Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Shiolle

  1. Contract Configurator 1.27.1 is working with KSP 1.7.3 for me. I've seen there was a problem with one of the Fine Print contracts on the latest version. Not sure if this is your case or not.
  2. A little bit of feedback, if I may. Background: I have started a new campaign recently with ResearchBodies, Tarsier Space Technologies and Other Worlds reboot (which adds Cersani system) as well as other mods which won't be relevant. I am using default settings as I thought to use the mod as it was intended. Difficulty is custom, but based on Hard. I have even written a ResearchBodies config for Other Worlds. Here is my experience with Research Bodies in this context. By far the most efficient way to discover bodies is sending probes to them. Never bother with anything but discovery
  3. Hi. What is supposed to happen when you point a Tarsier Space Technologies telescope at a discovered (has icon on the map) but unresearched (0 progress) body? Should you see it in the telescope? Edit: The answer is "yes", you can take their pictures although they will have their textures blurred (because the bodies are unresearched). Additionally, when you transmit or recover the resulting experiment data, it will add 20% progress to this body research and will charge you proportionally to the progress, so this route may be quicker, but is not cheaper than going through telescope contract
  4. They are working on multiple star systems support. I was able to build a version of Kerbalism (using two different branches) that worked quite well, and I've done the config. So, as you can see that's not finished, but once it is, I can provide you with this config if you wish.
  5. If I made a compatibility config for this mod to support Kerbalism (add radiation profiles to all the bodies) would it be a config for this mod or Kerbalism? Which mod supports which?
  6. @Sir Mortimer Thank you very much. The new branch is working great. I've also experimented with the reference body, and this setting is working as long as there is only one planet mod installed. The worlds beyond is itself modular, however that is not the problem since planets are loaded after stars and they should not affect the index. However other mods may affect it, depending on the order in which bodies are loaded. However, with these new changes, reference body is very easy to assign automatically. I created a pull request for this in sstu-and-solar branch. Thank you
  7. Thanks a lot, @Sir Mortimer, for providing the branch for multiple star support. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to test it properly yet because of a couple of problems there. All the problems I've encountered so far have the same cause: the root of the hierarchy of celestial objects (Sun in my case) doesn't have an orbit (it is null). So, the first problem was with Storm.Storm_frequency(double dist) method. It produces a null reference exception because it gets the star (Sun) of the home body (Kerbin) and tries to retrieve its orbit, which is null. Log. It seems this method tries
  8. @Sir Mortimer Thank you for your reply. I've created the first iteration of configs for one of the smaller solar systems in that pack based on values for similar stock planets and the description of the bodies in the pack. However, the major issue aren't even the values, but the fact that all magnetopauses are oriented towards Kerbol and not their host star (see the screenshot below), which is not even coplanar with the bodies in the new system. I will try to install Extrasolar to see if this issue is somehow resolved there, and if it is, how. While this is ongoing, I found out that som
  9. Hi. Thank you for the great mod. I have a question about Kerbalism support. There is a nuclear reactor in this mod which does not have a radiation source attached when Kerbalism is installed. Do you know if anyone has made a fix for this issue previously?
  10. Hi, and thank you for the great mod. I would like to use some bodies from the World Beyond mod. Of course, planets there don't have radiation profiles, and I would like to create a few. This is a huge mod, and I'm only using two small systems in it (it's fairly modular). I'm not sure I have the patience to cover the whole mod. I have read the section of the documentation about modding Kerbalism, but I still have some questions. I'm not sure how to approach multiple stars orbiting each other. I've seen in OPM config inside Kerbalism, it extended Kerbol's heliopause. Do I need for the
  11. I'm writing a patch that modifies a significant number of blocks. It references each of them by name because I don't want to affect blocks in other mods with similar names, so using wildcards is not an option. I also have a significant list of mods this patch will not support. I have to apply it to every top level entry (PART in my case). Is it possible to specify a common need block for multiple entries or the whole file? I've read documentation on module manager and looked through a few mods that do similar things, but I have not found anything like this. Is it possible?
  12. I personally was looking at Probes Before Crew. I can say with that the configs I'm working on, when they are done, will support PBC, but integrating with Unkerballed looks like much more work, since there are more changes to the tech tree on top of CTT.
  13. Could I ask you to remove the link to CTT configs from the OP for the time being? They are horribly out of date and Unmanned Before Manned is no longer developed. I am working on an update.
