Eggman360

Fantasitic, and as it is a security issue it makes total sense that they didn't anounce it, potentially advertising the weakness or vulnerablility (or in this case people reusing passwords across sites). Have those who's accounts were accessed been informed? It could be useful to them to know thier passwords, email address or computer may be compromised. Really happy to have this back up and running. Thanks everyone involved!

Still down I don't know how extensive this maintenance is, but if this was planned and it was supposed to take this long I'm sure there would have been a heads up or at least an announcement. I wonderif something has happened?

Still down I woke up this morning after me and my fiance binge watched a load of Sci-Fi movies Fri and sat (Promethius, Alien: Covenant, Sunshine and StowAway), got me in a real space faring mood, and wanted to play KSP again, I've been checking back every hour. Really dissapointed there isnt any other way for me to download, or an ETA. I would have linked it to steam but remember reading something on here that i read as "If you link it to steam you can't get it on the KSP site anymore", (i may have totally misunderstood it, but I like having multiple instances of KSP with different mod loadouts, so using steam isn't ideal for that.

Hey guys, just popped back on here to see how the mod is doing

True, and I admit most of this would be an addon to an addon, I just see mods that go so far and make so many sweeping and incredible hc ages, but they just stop short on their potential. Yes mods update and new features and functionality get added, but I think it's safe to say us "consumers" of mods can be an impatient bunch when it comes to waiting for official mod updates lol. That coupled with the possibility that the official mod authors might not want to go a certian direction with their mods, maybe the author of KAS doesn't think a grappling hook would be practical (no idea I'm just using that mod as an example) I do feel that option addons can be a very nich market (sometimes like the mods themselves), but that's what I like about it, if someone likes a feature they will use it, I used to use fuel generating mods, fair enough others could see it as cheaty or unrealistic, but in the end it's a game, and games are meant to be fun, and if fun for someone needs to be challenging and strict then cool

I take it the Kontainer cfg I sent was no good then RoverDude lol

I agree that EVA currently feels like about 2-3% of the stock game with that rising to 15+% with mods such as KAS I don't plan on making EVA "more important" than the rocket aspect of the game but as you say it does feel a tad lacking even still, so more can be done I hope to add packs and items that allow for scanning, collection of resources, onsite processing and field kit type items with KAS functionality, my main method will be a sort of "back-pack" system, sort of like an MMU, but even for surface interactions. Picture this... The command pods and cockpits (through Mod-manager) are given VERY limited KAS storage functionality, enough for one pack per kerbal it can hold. Each pack (there will be several variants) will have different textures and colours (will need help with that part of it) and they will all have unique aspects and uses, and some will overlap. Want a backpack that works SOLEY as a jet pack, should be easy, I'll just make a backpack with an RSC module and some mono-prop storage, then just position the nodes on the pack so it works with a kerbal's own "mini" jet pack. Want to mine Karbonite? Sure, go for a "Karbonite-EP" (Extraction Pack), wait, want to instead process it on the spot? Well that gets interesting, then you need a specialised pack, so you'll need a SPECIFIC "Karbonite ECP" (Extraction and Conversion Pack) that is fixed to one resource, holds just 5 units of the raw resource but holds a lot of the target one. True these two features exist in "rocket form", but we're just barely scratching the surface that this could be say the ship crashed, a landing leg broke, engine's duct tape melted off, whatever, if we know anything it's that irl NASA is all about redundancy, and with mods such as TAC, being unexpectedly stranded is a death sentence. I have one VERY ambitious idea, just thought of it now actually, say your engine DOES break off, but it's still intact just...not attached. Those of you who use ExtraPlanetary Launchpads knows about the recycler units, the ability to turn rocket parts onsite back into rocket parts and scrap to be rebuilt onsite. Imagine a n A-EVA pack that can recycle a part JUST like that recycle unit, then transport those parts back to the command pod (or even a separate backpack module) and turn that broken Liq+Oxidiser engine into several RCS ports, slap those on your ship and use your RCS reserves to take off and escape, saving a couple of Kerbals and avoiding the need to send another rocket just to reuse them When it's up and running I hope to make this a community project, anyone could (and really can now) just develop a model, a cfg or even create a whole part and share picks and ideas on here I only ask that once an established model is agreed upon, and when a framework for the cfg's is put together, contributors will use those same models and cfg's with different textures to keep them different even at a glance. I'm accepting any ideas, suggestions or assistance, I don't want to do this alone, I'm just one guy with a few ideas, we can make this so much better if everyone chips in and makes this a reality, and sets a standard

