troyfawkes

Hey guys Two questions. First, I was reading thoughts on HASFILE here (https://github.com/KSP-KOS/KOS/issues/1105). Has that been implemented in any way yet? Second, I'm having huge issues with the docking ports helper functions. E.g., ship:dockingports[0]:undock(). It doesn't always work as expected. You can recreate my issue exactly by creating a ship that has 2 docking ports attached to each other and trying to undock() them on the pad. I got around the issue by writing out this function: FUNCTION decouple { PARAMETER tag. SET my_part TO SHIP:PARTSTAGGED(tag)[0]. SET my_mod TO my_part:getmodule("ModuleDockingNode"). IF my_mod:HASEVENT("decouple node") { my_mod:DOEVENT("decouple node"). } ELSE { SET docked_node TO my_part:CHILDREN[0]. IF my_part:PARENT:name = my_part:name { SET docked_node TO my_part:PARENT. } SET docked_mod TO docked_node:GETMODULE("ModuleDockingNode"). IF docked_mod:HASACTION("undock node") { docked_mod:DOACTION("undock node", 1). } } } This works fairly flawlessly. Am I just doing something horribly wrong with dockingports? Maybe something like this would work to resolve the dockingports issue? Obv. you could refactor to make the function more general.

I'd love to see this too

This isn't working for me in CKAN :/

These look great!

I slowly add more mods until the FPS is unbearable :/ I do have a pretty stable career going that I should just stick to, but now I'm so tempted by 1.1 coming out that I don't think I'll be able to haha. Maybe with 1.1's performance fixes I'll do better?

Anyone who's getting the "Waiting..." message and just sitting back, it's not going to work. There's some bug with the update feature for people who turned auto updating off. The fix is to go into the control panel and find "Update Settings" (something like that). There should be an option in there to go through with the update. If that doesn't work, the Windows 10 updater from Microsoft works great. You don't even need a USB or anything, just works right off your computer. Updated a Win7 and Win8 PC this week, both work great (including KSP, with OpenGL and with mods). Uh... you WILL have trouble with Win10 until you let it update and restart. There are weird issues with the start button, search functionality etc. Hmm... Oh, and if you use Office products, you may have issues opening files. This is because Trust Center is being stupid. Just launch the application by itself, go File -> Options -> Trust Center -> Trust Center Settings -> Protected View, and uncheck everything. This could let a script kiddie massacre you with a crazy excel file, but if you can't open any excel file in the first place you'll probably lose your job so...

You'll get better answers if you include your craft files, but there are a ton of circumstances when you'd see virtually no movement. One is if your rocket is going fairly fast through atmosphere. The aerodynamics of the rocket will tend to keep it going in a straight line. If you've got static (unmoving) fins on the rocket, that'll make this even more pronounced. Another is if your rocket is very large and doesn't have control units on it, like SAS or RCS. Obviously having both of those is worse. Try starting sandbox game and finding an engine with high gimballing, add an SAS control unit and don't exceed 200 m/s in the lower atmosphere. If that doesn't work, you've got some serious bugginess. Otherwise, it's just a matter of getting used to aerodynamics.

Hey folks, I was watching a youtube vid, can't for the life of me remember whose, and noticed that he had attached two or three boosters together prior to putting them on the radial decoupler. He had also added a couple separatrons to pull the large triple booster sections away. The net effect was that he used far fewer decouplers and the debris was more manageable (not a huge cloud of boosters). I've just started using that idea and love it. I spent a good chunk of time putting together a perfect set of boosters in this pattern, saved them as a sub-assembly, and now I just re-use them whenever. Instead of having a hundred different launchers, I sometimes just switch out between these saved single, double and triple style boosters on the same launcher. Prior to this I hadn't really used sub-assemblies except for the entire launcher. Anyone have any similar ideas that I should look into? Any real launchers or space craft whose designs have cool ideas like this that I should look at? Thanks in advance!

Thanks for the tip man, +rep!

