[1.2 - 1.4] Modular Rocket Systems v1.13.2 (2018-03-12) - Stock-alike Parts Pack

[LN400]

Sweeeet. Again, thanks tons! Hopefully getting time to spend on KSP before long. Gonna let you know if I come across any borks.

[DaniDE]

Nice! Thanks!

[Cuky]

Sorry if I am being ignorant a bit here, but I couldn't find any info on this in OP or last few pages: do you have plans to convert textures into .dds format, as with stock KSP parts? There are some nice and useful parts I like from this mod, but I am a bit tight on RAM

[Cetera]

Cuky,

After a lot of experimentation, using the aggressive Active Texture Management does about the same thing as DDS textures. It isn't perfect, but it is very close. I've tried using the DDS converters and DDS loaders in the past, but they have a tendency to generate some strange artifacts.

I hope Necro will eventually do these in DDS, but in the meantime, running ATM is still a very good and recommended idea.

[Cuky]

Thanks for info. I somehow missed that ATM was updated for 1.0

[biohazard15]

Sorry if I am being ignorant a bit here, but I couldn't find any info on this in OP or last few pages: do you have plans to convert textures into .dds format, as with stock KSP parts? There are some nice and useful parts I like from this mod, but I am a bit tight on RAM

I second that.

[NecroBones]

I haven't made any plans for DDS specifically, but I'm certainly willing to look into it. Right now, the copy of the KSP "part tools" I have in Unity doesn't offer it as an option. And I'm stuck on a somewhat old copy of Unity, because they disabled emissive animations in later versions (unless you pay developer fees).

In the meantime, I squeezed in some of the needed updates for the cargo bays. I'm still not 100% sure it's exactly right, but we can take them for a spin and see how it goes.

1.6.1 (2015-04-29) - Bays are back, baby.
 - Re-added cargo bays.

[biohazard15]

For DDS conversion, you may try this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/98672-WIN-KSP-to-DDS-texture-converter

[Vahal]

Just a little info:

The Hound is till named the Terrier in the part description

description = Relatively efficient for a chemical rocket engine, the "Terrier" is designed to move reasonably large payloads in style.

It's ultralow priority and corrected that.

Thanks for the update(s)!

[NecroBones]

Just a little info:

The Hound is till named the Terrier in the part description

It's ultralow priority and corrected that.

Thanks for the update(s)!

Woops! I have it fixed here, for the next update. Thanks!

[Honeybadga]

Not sure about the Guidance Nose-Cone being available in from tier 0 of the tech tree. With it's SAS and torque of 4.0 it's vastly superior to the Stayputnik which only comes at tier 3. Same with the Sparkler 0.625m engine which comes one tier before the stock 48-7S Spark. The Sparkler feels clearly like an upgrade to the Spark. Balancing it like this doesn't make it very stock-alike.

Otherwise it really is an awesome pack.

[NecroBones]

Not sure about the Guidance Nose-Cone being available in from tier 0 of the tech tree. With it's SAS and torque of 4.0 it's vastly superior to the Stayputnik which only comes at tier 3. Same with the Sparkler 0.625m engine which comes one tier before the stock 48-7S Spark. The Sparkler feels clearly like an upgrade to the Spark. Balancing it like this doesn't make it very stock-alike.

Otherwise it really is an awesome pack.

I'll take another look at some of the locations. A lot of things changed on me. The sparkler is actually a 50% LV-909, and is meant to go with that, so I'll probably end up moving it. EDIT: Actually, it is currently alongside the 909 in the tree, so I don't see a problem here. It weighs 2.5x what the "Spark" (48-7S) does, so it already has trade-offs.

The guidance cone is meant to be tier-0, and it's limited in many ways. It doesn't have a top attachment node, so it has to be used at the top of the rocket rather than inline, which makes it obsolete before long. Plus it only has the most basic SAS (your pilots will always fly better in that regard), can't take soil samples, crew reports, or EVA reports, and the torque is minimal compared to what you can get with actual reaction wheels, and is less than the Mk1 Pod's torque. Plus it weighs 8x as much as the Stayputnik. Since it weighs half of what the Mk1 pod does, it makes it a bit of a judgment call as to whether it's useful versus sending a manned pod.

