NathanKell changed the topic of #RO to: Welcome to the discussion channel for the Realism Overhaul (meta)mod for KSP! Realism Overhaul Main Thread https://goo.gl/wH7Dzb ! RO Spreadsheet http://goo.gl/Oem3g0 ! Code of Conduct http://goo.gl/wOSv2M ! | [15:01] <soundnfury> Straight Eight Stronk (and) RP-0/1 is basically "Space Agency Spreadsheet Simulator" with a rocket-flying minigame
<soundnfury>
also, hmm, there's still RCS cfgs to make, and I'm not quite sure how those work
* soundnfury
digs into the existing cfgs some more
<leudaimon>
don't forget fuel tanks and proc avionics haha
<soundnfury>
those aren't generated, are they?
<soundnfury>
hmm, we appear to have duplicate PARTUPGRADEs for RCS fuels
<soundnfury>
eg. RFUpgrade_Helium in TREE-Engines.cfg and RCSFuel-unlock-helium in RCS_Fuel_Upgrades.cfg
<leudaimon>
they have to appear in the tree... so it would be better if they were generated too, no?
<awang>
Hmmm
<awang>
Why are RCS fuel upgrades not in the tree in the first place?
<soundnfury>
it appears they _are_
<soundnfury>
TREE-Engines.cfg has the @CONFIG{} and the PARTUPGRADE
<soundnfury>
but then RCS_Fuel_Upgrades.cfg has a bunch of duplicate PARTUPGRADEs, for no apparent reason
<soundnfury>
I'll just chuck the latter :P
<awang>
Huh
<awang>
Pap: Is RCS_Fuel_Upgrades.cfg chuckable?
<awang>
Or is there some hidden functionality that depends on it?
<soundnfury>
leudaimon: it would be better, but version 1 doesn't need to do it (those cfgs can stay manual for now)
<soundnfury>
afaict the existing spreadsheet doesn't generate them either. At least proc avi, that is
<soundnfury>
the tanks (e.g. Tank-II) are just ordinary parts that go in the ordinary tree .cfgs, nothing special needed there
<leudaimon>
sure... if it handles ECMs it's most of the job
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
awang has joined #RO
<Pap>
I am guessing that one of then is an old hold over from old RP-0
leudaimon is now known as leudaimon|ZzZz
<soundnfury>
and that's RFTechLevels.cfg covered too :)
<soundnfury>
all that's left now is data entry... anyone want to pick a part category (or other well-defined subset) to take responsibility for?
<soundnfury>
'cos I ain't doing all 3800 rows myself :P
<taniwha>
soundnfury: cfgnode.py and script.py are now in sync between cfgnode and io_object_mu
<taniwha>
soundnfury: also, you might want to take a look at cfg handling in export_mu.py and parser.py (in io_object_mu)
<soundnfury>
taniwha: I found that, in practice, I didn't have a need for cfgnode.py
<soundnfury>
since I'm not parsing, and the stuff I want to generate is simple enough to do with %-formatted templates etc.
<soundnfury>
(but thanks anyway)
<taniwha>
ok. and if you find you do want it after all, you know where to look :)
<soundnfury>
yup
<awang>
Oh wow, today's launch went into a high orbit
<awang>
Or at least high compared to the altitude at SECO for GTO burns
<soundnfury>
well, most LEO is higher than your average parking orbit
<Bornholio>
soundnfury do you have an open issue that it can be tracked in?
<Qboid>
[#1] title: data entry: Orbital Rocketry | I'm entering the engines under the Orbital Rocketry family of techs (parts with CATEGORY=ORBITAL in the spreadsheet) and their EngineConfigs. | https://github.com/ec429/kparts/issues/1
blowfish has joined #RO
<Bornholio>
uh i got nyankats on my screen
<Pap>
soundnfury: how does the data entry part work?
<soundnfury>
Pap: person goes through the spreadsheet, turns each row into a suitable object constructor call (see e.g. engines.py), refactoring as they go when they see exploitable commonality between multiple entities
<Bornholio>
why not export the whole thing into a csv and process it with .py
<Pap>
Bornholio: the way it is structured is not going to allow that
<Bornholio>
i should read more back chat shouldnt' i
<Pap>
I don't think
<Bornholio>
but you got it to make .cfgs didn't you?
