panarchist
-
Posts
1,069 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by panarchist
-
-
On 4/5/2024 at 6:51 AM, AtomicTech said:
It's a joke/nod about panarchist because some of his older mods used the name PSA (Panarchist Space Alliance) in it.
Technically, all my mods have PSA in the name, they just all happen to be old. :-D
On 4/4/2024 at 8:41 AM, bright Universe said:it is a problem.
by the way,what does PSA mean？
-
December '68 - when Apollo 8 orbited the moon - the first time mankind made it past LEO and changed SOIs.
On 10/4/2023 at 7:55 AM, Hotel26 said:I proceed now, bravely, to the next
post(merged) paragraph to get the ball rolling... (and maybe now I can get some respect?!)Yes, we have a badge:
(for those as or older than me)
Hotel26, June 1955, "KSP is what gets me out of bed in the morning -- and keeps me late returning"
Honestly you should get extra kudos for predating the Space Age.
-
58 minutes ago, Tokamak said:
(side question...how the heck do I actually upload images and logs here, instead of posting elsewhere and linking? I could have sworn there was a way...)
They removed that functionality a year or two back. You have to use an external link like Imgur or Pastebin now.
-
On 9/21/2023 at 2:20 PM, Stormwalker said:
EDIT: Found the problem, but haven't figure out how to fix it yet.
Problem is not in fact MKS (or anything by RoverDude) at all, actually. Nor was it a mod I currently have installed. At one point in the past I had the Global Construction mod installed, and apparently when I uninstalled it (using CKAN), some files got left behind, and those are causing this "NEED" in SSPXR-MKS-Extras.cfg to be satisfied as GroundConstruction (from the Global Construction mod) is an alternate to MKS for this requirement ( other things in MKS Extras are not being applied as the "NEED" for MKS for those items is not satisfied).
[LOG 16:30:23.837] Deleting root node in file StationPartsExpansionRedux/Patches/SSPXR-MKS-Extras node: @PART[sspx-inflatable-centrifuge-25-1]:NEEDS[MKS,!Kerbalism]:AFTER[MKS] as it can't satisfy its NEEDS
So, even though I don't have MKS, and don't have Global Construction anymore, it is apparently enough to fool ModuleManager into thinking I *do* have Global Construction.I deleted the files that I found, but apparently that was not enough, and there is some other vestige of GlobalConstruction remaining in my install that I have to track down and remove.
EDIT 2: Reinstalling and uninstalling Global Construction via CKAN fixed it.
Glad you were able to resolve it. Global Construction was once integrated with MKS, and like MKS it uses (or used) MaterialKits, so I'm not surprised that was the issue.
-
On 9/17/2023 at 4:59 PM, king of nowhere said:
I find that kerbalism is not compatible with a complex space program. Having a dozen ships around the place, and having to regularly service each one of them, would be too time-consuming. Kerbalism works best with a single mission, or a small number of missions. I had a lot of fun with kerbalism challenges, but it was always one single massive ship and I would always only control that one. what I love of kerbalism is exactly the challenge it gives in adding extra design constraints, at a time when the stock game had become too easy.
What I love about Kerbalism is radiation, and rendering it and the Van Allen belts beautifully in the UI. I have other mods for LS, science, and parts failures, but there isn't anything else out there doing radiation the same way.
-
On 9/17/2023 at 12:14 AM, Stormwalker said:
I'm a whole lot confused.
I tried to launch a station with a centrifuge module, and it won't deploy because it says I need something called "Material Kits".
I googled "KSP Material Kits" and found out they come from another mod called MKS.
I don't have MKS. I don't WANT MKS, because it comes with a lot of things in which I have no interest. Your mod doesn't say that it depends on MKS (if it did, I wouldn't have installed it!). Is it supposed to be asking me for stuff from MKS if I don't have MKS? Because if so, I might as well uninstall it.
You have at least one of RoverDude's mods installed, which means you have MKS, or at least part of it. If you look in the configuration options for your save game, you should see a checkbox for MKS somewhere in there that you can uncheck - or uninstall RoverDude's mod. Alternatively, you can go into GameData/StationPartsExpansionRedux/Patches and delete the "SSPXR-MKS-Extras.cfg" file.
