basic.syntax

I call feature creep! Very nice work

Having trouble after editing contract cfg-file parameters? Not making a formal patch? I wanted to share a couple noob mistakes & fixes: I was making cfg changes and not seeing them take effect after repeated restarts: it appears that making a backup copy of the original cfg, with a change to the first name but keeping the cfg extension, and leaving that renamed original in the same place as the newly edited cfg could result in the original cfg data being read first. And the original cfg data might still be found and loaded, after "cleverly" moving the renamed original to a nearby folder. If you must hack, edit the one file: copy lines to edit and comment out '//' the original line. "Why is the contract type I edited, not being offered?" One possibility: an edited value that starts with a decimal point will throw an exception. Remember to include a leading zero for decimal numbers, so they can be parsed correctly

While the main scatter loop is RNG, could you implement a scatter container object - which would enable predefined 'scenes'? (The container would be a list of scatter objects, and their XY coordinate offsets from an origin point.) While some players are thinking of towns and cities, I'm thinking desert oasis.

mind.blown This, plus the atmospheric scatterer completely overhauls and upgrades the look of the world(s).

Can you look for / do you have: [KSP folder name]\GameData\000_USITools ? (CKAN is probably supposed to take care of dependencies, but maybe something fell through the cracks. I don't use CKAN.) Tutorial (Installation) · UmbraSpaceIndustries/MKS Wiki · GitHub

I'm quite new to MKS & have been starting a new career save with it, and the community tech tree - which is essential, since the stock tree unlocks too many MKS parts at once in stock nodes. But even with CTT, I feel like some advanced parts may be exposed to the player in earlier nodes than they should be. It seems like the "Ranger" series should be the first colony parts we use, but the ball / anchor hub is way out in Composites, (300 science to unlock, with my game settings) - Ranger Inflatable Storage is in Logistics... I'll need to upgrade R&D before I can unlock these! But several Tundra and Wolf parts are unlocked in Advanced Construction, no R&D upgrade required

You need only enable the Refunding portion of this collection of fixes - they are all disabled by default in the KSP-Recall.cfg settings file.

Another workaround: Surface attach. The "Acapello" stock craft SM-25 is packed with FL100 tanks, with the first using surface attach, the rest stacked on the first one's attachment node. It was a frustrating experience working with the attachment nodes, b/c the VAB editor can show fuel flow, but then you take it to the pad and... no fuel.

I've read your thread - nice work! The Conformal Decals mod supports DDS. I've not tried it yet. I started independently adapting some art for mission emblems, and one thing led to another. I'm hoping this request to Squad to enhance the Stock experience isn't too far out of scope for a future update. It never hurts to ask - politely

I've been working on some flag variant textures in the past few days, and noticed the change from 256x160 (ugh, postage stamp size, you won't be missed) to 512x256 resolution - more pixel headroom for stock. (But a modder/player can feel free to go higher, if they want. I was tempted to "necro" the 1.10 modder's notes thread, which had questions like this about changes to flag art ) The 1.6:1 aspect ratio of original flags (256x160) is supported after the change, old flag image files looked the same - nice. But, if that's the case: Why was flag texture aspect ratio increased to 2:1 (512x256), if internally the textures are processed 1.6:1 (410x256)? All of the stock art was stretched to fit the new image dimensions; internally the image is squeezed back down, so that the new flag textures display properly in-game, on the flag parts. Does one of these flag parts - or other object in the game - use those textures as-is, without squeezing them horizontally? Was the change made, for a future plan? Squad could save a tiny bit of disk space if all stock flag textures were re-rendered at 410x256, which would have the added benefit of not looking stretched, while looking at the raw files in the folder This is also a note to players/modders: no need to stretch your art. The next problem I face is due to the internal processing of image files for display: compression. What looks like a solid color in your PNG or JPG might not look that way in-game, and show harsh color change boundary artifacts: blotches, jaggies. I've spent many hours recently, cleaning things up. (The stock flags could use some pixel attention to clean them up and reduce artifacts, but there's an easier path to take, to help all of us: ) Squad please consider supporting DDS format, for flags. I tried dropping a DDS in the folder, but it was ignored The format is supported by other mod-friendly objects. With it, you know what you are getting in-game.

I imagine it was a little hard to decide which intermediate KSP milestones to include on the timeline. Reprinting the entire list of version releases from the WIKI would have been an unwieldy wall of text

Thanks so much - so many pixels! Awesome poster material - a real keeper! An Inkjet printer is going to run out of black, tho. I wonder what this would look like with a light moon-gray backdrop? ~opens Photoshop to mess around~ Edit: (A few hours later) - b/c so much of spaaaace is black, reversing the backdrop color would require putting the "event horizon" image into a box, and the "Rosetta" image... idk. To do a decent alternate color scheme, I'd have to dig for the various images used, and start over. Sooo.... I'll just repeat my thanks!

I saw this on YT first, went in "blind" - and the reveal was sooo much better. I clicked, figuring it would be a short video, with fireworks, commemorating 10 years. No. "we're giving ALL players this ability!" Just awesome

Post frequency goes up when Squad is close to an update, then quietly gets quiet a few weeks after, and players start to wonder if that will be the last update... and so it goes — year after year

This seems like a lot of change for a "point" update Why not call it 1.2 ? [edit: misunderstood versioning; thx Devoblue for clarifying] Any Career-mode limitations, based on engineer level? Adding to craft in orbit, could be "overpowered," when combined with part limits, early in Career.