<Pap>
I can get the spreadsheet to do anthing I want it to do
<Pap>
The way that soundnfury has the file organized, it isn't going to work like that
<soundnfury>
I mean, you _could_ mechanically convert a lot of it, but then you'd get giant blocks of not-really-well-organised data
<soundnfury>
and you'd be totally failing to notice opportunities for further refactoring / consolidation
<Pap>
Is there a different way to organize the files?
<Pap>
That would allow large bulk edits?
<Pap>
For example...Let's say I want to do the Tantares mod and convert it all into RO and RP-0
<Pap>
We are talking a hundred parts
<Pap>
I am going to have to put the parts into multiple categories on different sheets, and I am also going to have to make sure I search for the corresponding engine before I do it
<Pap>
If I search and don't find it (user error) then I would add it and it would duplicate, no?
<soundnfury>
uh, I'm not sure I follow
<soundnfury>
for your 'bulk edits' is there some existing data source you want to consume?
<soundnfury>
as for the duplicates issue, my intention (which isn't in any way enforced) is that each file should be kept alphabetically sorted within each category
<soundnfury>
also, you don't _have_ to split something up by category (engines, fins, tanks etc.)
<soundnfury>
you could have a file 'tantares.py' that just holds Tantares parts of all categories
<soundnfury>
if that's what makes sense in that case
<soundnfury>
it's a very protean system
<Pap>
No, what I am saying is that there is no way to control where things are put in this system right now
<Pap>
For the Tantares example, yes, I could put all the parts in a Tantares.py file, but they should be scattered throughout the file as they are Soviet parts
<soundnfury>
right, there is no 'control' because there's nothing to enforce that control
<Pap>
I am saying that this is going to increase the time to do that by a lot
<soundnfury>
there is just the engineering judgement of whoever is adding the parts
<soundnfury>
and once we start to see what kinds of regularities exist in the data we're putting in, we can factor those out
<soundnfury>
for instance, we might decide that for a certain class of (generic) parts, costs should be generated by some formula, then we can define a function to create a part following that formula
<soundnfury>
and then have a bunch of calls to that function for each of the parts.
<soundnfury>
(the above might work for e.g. RCS thrusters and quads)
<Pap>
I fear that you may be underestimating the amount of work (and people willign and able to do it)
<Pap>
RO and RP-0 existed for a long time before I came around and no database of parts existed before I created it
<Pap>
It took hundreds of hours
ProjectThoth_ has joined #RO
blowfish has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
blowfish has joined #RO
ProjectThoth_ is now known as ProjectThoth
blowfish has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<Rokker>
i guess i did back them up before wiping the drive
Shoe17 has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
you know what I like about SRBs? You don't have to worry about the mod author screwing up the mix ratio
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<Rokker>
Starwaster: too much aluminum, not enough epoxy
<Hypergolic_Skunk>
Rokker: o/ I think my next time playing KSP for real will be the next time I'm unemployed.. which is sad, either way :D
awang has joined #RO
<Rokker>
Hypergolic_Skunk: fun
<Rokker>
Hypergolic_Skunk: I'm at the unemployed part of that statement atm
<Hypergolic_Skunk>
I feel both happy and sorry for you. mostly happy though.
TonyC has joined #RO
<Rokker>
dude, I'm fucking glad, my job was killing me
TonyC has left #RO [#RO]
<Hypergolic_Skunk>
GG. I can't wait to start an entire new KSP RO/RP1 run, but I have to stick to my current job at least a year, so my recent CV doesn't look as messed up anymore..
qwertyy has joined #RO
Senshi has joined #RO
schnobs has joined #RO
<schnobs>
Question: in an alternate history that leads to the huge shuttle, what should one do in lieu of Mercury?
<schnobs>
I figure that the ferry would be about late-60s stuff. Not in and of itself, but one needs reliable restarts and docking.
<schnobs>
The latter justifies/requires smaller exploratory missions.
Maxsimal has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
aradapil_ has joined #RO
aradapilot has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
aradapilot has joined #RO
aradapil_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
leudaimon_ has joined #RO
leudaimon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
leudaimon_ has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
leudaimon has joined #RO
<schnobs>
Is it just me or does the X-15 cockpit have no life support?
