[1.12.x] [BG] Planetside Exploration Technologies | Surface bases, NASA MMSEV, wind turbines & more! | v1.0.2

[golkaidakhaana]

2 minutes ago, Hohmannson said:

Moving other parts with parts is a complicated thing. I think the only replacement candidate if you don't want to re-make the model in Unity is Infernal Robotics - Next, you can try writing a config for it. https://github.com/meirumeiru/InfernalRobotics/releases

I don t have any experience in writing configs , nor do I think it is an urgent matter , as I m sure the mod will retain the majority of its function irregardless of whether BG is installed . However I couldn t see for myself when trying the mod earlier because of a severe issue with the wheel bearing part

[theJesuit]

1 hour ago, golkaidakhaana said:

This isn t up for debate ... I should not have to pay something like $20 for a DLC that adds one feature I will have a use for , which can already be replicated with free mods .

Given that this mod is free... and the unpaid author is choosing to use a feature of something they paid for... they could perhaps not have this feature at all so no one would complain.

Maybe the $20 is better thought of supporting Squad to keep updating while a new studio works on KSP2.

Peace.

[Grimmas]

1 hour ago, golkaidakhaana said:

This isn t up for debate ... I should not have to pay something like $20 for a DLC that adds one feature I will have a use for , which can already be replicated with free mods .

Whether you buy it or not is obviously up to you. Many of us - myself included - have bought and do like the BG DLC. You also have the option to wait until it's on sale - I got all of KSP+BG+MH on Steam for only 24 EUR. 

Still better than a $70 monocle DLC, I'd say. 

 

[coyotesfrontier]

Could we see a single bed and a double bunk bed prop in the future? I'm trying to spruce up the habitation module IVAs, but the lack of bed props aside from the triple bunk really limits what I can do.

[Spaceman.Spiff]

56 minutes ago, coyotesfrontier said:

Could we see a single bed and a double bunk bed prop in the future? I'm trying to spruce up the habitation module IVAs, but the lack of bed props aside from the triple bunk really limits what I can do.

Near future props has what you need I think. 

[benjee10]

On 4/8/2021 at 4:52 PM, Judicator81 said:

@benjee10 I added a localization support for this mod.
There are two pull requests on github:

• for Shared Assets: https://github.com/benjee10/Benjee10_sharedAssets/pull/2
• and for Planetside Space Technologies mod itself: https://github.com/benjee10/Benjee10_MMSEV/pull/6 

The latter includes full localization support, not only parts titles, descriptions, etc., but also mod's plugin code for wind turbines.
Russian localization files added.

I'm not sure if screenshots will be of any use here (as all messages on them are in russian), but why not?

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Awesome! I will have to take your word for it that the Russian is correct  will review and look at merging into the next update.

On 4/8/2021 at 9:13 PM, Matt Free said:

Hey i just wanted say that the hydraulic pieces are really slidey in my experience, Is there a way to change this?

Not much unfortunately. Try to build on the flattest terrain you can - any terrain slope will exacerbate the sliding. I will see if there is anything I can do my end to increase the grip, though I played around with friction settings before release and couldn’t seem to get a meaningful effect out of it.

10 hours ago, lemon cup said:

Care to share a link to your patch? I’m sure a few of us (myself included ) would like to give it a try while benjee goes through the many pull requests. 

@benjee10

These models are epic! Out of curiosity, what was your inspiration for the base designs? I’ve looked at some of the source concepts relating to the real Nasa MMSEV, and the surface habitats all seem to be very simple looking mock-ups. 

Large habs are based on the NASA habitat demonstration unit mock-ups, the 1.875m parts are based mainly on some very low-res concept renders of lunar bases from the Constellation program! And then a healthy dose of just making things up, which is always fun.

4 hours ago, golkaidakhaana said:

This is a fantastic mod and I commend your efforts , but sadly I am having severe issue with some parts ; symmetry with the wheel bearing is completely broken , and trying to attach with symmetry causes it to draw a persistent trail of bearings all across the craft , following the mouse ... The staircase part also seems to block kerbals from exiting the hatch it is attached to , but they can still enter fine through that hatch

I waanted to ask if it would be possible to remove BG compatibility in a future update , I bought the MH DLC and was sorely disappointed with it , so I have no plans to purchase BG , there aere maybe other people in this similar situation I would assume

I think this issue is likely due to the lack of BG - it is probably best for me to add a patch to remove the BG part modules if BG isn’t detected installed to avoid any weirdness. I had thought that the robotics would just be nonfunctional but it sounds like it is causing problems. Infernal Robotics support is unlikely to happen soon as it’s fairly non-trivial to set the parts up to use it - unfortunately there are significant enough differences between the stock system and IR that changes to the unity setup are required. The Canadarm parts for SOCK were a pain to get working and it’s not something I am looking to repeat imminently.

1 hour ago, coyotesfrontier said:

Could we see a single bed and a double bunk bed prop in the future? I'm trying to spruce up the habitation module IVAs, but the lack of bed props aside from the triple bunk really limits what I can do.

