenshots and savegame files, plus a full log from just after parameter 1 completes to splashdown.  But I can confirm that the change you made in this dll seems to have resolved the issue.  This time when I undocked, the "crewCapsule" ID switched to the actual capsule instead of remaining with the same ID as the "spaceStation".  So I was able to complete the contract without hacking anything.  I can provide the screen shots and such if you still want to look at them, but it looks like it's fixed now.

Nope, as long as you can confirm it's fixed, that's great.  What about the Rendezvous issue - did you get that again/still?

[Jansn67]

5 hours ago, nightingale said:

Did you update to the develop build of RemoteTech?  I've had this issue reported lots.

Oh my god, YES! Thank you very much for that hint. I place the 1.6.10-dll again and it...

EDIT:... it works. But all Contracts are away now.

And i have Black Kraken on some ships.

EDIT2: accepted some contract, restarted KSP and load savegame = Contracts empty.

Same in a new career game. I also can not exit Tracking Center. There also appears a fake "kerbin space station".

Ship on Launchpad is not visible. Installation (or Contact Subsystem) seems fu... up broken in general now.

Offered contracts list is full of identical "focused observational survey of kerbin".

And at least game stutter exmreme (without errors or exceptions in debug). Will start up from scratch next time.

 

Last edit before bed: New install, old savegame, everything restored back, working and ok.

THANKS AGAIN.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Jansn67