Jump to content

[1.9.1+] OPT Legacy 3.1.2 | Reconfig 3.4 [Apr 20, 2021]


JadeOfMaar

Recommended Posts

Hello there ;)

i hope y'all can help me with my problem.

I have both Legacy and Main Pack installed alongside OPT Reconfig.

I know that the legacy main wings dont work as main Wings because the elevons apply forces to the middle of the wing.

Thats why the main pack seperates the control surfaces from the wings. Problem is those control surfaces don't work.

No Options to configure no movement and no forces applied.

Maybe i did somthing wrong?

As for my install. I'm using KSP 1.7.3

I reinstalled all mods and started just with them. I downloaded the Mods from spacedock and copied all the files to my game folder.

Didn't really help, so any Idea what it could be?

Here is a Screenshot from my SPH:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lBQxzAJctRTt3WXO0AOI6Sm00ORRrYKk/view?usp=sharing

 

Kind regards

DJ

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DJToxica My guess is that you have two FAR configs for OPT. OPT Reconfig includes its own ( GameData/OPT_Reconfig/OPT_FAR2.cfg ) FAR removes the stock modules from wings and elevons. Try deleting OPT_Reconfig's file, or preferably, find and delete the other file.

Edited by JadeOfMaar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's it, found some other FAR Files and deleted them, now it works perfectly fine...except. My Planes bad so back to the drawing board :P

Thank you very much!

Edited by DJToxica
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good day. I apologize for my bad english - this is not what I'm strong at.

I have 2 questions regarding OPT and Reconfig (KSP 1.7.3, OPT 1.3.1):
In the first, I noticed that the Hummback cargo bay  do not work as they should. They do not protect the load from the flow, even if the load is placed exactly in 1 bay. There is no such problem with K, J, STAL compartments.
Maybe this is just a problem with my build? Or is it a common problem? You do not think to fix it?

The second question is the interiors of the TAV, Avatar cockpit. Why not use for them interiors from the J-HT cockpit? After all, it fits almost perfectly.

Edited by Cochies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cochies Howdy. :) I believe the Humpback cargo bays do work. The likely cause of your problem is that you are using the cargo ramp too. It somehow breaks or fails cargo shielding when attached and is nearly unplayable in that it causes log spam. The log spam but not the cargo shielding will be fixed in the coming Legacy update. There is something that I don't know yet or refuses to get along in the config.

The IVA assignments were addressed too. That should be on a satisfying level now but I'll look at that in particular, soon. Thanks for reporting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DJToxica Glad you got your issue fixed!

But OMG stock wheels on an OPT Space plane! :P

Check out Kerbal Foundries, the large landing gear for the heavier planes really works well.

 

Vertical stabilizers that are vertical will work much better than angled ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just mention, that yeah, there seems to be some (probably minor) issues with many of the IVA textures and props... Theres a *ton* of log spam for them...
I was planning (hoping) to take a look at the IVAs, after a couple other things get fixed... (namely the Humpback cargo tail)...

Edited by Stone Blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Cochies Howdy. :) I believe the Humpback cargo bays do work. The likely cause of your problem is that you are using the cargo ramp too.

Thank you very much! Rejection of the ramp did not solve the problem, but was the beginning of the search for a solution.
The reasons for the malfunction of the compartment turned out to be two. In the first ramp, and secondly - the node !!!!
Bay has 2 sets of nodes - internal and external. In case of inaccurate installation, the compartments are  connected not by external nodes, but internal ones, the compartment is not “closed” and the load is in flow.
Funny story......))))
Edited by Cochies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

yeah, KF is a *must have mod* for me, if I build any rovers/aircraft/spaceplanes at all
Stock gear are just too anemic, and too "general purpose" for my tastes

Unfortunately, the author is very fond of TexturesUnlimited..... I have to use old versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cochies said:

Unfortunately, the author is very fond of TexturesUnlimited..... I have to use old versions.

Why "have to"? ...
Textures Unlimited is just a small plugin, and IIRC, doesnt actually do anything unless configs have been made and installed for specific parts that use TU...
I mean, having TU installed shouldnt break anything else, or affect anything that does not specifically have a cfg installed for it...

Granted, having PBR'd KF landing gear bythemselves, while the rest of the game may not be PBR'd, looks a little off... its just a minor aesthetic discrepancy to me... vOv
especially with gear that are used on aircraft/spaceplanes... I mean, how long are the gear actually used, and how much time are you actually *looking* at them anyway?

Not judging you, just very interested in your opinion of not using TU... vOv

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TU interferes with Filter Extensions slightly, and makes some parts hard to see in the VAB/SPH pick menu.  Also, I've found many parts who's appearance is distinctly worse with TU - an extreme example I remember is a gold-foil probe which was invisible in bright sunlight as it was too dark.  Even on the parts where it does work, it distinctly changes the aesthetic of them so they don't match well with the rest of KSP.   I could go through and remove all TU configs from all mods and remove all shader configs that affect stock parts - but just removing TU does the same thing.

