• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral


  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer
  1. Ahhh.... my bad. Too many mods. I'm used to seeing the "SKH" from Ground Construction and my brain was thinking "SP" from EL. Too many mods... too many acronyms. *heh*
  2. You mentioned "Matkits, Electric Charge", but not "SpecializedParts". Do you have a container with "SP" in it?
  3. I have over 1200 hours logged in KSP and really like the concept behind Strategia. However, I've run into a bug early on. Please keep in mind that I am using the Portrait Stats mod to verify this, so it is possible that the bug is in that mod. However, since the issue is actually affecting my ability to use SAS, I suspect that Portrait Stats is simply showing me that Strategia is not able to effectively modify the Pilot's level. In this career game, I have landed probes on the Mun and am funding myself by doing orbital tourist flights around Kerbin. I have selected the Stratagia stategies; "The Mun Program", "Pilot Focus 2", and "Local Science 3". The bonuses from Pilot Focus 2 say that my pilots will perform at +1 level. When my rocket is first put onto the launch pad, my Level 1 pilot only becomes Level 2 (thanks to "Pilot Focus 2") when I activate SAS. This is verified by the fact that he is able to perform "Radial In" and "Radial Out" maneuvers. When I launch, he reverts back to a Level 1 pilot (I can no longer select "Radial In" or "Radial Out", and the Portrait Stats level changes back to Level 1 Pilot). When I reach orbit, if the pilot performs an EVA and returns to the ship, his level returns to Level 2 when I turn on SAS. If I time warp to a fast speed while in map view, the pilot's level reverts back to Level 1. If I EVA him again, his level returns to Level 2 when I activate SAS. I also noticed the same thing with "Scientist Focus 3". As soon as I compress time on the map, my Level 1 Scientist reverts back to Level 1 (losing the extra 2 levels from "Scientist Focus 3"). When I EVA him, he becomes Level 3. Can anyone verify this in their career playthrough? If not, I will continue to test it and see if perhaps it is a different mod conflict.
  4. I will write up something a bit more cohesive and add it to the github issue. Thanks for the direction. :-)
  5. I think it would be neat if there was a USI series of Contracts that lead the player through the steps necessary to build a base. The first contracts would involve landing the parts on Mun/Minmus (perhaps unmanned at first) and detecting that they are within the necessary range to activate the USI features. A next series of missions would involve manning the outpost and having a certain amount of food/fuel stored there. Then, have the player build a ship/probe capable of returning to Kerbin. Finally there would be a mission to recover the Mun/Minmus built ship/probe back at Kerbin. I have no idea how to set this up, but it would be a great tutorial for KSP and USI, especially if the contract description included the necessary details required to complete the mission. The missions could start relatively easy with no expiration date and progress to missions on other worlds with more rigid requirements. In fact, the very first missions might involve building a small outpost on Kerbin to practice setting up components.
  6. It was not a mission to retrieve a part... it was a mission to Rescue a Kerbal. In the screenshot I linked, it is referred to as "Dable's Heap". I had performed 5 similar missions before the Fairing Hangar showed up, and completed 4 more missions afterwards. The Fairing Hangar only appeared in 1 of 10 similar missions. I used the 'cheat' command menu to cancel the mission. Since there is no way to know which ship model that quest picks until you actually fly up there, it makes for a rude awakening when you close in and realize it is a model with no doors for EVA. I do not have the claw yet in this play through, so I have not received any missions to retrieve parts. I understand why you created the SpaceCrane, as it complements your hangars. In each play through I create my own sky cranes so I understand the usefulness of them. The 'issue' I had with your SpaceCrane is that it feels like it should be higher up the technology tree considering how well it works for the price investment. As I move up the technology tree, I plan to test your hangars with all sorts of arrangements since I tend to build very large bases that bring even my powerhouse of a PC to a standstill. For my PC, at least, lights seem to cause the biggest slowdown. The more lights I use, the slower everything runs. Turn off the lights and my game zooms, even with LOTS of parts and textures. If I knew how to code, I would probably make a 'Base Light'. A single light on a tall tower that had a HUGE radius capable of lighting an entire base without the need to have lots of small lights. Of course, that has nothing to do with this mod (unless you include lots of lights on your hangars). I'll let you know if I find any other oddities. :-)