I think I'm going to bump the weight up a little though to make it slightly less attractive.

Edited April 30, 2015 by NecroBones

[Honeybadga]

The guidance cone is meant to be tier-0, and it's limited in many ways. It doesn't have a top attachment node, so it has to be used at the top of the rocket rather than inline, which makes it obsolete before long. Plus it only has the most basic SAS (your pilots will always fly better in that regard), can't take soil samples, crew reports, or EVA reports, and the torque is minimal compared to what you can get with actual reaction wheels, and is less than the Mk1 Pod's torque. Plus it weighs 8x as much as the Stayputnik. Since it weighs half of what the Mk1 pod does, it makes it a bit of a judgment call as to whether it's useful versus sending a manned pod.

Not sure if you should compare it to a manned pod. Whether it is a good idea to introduce probe cores as late to the tech tree as Squad does in stock is debatable. Just saying that if you label your pack stock-alike, you might wanna consider to go with the flow. Otherwise there's stuff like Better than starting manned

I think I'm going to bump the weight up a little though to make it slightly less attractive.

Oh, really? It's a very nice looking part. You'll banish it into a niche by making it less attracitve. Then there's a bunch of people playing with Remote Tech (hopefully soon at least in 1.0 )

Please don't take all this as a rant but rather as constructive criticism.

[NecroBones]

Not sure if you should compare it to a manned pod. Whether it is a good idea to introduce probe cores as late to the tech tree as Squad does in stock is debatable. Just saying that if you label your pack stock-alike, you might wanna consider to go with the flow. Otherwise there's stuff like Better than starting manned

Heh. That's just it though, this mod is meant to plug a few holes in the stock lineup, and to me, not having an unmanned rocket option at the start is a bit of an oversight. So a very limited-use nose cone seems to fit the bill. And I feel comparing it to the manned Mk1 is exactly the right thing to do, since for the first couple of tiers, it's the only alternative. In comparison, while the cone weighs less, it also has less torque, costs 50% more, and can't do anywhere near as much since it doesn't have a person in it.

I have an edit on my side to bump the weight up a little and lower the torque slightly, which shouldn't hamper its usefulness much, but will definitely make it feel more like a trade-off from manning a Mk1 pod.

To me it seems very fair.

[Threadsinger]

Heh. That's just it though, this mod is meant to plug a few holes in the stock lineup, and to me, not having an unmanned rocket option at the start is a bit of an oversight. So a very limited-use nose cone seems to fit the bill. And I feel comparing it to the manned Mk1 is exactly the right thing to do, since for the first couple of tiers, it's the only alternative. In comparison, while the cone weighs less, it also has less torque, costs 50% more, and can't do anywhere near as much since it doesn't have a person in it.

I have an edit on my side to bump the weight up a little and lower the torque slightly, which shouldn't hamper its usefulness much, but will definitely make it feel more like a trade-off from manning a Mk1 pod.

To me it seems very fair.

I typically used the nose cone for starting tests, before I send Kerbals up. I know there's a mod for that kind of gameplay too, but this suited me well for my own role play. I also use it when I needed a core to test parts for test contracts on the launchpad (or in the ocean), or to eject (and test) parts out of Kerbin or Kerbol orbit. It can be a bit powerful in hardcore modes where you don't want to risk Kerbals at the start, and you can attach a girder to it at the top and make it mostly symmetrical, but it does fill a nice pre-sputnik niche. I also find the sputnik-looking core to have terrible aerodynamics for use as an expendable guidance package in the beginning.

Maybe a balance consideration would be to dramatically increase it's electrical requirements? We don't get solar panels until later (I think), so if it has a high consumption, that would limit it to short-missions unless you add a ton of batteries.

