rmaine

Members
  • Content Count

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

81 Excellent

1 Follower

About rmaine

  • Rank
    Curious George

Recent Profile Visitors

1,046 profile views
  1. Oh, I also see the same thing. From Zer0Kerbal's description above, I infer this is a bug.
  2. GitHub one downloaded and unzipped fine for me. And I think I forgot to mention thanks much for this.
  3. Hmm. Hadn't occurred to me it would be sensitive to that, but ok. 64-bit Windows 10, USA, 7zip 19.0 (which I just now checked is the latest version) for Windows x64. System fairly overpowered for the task. i7-7820 CPU, 32 GB ram, NVidia RTX 2080 8 GB video, 2 TB SSD with 1.3 TB of it free. Now that you ask, I also tried unzipping it on my iMac using the unzip program. Also gets an error for the same files. Note that it does unzip most of the files ok. Just "poodles" (as the forum bowdlerizer likes to put it) about those two.
  4. Well, maybe it is just you and me. But that seems unlikely. :-)
  5. Thanks taniwha. That's useful data. I had figured out about avoiding springy suspensions. For supply ships to my Gilly base, I avoid landing gear as they aren't needed for landing there and Gilly is really bad about launching things high into the air on scene load; I just stick a few horizontal beams out from the base of my lander part to help with stability on the ground there. On the root part in particular sagging. Hmm. I already have gotten into making my root pretty minimal - just enough to conveniently be able to expand from (using simple construction). But you give me the idea of trying to set it on a local high spot or maybe something to jack it up just a tiny bit; I'll have to think further on that.
  6. No, I'm not using Blitzy. I have the toolbar controller because several mods that I use require it, but it is basically sort of pointless because without Blitzy there's nothing for it to actually control.
  7. You'd have to ask zer0Kerbal to be 100% sure, but I'm 90% sure that K&K cupola is from planetary base systems. It fits the form factor of the other parts from that mod. I don't want to delete that mod from my save just to check because that would trash everything. I also noticed that the ordinary cupola didn't work; see my post just a few above here. I couldn't tell you about years ago. I've had KSP a few years, but only started using this mod a few months ago.
  8. Do you have the Kerbal Planetary Base Systems mod installed? I'm almost certain that cupola is in that mod. I don't see (though maybe my old eyes overlooked it) that mod listed in CKAN as a dependency for NSSC, but it probably ought to be. The cupola is unlocked by "command modules" in the tech tree. For me, it shows up in the VAB build menu under the Planetary Surface Structures tab,, though that might be a function of the "Group all Parts in Function filter" setting option for Planetary Base Systems.
  9. Pretty minor as "bugs" go, but the OP of this thread mentions the current version as 3.8 and then has a link to what is "new and noteworthy". That link appears to point to a page that has no information after version 3.4. Yes, I find the actual info about 2 posts above this one.
  10. Far be it for me to say that you shouldn't be able to have such an option, which I can then ignore. But it sure seems unlikely to be viable to me. For a start, there's that caveat about the game being bug free. Might as well wish for a free pony to be included while hoping for other things that ain't gonna happen. It's frustrating enough as it is now to have to go back to some save after hitting some bug. Like the ones where my orbit just starts changing as though I'm thrusting even though I'm not. Or I have a base that is perfectly fine, but then self-destructs because of physics phase-in when I go elsewhere and then back to that scene. Or other things. Those sorts of things are frustrating enough as is, but would be beyond frustrating in an ironman mode. And then, as someone else mentioned, there would be the need to add "simulation" capability. Somewhat amusingly redundant in that the whole game is a simulation in the first place. I ought to be able to test whether a design is capable of doing the job before committing to fly it in ironman. Hey, NASA never simulates things before flying, right? :-) (Actually they simulate the um... nether regions out of things before flying.) Of