-
On 8/15/2023 at 6:30 PM, cxg2827 said:
The Lindor V mission was the finale to completing my JNSQ career save. Huygen is probably the prettiest moon to visit, though was on the same challenge level as Eve.
A big thanks to the mod team for making this planet pack.
Gorgeous ship, great video! Also, a real nail-biter at the end.
-
On 8/20/2023 at 11:26 PM, Mutantbard64 said:
I have a bug where some parts will make the game crash and close near instantly I dont which parts yet it worked before what do I do?
Try reproducing with only Heisenberg and its dependencies installed (no other mods) so you can determine if it's a mod conflict. If it still happens with no other mods, then there may be an issue. Most likely there's a mod conflict.
-
On 8/10/2023 at 3:54 AM, JonnyOThan said:
This is a good suggestion, but you could also just use ckan and have immediate access to all the versions of the mod and not have to worry about renaming or managing any files.
Also a good suggestion, but a lot of people don't use CKAN, and sometimes it's not practical to use CKAN.
-
On 7/7/2023 at 11:59 AM, Aperson3546 said:
having either extraplanetary launchpads or kerbal attachment system seems to make no button in the KSC view work such as quit to main menu, enter VAB or fly active vehicle on the launchpad does anyone know why?
It's most likely due to a mod interaction, but not EL or KAS by itself. Best way to figure it out is to remove all of your mods that are not "parts-only", and then add back half the other mods and see if you have the problem - if not, remove that half and add the other half. Keep removing and adding half the set with the problem until you isolate the specific mod. EL does modify the KSC buttons, so it's likely a conflict between EL and another mod that accesses the same functions.
-
On 7/6/2023 at 10:03 PM, JadeOfMaar said:
The only likeness to System Heat is that there is or should be a restriction on what radiators should be usable. It's indeed about maintaining a heat loop that doesn't concern ISRU and engines. This is within scope for Kerbalism, I think, but I'd rather that it has compatibility without dependency and without coming close to provoking Kerbalism's incompatibility with mods like MKS.
If you're suggesting that this could be done by wedging those two mods tighter together somehow then you're free to experiment and I'd like to see if and how that works out. But ideally this gameplay loop should start from the ground up and be as simple as USI LS or Snacks. That means more players and the more basic of players are willing to install it.
From a technical perspective, the input and output temperatures are far lower, necessitating a different working fluid. For a life support radiator, you're basically limited to either water or ammonia. Ammonia is more efficient, and to date nearly all LS radiators in the real world use Ammonia. I've been thinking for a while about trying to model this in KSP via System Heat and possibly a modified version of TAC-LS or a custom mod, but I've been either too lazy or too busy to start creating one.
-
On 7/8/2023 at 3:10 AM, munix said:
What does that even mean? We know that modding is not officially supported yet, so why would it be documented already?
(emphasis added)
That's exactly the problem. Documentation is a living thing. It's never 100% up to date, and always in flux. It's the nemesis of any organized tech company and the last thing to get attention. And that's a problem - it's always a problem, but more so when it doesn't start or isn't disseminated early on, because the more documentable content that gets added without documentation, the less likely it is to ever be documented.
In today's game modding climate, as soon as you have an accessible API, there should be documentation for it to support the modders. (and internal devs) Modding is expected nowadays, and it increases game sales and gives the game longevity and additional sales long past the point at which sales would normally stop. The earlier support exists, the larger and more robust the community for that game. It's a win-all-around situation.
-
6 hours ago, Angelo Kerman said:
I'm not so much bored as I am frustrated with showstopping bugs. As a result, I tend to mess around until I run into one and have to put the game away for awhile. There's a lot for me to do in KSP 2, like visit the anomalies. The "boredom" for me is waiting until the next patch hopefully clears up the issues that I ran into.
This right here, 100%.
6 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:I am really confused about what people see in progression. The game dictates what you can and can't do, I'm not seeing the fun.