<Starwaster>
You're supposed to hold your breath
<Starwaster>
hey what's the largest payload the Falcon 9 has ever flown?
<leudaimon>
Starwaster I doubt any of the big sats are heavier than a fully loaded dragon...
Maxsimal has joined #RO
<Probus>
What is the name of that mod that makes you search for each planet before they show up in the tracking station?
<Probus>
Research Bodies...
UmbralRaptor has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Maxsimal>
doesn't seem appropriate for RP-1
<awang>
Besides the fact that we discovered all the major planets before 1951, why not?
<awang>
If you want realistic, you can really only discover the smaller bodies, e.g. Ceres
<soundnfury>
I mean, it _would_ be nice to have errors in orbit & (especially) mass data for planets until you've done a flyby to refine them... but that's not really doable in KSP as it is right now
diomedea has joined #RO
diomedea has quit [Client Quit]
<awang>
Some fuzziness in atmo data could be nice too
<awang>
And fuzziness as to what constitutes inSpaceHigh vs inSpaceLow
<schnobs>
awang: you can easily roleplay the first, and just as easily defeat it by saveloading.
<schnobs>
as for space hi/lo, I don't get the point.
leudaimon has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<awang>
schnobs: ...For some reason roleplaying never really comes to me
<Probus>
Talk about saveloading awang. It is time for an Ironman mod in my humble, but correct, opinion. :)
<schnobs>
what's the bonus for upgrading the tracking station, btw?
<schnobs>
gni...
<schnobs>
the VAB is what I meant to ask about.
<schnobs>
It's as costly as 33 upgrade points, and I don't care about a second pipeline. When will it be worthwhile?
UmbralRaptor has joined #RO
<schnobs>
Just discovered the MJ PEG thingy. Won't take off. :(
<schnobs>
Do I have to pre-stage the engines or something?
UmbralRaptor has quit [Quit: *BAMF!*]
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
has anyone been able to get a polar orbit or other highly inclined orbit with lamont's PEG?
<Starwaster>
schnobs you have to initiate the launch by staging, yes
<Starwaster>
unless it's a timed launch (i.e. launch to rendezvous or plane)
<zilti>
Hm, CKAN is still down? I get "Failed to connect to repository. Exception: The value must not be NULL. Parameter name: collection"
<zilti>
schnobs: MJ PEG?
<schnobs>
Starwaster: it was a timed launch; I eventually got it to work, though.
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
<Starwaster>
zilti PEG = Powered Explicit Guidance. It's (usually) better than the original MJ ascent guidance
<zilti>
Ah.
Senshi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
awang has joined #RO
<awang>
Probus: Ironman mod?
<awang>
schnobs: second pipeline gets better upgrades per build point, IIRC
<awang>
2x the build rate per build point for second pipeline, 4x the first build rate for the third pipeline, etc
<awang>
idk if it's 2x, 4x, 6x or 2x, 4x, 8x
<schnobs>
Yeah, but first you need something worthwhile to put into the second queue.
<schnobs>
Which I don't have very often.
<schnobs>
You *can* crank out LVs and later mate them with individual payloads, but the process is a bit involved and for whatever reason I tend to make a mess of things.
<awang>
Yeah, idk
<awang>
You'll have to ask NathanKell or Pap about balancing stuff
<awang>
Starwaster: I think lamont has gotten to polar orbits quite a few times when testing PEG?
<Probus>
Yeah awang. It saves as soon as something blows up, and quite often. no F9, no revert and no F12.
<schnobs>
awang: it's not as much about balance rather than usability.
<awang>
schnobs: I mean, the second build stuff is perfectly usable
<awang>
Just no incentive to use it
<awang>
Or not much incentive
<schnobs>
It's easy enough to mess things up in plain old RO. Mismatched RCS and propellant is one of my favorites, closely followed by staging mishaps.
<schnobs>
mating half-finished vessels in KCT compounds this.
<awang>
Wait
<schnobs>
About incentive, well, I liked building early probes in pairs. Because testflight.
<awang>
What does mating half-finished vessels have to do with KCT?
<awang>
Right, but you probably don't have the funds until later in the game, when things are relatively more reliable, right?
