Errol

Members
  • Content Count

    1,057
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

324 Excellent

1 Follower

About Errol

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

5,303 profile views
  1. Thanks for the info. I haven't used Nertea's mods much before, wasn't fully aware of his stance on this stuff.
  2. @Nertea I'm wondering how difficult it would be, and if it is allowed (I'm not super well versed in licensing stuff) to create and/or share modified versions of these parts. So far all I have done is learn about .cfg stuff, but I would like to learn more, and also really want something very close to what this mod has. Here is my idea: I would like a centrifuge ring that is intended to be assembled in space rather than launched and then extended. What I am thinking is just changing the model of the large centrifuge so that the hub and struts are all gone, and to duplicate the sections to make the ring be soild and continuous. The attachment nods would stay in the same places, and the assumption would be that the ring is riding on rails of some sort that you just imagine being there for role play purposes. I guess you'd also have to modify the colliders..... I'm not even sure where to begin with learning to do that, never mind the licensing questions.... Maybe easier to request you release just those beautiful curved habitable sections of the large centrifuge as a single part so we can build with it on our own in KSP? Would need to get creative to find a way to get it rotating, but if the are the right length and have attachment nods on the ends, they could be made into a solid ring with the recoupler mod. Come to think of it, they could even be launched individually, and assembled in space with docking ports, this would mean no dependency on other mods like EL or recoupler if you want to release this idea as a part in this mod. Doesn't address the getting it to rotate issue, but I'd rather have more pieces to play with, TBH. Anyway....to cut this meandering post short, love your work, can't stop myself from picturing different uses for elements of the parts you have made.
  3. @Lisias Your time is valuable, and valued....do you have a patreon?
  4. Honestly, this releasing without clouds would be a major oversight.. I have been trying to figure out what the raison d'etre is for a KSP2, ie, what would actually set this game apart/give players a reason to migrate over. Clouds, some sort of freeIVA type thing, proper landed craft physics (including reliable wheel physics, READ: FRICTION); as far as I'm concerned, are the BARE MINIMUM requirements for me to even bother thinking about switching over.
  5. I asked that question in literally the first post on this page, and it was answered immediately after that;
  6. This is the best Dev Notes you guys have released for nearly half a year. Kudos, and god speed on the bug hunt in the last moments before release.
  7. Does anyone know where I can point my wallet to help them keep spacedock up? Do they have a patreon or something?
  8. @allista Would there be any way to get this mod to ignore the volume aspect of a vessel? I want to "deploy" a blimp in atmosphere. As there aren't currently any deployable balloons I like, I am thinking of doing it with this parts mod: But I want the hangar much smaller than those parts, to simulate inflation when the vessel is launched from the hangar.
  9. Is interesting a good thing, or bad thing? Does it make landings easier for you, or more difficult?
  10. You realize that Apollo barely even relied on manual flying? The main actual hands on stick moment is just the final descent, most of the flight is automated. Also, using an autopilot doesn’t just require “one click” because you first have to design and build your craft.
  11. I think that @linuxgurugamer is a better person to ping for that.
  12. Thank you, I appreciate this high level summary. As an end user, rather than a dev or even a modder, explanations like this help to guide my limited understanding of what goes on behind the scenes.
  13. Honestly I'm a little apprehensive about this. Last time they tried to add an essential mod to stock, betterburntime, to be specific, they rather botched it. Sure, it LOOKS slick, but the stock implementation is slow and generates unnecessary garbage. In fact, I still use the mod version because it improves performance over the stock option. So this time, yeah, great, we get some stuff that looks all shiny and new, but I will reserve my opinion for when I get a chance to actually test this out.
  14. @linuxgurugamerFeature request, could the button to turn the graph off be made something other than alt + (numpad) * ? Those of us on a laptop with no numpad are unable to close the window without an external keyboard connected.
  15. Does anyone know what is with this? https://spacedock.info/mod/2026/[x] science updated (is that spacedock one better than this one in some way?)