basic.syntax

Let's make a poll! (lol)

The mission builder was an entirely appropriate choice for the expansion. A way to make formal challenges out of what players were doing in that section of the forums. The mission builder earned higher marks in PC Gamer's review, than the new parts.

I'm not so sure... while I wouldn't object to having the amazing KSP2 that exists only in the imagination, I don't see any signs of it. T2 could spend considerable time re-making the game with a new team in a new engine and releasing it for $50 in 3 years, or in the same amount of time, they could help Squad spin off DLC 2, 3, and 4 at $15 each, with incremental and necessary updates to the base game to support the DLC's, as they did with 1.4. Still, it's a big challenge to make each expansion interesting enough, with something appealing to existing and new players. Parts alone don't do it, b/c so many will say 'there's already a free mod with that.'

KSP improves with every update. I don't consider anything released as done and final; Squad has proved slow but dedicated to fixing, updating and expanding KSP features and art over time. KSP still feels like one of my better game purchases, when compared to other games that insist you spend on a new base product to get the latest features and art.

We want the update when promised, but we also want it to be good. Despite what was said, if they need to take another week, let it take another week. Friday (if it happens tomorrow.. and 'today' isn't over yet) isn't the best day to release an update, b/c most staff is generally gone for the weekend & can't respond to an unexpected crisis. (Hopefully there won't be one.)

Thank you! Textures are being picked up now. Was not sure if I had to recreate a path for textures like this... I had hoped the path in the cfg would be enough, to describe the intended destination / ownership of files found in the folder with the cfg.

Another question - I'm trying to replace a stock part texture, but so far no luck, the stock texture is still used. (Previously i'd been overwriting the stock location, but know this is a Bad Practice since I'd have to replace it again after a future KSP update.) I created a subfolder under GameData\DiRT\Textures, with the same name as the part folder with texture to replace, and copied in my model000.dds. In the config file I should "...set the "TextureFolder" to the GameData-relative path where your texture files live..." I tried "Squad/Parts/Science/[folder name]" I also tried locating my replaced part "texture pack with a single texture in it" folder directly under KSP\GameData, with other mods. hopefully relevant excerpts from KSP log:

UomoCapra started responding to "is my bug fixed" type of questions, my post is just another one. I linked a forum post, because it has a picture that shows the problem (though the pictures in #17834 linked by NoMrBond are better.)

Aero/re-entry shaders sometimes can be seen through parts ... NoMrBond's links Separately, I recently had an encounter with a 'class E' asteroid and my craft is embedded slightly below the surface. Found the problem described in bug 18308 on the tracker. "Asteroid collision does not match up with visual appearance."

Yesss! The clues were there, it just didn't register at the time. All sorted, thanks for 2nd eyeball on my mis-config!

Removed KAC/KER and tried again; this is an excerpt of ksp.log

Screenshot shows texture loading log messages, which seem to indicate something was loaded, but I'm still seeing default textures. Jool and skybox should look different in this case. Have I left out a step (do I need to edit cfg file)? No error messages. My filenames and file sizes / dimensions seem to match. Not using any other replacer mod. v1.4.2. Only other mods are KAC + KER.

Just for the sake of download sizes and bandwidth, why does MH include banner images in the zip, which MH users already have?

Poll is closed... I made my case, agreed with some fair criticism, and didn't bump the thread. Looking at the lukewarm interest this post / poll generated, I'm thinking the suggestion might pass your test: Players were NOT clamoring in any significant numbers, to get these parts for free. I still believe in the points I made & hope Squad might add these simple, fundamental building block parts, to the base game, in a future update.

Epic. I slowed it down in playback so I could follow it better. I learned some things... whether I can do them or not, is a different question Down to the wire coming back up from Tylo, not much margin lol I like the ultra compact lander. "Legs? who needs 'em," just land slower That was a LOT of aerobreaking orbits on EVE. I don't know that i'd have that much patience What holds Omega together? Autostrut magic? Once it redocked, to a single standard docking port (all I noticed) I thought it would shake itself apart under acceleration.

Agree @Just Jim, slight drift/jitter with legs is an old problem. Doesn't mean the issue shouldn't be re-raised every now and then This old post provides some good advice about how leg values for spring and damper work. LT-2 legs seem to be easily crushed in 1.4.2, but that's a separate issue.

This has been reported by other players, and Squad staff have replied about it, in the 1.4.2 update thread. Hopefully it will be addressed in the next update

I see a wide range of opinions on what an expansion should include; nice parts make some players happy but others say "free mod parts already do that." That was a large factor in PCGamer's review. Squad did right in my view by including a new game mode, though it doesn't make everyone happy, and new parts, that also don't make everyone happy. But by covering both bases, various MH players with diverse interests, have something new to play with. That's assuming more bugs are fixed after Squad returns from their break. We already know one item for certain will be in the next patch, the 5m fairing fix.

If you know "just enough to be dangerous" to yourself and make a backup copy of the cfg file with a different name, and put it just about anywhere in the Parts sub-folders... the very helpful loading process may find this backup, leading to other problems. Do not leave any "helpful backup" anywhere in the Parts sub-folders, its best kept outside the KSP folder tree in its own special place. And thus, I spent half an hour wondering why R&D was filling up with 5M parts that I would purchase for use, only to go into the VAB and find that I still needed to purchase them, looping back and forth between VAB and R&D, with a side-trip into the persistent file to see what it looked like in there (a growing list) until it dawned on me that I was fighting with my "helpful backup" parts. lol. It's all good now

Yes, the engine bell stays the same size, that's your guide. I mentioned the base size, but it does not matter. RoverDude said: just look at the mesh (geometry / diameter) of the engine. Smaller bases look better under engine plates and other custom mounting we might do.

DMagic just used numbers to prove that ... you don't need to look at numbers; looking at the size of the engine bell in his examples is good enough. Moving up to the KE-1, I see a 1.8m tank fits perfectly under the engine bell and it includes a 1.8m "mid" base, so I expect that 1.8m will "just work" to occlude the bare variant.

I would explain from time to time that Squad had decided missions would not interact with contracts, but I agree that "it would be nice, if." I think if Squad does not make an extension to the contracts system that can draw from a player's collection of missions at some point in the future, an enterprising modder is going to come up with something Some would have to be restricted to one time per career - it would feel strange to re-roll "dawn of the space age" more than once. Some will be meant to be run consecutively, where the contract system is semi-random with some "weighting" mostly based on contract type you accept more often. You'd want to select or edit a list of which ones to permit into your career; consider that some will be short, some very long, and all written in different styles.

It's an amazing engineering challenge - all the foils and membranes that have to unfold and stretch; now I understand why it spent so much time in vacuum chamber testing. This more recent article talks briefly about technical problems they've been working on:

This hopeful video shows just how complicated the unfolding process will be. Going to be a lot of crossed fingers, for a long number of days after it launches.

Some companies will over-correct based on nagging feedback, let's not see this end up being written by a Take Two lawyer, with impeccable grammar and even longer sentences. Various footnotes and disclaimers. (Considering their hourly rate, probably not.) Weekly updates have been written semi-informally since day one. The ship will sail on.