• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1009 Excellent

1 Follower

About DStaal

  • Rank
    Capsule Communicator
  1. I've read that. Still didn't understand your objection. Wanting to learn.
  2. It's on every part with a 'ModuleConnectedLivingSpace' module - even if the part has been marked as 'passable = false'. So you need to add that to the parts. That looks good to me. You say it's working, is that a typo? If it's working, there should be no problem. Do *not* use FOR, unless you're sure you know what you're doing. It doesn't mean what you think it does, and mis-use of it is half the issues I have when installing mods.
  3. I do find it interesting that you refuse to use a mod because of *two* parts that you could remove from it. (I'm assuming the parts you have issue with are the antigravity pads - if you have problems with other parts I'm confused.)
  4. Vessel B needs storage for ore. Local logistics can pull ore to it, but as far as I understand PL requires *attached* storage. I sometimes manually initiate the local logistics transfer to the vessel doing the push to PL as well - If there's no demand on that vessel for the resource, automatic local logistics won't kick in. I might actually just attach a KAS pipe between vessel A and vessel B, if it were me. Simpler all around.
  5. Most common reason for this problem is accidentally attaching the tubes backwards. Worth double-checking.
  6. My solution is to design the station with a docking section and expansion sections - the docking section gets normal ports, the expansion sections get construction ports. Or you could just use construction ports everywhere.
  7. Quick note: The config for the BOMP-L makes it a probe control point - not a probe itself. (Been looking for an excuse to use these, but so far that's been the size I've been needing.)
  8. I don't think there is a way to identify on the mod level - however, if they've specified a manufacturer or have a coherent naming scheme on their parts, you can use that to filter.
  9. Up to you. It was one of the first mods I installed, so I can definitely say a newbie to the game can handle it if they want.
  10. Well, if you want to put up a list I'd be willing to take a look. It'd at least give a starting point. I will admit my testing so far has been with the XLs, mostly because that's what I was working with.
  11. Also: It might be worth deleting your MM caches. It'll mean a bit longer startup next start, but they could influence this as well.
  12. The other thing I can think of would be if you installed a tech tree mod - especially if you installed or removed it after you started the career. CTT is usually safe from this type of stuff, but it's at least messing with the same things.
  13. It's definitely something that's handling EC differently - it handles fuels just fine (that I've noticed...), even in the Mission Support mode it handles Monoprop. It's just the EC it's missing. Anyway - if no one else is seeing it I'll chalk it up to some mod interaction - and put on my 'track this down when I get some spare time' pile. It's only really a problem for a very specific use-case, and even then I can work around it without much trouble. (Just sit on the pad a while...)
  14. They play perfectly fine together. Near Future Electrical does contain a patch to switch USI reactors from their normal operation mode to working like NFE's reactors - but it can be removed without issue. With the patch in place, the two sets of reactors operate the same. Without it, they operate differently - which might be what you want.
  15. You might want to take a look at USI's reactors - they behave the way you want, providing only as much power as needed. (If you have both them and NFE, you may want to remove the NFE compatibility patch to let them use their own mechanics.)