All the IVAs are in a bit of a bare bones state at the moment - I hope to expand the number and variety of props in the future, and will be providing HabTechProps as a standalone download for mod authors too. So you can definitely expect some more bed variations.

[golkaidakhaana]

1 hour ago, benjee10 said:

I think this issue is likely due to the lack of BG - it is probably best for me to add a patch to remove the BG part modules if BG isn’t detected installed to avoid any weirdness. I had thought that the robotics would just be nonfunctional but it sounds like it is causing problems. Infernal Robotics support is unlikely to happen soon as it’s fairly non-trivial to set the parts up to use it - unfortunately there are significant enough differences between the stock system and IR that changes to the unity setup are required. The Canadarm parts for SOCK were a pain to get working and it’s not something I am looking to repeat imminently.

Thank you for the answer ... it is a shame to hear this but I appreciate your honesty nonetheless ... this mod alone almost makes me want to buy BG , in spite of how I distrust Squad and T2 , and their practises ...

I think the other discussion about BG and DLCs is unwarranted and cherrypicked from an insignificant comment I made in my original post ... please stop quoting me with it

[Feellikeapple]

what is the soft capture ring used for?

[minerbat]

is it RO and kerbalism compatible? i don't yet play those mods, but i want to if i get a better computer.

Edited April 11, 2021 by minerbat

[lemon cup]

8 hours ago, Feellikeapple said:

what is the soft capture ring used for?

In real-life it is to dampen the force transmitted between the docking spacecraft, to prevent over stressing and buckling anything important (e.g.: everything).

Here it has a slightly different use. All docking ports have magnetism that pull them towards eachother when you get close enough. But since the APAS has the additional requirement of being “clocked” properly with the other port (line the 3 petals up), if you were to come in slightly misaligned, the magnetism would pull you in but the petals would prevent a successful dock, and cause all sorts of unwanted rotation - never a good thing when two spacecraft are touching. 

The soft capture ring can help prevent that. With the ring extended, when it contacts the other port the magnetism will still be weak enough that if you need to make slight adjustments to your alignment, it won’t yank you around and wreak havoc with your SAS/RCS. Then once you’re alignment is true, retract the ring, and then actual docking will be achieved. 

You can extend the ring on both spacecraft, one, or neither. You don’t have to use the soft capture ring, it is just there for convenience/ a bit of realism.

Edited April 11, 2021 by lemon cup

[Guest]

11 hours ago, golkaidakhaana said:

Thank you for the answer ... it is a shame to hear this but I appreciate your honesty nonetheless ... this mod alone almost makes me want to buy BG , in spite of how I distrust Squad and T2 , and their practises ...

I think the other discussion about BG and DLCs is unwarranted and cherrypicked from an insignificant comment I made in my original post ... please stop quoting me with it

My logic is I’d pay $20 for this mod if it was for sale, and BG is actually pretty useful but even if i refused to pay anything for it I wouldn’t be because this mod is easily worth the cost, if any of that makes sense 

[Hohmannson]

A perfect rover for camping. Also, the mod really looks better than real HDU-DSH did, maybe because it's made by an artist.

Just in case, deployable tents are Ven's Stock Revamp.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Hohmannson

[Feellikeapple]

20 hours ago, lemon cup said:

In real-life it is to dampen the force transmitted between the docking spacecraft, to prevent over stressing and buckling anything important (e.g.: everything).

Here it has a slightly different use. All docking ports have magnetism that pull them towards eachother when you get close enough. But since the APAS has the additional requirement of being “clocked” properly with the other port (line the 3 petals up), if you were to come in slightly misaligned, the magnetism would pull you in but the petals would prevent a successful dock, and cause all sorts of unwanted rotation - never a good thing when two spacecraft are touching. 

The soft capture ring can help prevent that. With the ring extended, when it contacts the other port the magnetism will still be weak enough that if you need to make slight adjustments to your alignment, it won’t yank you around and wreak havoc with your SAS/RCS. Then once you’re alignment is true, retract the ring, and then actual docking will be achieved. 

You can extend the ring on both spacecraft, one, or neither. You don’t have to use the soft capture ring, it is just there for convenience/ a bit of realism.

I know what the soft capture ring is for, just don't know what its for in ksp

Just now, Feellikeapple said:

I know what the soft capture ring is for, just don't know what its for in ksp

but still thanks

is raster prop monitor needed for those displays?

[NiL]

On 4/11/2021 at 2:20 AM, benjee10 said:

Not much unfortunately. Try to build on the flattest terrain you can - any terrain slope will exacerbate the sliding. I will see if there is anything I can do my end to increase the grip, though I played around with friction settings before release and couldn’t seem to get a meaningful effect out of it.

There are mods who add "tether" option to landing legs, which freezes the craft relative to the ground, but I can't for the life of me say which mod it is.

On 4/11/2021 at 2:20 AM, benjee10 said:

I will have to take your word for it that the Russian is correct

Translation on the screenshot is correct

[B-STRK]

13 hours ago, NiL said:

There are mods who add "tether" option to landing legs, which freezes the craft relative to the ground, but I can't for the life of me say which mod it is.

