Jump to content

MedievalNerd

Members
  • Posts

    759
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MedievalNerd

  1. I'll do my best to do the last hotfix to MS19 (f) this weekend. This before getting ready to sprint into MS20. Which should include 2 new major features: * First Manned Experiments (Mercury & Gemini) * Photo & Video Experiment Plugin (For later impact probes.) And it should be somewhere in there time to make an installation video, which I'll be working out the details with Nathan tonight most likely. Thanks for all your feedback and support! Stay tuned!
  2. It's part of my fix list. But thank you for bringing it up again. Stay tuned!
  3. Bah, I did my job well and proper. Not my fault that in the ocean of people involved things didn't run as smoothly as they could. The sheer number of people involved in that game is mind boggling. Took me 6 minutes fast forwarding through the credits to hit my Company section. lol
  4. Yes, sorry it's taking forever. Things ramped up at my work, so trying to even out things before jumping back in. As I mentioned previously, I'm getting two 4 day weekends coming up! Plus I asked Nathan if we could take some time to discuss installation instructions, which I'll use for the installation video. Bit of a vain moment here, I finally got to see my name in the credits of Watch_Dogs! I'm part of one of the studios that worked with Ubisoft for the localization & Audio production! Woot!
  5. In terms of custom experiments, the issues lies with RT2 I'm afraid. Perhaps some stock experiments haven't been updated, but for the most part they should have. Perhaps the geiger counter by default is set to 0% transmission? It's not 'my part'. So I dunno. D:
  6. Sweet mother of Kerbals. That's a lot of points. Take note that some of them aren't to do with RPL but with the mods themselves. I'm a bit swamped with real life at the moment, but i'll be jumping back in this weekend, but more so the next. (took some vacation time, which I'll be sharing with you guys & galz... ain't that a treat. ) But thanks for the feedback, I'll check it out in depth and let you know where what should be posted for better follow up. Some points do have to do with RPL though. Cheers,
  7. Balance is still off, I tried my best to do some rough math and calculate when what unlocks with which experiments. It's still far off from decent i'm afraid. The FASA parts are a mess, I'll concede that point! Redvar will be adding years to the parts, and i'll make them fit the nodes better with that!
  8. Here are the RPL probes that are currently implemented. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/58135-TechTree-0-23-5-MS19e-Realistic-Progression-LITE-%282014-05-11%29?p=778717&viewfull=1#post778717
  9. Fair enough, glad to hear you finally got to encourage Squad for making this amazing game. I'll say one thing though, if you find the installation complicated, you'd probably find the whole assemble of mods even more complicated specifically with RSS/RO and massive changes they bring. And no it's not an inconvenience at all, perhaps I misunderstood why you said that, but not having someone play RPL is definitely not a problem. I've booked some 4 day weekends mixed with some National holidays in Canada which are coming up soon. I'll see if I can work on the installation instructions/video. But I am more inclined on adding more experiments, or start the push for MS20 and get video/photo and manned experiments into the fold. It's true that there are a lot of mods, but in the end apart form being a lot of them, there isn't that many complicated steps to do. Although RO, RPL & RSS do have little additions/changes you need to do other than installation the mod. Hang in there peeps!
  10. Oh, so you are making demands now? That's interesting, I'm definitely inclined to give in when asked so nicely. As for why not all in one zip question, that's been asked numerous times and answered. Multi-tiered problem, from licensing, to updates & inconsistent releases. It would be hell to maintain. If someone wants to go out of their way and ask all the modders for their permission, combine the pack, and host it while making sure to keep it updated. Go right ahead. But it should be known that some modders already said no, and I sort of understand their reasons. The last thing you want is to have people popping on your page, posting issues that have been fixed in the latest release, but the 'pack' wasn't updated yet. And I hope your sig is outdated, because I won't be giving support to someone who openly says that they are pirating the game. Quite shameful.
  11. I don't believe that curse is the new "official" modding platform. Modders should read the T&C of the site prior to posting their mods there. Cheers,
  12. RT2 is still up on github, just use the second link on the RT2 OP. (He calls it bugs & reports I think, but the build is there)
  13. Hi Semmel, Thank you for the praises. It's definitely true that handling all these mods for a new comer to KSP could be, and surely is, daunting to say the least. And yes, reading all the OP's and following up on any post installation instructions adds another layer of difficulty. In terms of segregating mods from stock KSP, that would be hard considering I use some models of those mods for RPL probes. IE, Sputnik 2 is a resized KW Rocketry nosecone. But you did point to something Nathan and I previously suggested. IE, if you use PP or StretchySRB for fuel tanks, then you can definitely delete the tanks for those mods manually. That would downsize the amount of parts considerably. Same thing with fairings, if you use procedural fairings, don't need all the NP/KW fairings. As long as you make sure not to delete stuff that is being used for RPL Probes/Experiments. If you go in the parts of the RPL Tweak Pack you can check which model I use, for the most part I stuck to stock. And stuff like IR or LAZOR, I placed them in the tree as to make them optional. I'm not sure if I'll use them to make experiments down the road. But those are like not even on my radar for now in terms of integrating experiments to them. See this a sort of disclaimer. Again speaking parts, anything pertaining to engines so KW, NP, the oms & double oms engines from the Shuttle Engines, etc. Those are rather crucial if you don't want to end up with a lack of engines/thrust at a certain tech level. Nothing stops someone to not include all the mods, but one should do so carefully and not arbitrarily. As for making RPL "stock compatible", that wouldn't work considering that RPL has been heavily modeled based on Nathan's Rfts. So engine diversity/choice would be heavily restrictive. With engine sizes going up to 10M, you need a good diversity of models/sizes. Plus there are already a crazy amount of nodes, if I start put sub nodes to each node for 'non stock' mods it would be probably pretty hard to keep it looking decent. It's already pretty bizarrely shaped. But let's keep in mind RPL is still in it's alpha stages to polish and such is still miles away from the final 'vision'. I'll be working on polish and clarifying installation instructions as development moves forward. Cheers,
