Jump to content

KawaiiLucy

Members
  • Posts

    160
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

87 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Can confirm, especially Eve is looking funky. The rest of the bodies seem unbroken, but they do look somewhat different from previous scatterer versions, eg. a more saturated blue for Kerbin.
  2. If the messages from above are still correct, I suppose you won't put any time in this @Poodmund?
  3. Ah my mistake, almost got it in the right thread though .
  4. I've just loaded up ksp with the new scatterer release, and am getting some funkiness that might require fixing (I know opm doesn't officially hold compatibility for 1.12 in the title)
  5. @linuxgurugamer I've made a pull request to add what I discussed above. If it is too much I can modify it again to only includee station cores instead of station cores + habs. I've held back from removing the crew capacity requirement yet. And was it the right file I modified? is there a special purpose for the cfg-disabled?
  6. So regarding the sspxr contracts: I've tested adding the new parameters for station cores, and it seems to work (at least they show up in the contract card in mission control). I was thinking though, to change the requirements to "size x core + size x habitat", instead of just "size x core". That would mean the requirement to have 4 crew capacity would be redundant, as the smallest combo already gives you 4 crew capacity. Thoughts on that? I was also thinking to write contracts to add centrifuges and airlocks, to emphasize station construction and maintaining. But I believe there is already an "add crew capacity" contract, so I don't know if it would be worth it though, since centrifuges are habitats already. And forcing you to add a centrifuge over a habitat might take away the flexibility you have over how you design your space station. hope that was kind of clear...
  7. Is it possible though to make this 'automatic'? I've been playing on 2.5x rescale, and noticed it wasn't possible to complete the barnstorming contracts, since the maximum allowed altituted was then below the ground. Adding a few meters manually in the config made it possible though, but it's kinda tedious.
  8. Yes that's it! I'll look into fixing the conflict(s) soon-ish, I am just low on time since University is taking most of it right now. I tried fixing the indentations a while back, but I remember it was doing funky stuff, so I kind of gave up on trying to fix it.
  9. The pull request on github by me already has the station cores all included, but not the "and x habitation module" parameter.
  10. I need to see your whole gamedata, do you have firespitter installed? What is the MKS version you downloaded?
  11. A screenshot tells a thousand words. What does your GameData folder look like?
  12. the 12.x stands for any version of 1.12, so 1.12.1, 1.12.2 etc. etc.
  13. That was my first thought, but you can ony change values, not currencies; at least in the default cfg. This does make sense from a milestone perspective, but wouldn't allow for more flexibility, i.e. if you were to use system rescales (talking out of own interest here ^^), then you might not have enough capacity to reach orbit with just 18t rockets. Maybe you could mitigate that issue by modifying the max weight values. In the end it wouldn't be the linear progression path, where you upgrade where/when you need it...
  14. Might be off topic, but: there is the mod "dockrotate" around, which I've used and never had issues with before (drifting) so I must wonder if the root cause is how the rotating code works in the first place?
  15. Update v0.1.1: Moved Parts Added Cost Rebalance Support more Mods (see first post) Tweaked Techtree Nodes
×
×
  • Create New...