Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lordqarlyn

  1. Thanks. I am using MechJeb - the latest, Korpernicus, OPM, Asclepius planet mod, KER, Distant Objects, Final Frontier, Planetshine, the SpaceY mods, and the Near Future mods, all should be latest versions. When I get a chance I will send the craft file, which other than MechJeb, is stock, as well as log files.
  2. Thanks guys for your suggestions. In fact I have tried switching control points and orientation. MechJeb still does the same thing, as soon as I enable speed control, even at a setting of 0m/s, it accelerates in the direction the rover is facing until it flips or reaches the top speed of the wheels. Regular operation of the rover works fine, I can use rovers, but without the speed control it's tedius.
  3. I am having problems with MechJeb Rover Autopilot speed control. I searched this forum with no luck, at least nothing within the same versions of KSP & MechJeb. I started a new game recently, made sure MechJeb was updated to the latest version. I pretty much only use MechJeb for three things in the game, three critical things for me; orbital rendezvous, docking, and cruise control for my rovers. The former two work fine. I cannot seem to get speed control to work right. Whenever I enable it, even at 0m/s, the rover will just keep accelerating. I have tried both auto and override for friction and traction control, I tried various settings. Once I did get it to work on a rover, but I cannot duplicate with I did even when I duplicate the settings on the working rover. I've always had it working in previous versions, once I optimized the friction and traction settings for the particular world. I really hope to get this working because for me rovers are a pain without MechJeb speed control. Thanks!
  4. Removing Planetshine fixed the pink square for me, unfortunately. Hopefully someone will update that mod and KER too. If I knew more than squat about modding I would do it myself.
  5. Heck, I'm not even asking for deformable terrain, just more featured and varied terrain. But deformable would be cool. While I myself am not much good at base building, I know many players are and love it.
  6. Dude I'm with you. It would be nice if there was a biome-specific "stone" for each biome. Or, to get the full science value, you would have to make multiple visits and collect multiple stones. I hate bringing other games, but again I love how No Man's Sky did the planets. I'd love to see that method implemented in KSP. Not only would the potential to have many good science value collectibles, the terrain features would be so cool; there would be real canyons, extensive caves, ravines, real mountains (though I suppose Kerbin has mountains lol). With much fewer bodies in game, they could do a lot of interesting things with it.
  7. Here's something I noticed when I was doing my first Mun landing with the Breaking Ground pack, terrain scatter features don't cast shadows, however, Mun stone features did. That caught my eye right away, that is, seeing what I thought from above were merely terrain scatter features but some of them were casting shadows. I was landing while the sun was nearly at horizon so things were casting long shadows. I attempted to guide my lander to one of them, but being still early tech and a while since I played and just newly experienced kerbalnauts it was a little tricky for me. For now I've turned off scatter until I get used to what Mun Stone features look like. Then I will turn back on terrain scatter. I'm one of those weirdos who like terrain scatter, it does add a tiny amount of surface features to otherwise nearly featureless surfaces. Anyway, if you happen to have terrain scatter on, look for terrain features that are casting shadows.
  8. I have to chime in as one who also thinks the planets and moons are bland and almost cookie cutter like. What I would like to see, the planets with terrain and features like No Man's Sky. Okay, okay that game isn't perfect, but when I am playing it, going through caves, on rough terrain, even hills and mountains, flying around on the planets, I often find myself thinking how cool it would be if Mun or Duna or Eve had features like these. To land in a spot and just over the hill, a long lava tube that goes on and on, and deep inside, are new types of surface samples (perhaps individual features could be their own biomes) that add even more to science and perhaps even prestige. I mean seriously, I would love to see the analogue of Olympus Mons or Mariner Valles on Duna lol. While I am sure there are mods that do this, (Asclepius does come a little bit close to being a planet with terrain like those in NMS), as others pointed out being stock integrates with the game much better.
  9. I too am really looking forward the 1.2 version. I never realized how much I depended on the measurements it provides, especially the TWR and delta-v per stage, and that I can change the reference from Kerbin to other bodies to get a feel how my spacecraft will perform, well, in space. In my view, it should be stock. I see KER like your engineering team. You the boss proposes configuration, KER acting as the grunt engineers does the grunt math work to calculate the expected performance.
  10. I'll say it again, thanks, and this should be stock. It's a perfect stopgap and the next logical step in kerballed spaceflight.
  11. Off topic but is it bad that when I play Skyrim, I can't look at either of the moons without trying to figure out the delta-v needed to reach them and potential landing sites lol?
  12. Well, for Mun and Minmas missions, I use radial engines and attach the rover underneath using an inverted decoupler. After landing I release the rover and I am in business. And at least in this version, rovers handle better, from 0.90 to 1.05 they were practically unplayable to me.
  13. So, okay, I am not the only one who has landing legs that explode when a kerbal bumps into them. But at least rovers work much better now.
  14. Awesome! This should have been part of stock. You shouldn't need to add yet another decoupler.
  15. Yes, I'm easily able to make kerballed rockets under 18t. I use a Rockomax BACC as the first stage, and a lv-t45 2nd stage, with a tiny lv-909 stage that inserts and stabilizes the orbits and reentry. I even have enough weight to spare to add goo, and an octo command pod for non pilots. what I haven't been able to do is make a Mun flyby or landing under 18t - under 30 parts easy, but not under 18t.
  16. I have had this problem since .24, particularly with the Mk1 capsules. it's really annoying, since EVAs are essential to the game.
  • Create New...