  14. Nope, but I can work on that. I also really want to implement ScanSat? gah, the name eludes me for some silly reason.
  15. Hi prc, That sounds more like a TAC issue. (Kerbals not having oxygen when exiting the capsules) And since you tested this in sandbox it's sure that RPL isn't at fault since in Sandbox you don't get the tech tree. (Although the MM tweak files still remain in effect) lol, yes time is pretty much the key mitigating factor for everything in life. As I mentioned previously, I also work a full time job as a Project Manager for an outsourcing QA Company. So it's not like I have the energy to consecrate all of my weekends to RPL continuously, I have to take a break once and a while. There are already some things being worked on for the installation instructions. But me and Nathan are a bit butting heads to the level of simplicity we need to go to. And judging by some of the mistakes I've read for this and other mods, it's quite traumatizing how much you have to explain things. Just asking someone to install a mod you can get varying results: * Some people don't extract the files and just shove the archive in the game data folder (if it even is in the correct folder). * Some people don't pay attention to only keep the actual mod folder, and not the archive name. IE when taking a mod from Space Port, you don't want to keep the Upload12-12-12_Modname folder. But I know some people who tried to keep it and that totally breaks any attempts to refer to the content of said mod with Module Manager. (Since some tweaks refer to specific folder names) * And then you have post installation instructions which in some cases seem to be ignored completely. IE, ModuleRCSFX for RO. I mean there is a reason why it's not in bold red letters on Nathan's thread. So it's not just time, but also coming to an agreement to the level of detail the instructions should include. And I'm actually concerned that if you go too far on the simple level, then it'll throw moderately skilled people off and they'd ignore the video and perhaps miss some of the more subtle things that the video would do good to explain. It should be noted that in the end, it's not like we are hiding details. Everything is written in the installation threads, but one must read the entire OP thread of ALL the mods. Or they will miss something. Life is hard, but reading the OP of 15 mods isn't that bad is it? Cheers,
  16. In any case, you should always use MM tweaks to fix stuff you don't like in another mod's .cfg files. But I'll admit that the way the PP cfg file is made for the tech levels, it's not that obvious to make a MM tweak file. (Hence why Nathan parachuted one my way )
  17. Hey Semmel, Nathan sent me an MM tweak file that those the above. I'll be putting it into MS19f. Along with a few other fixes I've been noting from the forum posts since release. Just hope people won't try your suggestion and end up doing funny things in the process.
  18. Should be in the starting node: NODE { name = newnode_2565 techID = TechTreeStart pos = -2297.167,395.6667,-31 icon = START cost = 0 title = Starting Technologies description = Starting Tech - Part 1 (Research the node above this one as well!) anyParent = False hideIfEmpty = False parents = node0_start PARTS { name = decoupler.ftr name = FASAFlagPod name = FASAlaunchClamp125 name = mumech.MJ2.AR202 name = mumech.MJ2.AR202.features1 name = mumech.MJ2.AR202.features3 name = mumech.MJ2.AR202.features4 name = Proceduralwing2 name = Proceduralwing2EndPiece name = ProceduralAllMovingWing name = ProceduralwingBac9 name = RLA.decoupS name = miniFuelTank name = launchClamp1 name = radialDecoupler2 } }
  19. I'm a bit confused as to why you have such apprehensions about AJE if you are more interested in 'late tech' space exploration? Seems like jet engines would be irrelevant to what you want to be doing. I personally have no appeal to planes or jet engines simply because I'm personally interested in space exploration, not flying around kerbin in planes. D: Also, although it's still in early alpha stages if you would use my tech tree (see my sig) then you could still have access to KSPI stuff, although in later tech nodes. I guess one could artificially give themselves a science point boost to reach the 'tech levels' they so desire. So in any case, you don't need to get stuck on the tech eras RO goes through, or the mods it supports. If anything, since it's all tweakable, use it as a base, improve and share it with the community. Nathan has done a stellar job at spearheading RO/RSS, not to mention providing key support for countless other mods. So any outside help is always appreciated! In terms of solar panels, go ahead and suggest better values than the ones offered. It's not quite obvious to get straight values for certain components. Often times articles or wikis on certain spacecraft will focus on the engines, or whatever component and sometimes leave out key details like. How much did the solar panels generate and exactly how big they were. What tech were they using, etc. If you did research which provides you with those values, again, do share! So it's not like we are using arbitrary values, just the best information that was available after doing research. (You seem to like to do that, so just need to figure out how to edit .cfg files. Which in case you didn't know is just plain text with very simple syntax.) Enjoy what's available or get busy!
  20. As NathanKell said, all this time 'explaining' how things are wrong, you could have done said research and update the cfg file yourself. Editing cfg files does not even require any programming skills. Do more, ask less.
  21. I'm working on an epic excel sheet with extremely detailed instructions and will have a link table with a checklist that you can flag to confirm you downloaded, installed, and where applicable, made the post install changes/edits. There will also be an installation video! Hang in there, sorry that you are experiencing issues.
  22. O_o Oh noes! But... I wonder, where the hell is it then? I don't have any unassigned parts when I load the tree. That's... not reassuring.
×
×
  • Create New...