I think that's why I play almost entirely sandbox. Honestly, I'd rather have a system where I could choose on which date parts unlock, so I could simulate going from 60s NASA ->Skylab -> STS -> FutureStuff without having to worry about getting enough funds / science to level up. I want progression, just not in the traditional way.
3 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:Yeah - I think I only played Science Career for the same reasons!
Ditto. I wasn't a big fan of it with science either. What I really want is to be able to have science mean something but not have it determine if I can have a space program. Don't hinge my unlocks on it. I want a reason to *do* science, but I don't want it to impact whether or not I can do a launch.
-
On 2/17/2023 at 6:19 AM, Minmus Taster said:
I meant you launch multiple craft into orbit and dock them to form a single craft.
This is what happens when we all use sloppy terminology for years. Technically, building a ship in orbit by launching 2 smaller ships from the surface and docking them is "orbital construction". So is docking 2 smaller ships already in orbit. Building a ship in orbit from raw materials, whether mined from an asteroid or launched from a planetary surface by making the parts is "orbital manufacture". EL in KSP1 is orbital manufacture, and having that in KSP2 is definitely a ways off.
On 2/17/2023 at 6:19 AM, Minmus Taster said:I meant you launch multiple craft into orbit and dock them to form a single craft.
This is what happens when we all use sloppy terminology for years. Technically, building a ship in orbit by launching 2 smaller ships from the surface and docking them is "orbital construction". So is docking 2 smaller ships already in orbit. Building a ship in orbit from raw materials, whether mined from an asteroid or launched from a planetary surface by making the parts is "orbital manufacture". EL in KSP1 is orbital manufacture, and having that in KSP2 is definitely a ways off.
On 2/17/2023 at 6:19 AM, Minmus Taster said:I meant you launch multiple craft into orbit and dock them to form a single craft.
This is what happens when we all use sloppy terminology for years. Technically, building a ship in orbit by launching 2 smaller ships from the surface and docking them is "orbital construction". So is docking 2 smaller ships already in orbit. Building a ship in orbit from raw materials, whether mined from an asteroid or launched from a planetary surface by making the parts is "orbital manufacture". EL in KSP1 is orbital manufacture, and having that in KSP2 is definitely a ways off.
-
7 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:
This emphasises the "Early" in Early Access. This is not the final game, far from it. It's like a mix of pre-v0.13.3 KSP and the v1.1 Experimentals builds that Squad released, and those were a buggy mess.
pre0.13.3 and 0.18, because we'll having docking out of the gate this time.
-
On 2/2/2023 at 5:16 AM, Maria Sirona said:
Ahoj!
You have some interesting flags in your pfp, @panarchist
Someday maybe I will actually write the KSP fan fiction that explains them. In the meantime, I am messing up the guessing of my predecessor, and guessing that the next reply will come from @Abel Military Services
-
-
On 1/28/2023 at 4:36 PM, JadeOfMaar said:
Nope.
If that's your reason, you haven't given any real thought to how worthwhile or wasteful it is for the devs to implement this. And it's far into the wasteful side because:
- The planet will largely never be seen for its colors because there is no ambient light because it's rogue. Waste of effort to make the textures.
- Players will find themselves complaining or struggling on landings because they can't see how close or far the ground is. There will be spam of lights and tweaking of visuals in desperate attempts to cheat the darkness.
- Once you know where the Kerbin-like worlds are, you don't have a dog's hair to give about the rogues anymore. And it'll probably be quite a detour to visit them on your way to anywhere else. Who's gonna pack the dV for that? Let's be honest here.
Exception to #2 would be what @SenatorSteam said above. If you like landing challenge and spooky vibe. Then again, a night side landing on any non-rogue world, especially an outer gas planet's large moon can give the exact same gameplay value so I withdraw my exception.
Agreed on all points, but with an exception to #3, which is if the devs placed a concentrated resource on the rogue planet valuable enough to warrant the journey. (if such a thing existed) Anything which would qualify is probably wildly unrealistic.
-
1 hour ago, Ooglak Kerman said:
Well... yeah, but there is no information on what "Dispersal" and "Variance" mean.
There is - you may have missed it.
- Variance = 0 ~ 100 (% how noisy the resource distribution is between highest and lowest amount, not necessarily your defined Min and Max.)