Just wanted to clarify that the crash might be Linux specific but the bug/log spam is also on Windows (I get it on Windows 7).

I have this exact same issue. Not sure what the effects are but my log is having a lot of fun.

Definitely not just you

I think this is something that might come through all of these great contract mods. Here's a concept for you: The end game is to colonize 5 bodies other than Kerbin with at least 20 Kerbals each. Use a life support mod and a mod that lets you build ships outside of Kerbin. After 5 years, you can't use Kerbin anymore. Some jerk crashed an asteroid into it. Figure out some other crazy goal and continue Alternately, immediately build a mining base on one of Kerbin's moons and have a shipyard in orbit. How quickly can you stop using KSC to launch vessels? Then just continue the game as normal

If you don't use someone else's dV map (I don't), make your own. When you know exactly how much dV you need, your ships will work perfectly That having been said, design with a dV safety margin based on your piloting and mechanics skills. I go for around 10% extra per stage. To make my personal notes I use the Notes plugin and add in details as I go: dV Map (m/s): Kerbin: LKO (100km): GSO (2.868Mm): Mun Intercept: In/Out Orbit (30km): Landing: LO: Full Mission: Duna Intercept: Kerbin Ejection / Correction: In/Out Orbit (52km): Landing: LO: Return Ejection / Correction: Kerbin Orbit: Full Mission:

Thought Duna's atmosphere meant I could use air breathing engines. That was actually extremely frustrating since it was in a hard core realism game and took so much effort..

Kerbals bouncing off their heads from 20km and surviving is quirky and fun. Kerbals sliding 400ft on the Mun and accelerating the whole way while stretching and contorting wildly until they're going 100m/s and explode is... not? I'd love to see a mod that just addresses some of what you'd expect from EVA physics. E.g.: When a kerbal hits the ground they should not bounce nearly as high as they do. When a kerbal is sliding along terrain, they should be slowing down a lot more than they do. Kerbals recover their equilibrium mid-air after something like 10s without impact, and ~3s when on the ground and not moving. Personally I'd just prefer this to be lower, but the ideal system would look at trauma from impact and tie that to disorientation time. Maybe have a difficulty setting for kerbal survivability from impact, just so that the hardcore guys can tweak it and everyone else can let kerbals bounce from upper atmo Anyway, just an idea!

Amazing, works perfectly for me

Hey all! Is it possible for some super smart person to hack together an MM patch to get PP to have usable tanks for Cryo Engines?

Hey guys Is it possible for one of you really smart folks to hack together an MM patch to get Procedural Parts to support Cryo?

I got in touch and sent over a full revamp of the 3 variations into the new style Needs quite a bit of tweaking still but I'd love to see the tech trees recover from the 1.0 deforestation

How much do you want to bet that there's a missing brace in there somewhere though? Also two things: 1) I have no idea what anyToUnlock = True means, but CTT2 has it in everything so I just kept it. 2) The Parents are all going to need a bit of manual work, I think, because they currently all have "lineFrom = TOP" and "lineTo = BOTTOM" Beyond that, let me know if you need anything else / when everything's running so I can play it

Hey Probus, Right now this is what you've got: I think this is what it needs to look like at the end of the day, judging from CTT2.0 and what Nertea does with his part mods: If that's the case, this might work (based on the newest version you have on the front page): https://jsfiddle.net/troyfawkes/h65ufdxp/ I included the regex I used for your / my reference. If the format works, you can either put your updates in that way or let me know what needs to be changed and I'll see what I can do?

Hey Probus, I know format is a huge problem with these kinds of things. Is there any manual work you need to do? If you can post an example of what format you need and what format you have, I might be able to regex it all into place in a couple minutes. Not sure if that's helpful, but let me know what I can do

Looking forward to the update Arachnidek It doesn't look like any tech trees have come out for 1.0 yet, the syntax change must suck.

Hey MrCynical, can you transmit science back with 323? I'm grabbing it now but testing a hundred other mods individually due to a fun save breaking bug...