My opinion, as someone else who loves KF - but is using the older pre-TU parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think there was anyone who didn't like TU :)

I love it, cant play without it ESPECIALLY if you have  -force-d3d11 in your target line of your shortcut ;)

I don't see any ill effects with filter extensions under DX11, and I have a metric poop ton of mods installed.

Edited by TheKurgan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a few of us.  (And it's possible that the interaction with Filter Extensions was fixed.)  Mostly I just avoid using the mod - no need to bring it up.  It's not the only mod I dislike for one reason or another.

It only comes up because it was added as a required dependency on a couple of mods that I otherwise like.  KF is the biggest problem in this regard, as it's a very unique mod that greatly improves rovers - but had an update where TU was suddenly required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, TheKurgan said:

I didn't think there was anyone who didn't like TU :)

I don't see any ill effects with filter extensions under DX11, and I have a metric poop ton of mods installed.

WOT??.. theres a *ton* of peeps that dont like PBR'd parts in KSP... Actually, many of the top, highly skilled parts mod devs dont like it...

Also, now that DStaal mentions it, thats right, I forgot about the (minor) issues with the icons in the editor...

Those aside, even tho I prefer non-TU'd PBR parts as well, I *HAVE* to absolutely have the TU plugin installed, or the old seperate Dx11 patch version installed...

i *NNEEEDD* Dx11 ... and the solid blue editor icons *without* TU installed, is a show stopper for me...

Edited by Stone Blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stone Blue said:

Почему "должен"? ...

Не осуждаю вас, просто очень интересует ваше мнение, что вы не используете TU ... vOv

Everything is very simple.
I hope my abilities and the translator's functionality are enough to convey this accurately enough)))
I'm not trying to blame someone for the lack of a sense of style, I am only talking about my feeling.
In my perception, space ships are not shiny. For me they are matte. Matt space suits. Matte white color modules ISS. And so on....

The brilliant parts make me feel like a Gipsy Maybach or molded furniture. Not space ships.
I understand that many people do not think so. I understand that doing so and not otherwise is the right of the author of the mod. I understand that these are the trends in the development of graphics. I understand that Ilon makes shining "Merlins" ....
But my space is not like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stone Blue said:

WOT??.. theres a *ton* of peeps that dont like PBR'd parts in KSP... Actually, many of the top, highly skilled parts mod devs dont like it...

I was being kind of sarcastic... maybe facetious? I knew I was not right... lets put it that way lol :P

I know there are many who don't like it, I myself do not like the super shiny stuff. I mean it works for certain things, and looks great when not overdone.

I use it because I use DX11, and need it to make those icons show up.

Cheers.

Edited by TheKurgan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a suggestion:

Can you rework the deploy limit on the Humpback Class Tail Cargo Ramp?

I am trying to make highly flexible, high capacity space-planes, but the way the ramp currently works forces me to use extremely high landing gear. On most other mods (and even in the main pack) the first roughly 70% of the deploy animation/limit is the actual unfolding of the part, with the remaining 30% being the part fully deployed, allowing you to adjust the ramp slope from level with the air-frame to the maximum deploy. However, the way the ramp is currently implemented, the entire animation is used unfolding the ramp, meaning there is no way for me to adjust the final height of the ramp.

I request this for three main reasons:

A: I want to use these legacy parts because they fit my aesthetic better, so I am limited to this option only.

B: With the cargo ramp as it is, I have to and my giant space-plane on stilts basically, and it makes landings much harder than low to the ground landing gear.

C: My large, long mobile base designs get beached on the peak of the ramp at this height.

 

All I would like is a new variant or rework of the existing one that allows the cargo bay to be usable nearly flush to the floor, like the orignal mod did.

I hope this isn't too hard for you to implement/work on, as it is a feature I desperately need.

Thank you for your time!

 

Edit: Also I forgot to mention: The current design of the ramp is a little narrow. I would appreciate a version that extends to nearly the width of the floor of the cargo bays. Thank you again!

Edited by Operation Captain Viridian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cochies said:

I apologize, but the exhaust of the HAE-02 engine is directed forward, not backward. Is it possible to fix it? Or maybe you can tell me how can I do this on my own?

The purpose of that forward flow is to make for a wispy, almost alien effect to the engine's workings. Since you're seeing it so that it becomes a problem I have a good idea how you have it attached. The plume is made to flow that way and I don't think giving it negative values will work. This will at least keep the plume from going so far forward at high thrust.

Save it as anything with a .cfg file extension in GameData/

@PART[opt_mk2_engine_short]
{
	@EFFECTS
	{
		@running_thrust
		{
			@MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE[flamethrust]
			{
				@key,1 = 1 0.4
				!key,2 = nope
			}
		}
	}
}

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2019 at 5:58 PM, JadeOfMaar said:

The purpose of that forward flow is to make for a wispy, almost alien effect to the engine's workings. Since you're seeing it so that it becomes a problem I have a good idea how you have it attached. The plume is made to flow that way and I don't think giving it negative values will work. This will at least keep the plume from going so far forward at high thrust.

It is sad.
I was hoping you know how to fix it, how people do it.
I would not have to repair it like a monkey.))))

WE3y3X3ghY0.jpg

 

Edited by Cochies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...