CaffeineAddict

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About CaffeineAddict

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. A qualified "Yes". Using a Windows 10 client (VM) on VirtualBox (Parallels or VMWare Workstation behaviour might be slightly different), I mapped a permanent Shared Folder to the folder on my Mac that I use to store my KSP installations. I "installed" CKAN on my Windows VM, pointed it at a test install of KSP on my Mac (1.8 in this case), and it was able to interpret which mods were installed and how (manually or via CKAN). I installed a new mod from the VM instance of CKAN and started up KSP from the Mac, worked fine, then un-installed it from my Mac instance of CKAN, and it correctly uninstalled it. Note that starting KSP from the VM instance of CKAN will attempt to open it in the VM, so if it gets so far as loading successfully, it will probably run like a potato. No config files needed to be moved around or copied, and it was fairly straight forward. That said, I would imagine that this is a use case not envisaged by the developers so YMMV, and I would guess that support would be problematic.
  2. So I'm running KSP 1.8 in windowed mode (1280x800) on my MacBook Pro / Catalina and the KSP window is very small, and UI elements are disproportionately large, except for the orbit lines in map mode, where the numbers (speed, altitude etc.) are very small. Running a similar config in 1.73 (also windowed, but at 1280x720) does not exhibit the same behavior. This behavior was the same for KSP 1.6x, 1.5x and 1.4x as well. The primary difference being that the 1.73 install has some sort of global scaling factor applied to the entire window (not the individual elements such as UI_SCALE_XXX values), bringing the window size up to a reasonable size, while having all of the the UI elements sized reasonably well. In the 1.73 instance, in the Settings|Graphics tab the Screen Resolution is set to "custom", while the settings.cfg file values are SCREEN_RESOLUTION_WIDTH = 1280 and SCREEN_RESOLUTION_HEIGHT = 720. The various UI_SCALE_XXX values are "1". In the 1.8 instance, in the Settings|Graphics tab the Screen Resolution is set to 1280x800, while the settings.cfg file values are SCREEN_RESOLUTION_WIDTH = 1280 and SCREEN_RESOLUTION_HEIGHT = 800. The various UI_SCALE_XXX values are "1". I'm guessing that it is something to do with the Unity upgrade, but don't know where to start looking for a fix. Is it possible to somehow add a scaling factor in KSP 1.8 to the entire window?
  3. I've upgraded earlier this week to Catalina and can confirm that this is case. The command line and ConsoleUI options work fine, and performance (at least with ConsoleUI) is considerably better than the WinForms front-end, although not quite as functional.
  4. Hi, I've recently got into RP-1 after playing KSP for a little while. I'm running KSP 1.61, with the RP-1 and dependencies installed via CKAN, according to the instructions to install RO and RP-1 on KSP 1.61 on the RO/RP-0 github wiki. I've researched Early Tracking Systems to enable an upgrade to my tracking station from level 1 to level 2. Once researched, the cost is 25000 funds, but when I purchase the upgrade in the research and development facility, no funds are deducted, and if I upgrade the tracking station by right-clicking it and selecting upgrade, it's 75000 funds - is this the correct behaviour, or am I missing something?