Esquire42

Members
  • Content Count

    114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Esquire42

  1. I'm glad you took this up again. I have been busy in with academic/work life (I'm a sysadmin) and have no idea when I'll be able to get back into KSP. So I'm glad this turned out well.
  2. It's on CKAN....for 1.1.2. Really shouldn't be expecting something from a mod that hasn't been updated since a year ago.
  3. Just a piece of advice, I'd put the mod's version number after its name in parenthesis in the title of the thread; a massive lot of modders use brackets in front of the name to indicate game version.
  4. Probably something with tech tree stuff. Do you have any tech tree mods installed?
  5. Same(ish?) models, new textures. But I agree Nertea did a great job with them!
  6. Possibly. Is there a thread for this? Nertea doesn't need to be spammed with unnecessary notifications.
  7. I play with MKS so a supply chain for orbital construction would be an extensive mining setup that includes regular ore, metallic ore, uranite, karborundium, etc, plus the infrastructure to haul those materials and construct craft in orbit (via EPL). (I highly suggesting checking out MKS and the rest of USI, it adds a great deal of depth to the game.) So thus I'd rather set up a Kerbal-less supply line first to create a self-sustaining base before sending Kerbals in. I'm not sure why you're confused by long-range relays. It's exactly what it says on the tin. Motherships are expensive things. It's much easier and efficient to send smaller ships to enable orbital construction and go from there.
  8. 48 hours in real time? I mean, sure, this is KSP, if it's conceivable you can do it with enough boosters and gravity assists. Are Nert's nuclear engines designed for that/pragmatic to use it in this manner? Absolutely not. As far as the mod technology world goes, these have a nice balance between thrust and ISP - about in the 500s-1000s range if my memory serves me right. Since these run on LH2, there'd need to be a massive amount of fuel tanks to haul up/build in orbit. So, there's still room for improvement. Near Future Propulsion has electrical engines that get close to 10000s of specific impulse with tiny amounts of thrust. You could leverage them in the right way to get there in time in an efficient manner. But by far the best way to do interstellar is to either have a really long mission with electrical engines to set up a supply chain for orbital construction, or use RoverDude's warp drive to set up jump beacons and optimize a system for those on either side. I play with all of Nert's mods and the USI suite + Deep Freeze, OPM, and lots of others, so I'd probably do drone construction of a supply line to build ships and send a bunch of frozen Kerbals over when I have a self-sufficient base. Long-range relays are cheap, Kerbals not so much.
  9. Nice job! Would you consider sharing the craft file when you're finished? I'd love to fly that.
  10. Amazing mod @dboi88! Definitely a must have now. @linuxgurugamer, is this another one of those mods that you have to fiddle around with to get onto CKAN? I don't see it yet; my apologies if it's just not showing up for me.
  11. Holy **** I didn't see that this got released until now. Well done @Shadowmage! All the rep!
  12. Necro-thread! Sorry this has fallen by the wayside. I've been really busy. Planning on getting to work on this again soon, within the next few weeks. In addition, if anyone would like to join @captinjoehenry and myself with development/QA of this mod please PM me.
  13. REGARDLESS of whose fault it is, you shouldn't have two copies of the same mod in the same game to begin with. This may be the only conflict you've had like this, but that has nothing to do with where the issue occurs. Your experience is not the complete set of all possible mod combinations in KSP. When a mod developer says that the issue is coming from elsewhere, it's typically coming from elsewhere. Both K. Yeon and stali79 take pride in maintaining/developing this mod and want it to be bug-free; they're not passing the buck and being lazy. Also, may I suggest italics or bold or underline for emphasis?
  14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers English has less than a billion native speakers. So less than ~14% of the world population. Not that universal. Sure, it's big by language standards, but most languages aren't that big; there's no language that makes up the majority of the population. Also, it's pretty obvious who will use the German localization: German speakers. Duh. And from an educational standpoint, you should learn Mandarin, since it's the language with the most speakers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_total_number_of_speakers Yeah nope. Chinese is bigger still.
  15. I'd give you a log but my install is insanely modded, and sometimes not nicely either. It *could* be an issue with Tweakable Everything like linux suggested above... if I have time I'll run an install with just that and Hangar EDIT: Saw your second post. The one I've noticed it with is the Mk3 cargo bay, because I've been playing around with rover deployment recently. EDIT2: Welp, TweakableEverything isn't the culprit. I can give you a very messy log file while I look for another possible conflict.
  16. No, although that's a lovely mod. There is (now was in my install) a MM patch for Hangers that added that functionality to stock cargo bays. It added the mod's "open bay doors" toggle to cargo bays (meant to be used when the cargo bay is used as a hanger) on top of the standard "open" tweakable. However, these two didn't always work well together: clicking open wouldn't open the doors, nor would clicking open bay doors.
  17. There wasn't anything mentioned in the OP so I was assuming it was more complicated than that!
  18. Is there a possible way to easily remove hanger functionality from the stock cargo bays? The "open bay doors"/"open" tweakables can't coexist with each other and don't work consistently.
  19. I'm a fan of either of these two. Maybe a combination-- all tanks can get cooling eventually, but for non-cryo tanks the cooling is more resource intensive.
  20. I've had issues with tiny probes being randomly hard to control before and changing my maneuver nodes vastly because of it. It might be a physics engine thing.
  21. I've seen mixed responses to the question. Some places I've seen yes, and some no. There is an option in the persistent file for part upgrades in sandbox. Porkjet's revamped rocket parts show that upgrades are available but I don't use those parts enough in my sandbox save to look at the difference. I can do so sometime this weekend. EDIT: Looks like it's all good. Might have been some Filter Extension weirdness.
  22. Same thing here. I removed Filter Extensions entirely and the issue was resolved.
  23. Hi guys, have any of you had any luck with installing this via CKAN? It'd be a great addition to my silly BDA install. It might be something @linuxgurugamer or @politas need to look at; it seems there's been issues getting new mods on CKAN recently.
  24. Hi @DMagic, I'm not seeing the relay upgrade for the antennas appear in sandbox mode. I do have the Part Upgrade in sandbox setting checked, but the SIGNET devices display as direct transmitters only.
  25. You should also see when @ethernet was last online. If it was a few days ago, then I'd recommend a longer waiting period, but if it's been months, I would go ahead immediately. EDIT: Looks like it's been a few months since they've visited. I'd go ahead and make it official. Also, thank you for recompiling Station Science! Mods: Should this be moved to Add-On Discussion?