• Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

13,805 Excellent

About Snark

  • Rank
    E Pluribus Boojum

Contact Methods

  • Website URL Array

Recent Profile Visitors

17,784 profile views
  1. A lengthy, illuminating, and useful technical discussion, with many posts by thoughtful people, has unfortunately had to be removed due to running afoul of the rules (and the EULA) from the get-go. Folks, please remember that you're not allowed to decompile KSP. You're allowed to access public and protected members of classes; that's it. You're also not allowed to inject stuff via reflection-- anything you can't do via public/protected members is out of bounds. We understand that the discussion here was well-meant, but unfortunately it's just not allowed, due to legal boundaries. What's really unfortunate, here, is that much of the ensuing discussion wasn't actually about decompiling per se, and if it had been introduced in a different manner, could have stayed. However, since folks were directly responding to the forbidden content and quoting each other back and forth on it, that made the whole thing into one snarled monolithic block; basically the only way to take out any of it was to take out all of it. And that makes me sad, because it was an otherwise illuminating discussion. It means that the casualties of the snippage include useful observations by various fine folks who took the time and effort to (legitimately) look into things and make useful technical conclusions. It means that these nice people's time ended up being wasted, and it means that the community doesn't get the benefit of their analysis. Folks, if you see someone coloring outside the lines (e.g. discussing decompilation), by all means report the post so the moderators can have a look at it... but please do not otherwise respond because any ensuing conversation-- even if otherwise legitimate-- could end up getting sufficiently entangled with it that we end up having to throw the baby out with the bathwater, as happened here. TL;DR: Please do report problematic posts, but please don't respond to them. If you're sufficiently concerned about something to report it, then it's best not to respond. We apologize for the inconvenience, and thank you for your understanding.
  2. As @Aazard points out, these are part of the game assets and aren't accessible as stand-alone files. This means that, alas, they are not available to players or modders, since the EULA disallows decompiling game files. As the add-on posting rules explain, Sorry about that.
  3. We're sorry, but posting links to recompiles in this fashion violated the add-on posting rules, so we've had to remove the link. It's fine to publish a new fork of a mod (assuming its license allows it)... but if you do, you have to follow the same rules that any publisher of a mod does. There are hoops to jump through (including a license, linking to source code, etc.) Yes, it's a hassle and we're sorry about that, but alas, it's necessary.
  4. Since you're posting an awkwardly cropped and almost unreadable photograph of a screen rather than taking a screenshot in-game, it's almost impossible to tell what you're referring to. As far as I can tell from the image, yeah, it kinda looks like a loading screen... what's your concern? KSP has always had loading screens.
  5. Kind of hard to read from the image. I'd guess it's some kind of loading screen, myself.
  6. Hi @OvinandRusk, The way you're trying to post your image isn't going to work-- you're trying to link to a private thing that only you can see. If you'd like someone to look at your pictures, you need to do it a different way. Basically what you need to do is this: Host your image on a publicly viewable hosting site. There are lots of free sites that can do this, but is probably the most popular here on the forum, likely because it doesn't require you to make an account-- you can post images anonymously with just a couple of clicks. Just go to their website, click on the green "new post" button up top, drag your image to the "drop image here" box, and you're done! Once it's hosted there, right-click on the image itself and choose "Copy Image Location". Important, you want the URL of the image, not the URL of the page that it's sitting on. Don't copy the URL out of your web browser's address bar. If the URL you copy doesn't end in ".jpg" or ".png" you haven't copied the right thing. Paste that URL into your forum post and it will automagically get converted into an inline image.
  7. No. The mod is licensed "All Rights Reserved", which means you're allowed to download it from the author's posted location and nowhere else. If he's taken that down, then that means you can't get it, sorry.
  8. Hi @NanoOps , and welcome to the forum! So, just a side note: This thread is really old, from 2014, and the game has been through many revisions since the people who posted here wrote what they did. Accordingly, I'd advise against reading too much into such an old thread-- if you've got questions, better to start your own thread. Accordingly, locking this one to prevent further confusion. In answer to your question, though: if you have a science instrument that contains a measurement, and you want to get credit for that by retrieving it on Kerbin, then there are basically two ways. One way is to recover the instrument itself, i.e. have the instrument still be on your ship when you land, and then recover the ship. The other way is to collect the science from the instrument, either using the "science box" part or by sending a kerbal on Eva to remove the science, and then retrieve that. If you've gotten the science out of the instrument, then you no longer need to recover the instrument itself.
  9. Yep, I'm getting this, too. Running Scatterer, but no other visual f/x mods.