  14. This is indeed a refined CTT patch that tries to improve aircraft progression and actually give a reason to use propeller engines early in career mode. Regarding whether you should link it to the OP, that is up to you. However, I made this patch for a career I started and I have no intention of supporting it. I know very little about modding in KSP and module manager in particular, so the configs are most likely probably written in the most awful and inefficient way possible. As for engine weight, it's not just the engines. If you tried to bring engine's weights in line with historical fi
  15. Thank you. I was able to get a plane off the ground following your advice. In the end all I needed to do was to use the same wide wing you do on my designs. Interestingly enough, your plane has the same wing area as one of my biplanes, but it appears that two large wide wings are much better than four thinner ones. Just for the record, the planes I was talking about: 1. Monoplane: 2. Biplane: 3. What actually flew:
  16. I will post screenshots when I get home in a few hours. In the meanwhile, I tried fairly simple monoplane and biplane designs, my plane's wet mass was around 2.8 tons. If that sounds like a lot, remember that the lightest of the early engines weighs 800 kg and the starting cockpit weighs 1 ton. The plane was woefully underpowered, but at this scale a faithful reconstruction is impossible: for example, the 9J "Baron" engine weighs 2.5 times as much as the whole Fokker Dr.I triplane it was modeled after. With such weight, wing load shoots through the roof and take-off speed is over 60 m/s.
  17. I tried to play in career mode with the setup I mentioned, and I ran into another problem. Those early engines' velocity curves are brutal. 25 m/s takeoffs just don't happen with Ferram Aerospace. I was able to get my plane off the ground without it as an experiment, but not with FAR. I tried different things that would lower stall speed, but it is hard to do with limited parts at the start of the campaign. Have you tried making airplanes with early engines with FAR? What did they look like?
  18. First of all, thank you for this beautiful mod. I recently tried to setup mods for a new campaign, and I thought about using Airplanes Plus. Among other mods, I wanted to use were Unmanned Before Manned with Community Tech Tree and B9 Aerospace Core. I’ve found the patch for CTT by Three_Pounds (thank you!), but I don’t like how the parts from this mod are assigned to the tech tree. Airplanes Plus engines are completely outclassed by the stock engines by the time you get them, and you even encounter some of the early piston engines when you already have supersonic flight from stock parts!
  19. Thank you for the answer. I've read that passage, but I don't have any custom sunflares. I mean, that is 100% stock GPP install on a clear KSP. Also, I don't really understand what the numbers in that file mean, so I don't know what exactly I need to fix. Previously (in GPP 1.1) there was a separate Ciro.cfg to use with scatterer, so perhaps I will try to find the difference between Ciro config in 1.2.2 and 1.2.3, but I though that recent changes should have removed the need to do it. P. S. Maybe I have misunderstood what you're saying. Do you mean that the screenshot I posted is how it s
  20. I have a problem with sunflares in 1.2.3, this times with a only GPP, clouds and scatterer on a clean 1.2.2 install. This is what it looks like: This is what my GameData folder looks like: Default scatterer settings, although turning "sunflare shader" option in the scatterer on or off doesn't make any difference (no restart, I don't remember if it is needed in this case). This is a log file from a short run: KSP_GPPCloudScatterer123 Version 1.2.2 worked fine, as far as I can tell, though I have to say my flares never looked anything like the screenshot in the post abov
  21. Yes, GPP distributes scatterer 0.0256. Has the config format changed from 0.256 to 0.3? And also, could I still ask why scatterer configs for Extrasolar contain override of sunflares for the Sun as well as Valentine?
  22. Thank you for the answer. What I have in mind is to make valid scatterer configs for GPP's version of scatterer for Extrasolar bodies. I don't think I need to edit individual planet configs, am I? So the task is then limited to making compatible planet list and sunflares configs.
  23. First of all, thanks for the great mod. I was trying to use this mod with Galileo's Planet Pack and everything is working fine except sun flares: I've traced the problem to scatterer configs for Extrasolar. Galileo's Planets Pack distributes its own version of scatterer, and although I'm not familiar with transformations for module manager, it seems that Extrasolar overrides default scatterer config completely rather than insert its own bodies. I think I can edit EVO_planetList.cfg, but I there is something I don't understand. Why does Extrasolar edit Sun's flares too? Shouldn't
  24. @JadeOfMaar Ok, I'm sorry about posting the question prematurely. Alternative Ciro.cfg without scatterer and regular Ciro.cfg with scatterer work great. However before I started experimenting I got this problem on a version with scatterer and original cfg. I was also trying to make GPP work with Extrasolar mod there, so I will continue my experiments. Thank you.
  • Create New...