- Dispersal = 0 ~ 100 (multiplies the sharpness/contrast of that noise and makes the high points much more abundant and the low points much less abundant)
-
On 1/20/2023 at 5:57 AM, Stone Blue said:
-Heisenberg Airships also has a couple props
The thing about Heisenberg, is it has a WildBlue .dll that deals with *how* props work. The only other plugin which deals with *how* props work, that I can think of, is Firespitter. These are good if you wanted to make your own props to add to KSP.That's done through Kerbal Actuators, isn't it? Several non-WBI mods also use that as a dependency.
-
13 hours ago, Leganeski said:
The patch in my last comment runs at :FINAL, after Sigma Dimensions has finished entirely, and manually sets sphereOfInfluence to 102500. That didn't work either, so the only possibility left that I can think of is that some other mod, also running at :FINAL, is deleting the parameter for some reason. But that's a really weird thing to do, and I don't know of any mods that would do that.
That was my thought, too. Barring a bug in Sigma Dimensions or something in Kopernicus we're not aware of, I think that's the most likely candidate to check.
-
On 1/23/2023 at 10:09 PM, shoe7ess said:
Hello all. I have searched the thread (and google) to find a way to HomeSwitch from Kerbin to one of the OPM planets (maybe even a moon, not sure yet) after I reach the point in my career that I need to start heading to the GU galaxies. I'd like to create a launch site without ELP which I believe is possible with KK (as well as using the Alien Space Program configs/textures as a jumping off point if needed), but not sure where to start. I see a homeworld setting on my KK launch sites through KSCExtended and KerbinSide (not sure if Tundra adds launch sites or just edits them, but I can't find any homeworld settings in the configs there so far), so I'd assume I'd just add an OPM planet/moon after I have RT control throughout the system.
If anyone has a config/preset they could share that I'm just overlooking I'd appreciate it. If you'd prefer me to post this in the KK thread I can aim my questions there. My current idea is to duplicate one of the polar launchpads (maybe even KSC itself) and set the HomeWorld to "Neidon" for example, but I'm not sure if that would work or not? Does anybody happen to have any configs for OPM or somehing similar I could use as a template?
Thanks!
Why do you need to homeswitch to something else? KK supports bases on other bodies, you just have to have someone on the ground there and then CTRL-K to create the map decal, group, launch site, etc. After that, you can select to launch from that site - none of that requires EL.
-
On 1/23/2023 at 10:58 AM, tmccreight651 said:
Good suggestion, but it didnt work. both moons are still larger than their SOI's
On 1/23/2023 at 2:12 PM, OhioBob said:Are you sure you applied the patch correctly? You should take the text that Leganeski gave you, save it as a plain text file but with a .cfg extension, and then place the file inside your GameData folder. I see no reason why it shouldn't work.
If @tmccreight651 is using the 2.5x Rescale Continued config, then that may be it. That file has CustomSoISize = 0. When =0, Sigma Dimensions multiplies the SOI by the rescale modifier (2.5) rather than whatever is intended. If CustomSoISize is defined in multiple places, (and/or if the sphereOfInfluence parameter is defined in multiple places for that body) then the behavior will depend on the MM patch load order.
In any case, it's not going to be simple to find the root cause since there are multiple moving parts.
-
On 1/13/2023 at 6:22 PM, Ooglak Kerman said:
@Angel-125 Have you used SimpleConstruction before? I've been using it for a while and it's pretty cool. Unfortunately, it's not compatable with EL - though EL does show up as installed - so the RangeLand pad won't be of much use I guess. The other stuff that NEEDS[Launchpad] does work though.
Just wondering.
Simple Construction isn't compatible with EL because it *is* EL - as in it uses the same Launchpad.dll on purpose and by design. (this is also why EL shows up as installed) It's not compatible because KSP doesn't like having multiple instances of the same dll. Any mod built to support EL will support SC automatically.
What Interstellar Planet Packs are compatible to the Outer Planets Mod (OPM)?
in KSP1 Mods Discussions
Posted
I'll second this and add that I have Nova Kiribani and OPM and still haven't made it past Duna.