Quiana

I figure I'll ask and see if any Win 10 folks have tried this. I know we had discussions before about issues between this application, Saitek, and Win 10. I can try it later when I get home but I've got a busy day today so I may not be able to verify if the bugs pre-1.1 are gone now.

TMS, they've already confirmed that consoles actually have a REQUIREMENT for achievements. They never wanted to put achievements in as they do also cause the exact opposite, causing a completionist to do them to get them done. The best rewards sometimes in a game like this is not the game patting you on the back, but your own sensation of joy when you complete something you've struggled at or thought 'I can do that too.' when you see someone else's work.

Also the CKAN database is actually built right off kerbalstuff, so, it only parses what's on that site. It won't do any other external links, either. The protection from a bad thing on there is the requirement for source code to be published and with the program, so you can do a comparison or virus scan it beforehand.

If not, then I'm sure a quick MM patch can add those swaps into the tanks, based on their dry volume and the mass of the appropriate fuels. If you need some aid, I can read up a bit and give some sample configs for the IS fuel swap module.

If I recall right, the reason it is this way is due to the wealth of information required to setup the parachutes. They are highly configurable, with good reason and need the extra space from a dedicated place to be displayed. Not only that, but you certainly do not want to accidently open all that information with a right-click on your chutes, or have to open the UI Window through each chute (though there is a symmetry toggle inside the GUI to setup symmetry partners).

Also you may want to actually update your MM to 2.6.5, rather than 2.6.3. It doesn't hurt to ensure it is up to date.

There is not enough reputation on the forum to really describe how wonderful your texturing on those models has gotten to. I remember when it first came out, they were impressive then, now they're just incredible. Looking forward to the 2.0 concepts as well, unless you're keeping those preview ideas to the development thread for the most part.

Quick question, call me a bit dense but if one wanted to remove the extra tag for Kerbal count in the editor but retain the mass changes in flight, what would I need to do in customizing the MM provided file for this? I like the concept of adding the weight and having to mentally adjust for it, but I also don't want to clutter up my editor windows with an additional slider as I have a fair few of those with my mod list.

Well my sash must be at my folks' place. I have all the badges from camps, cub scout activities and the like, including my eagle sash and dress pin (the one for lapels on suits) but not the sash itself. I'll find it eventually.

I noticed this from your signature. I too am an Eagle Scout. I started in Cub Scouts. I'll get a merit badge count when I get home and find my old sash, it's in storage someplace. Nice to see that we do have a few eagles on the forums.

The license allows you to adapt and share as long as it is under the same license (IE anyone who receives is under the license, cannot use commercially, and must give credit to the original source). Did you check if they seat alright after the changes with no gaps? I know a few parts had to have minor shifts in some mods besides the +/- indicators on nodes.

Just a side-note from looking at this again, you may want to investigate the shared module between DRE/nuFAR. I cannot recall the name of it, but there were issues with mods that adjust a certain stock module competing with each other, which prompted both mods to share-write that custom module to integrate with the flight director. You may want to look into that, seeing as this is likely going to interact with that same director. Could be a potential issue with compatibility in the future.

A little helpful support on asymmetric flameout here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119607-Airbreather-fuel-flow-logic?p=1909169&viewfull=1#post1909169 As indicated, Intake spam certainly does not work, engines perform much in the same manner as the RL versions do (albeit significantly higher thrust values). Just check your intake placement order to ensure each engine is fed correctly and you won't have issues with flameouts in anything but a symmetrical/staged pattern. If anything, the drag from additional intakes will significantly hurt you compared to actually gunning for a little under the max height to air ratio.

I'm with Enceos on this one. The Ablator resource in stock has the same density/etc as your own AblativeShielding resource. I think the question isn't making/altering the stock resource (unless you feel the resource values need to change) but in using the existing one instead of having a separate resource tracked by just your use (or others tying into DRE) since it would be assumed most other heat shields/etc are tying into Ablator. Since the values are the same right now for both resources and I do not think the heat shield weight/cost has ever been an issue, it makes good sense to go ahead and tie into the stock one and drop the extra resource.

That's great to hear Taniwha. Please let us know if you need a Windows 8.1 test subject. I'm still having issues with my Saitek Cyborg X stick and need a replacement for stock joystick detection. However, the older AFBW had issues with 8.1 that were never resolved. As it is, a friend is shipping me two older Logitech sticks just in case but I'd love to be able to use my X properly for KSP.