  10. For a target in low orbit, I just wait until they're about 10 degrees above KSC's western horizon and then launch direct to intercept, docking before it even reaches that Korea-looking peninsula to the east. For a target in high orbit, I launch to low orbit and then set a maneuver node, drag its handle until Ap reaches the target's altitude, and then slide the maneuver node around until I get a good intercept with the target. Thus, there's only ever about 1/4th of an orbit for a low-orbit target, and at most 1 orbit for a high-orbit target.
  11. Much content has been removed or redacted, due to people who should know better choosing to turn a civil discussion about physics into a personal flamewar, slinging insults and personal remarks. C'mon, folks, you know better than this. I can't believe I'm having to say this, but it looks like a refresher is in order: It is always okay to state an opinion. (But other people have different opinions, and it would be unreasonable to expect them to agree with you.) It is okay to state assertions of fact. But others may disagree, so you'd be well-advised to cite evidence if you make an assertion. "Everyone knows this" is not evidence. "You're ignorant if you don't understand this" is also not evidence. When someone asserts that you're wrong, by citing what you said, it is not a personal attack on you. This is simply what's called "civil debate" and is perfectly fine. They're not insulting you. They're merely pointing out that they believe you are, in fact, wrong, because reasons. Which you might be. Or maybe they're wrong. Which is why things work best if all parties concerned simply cite their evidence so that people can decide for themselves whom to believe. It is never okay to make personal remarks. It's not okay to make personal remarks in response to civil debate. It's also not okay to make personal remarks in response to someone else making personal remarks. When you do this, it's not "debate", it's a "catfight", and not something that's appropriate for the forums. To be clear: "Personal remarks" (which are not allowed) includes addressing a person's behavior rather than the content of what they said. Example: calling a person ignorant, or uneducated, or uninformed, or speculating about their level of personal knowledge. Example: referring to or putting interpretations on a person's behavior (e.g. "you always do X", "you don't seem to understand X", etc.) Address the post, not the poster. In short: Please comport yourselves like civil adults. Don't respond to civil debate (including someone saying you're wrong) by making personal remarks. And if someone else makes personal remarks, please either ignore them or report them-- but don't respond to them. If you don't feel that you can be a grown-up, or can't handle people civilly disagreeing with you, then kindly hold your fire and pass on by. Thank you for your understanding.
  12. A lot of content, from various people who really should know better, has been removed. This is due to various combinations of: off topic personal remarks, insults, or attacks publicly calling for moderator action ...all of which are against the forum rules (2.2.o, 2.2.d, and 3.2, respectively). Folks, please play nice. Remember that we're all pals here, and if you can't discuss something civilly, then just stroll on by. If you see someone posting something that you disagree with, then by all means debate it-- but please debate it on the merits, not by trying to ridicule the person who posted it. Address the post, not the poster. Furthermore, if you see someone behaving in a way that seems to you to be against the rules, by all means report the post so that the moderators can have a look-- it's what we're for. But any report made is private, between you and the moderator team; it's not okay to threaten people with reports, per rule 3.2 as mentioned above. I trust that we can all comport ourselves like civil adults? Thanks.
  13. Short answer: It needs only xenon fuel. No regular fuel required; don't bother adding a regular fuel tank. It needs a lot of electricity, so have plenty of solar panels. It needs to be in a vacuum. Don't try to use it until you're in space.
  14. Other things that can stop you from being able to transfer fuel: If you're in a career game, and you haven't upgraded the R&D facility to at least level 2 If you've got the "Fuel transfer obeys crosfeed rules" option turned on, and there's some "No Fuel Crossfeed" part in the path between the two parts you're trying to exchange fuel.
  15. My solution to this particular conundrum is that I play deliberately finite careers. That is, when I set out to play a KSP career, I begin with a particular "story arc" in mind. In particular, a very important criterion is the goal: what does "done" look like? Depending on how ambitious / committed I'm feeling, the goal might be something modest, or it might be something big and complicated that would take a long time. Other than the goal, the other part of deciding on a story arc is deciding on which game play-altering mods, if any, I'll use in that save: is life support a thing? is the solar system modified or replaced? etc. Once I've picked out the set of mods and chosen my "done" criterion, then I set out to play the career. Length varies based on complexity of goal and how much spare time I have available for playing, but typically it occupies me for a month or two. Then, when I achieve the goal, yay! I win! I pat myself on the back for a job well done, and I'm finished. When I feel like playing KSP again-- which might be right away, or might be later-- then I pick a new set of mods and/or a new goal, and start a brand new career. I make an effort to make each career something different and fresh (by picking different goals and/or mods). That's how I keep KSP "fresh" for me over the years, and why I never get bored of it.