[NecroBones]

I typically used the nose cone for starting tests, before I send Kerbals up. I know there's a mod for that kind of gameplay too, but this suited me well for my own role play. I also use it when I needed a core to test parts for test contracts on the launchpad (or in the ocean), or to eject (and test) parts out of Kerbin or Kerbol orbit. It can be a bit powerful in hardcore modes where you don't want to risk Kerbals at the start, and you can attach a girder to it at the top and make it mostly symmetrical, but it does fill a nice pre-sputnik niche. I also find the sputnik-looking core to have terrible aerodynamics for use as an expendable guidance package in the beginning.

Maybe a balance consideration would be to dramatically increase it's electrical requirements? We don't get solar panels until later (I think), so if it has a high consumption, that would limit it to short-missions unless you add a ton of batteries.

I think that's a good idea. Actually it already used slightly more electricity than the 'putnik, but not by much. I've increased it to be on par with the inline stackable 1.25m probe core. I also reduced the battery to half (50 instead of 100).

[passinglurker]

I don't see anything wrong with letting probe cores last more than ten minutes without extra batteries even if they had enough juice or were efficient enough to go a whole kerbal day it still wouldn't be enough to really go anywhere with them.(it takes about a day to reach the mun)

[NecroBones]

I don't see anything wrong with letting probe cores last more than ten minutes without extra batteries even if they had enough juice or were efficient enough to go a whole kerbal day it still wouldn't be enough to really go anywhere with them.(it takes about a day to reach the mun)

True, I didn't really think of it that way. I'll undo the battery reduction and see how it goes. The good news is that most engines generate power, so at least during the ascent you're usually in good shape in any case.

[Vahal]

The probe core nosecone is already VERY heay for a 1.25m core. 0.4t is almost the MK1 lander can weight (0.6t). Four times the inline probe core weight and almost the same of the 2.5m inline probe core (0.5t) . I think it is already less attractive than for example the stayputnik or any other 0.625/1.2m probe cores due to its shape (one node only and rounded) and its weight even if it has more EC than the others (a 1.25 inline batterie is only 0.1t). The poor thing has enough drawback (I would decrease the weight to 0.3 in fact)

[NecroBones]

The probe core nosecone is already VERY heay for a 1.25m core. 0.4t is almost the MK1 lander can weight (0.6t). Four times the inline probe core weight and almost the same of the 2.5m inline probe core (0.5t) . I think it is already less attractive than for example the stayputnik or any other 0.625/1.2m probe cores due to its shape (one node only and rounded) and its weight even if it has more EC than the others (a 1.25 inline batterie is only 0.1t). The poor thing has enough drawback (I would decrease the weight to 0.3 in fact)

Darn all of you and your sensible comments... lol

I've reverted the mass change back to 0. 4t. So for now, the edits stand as:

* reduced torque to 3 (from 4)

* increased power consumption to 0.05 (from 0.03)

While I was at it, I've also improved the gimbal on several engines to correspond to the stock changes.

[naidis]

i'm checking which mod crashed my game and i found i can't access to the VAB/SPH with my career save if i moved MRS mod out. why is that?

update: i manually removed the contracts in my save which came from MRS, and it's solved now.

Edited May 1, 2015 by naidis
solved

[NecroBones]

In today's 1.0.1 patch, Squad reversed the change they made to how "MaxThrust" works. For 1.0, they changed it to be Sea-level thrust instead of the actual "max" (vacuum) thrust. Today, they switched it back. Because of this, I'll put out an update again today with corrections to the engines in the mod.

[NecroBones]

In today's 1.0.1 patch, Squad reversed the change they made to how "MaxThrust" works. For 1.0, they changed it to be Sea-level thrust instead of the actual "max" (vacuum) thrust. Today, they switched it back. Because of this, I'll put out an update again today with corrections to the engines in the mod.

Since I'll be updating today anyway, I'm also putting in the DDS texture conversion to help with everyone's RAM usage.

[Vahal]

YAY!

time to redownload mods... again Changes seems good about nosecone.

[Kolago]

MRS Nose Cone, 1.25m Rounded (NBnoseRounded) has a node in the wrong direction:

node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1, 0.0, 1

Shut be:

node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.5, 0.0, 0.0, -1, 0.0, 1