Totally understandable I was considering a "StarTrek" replicator type mod that uses ORS to collect Dilithium and the power that it produces can make ANYTHING, from ore, metal, rocket parts, kethane, Karbonite, mono-prop, LOX and fuel, xenon, argon, you name it but it seemed like one of those "once you have a big set-up the other ways to obtain and manage resources becomes trivial, that and the fact those are pretty much core features of kethane and Karbonite so I didn't go through with it :/

Maybe if you duplicated resources from TAC, MKS/OKS etc then you could have this work both with or without those mods but the part would then require at least water and some form of nutrients, we can make bio-diesels,and things today with algie (even though rocket fuel isn't quite the same ) speaking as a student of both Chemistry (primary) and biology (dabble) it would be possibl even in real life to engineer a bacteria to breakdown and restructure most hydrocarbons into another form. Granted that in this transfer there is a little loss to account for the respiration of the bacteria but say even a 70% conversion rate (on a molecular scale) would be very promising and would yield good results depending on how "useful" the starting material was compared to the final product.

Good god, you're like a wizard RoverDude O.o

Sent the new Kontainer file Rover But seriously, if it turns out to be a load of rubbish don't hesitate to say so, the USI mods are incredible and I'd hate to lower the quality

oh I see, so it links a few changes together in one press. I understand. We kept tank textures and contents separate so the player could have a ship that looked seamless like this (The green curved tank at the front where the probe core is is in fact a mono-prop tank ) (sorry for the pics, ill stop if you want, im just suggesting alternatives and giving examples ) :

And each "set-up" has fixed resource allocation, but when empty the set-ups should all cost the EXACT same, so I fail to see the difference :S I know I'm probably ignorant and haven't seen the order, but the way the cfg is written seems very...chaotic. In the procedural mod we used individual "Module sections" in the .cfg for each "Tank Set up", which negated the need for the TankCost line. If the USI mods used this method and used individual modules in the part .cfg's then 1-it would be easier to edit/follow, 2-it would make the set-ups "truly" have a fixed resource allocation, and 3-would be truly "modular" to allow module manager functionality In the Procedural Parts mod using this "module" way I could easily make tanks that could do this: note the last picture, the tanks on the far left and the far right are in-fact the same "part" in the catalog, just altered by a basic GUI in the VAB/SPH (Check out the first link in my Sig lol) And this interface may look similar to the FSfuelSwitch

They wouldn't even need to do that, they could have just done: PartCost = anything ResourceAmount = XXX and final price just = part cost + (XXX*UnitCost for the resource) Simple, straightforward :/ lol (Also RoverDude, I'm not sure why but the radial attachments of the "honeycomb" Kontainers seems to work fine today, looks like the cheeky Kraken had been gnawing on the edges of the Kontainers yesterday haha) Final note, save for the "TankCost" line, the "new" Kontainer .cfg is ready, I'll send it I'm a few mins If you want me to hold off until we have values for the "TankCost" then I'll wait though

Wait, in the SPH if you right click and then alter the contents vie the slider the price DOES change, and if you change to another configuration (texture set thing) the price DOES change, if the" kontainer" has the same volume from set to set then the empty price should be exactly the same. Granted that certain set-ups can hold different "amounts" of each resource but the empty cost should be the same, and we dictate how much the tank can hold based on the "ResourceAmounts =" value in the .cfg, I could make a set-up that contains say 5,000 Ore, and one that contains 100,000 ore, clearly one is cheaty, but the part should cost the same empty, and if I change from the 5k set up to the 100k set up via the right click GUI the price changes on the fly. My only question is, if "TankCost =" is relevant, why do none of the stock parts need it? When I worked on the procedural parts mod we didn't have a "TankCost" line, and in that mod we could change a tank's size and shape on the fly and the VOLUME was even calculated on the fly, let alone the amount of resource it could hold or the new shape/size's cost :S