Jump to content

DoktorKrogg

Members
  • Content Count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

131 Excellent

1 Follower

About DoktorKrogg

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I glanced at the issues you posted on GitHub. Hoppers aren't meant to be moved around. So doing things like docking a hopper to an orbital station, connecting it a depot and then undocking it will assuredly result in unpredictable behavior. Same in reverse (i.e. connecting to a depot and then docking the hopper to a station afterwards). This all has to do with how KSP keeps track of vessels and the parts connected to them. It's also possible there are some bugs. Hoppers are the one thing in WOLF that I personally haven't done much testing with yet. One thing that I think would help us hel
  2. Which is why MKS isn't going away and why we provided hoppers in WOLF. We definitely envisioned players mixing and matching pieces of WOLF and MKS. If WOLF is meant to replace anything it would be Planetary Logistics and Orbital Logistics, but certainly not all of MKS. Everyone has different ideas about what is and isn't "fun" in KSP. I think the USI suite is in a really good place now in terms of offering different options for different playstyles and we've got even more in the pipeline. Stay tuned!
  3. RE: the conversation around refueling vessels at the destination in order to get free transport routes in WOLF, @RoverDude and I discussed that at length during development and agreed that if you've taken the time to build out the MKS infrastructure necessary to support refueling at the destination, then you're still playing in the spirit of MKS/WOLF. So we don't see this as an exploit. Getting a bunch of extra payload by docking at a massive station is a bit exploit-y but the cargo crates will address that issue. In general, we aren't super worried about "exploits" because KSP is a single pla
  4. The resources are based on the availability/abundance for that resource in the stock resource system. If you're playing with a mod that changes the availability and distribution of resources, then that's probably the explanation. We do "blacklist" some resources on the starting planet (ExoticMinerals & RareMetals for now) to give players a nudge off the starting planet and onto other bodies in order to do the full WOLF resource chain.
  5. It's fairly easy to hack yourself some extra resources via your save file. If you're handy with a text editor, you can make the edits manually (just do a search for "WOLF" in the save file). If you're not comfortable doing that, check out the KML mod for editing save files: Removing parts from WOLF is non-trivial. It would mean a) keeping track of all the parts that have been added to WOLF and bloating the save file and b) possibly causing a cascade of failures if you remove a part that had outputs being consumed by other parts. That's one of the reasons we added the planner to the WOLF
  6. Not true. The values for InputResources and OutputResources are the actual values used by WOLF. I know this because I wrote the code for WOLF and because I also just tested it to make sure I'm not going crazy. Making that change is not, however, retroactive. The only way to change it retroactively would be to manually edit your save file.
  7. Not sure what you have in mind in terms of a setting but it's unnecessary in this instance. A ModuleManager patch for the TransportModule part to change the value of the OutputResources node in the WOLF_ConverterModule would do the trick.
  8. By KCT I assume you mean Kerbal Construction Time. If so, then we have no plans to officially support that mod. I see that as another example of a mod that aims to make KSP more of a simulation than a game and that just isn't really the focus in USI. Like I said in regard to transport routes in WOLF, I'm happy to provide hooks in Konstruction for other mods to inject their own behaviors (like introducing a delay between queuing up a vessel to be built and actually spawning it in game). It would fall on the maintainer of Kerbal Construction Time to actually make that mod "Konstruction-aware" th
  9. Solving this problem is non-trivial. It would mean adding a bunch more code to check for the types of fuel used on the vessel, tracking fuel burn, creating multiple types of TransportCredits and determining which ones were used to complete the route (i.e. what if multiple fuels were used along the route?), what to do about stages that are jettisoned along the way (which type of TransportCredit does that cost?), etc. Ultimately this boils down to "is KSP a simulator or a game?" and everyone has their own opinion on that. @RoverDude and I tend to fall on the "it's a game" side of that argument a
  10. We are indeed working on a new system for building vessels in-situ and it will live in the Konstruction mod. It will use MatKits and SpecParts along with some new resources (and corresponding converters for them in MKS and hoppers for them in WOLF). The new resources were necessary to account for things like gravioli detectors whose mass is very low but cost is very high. Otherwise you could just dump a crate of MatKits on the runway, pump out a bunch of gravioli detectors and recover the vessel for a substantial profit. A big difference between our system and systems like GC is that vessels w
  11. We wanted to be able to unit test the plumbing to prove that it was sound before dropping it into the game. It's a fairly common pattern with Unity to just dump all your code in a MonoBehaviour and call it a day but you can't instantiate MonoBehaviours outside of Unity. So we needed to decouple as much of the code as possible into POCOs and only use MonoBehaviours where we needed hooks into KSP. We're pretty happy with where WOLF ended up. It's given us a platform that will let us spring off in multiple directions with new, interesting gameplay options that we're already working on!
  12. Routes only cost TransportCredits if there is a mass loss between Point A and Point B (i.e. fuel was burned, stages were jettisoned, etc.) It's entirely possible to setup free transport routes.
  13. You need to leave something for people to complain about...
  14. Atlas parts, WOLF, a non-broken light globe, no more wonky textures, so many other little fixes that I've forgotten half of them already... Gonna be a massive update. Oh, big change to drills too. Multiple drill heads have gone away and all the overheating issues along with them.
  15. It's not possible with nuclear reactors. To piggyback on what @RoverDude said, a fully fueled and appropriately sized nuclear reactor will last years or decades in some cases but not indefinitely. You would have to go with solar, a fuel cell, Karbonite generator or something along those lines if you want a completely hands-off base. Even so, if you're also playing with USI LifeSupport, then you'll have to hop back to each base periodically anyway to let their supplies replenish. I hate to keep teasing this but one of the goals of WOLF (coming soon™) is to address the constant babysitting requi
×
×
  • Create New...