Jump to content

RoverDude

KSP Team
  • Content Count

    8,837
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RoverDude

  1. Full disclosure... I spent a lot of the time building that just sitting there and watching the animation on a loop
  2. We'll be giving the whole tree a once-over - the early bits are mostly there to support electric rover routes and MKS support
  3. True background processing is a save killer. Stock's compromise is to do a catch-up in (roughly) four hour chunks while vessels are in focus, and MKS leverages stock. WOLF solves this by removing the temporal element (and tbh, WOLF was one of the thoughts I had when I built stock, but it's limitations are why it could not be stock - that is, it is completely decoupled from stock systems that manage things like batteries and (especially) solar panels). for WOLF see the wiki and experiment. For greenhouses, if you are using USI-LS, it works the same way as stock, so the two dovetail
  4. No more science crate, but there are new storage bits that work with the stock inventory system.
  5. Could be a bug - if so best way to get it fixed is going to be a PR or a Github issue as we kick out all of the bees
  6. 100% by design. If you've gone through the hassle of setting up refueling stations, then a 0 TC route is acceptable. No different than 0 TC routes with ion drives and electric rovers are fine. Me and @DoktorKrogg agree 100% TC's represent the infrastructure requires to continuously maintain that route, in terms of ship refueling and repair and managing the logistics chain. Cargo bits are just there as a measuring stick as you simulate the first route.
  7. There's no need to launch a workshop - just go to your orbital shipyard vessel, note down the requirements. Full MKS chains too. But you really are going to want WOLF by then. Been fixed for ages.
  8. Short version: MatKits cover mass. SpecParts through Prototypes cover cost. So bulky cheap things are matkits only, small expensive things use more specialized bits up through prototypes (which are 30,000 funds or so per unit).
  9. MKS is a gameplay mod. KPBS is a parts mod. So KPBS gives you a different form factor for MKS bases, but the other way around is like comparing ham and hamsters.
  10. 1. EC is already handled differently in USI-LS. The rest, really is no more or no less challenge with one part or three. It's a math game (unless you intentionally make something out of whack). 2. TAC-LS does not have radiation or hab, last I checked. 3. It would be clunky, but doable, and no support would be provided. All of these bits are configurable.
  11. And this is where I get philosophical. When I used TAC-LS, the only difference between one resource and three was more parts, and three resource tanks. Like, I never had a situation where I was out of one (food/water/oxygen) instead of all three in equal measure. EC was a wild card (and USI-LS has that), also USI-LS has a lot more breadth as it covers long-term habitation (which is trickier to deal with than just keeping Kerbals fed). Lethality and effects are all customizable as well. But to each their own
  12. Never been a compatibility problem with scansat that I am aware of. And MKS has been 1.11.x compatible for a while. It won't conflict, just don't use USI-LS if you use TAC-LS. You won't be using a lot of the modules though as TAC-LS has no analogue for habitation, and any community patches for TAC-LS do not have official support. tbh, USI-LS just fits a lot better.
  13. Yep, surface is in the pre-release. As well as new supply chains - though for some of the upper end stuff it may just make sense to ship it up. In my own save I am reserving that level of manufacturing to a single body due to the magnitude of the planetary infrastructure (which IMO is best to do using WOLF).
  14. Best way to see something sorted is to either (a) do a PR (in this case, possibly a custom drag cube/cubes, though I have no idea if that will work for FAR), or (b) log a github issue (or comment on an existing issues) since that's where I go when working on the different mods to see what else to toss in.
  15. Pull Requests are welcome Just be sure to do it to the DEVELOP branch
  16. A lot of that credit is for @DoktorKrogg RE the new stuff The new resources are there to handle cost. Basically we start with enough MatKits to cover the mass (so for some parts like structural bits, etc. MatKits are enough), then we fill it up with other resources (specialized parts through prototypes) until the part cost is covered. Otherwise you could go into a very lucrative gravioli detector assembly business.
  17. Best bet is always a Pull Request. Second best bet is a Github issue
  18. Yeah... that's completely wrong. Also your KSP version is too old, no guarantee it will even work. 1.11.x
  19. K&K is not part of this mod - sounds like an install issue, and insufficient details have been provided. KSP version? Mod version? Screenshot of your Gamedata folder?
  20. Nope, machinery consumption is an MKS converter thing. As for ship construction, required resources vary. You need MatKits for mass, and Specialized Parts, Robotics, etc. to handle cost.
×
×
  • Create New...