Kwebib

@R-T-BI think I could live with it - would just take getting used to. Interesting that my camera is at a different angle than @caipi's. Here is the angle mine sits at:

About how often should we expect an engine failure on Hard difficulty? I've done probably a dozen launches in my new game and have had no failures - even with "standard" engine quality.

@R-T-B the camera position, upon returning to the Space Center scene, changed with R84. The camera is higher up now and points down more, i.e. it's not the typical "isometric" view of the space center. Definitely not game-breaking, but just thought I'd note. Also, I'm using JNSQ if that matters.

Here's the patch I use. @PART[restock-engine-schnauzer-1]:AFTER[ReStockPlus] { !MHReplacement = True } @PART[restock-engine-caravel-1]:AFTER[ReStockPlus] { !MHReplacement = True } @PART[LiquidEngineLV-T91]:FINAL // Cheetah { %TechHidden = True } @PART[LiquidEngineLV-TX87]:FINAL // Bobcat { %TechHidden = True }

They are part of ReStock Plus but hidden if you have Making History installed.

I patched them out of my game and added the Schnauzer and Caravel back in (which are normally hidden if MH is installed). They're not exact replacements, but close enough for me.

@Lisias DOE shows a "Kopernicus Watchdog" flare (a fake planet being used to alleviate a Kopernicus bug). Do you think you could write a patch to exclude this celestial body? See here: Kopernicus Thread Comment

A "KopernicusWatchdog" distant flare shows up with Distant Object Enhancement as well. Should I post this in the DOE thread?

How hard would it be to have the monthly budgets be provided for irregular month lengths? I am using JNSQ Real Date™ so I actually have Jan/Feb/Mar/etc.

Is there somewhere in the game data where you can see what all the progression milestones are?

Browsing the configs, it doesn't look like Kerbalism assigns specific data capacities to the BDB pods. I assume this means BDB is getting the generic Kerbalism data capacity, which is kinda low.

@CessnaSkyhawk perhaps consider using the celestial body science editor mod and provide a config to lower science multipliers for the planets, a la PBC or KTT, so you can't get 10,000 science from Kerbin's moons alone. Edit: I see you're doing this with Kopernicus. Maybe they should be nerfed further?

Nevermind, I'm an idiot and the failure slider defaults to 100% if you select the hard preset.

How come the default engine failure slider is at 75%? Is that the recommended setting? If so, wouldn't that make it 100%?

Absolutely incredible. Can't wait to run this on my 1060 6GB

@OhioBob I'm curious what your reasoning was for the atmosphere changes.

Is it possible to cheat-menu or save-edit the sunk landing gear vessels?

Nice. Good to know. Thanks for all the hard work!

@R-T-B is 4k really that demanding or is the scatter that demanding? I would think stock KSP on a 3070, even at 4k, would run at triple digit fps.

Put a folder called Principia in Gamedata and put this cfg in it: @Kopernicus:FOR[Principia] { }

Also sad that the game was left in this state.

You can launch from Woomerang and Desert by clicking the asterisk next to the craft and selecting "Select LaunchSite". The new 1.12 sites aren't available, though.

@Gordon Dry would this work? @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]:HAS[#EngineType[LiquidFuel]]:FINAL { @MODULE[ModuleEngines*] { @minThrust = #$maxThrust$ @minThrust *= 0.25 } } @CessnaSkyhawk if you're interested, perhaps a patch to limit the thrust based on the type of engine instead of my blanket patch above?

I'm not sure what you're considering outside the scope of this mod, but have you considered patching engines such that you can't adjust their thrust down to like 1%? This is kinda similar to the reaction wheel nerf in that it makes you require RCS (or some tiny low thrust liquid fuel engine) in order to do tiny orbital corrections.

Looks excellent! Congrats on the release!