Jump to content

Claw

Members
  • Posts

    6,422
  • Joined

Everything posted by Claw

  1. Yeah, I agree. We tend not to play jokes on individual users simply for the fact that it can be poorly interpreted. Same goes the other way. Really, moderators play a little fun at each other more because we tend to know each other a bit (from hanging out in the chat). Practical jokes in text form can be taken very badly, so they are generally discouraged. On the subject of Green Iron Crown (GIC), as was stated, we create "regular" user accounts for testing purposes. GIC escaped because we were checking an issue with the reputation system. In the few minutes we spent checking things, a user noticed that something was amiss, and the snowball began. Cheers, ~Claw
  2. Yes, that was a particularly sad day. You'd also be surprised at the types of PMs we get, in response to reminding people about the rules. That's what did it for me...
  3. Padishar is quite right. ModuleGrappleNode is the folder you need (from StockBugFixes) if you want to fix some of the claw bugs. Among others, it specifically fixes a bug with quickloading and entering warp, which causes part of the craft to stick in place and rip itself apart. Cheers, ~Claw
  4. You'll probably need to post a list of your mods and some pics of your craft. I also suspect that you'll need to post in the modded support section, but I'll leave this here for now until there's more info for us to help better. Cheers, ~Claw
  5. Save files are the best for this sort of thing. Also, there is a bug with the aimpoint for the target vessel, where it is really aiming at the root part of the ship. So is it possible that your craft is aligned with the root? (If you were to zoom out that picture.) Cheers, ~Claw
  6. Yep, it's a necro. But since you guys are enjoying it, post on! Cheers, ~Claw
  7. Early career can be difficult for these short sounder type missions. The problem with something like you have there is that it's fairly low drag, and wants to point nose first when coming down. So there's not a lot slowing it down. Instead of launching straight up, try using a flatter profile, launching and flying at a bit of an angle. That way, when coming back down, the ship is traveling a bit down range also. This lets the rocket travel in thicker air for longer and helps it slow down. Also consider decoupling that SRB. They add a bit of weight and make it harder to slow down. Funds wise, empty SRBs are quite cheap. You can also keep the decoupler by attaching it upside down, so that it sticks to the Sci Jr and jettisons only the SRB. I'm sure others have more ideas. Good luck. Also, welcome to the forums! Cheers, -Claw
  8. 1. Yes, that's fine. 2. You make a license that you're comfortable with. An easy utility for this can be found here: https://creativecommons.org/choose/ There is no "official template" for the forums, so long as it's included with your add-on, and you adhere to any licenses from works that you use (with appropriate permissions). 3. You don't have to credit Squad for MM configs that you release. 4. Anything you borrow needs to be borrowed in accordance with the applicable license. Often it's good practice (even when the license permits) to contact the author and ask them if it's okay. If you want your stuff included in someone else's work, you also coordinate that directly with them. 5. Some people credit anyone who has helped them along the way. Typically speaking, borrowing from community knowledge isn't something that you need to credit. Borrowing someone else's work, however, needs to be credited. When in doubt, give credit where credit is due. Good luck with your project. Cheers, ~Claw
  9. My comment was aimed at if you're trying to size the engine shroud based on the size of the part above the engine. This would still fail if you have an FL-T45 attached to an FL-T800, and you put a size 2 decoupler underneath. Then you'd have a size 2 engine shroud surrounding that FL-T45. It's the opposite problem. Why would anyone do this? Idk. Same reason you sandwich a size 1 engine between a size 2 tank and size 2 decoupler I guess. Because it works for whatever you're doing at the time. I do much prefer the angled idea, where it's detecting part sizes on the top and bottom nodes (as posted). By the way, it's actually the engine that's creating the shroud, not the decoupler. The engine has no idea what's above or below it. It just checks to see if the bottom node is filled. Cheers, ~Claw
  10. That's because we have yet to see someone post a consistent way to replicate this in stock. It happens, and happens a lot. But I haven't heard of a consistent way to make it happen. Cheers, ~Claw
  11. Well, I'd say it needs to be the maximum of the decoupler or the engine, because what happens if you put a smaller decoupler under the engine (or other part). But that rule doesn't work when hooking decouplers to something like a quad coupler. Also, if it's the size of the decoupler, that still doesn't work for the case where the decoupler is bigger then the bottom of that fuel tank too. Then the fairing is open on top. I think there are a lot of strange combinations with these, which would also lead to unusual scenarios if the fairing is just set to the size of the decoupler. Not sure what's ideal here... Cheers, -Claw
  12. Hopefully my fixes will no longer be needed very soon. But I do appreciate the .craft file, because I can feed this back into experimentals for testing (and confirmation). Cheers, -Claw
  13. Yes, when things are on rails, there are no aerodynamic calculations. The only difference from what you said is that the cutoff for deletion is actually based on pressure: 0.1 atmospheres, which is ~23km on Kerbin. Cheers, ~Claw
  14. Moved to modded support. If you can, please also upload a log file (check the sticky in this forum). The log might show some errors, which can help narrow down the problem. Welcome to the forums! Cheers, -Claw
  15. Did you disable Plus or uninstall the whole fix? I suppose the grip multiplier might be overzealous. Actually, that was fixed in 1.0. So if your engines aren't gimbaling the right way, then there's something else going on. (Fixed as in they invert gimbal properly, not fixed as in there's an "invert" button.) Have you tried it recently? Or are you going off old data? Cheers, ~Claw
  16. That's pretty sweet. I can't recall seeing an oval station like that before. Nice job. Cheers, ~Claw
  17. I agree that it seems to look like a ladder. You can also look in the GameData\Squad\Parts\Resources\RadialDrill directory and make sure that's there. I would agree with 5thHorseman. Installing the game again will likely clear it up. Are you using any add-ons? Sometimes they remove or modify parts, which can cause issues if the add-on doesn't install properly. Welcome to the forums! Cheers, ~Claw
  18. I see you have a few mods there, so I've moved this to the modded support forum. Thanks for posting a picture, that does help. I don't know this as a stock problem off hand, so possibly it's being caused by an add-on. Which add-ons are you using? Also, it might be helpful to check your log file at that time and see if something is coming up in there. Also, welcome to the forums! Cheers, ~Claw
  19. No worries. Sorry it got skipped over initially. Cheers, ~Claw
  20. Sorry, guess we skipped over this one with the airplane stuff. I tried this in 1.0.4 and didn't have any problems with the action groups. It was a simple case with a Mk1 capsule and the antenna. Maybe there was more to it? Cheers, ~Claw
  21. Sorry Wcmille, but this thread is an oldie. Your points are good, but I think the folks who started this probably have their answer by now (since it's about 2.5 years old). Actually, this has been arisen from the dead twice. So I think I will go ahead and close it to prevent any further confusion. Cheers! ~Claw
  22. Seems like the stock parts are slowly being converted to emit light, as they are updated from older versions. I believe for now the only way is via add-on packs as indicated above. Cheers, ~Claw
  23. You aren't the only one to report issues for v1.0.4. Though I don't know exactly what the burden is from when comparing 0.9 to 1.0 (aside from the aero). Cheers, ~Claw
  24. Nothing wrong with a good old fashioned rocket. Some people just prefer to fly a plane to space sometimes. Also, it's often considered a bit of a different kind of challenge. Some designs can even haul quite a bit of stuff to orbit. Humorously, there's a lot of stuff in KSP that doesn't serve a purpose, except to be there. Much of this game is wrapped up in the "I do these things because I can" sort of mentality. Also, welcome to the forums! Cheers, ~Claw
×
×
  • Create New...