  7. I would like to start out by saying Thank You for your contributions to KSP and I look forward to your collaborations with RoverDude. (I added you to my Patreon list) Okay, onto the 'issue' at hand. I started a new game using the Galileo Planets pack as well as your Hangars mod and most of RoverDude's mods. I took a mission to "Rescue a Kerbal" in low Gael orbit (the Galileo equivalent to Kerbin). Since my tech level is low, I do not have access to the Claw yet. However, I have been able to rescue a few Kerbals so far (I prefer to rescue them from my 'competitors' instead of hire them). When I arrived in orbit, I found one of your Fairing Hangars as the command pod. The problem is, there is no way for the Kerbal to EVA out of your Fairing Hangar. :-( Also, if I might offer a suggestion... your Skycrane is severely overpowered in the Career mode. It does far too many things too early in the technology tree and takes away from a lot of the challenge that makes the career mode fun. I chose not to use it because it feels 'cheaty'. In fact, I thought that Roverdude's skycrane was overpowered until I used yours. Fortunately, I can just not use it... however, I feel that it detracts from the rest of your mod when you have such an overpowered item so early in your mod's technology tree. Just my opinion, of course. That said, I do like the idea of no-part 'upgrades' in the technology tree. Perhaps make the initial skycrane very weak (similar to building it with parts available in the tech tree at its level/cost), then make us purchase upgrades later in the tech tree to improve the Skycrane's capabilities. Thanks again!
  8. All I really want is to be able to click on a menu and not have it click the planet/ship/waypoint/etc behind the menu (especially windows like the ScanSat Big Map). If your UI mod stops click-throughs... I'm sold. :-)
  9. I would like to start out by saying "Thank You" for an alternative way to play career mode. I've leveled up Pilots, Engineers and Scientists in my current career game, however, I have run into a 'little' issue. My game is still new, so I have only been to the Mun (numerous times) and sent probes out to Minmus. I made most of my cash transporting tourists for Mun landings and spent most of my cash doing training missions. Now, Jebediah is level 5 Pilot (all missions to fly around the Mun), yet, I still keep getting missions to train him up. I also trained up another pilot using the 'fly to waypoints' and those were much easier/faster/inexpensive than the Mun orbit. Yet, it seems like the Mun missions favor Jebediah and the 'fly to waypoints' favors others, even if they are a much higher level. Of course, I could just be experiencing a bad run with the RNG. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that I have not left Kerbin and the Mun, thus, not received the XP from Minmus, so the mode doesn't really believe that Jebediah is max level? Or, maybe it has something to do with his BadAz rating? Again, not game breaking or anything serious. Just an annoyance since the same mission (fly Jebediah around the Mun) keeps renewing despite the fact that he is Level 5. I am mentioning it in case it is an easy fix or is related to another problem.
  10. Ahhh... I guess that is why I did not get credit when I sent Hitchhiker Containers. I had been using RoverDude's mods and had lots of his little escape pods situated around a large heat shield that would allow me to take dozens of Kerbals around using very little Mass. However, it seems that KSP 1.2 has a fit in the VAB anytime I have too many mod Parts added. I've re-installed numerous times with different mods and it seems that each time I hit a certain Parts limit, my VAB starts flickering like a X-mas tree which makes it a pain to see the toolbar, contracts or the engineering info. So, this play through, I decided to go with a relatively minimal modded build. Your mod looked nice since it accomplishes what I want, using fewer parts/dependencies than the USI mods (his mods tend to have lots of little parts). Hopefully the devs will get the Part count thing in the VAB sorted out and I won't need to be so picky with my mod selection. Even so, I've come to appreciate the relative simplicity of your mod. :-) If you are not already planning for it, a couple of lighted windows on the Adobe would be a nice touch (something about being strapped into your bunk and looking out the window to see Kerbin below when you wake up). Also, if there is a way to 'light up' the Peekaboo windows so that it doesn't look so dark and unoccupied, that would add to the 'ooh' and 'ahh' factor of it. It doesn't need to be a complicated/fancy texture... just 'whiten' the widows when we turn on the station lights. Of course, if you feel compelled to put in some potted plants or a desk inside the window textures that would certainly make the screenshots look snazzier and give people a reason to look at the windows as they fly by to dock. :-)