course, NASA also heavily uses autopilots, which some people here seem to consider "cheating." I recall seeing a KSP 1 mod for something like a simulation mode inside of KSP. And there's always the option of starting a separate test game in a sandbox non-career mode to try out something, but that's a lot of fuss. For a decent ironman mode, you'd want that built in. Anyway, all in all, no I would not use an ironman mode. That doesn't mean I'd object to you having one available, but it does imply that I'd hate to see significant development resources spent on such a thing to the exclusion of something I'd consider more useful. (And development resources *ALWAYS* involve tradeoffs.)
  11. Aha. Likely useful data. I just hit it again. Have a screenshot of input locks, but it is incredibly boring and not worth the bandwidth. Just says current input locks: AmpYear_KeyBinder and bitmask 0. I wasn't even using ampYear when I previously hit this, so that's presumably not a useful hint. But you asked about the config.xml file and deleting the PluginData folder (which has literally nothing but that file). Copied that file and deleted the folder. Voila! (Or as I'm prone to mistype it, viola). Deleting that folder made the problem go away. The folder was automatically recreated when I restarted the game and I compared the old and newly created config.xml files. Only difference was in the MainGUIWindowPos. The old (bad) file has NaN for both x and y. That looks highly suspicious to me. File shown below, but I'm betting that was the important bit. BTW, I run with a KSP UI Scale of 170% (otherwise, my old eyes can't read anything unless I drastically lower the resolution). That might be related and might be why this isn't hitting darn near everyone who uses the mod. ?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <config> <bool name="DisplayTargetGUI">0</bool> <bool name="DisplayDescentProfileGUI">0</bool> <bool name="DisplaySettingsGUI">0</bool> <bool name="UseBlizzyToolbar">1</bool> <bool name="DisplayTrajectories">0</bool> <bool name="DisplayTrajectoriesInFlight">0</bool> <bool name="AlwaysUpdate">0</bool> <bool name="DisplayCompleteTrajectory">0</bool> <bool name="BodyFixedMode">0</bool> <bool name="AutoUpdateAerodynamicModel">1</bool> <rect name="MapGUIWindowPos"> <xmin>0</xmin> <xmax>1</xmax> <ymin>0</ymin> <ymax>0</ymax> </rect> <bool name="MainGUIEnabled">1</bool> <vector2 name="MainGUIWindowPos"> <x>NaN</x> <y>NaN</y> </vector2> <int name="MainGUICurrentPage">0</int> <bool name="GUIEnabled">0</bool> <bool name="NewGui">1</bool> <double name="IntegrationStepSize">2</double> <int name="MaxPatchCount">4</int> <int name="MaxFramesPerPatch">15</int> <bool name="UseCache">0</bool> <bool name="DefaultDescentIsRetro">1</bool> </config>
  12. "One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish..." If you haven't had young kids, you might not recognize the Dr. Seuss allusion. If you have had kids, you might have been making such an allusion. :-)
  13. Ah. Good point about "EL" vs "EPL". The grammatical distinction between "extra planetary" and "extraplanetary" is probably a bit subtle for many people. Probably about as difficult to get people to understand that one as it is to get them to understand that the plural of "craft" is "craft" (a pet peeve of mine, as I find it downright jarring to read :crafts". :-)
  14. I once tried wordstabilizer. A brief test seemed to help with 2 of my bases that were a bit prone to problems. So I started playing using it. Before long I was at a base that had previously been fine, so I hadn't tested it. Broke the base right in two. :-( That was the end of my trying it out. I can't tell what's in USI-Core without installing it. I don't know an easy way to tell what parts a mod adds if it isn't documented separately somewhere, Guess I could try installing it to see.
  15. That (having some way to afix bases to the ground) would be great.It's one of the bigger annoyances that I've run into that bases don't stay put. Some crawl around (and sometimes even crawl into each other if you have multiple ones close together). Others do a whiplash thing on scene load. Some go flying into the air, possibly with fatal results. Gilly is particularly prone to bases flying into the air. I've fiddled with lots of things, but haven't yet gotten anything that really solves it consistently. None of this seems particularly realistic.