-snip-

Either install USI Tools (along with any USI mod) and plug in the Ground Tether module into the part, or use Parking Brake and make sure there is a command part on the base craft. But I thought 1.10 or 1.11 added base-fixing? (Or it's still not perfect? Sigh.)

(PS: Not on 1.10 or 1.11, which is why I'm dependent on USI ground tether and Parking Brake. And even then, they're not 100% foolproof either.)

[NiL]

12 hours ago, B-STRK said:

USI Tools  Ground Tether

Oh, yes, this is the thing i'm talking about! Thanks 

[EndAllFilms]

Can we get a Jamestown craft file?

[KallangoVerde]

(GOOGLE TRANSLATE)
Hello Benji ...

First ... congratulations on the work is wonderful!

The inflatable habitat appears in a strange way when it is not inflated as in the photo below:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t8IxaK9Oxg8aI0wLp5SH3hnHlOv6HYe1/view?usp=sharing

I noticed this also happen with parts from other mods. (Always play with animation).

The base that I set up yesterday was very cool ... but I was not able to remove the mobile chassis easily as it did in the mod trailer.

In the photo below I lifted the floor as much as possible but whenever I triggered the undocking ... KAAAABOOOOOMMMM !! 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dxWJaBHDzWN_UfZVX8g2Tst9P8lk7naw/view?usp=sharing

 

I only succeeded after I changed my tactics.

Undocking before supporting the entire base on the floor. That was the only way ... (so far)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gRjCNiHFr6TcdUkq33D9B9oEgW4rgxsi/view?usp=sharing

Am I doing something wrong in the process?

 

KSP.log

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12brFuTpPg_BYbQBJmAlb7O37nmHgg7ij/view?usp=sharing

[Cheesecake]

@KallangoVerdeDid you test a update to KSP 1.11.2 because you are using KSP 1.11.0?
As far as I can see the inflatable looks OK for me.
Also we need the player.log, not ksp.log.

[benjee10]

2 hours ago, KallangoVerde said:

(GOOGLE TRANSLATE)
Hello Benji ...

First ... congratulations on the work is wonderful!

The inflatable habitat appears in a strange way when it is not inflated as in the photo below:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t8IxaK9Oxg8aI0wLp5SH3hnHlOv6HYe1/view?usp=sharing

I noticed this also happen with parts from other mods. (Always play with animation).

The base that I set up yesterday was very cool ... but I was not able to remove the mobile chassis easily as it did in the mod trailer.

In the photo below I lifted the floor as much as possible but whenever I triggered the undocking ... KAAAABOOOOOMMMM !! 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dxWJaBHDzWN_UfZVX8g2Tst9P8lk7naw/view?usp=sharing

 

I only succeeded after I changed my tactics.

Undocking before supporting the entire base on the floor. That was the only way ... (so far)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gRjCNiHFr6TcdUkq33D9B9oEgW4rgxsi/view?usp=sharing

Am I doing something wrong in the process?

 

KSP.log

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12brFuTpPg_BYbQBJmAlb7O37nmHgg7ij/view?usp=sharing

The inflatable looking like that is probably down to your graphics quality settings - on lower settings it can override the way vertices assigned to armatures behave. I will take a look into the other problems tomorrow!

[KallangoVerde]

 

12 minutes ago, Cheesecake said:

@KallangoVerdeVocê testou uma atualização para KSP 1.11.2 porque está usando KSP 1.11.0?
Pelo que posso ver, o inflável parece bom para mim.
Também precisamos do player.log, não do ksp.log.

yeah ... I used the updated Steam version with no mods, and a version with mods that I had updated to 1.11.0

I was even surprised to see the Cormorant mod working relatively well. I think it's time to change ...

5 minutes ago, benjee10 said:

O inflável com essa aparência provavelmente se deve às suas configurações de qualidade gráfica - em configurações mais baixas, ele pode substituir a maneira como os vértices atribuídos às armaduras se comportam. Vou dar uma olhada nos outros problemas amanhã!

Yeah ... it makes a lot of sense now. ReStock's antennas were all wrong just yesterday that I reduced the quality of the textures.

Thanks for the tip ... I'll test this and I'll come back later to tell you

[golkaidakhaana]

@benjee10 I think I may have asked about it before ... but is there anything I can do to fix the issue of the staircase part blocking EVA of kerbals ?

[FabioofSpace]

Hey, does this mod work with MKS?

[Grimmas]

1 hour ago, FabioofSpace said:

Hey, does this mod work with MKS?

It will work in the sense that it will be just a parts mod providing parts. It will not work in the sense that it doesn't currently have any patches for USI-LS/MKS (so you won't get habitats / life support / other expected USI modules in these parts). 

[somnambulist]

On 4/9/2021 at 5:35 PM, Rocketry101 said:

Can you possibly create a copy and send it through google drive or mega?

https://github.com/is-this-alberro/TUFX-Config