  11. This is a nice set of parts, Thank You!. When I saw the Adobe, I thought, "Woohoo, easy way to haul 10 tourists to a planet and land them for phat monies and prizes!" So, I made a Mun lander with the Adobe as the center of mass and a MK1-2 Command Pod on top. Landed on the moon, had the the Pilot, Scientist and Engineer hop out to get their 'Plant Flag' credit, but did not get any "Landed" credit for the 10 tourists sitting in the Adobe. :-( Since it says tourists can not EVA, I am guessing that the Command Pods and Crew Cabins have a code flag that allows a tourist to get credit for landing on a planet... but the Adobe does not possess the flag? If it is something you can easily flip from a '0' to a '1' in the next release, that would be appreciated. :-) Otherwise, I'll go back to stacking Command Pods and/or Crew Cabins in clumsy configurations so I can transport more than a few tourists at a time. Thanks Again
  12. Since KAS is responsible for attaching two objects and separating two objects, it seems to me that it would be very much related to KAS. I doubt a separate mod could compensate quickly for the changes that KAS makes... that being, keeping track of how many parts are in an object and which parts were separated from that object. Of course, I am not a modder so I do not understand the voodoo that you do to make the magic happen, I am just thinking in terms of what 'should' be logical. My apologies if logic does not apply here. Also, any cheat that affects all joints would likely just make the game 'not fun'. That is why I asked if it were possible to apply that setting to individual objects... or all of the parts attached to said object. I suspect that you'd need to keep a database of all parts on all objects so that you could reassign flags to each part as it was added to or separated from an object. Again, my apologies if this is a monumental task. I am very appreciative of the efforts modders such as yourself have invested into KSP and am only offering up ideas.
  13. Is it possible to set any object set to "Base" (not Ship/Probe/etc) to ignore physics? I just keep thinking that if I build a house on the ground, the rebar, concrete and pillars are going to make it pretty unlikely that anything short of a hurricane or earthquake is going to affect the building. The idea that the physics engine suddenly affects those buildings on load seems like a silly issue to keep fighting. If there are cheat codes that allow you to ignore physics, could that be applied to a single building/structure/root_part when a name change occurs?
  14. As stated before, it is a known issue. That said, I have a large base on the Mun (20+ buildings and ships) connected together with KAS and I have a rule of thumb that I use: ... always connect and disconnect along the linear 'chain'. In other words, the last thing you connected should be the first thing you disconnect. Like a 'stack' of plates. If you disconnect or connect somewhere in the middle, it is much more likely to send everything flying into the air for a fireworks show. It also seems to depend which direction you attach to. The larger section is situated on the ground and if anything needs to bounce around a bit, it is the smaller one I just added. If I follow this rule of thumb, my base does just fine. That also means that if I want to disconnect something further down the chain, I must disconnect everything leading to it, and then reconnect leading back out. One after another... in a linear chain. Another thing that I see happen occasionally if I link more than 2 lines to a single ship/building is that the connector becomes a permanent part of the ship/building. When I disconnect it, the ship now has its axis origin of the mass at the point of the connector making it impossible to fly the ship without veering in the direction of the connector. There seems to be no way to remove the connector as I must destroy everything attached to it first. That is my biggest headache and can only be fixed with a reload (unless there is a fix that I am unaware of). Perhaps others have different experiences, but for me, this has been the easiest way to play without needing to reload often from, as they refer to it... the Kraken.
  15. I posted this to the KIS GitHub but thought that it might be useful to RoverDude as well since this is the forum where I initially posted my findings. ________________________ I spent a few hours testing this and what I found is very interesting. It either points to bad pointers (lack of memory clean-up) in the core code or possibly a way to access data that people are unaware can still be accessed in the save files. In other words, if there is invisible mass from KIS items, it may be possible that there is invisible mass from other KSP items and mods that cause un-reproducible bugs that might give the illusion of bad aerodynamics or weight issues causing rockets to list on one person's game but not another person's. Hopefully my testing proves helpful.