<schnobs>
Yup. 1 Million is too much, I can't afford it until I no longer need it.
<awang>
Actually
<awang>
Now that I think about it
<awang>
A second build rate could help in my save, if only because it lets me grind while waiting for the larger ships to finish
<awang>
I'm stuck in the SPH otherwise
<schnobs>
The VAB<->SPH distinction is pretty pointless, IMO.
<schnobs>
And it's not that I'd have zero use for a second queue -- but I'm pretty convinced that, on average, boosting the first benefits me more than investing in the second.
<awang>
Well, you technically get more bang for your buck with the second rate
<awang>
And a larger percentage difference per upgrade
<awang>
Since the rate per point is capped at what, 0.05 or something?
<awang>
At least for the first build rate
<schnobs>
yep.
<schnobs>
There has to be a point where upgrading the VAB yieds you more build rate than investing the same amount in upgrades.
<awang>
There's probably a formula for that
<schnobs>
first upgrade boosts build rate by 25%
<schnobs>
So once your rate reaches 1.8, upgrading the VAB becomes reasonable from a monetary point of view.
<schnobs>
+-maintenance.
<awang>
First upgrade to the second build rate?
<awang>
Or first build rate?
<schnobs>
First build rate.
<awang>
Hmmm
<schnobs>
And sorry, if you only look at the first rate it needs to be 2.4 before the building upgrade.
<awang>
Build rate formula is actually a formula
<awang>
So maybe plugging those in could yield results?
<awang>
You probably have a better way of figuring this out
<Probus>
awang: Yep
leudaimon has joined #RO
<Mike`>
zilti, you got 16GB RAM? hm. that's kinda not enough for me. I can run the game on that for....2-4 hours maybe? until it takes 13-14GB which makes my pc swap other apps and get horribly slow :(
<Mike`>
but quite imptressive mod list you got there, hmm...should try to remove some mods i have and you dont
<Mike`>
thanks for the list
<Mike`>
zilti, oh, i see you're not on 1.3.1 yet.. :s
<ProjectThoth>
Bornholio: You in?
<Bornholio>
now
leudaimon_ has joined #RO
leudaimon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
leudaimon_ is now known as leudaimon
<awang>
Mike`: And here I am sitting at ~23 gigs RAM just after loading o_O
<awang>
I think KSP's memory reporting is busted on my machine
<Bornholio>
ksp reporting is crap
<Mike`>
ksp reporting? my numbers are from task manager
<Bornholio>
pap got to mk1/mercury pods last night and didn't have crew science interface options show up in VAB
<awang>
My numbers are from the mac equivalent
<Mike`>
do you have some kinds of "top" on mac showing different numbers for res, virt etc?
<awang>
Yeah
<Mike`>
and that shows 23GB as RES? oO
<awang>
Uh
<awang>
I was more thinking Activity Manager, not top/htop
<Mike`>
well
<awang>
I'll check top next time I boot
<Mike`>
as i only know linux, i was interested if top shows the same high number
<Mike`>
:)
<Mike`>
kk
<awang>
Maybe
<awang>
Any extra parameters I need to pass to top?
<awang>
I know some linux, but it's basically all dev-related
<Mike`>
don't think so
<Mike`>
i only used htop anyway during the last years but top should do the job
<Mike`>
just checked, plain top is fine but shows res in KB
<Mike`>
so numbers will be large :)
<awang>
I don't see res
<awang>
I have PID, COMMAND, %CPU, TIME, #TH, #WQ, #PORT, MEM, PURG, CMPRS, PGRP, PPID
<Mike`>
interesting
<awang>
Ah
<awang>
htop has RES
<Mike`>
k, htop is better anyway if you have that
<awang>
It was broken on High Sierra until relatively recently
<awang>
Well
<awang>
More like macOS couldn't handle htop
<awang>
Something in macOS broke
<Pap>
Uh oh Bornholio that means 1.3 broke something. Someone is going to have to dig into that and I don't have the time unfortunately
<Qboid>
[#682] title: Htop on macOS High Sierra | Can anyone confirm the htop available on homebrew (2.02) is broken on macOS 10.13 (crashes iTerm2 after several seconds)? | https://github.com/hishamhm/htop/issues/682