Justin Kerbice

I've just look at the archive, why not adding the 2nd post content inside ? (License didn't help that's much ).

that's what Squad should have done in the first place, quite a shame for them and a big thanks to you !

maybe you forgot it is nothing related to hide/display physical model on the body but "only" the launch site button(s) in the VAB/SPH AND the map icons (should be already done for this "base boss" thing). Which looks like to be 75% or more GUI only stuff. A skill you've proven to be good at. And if you don't like it... this would end either like KSP (devs don't like a feature so they don't add it even if 99% of players want it) or someone add it and... you'll have to accept it or not in the main branch of code or offer a forked/alternative version with this.

But you (almost) did it: What it miss is just a bool attribute for base (isDiscovered), false by default, can be set to true by launch site creators. With your own new code, set it to true when a vessel is within the 2000m range and update site cfg. + add UI button for creator to set it to true or false when adding a site. At least that's how I saw it and I give it a first try but unity UI is definitely not my cup of tea, so weird. It is not even event driven (the fact is unity redrawn the exact same GUI stuff at the exact same place every frame or so, instead of drawing it once, and let the graphics data where they are and as they are, checking for changes on events, like any common GUI system), that's may explain why KSP use so much CPU resources (+ try with and without crews in SPH/VAB) ! By the way, I forgot before: "base boss" maybe not a good name, I don't like it IMHO.

That would be a nice idea, despite the small cockpit need a better "kerbal cruncher" (as players seems not very mad about this huge inaccuracy of former C7's parts) or be unkerballed. I like building small probe plane with some of my mods (especially low profile misc engines, which have a 0.625 ultra efficiency Xenon powered engine, which is great with just 2 tanks + the simple wings I've made for the wings tutorial, they are small and also generate lot's of lift). RLA stockalike mod also include small parts (there are many engines but I never tried them yet).

Looks good, I guess discovery feature as defined before was no longer needed, at least on how I understand these new features .

For me, I found IVA pointless and useless, it's just a costly (from memory point of view) eye candy. Useless cause in the mk1 cockpit for example, seat is ridiculously too low, you can do nothing except waching around so this is just for 5 mins enjoyment seeing stupid smiles of kebals or sticky notes.

It would be good to get some resource mod but: what is the point of your mod ? You wrote bout getting metal but for what purpose ? I spent weeks mining, creating base and I got some metal then ? All currently existing resource mods (which end to be boring) for KSP lack of a good/proper integration and a redefined gameplay where resources are REALLY needed for everything. Tech tree need to be modified, to allow mining first and some exploration, progression needs to be set so players can start scanning/mining, then building, then going farer and farer, then in space where resources should be more valuable, due to the cost of extraction mostly, etc But I don't believe KSP is really designed for resources right now, it needs too much changes current design may not allow. If you know it, or not, take a look at Terraria, another sanbox game in which resources are VERY needed and are the core of the game (and overall design is a lot lot more better than KSP IMHO). BUT, don't try the game or you may end addicted !

Thanks for this update, but: This is very bad, DO NOT upload experimental on KS, people will be aware of update and may download the last release, as reading is too much for some people... You'd better put it on an alternative download site (like mediafire or whatever you want) and just put the link here for people who really want to try it.

Using a previous release version of KK as well as Kerbtown, static buildings works on other bodies out of Kerbin SOI the same way as they do on Kerbin. (I'll never understand why people don't give it a try by themselves... is it so hard ? )

Many players, too much used to human space programs, forgot the main kerbals concern: having fun ! That's explain why, starting to go to space themselves and thinking it would be very funny to move on zero-G etc get bored to death by waiting days, weeks or years locked in a tiny pod, so they decide to send probes and stay on Kerbin for playing .

Not sure, it's possible less keys means bigger bad tangent points, like a big zig zag when a smooth down/up curve was expected.

Hi, This is another magic of the buggy float curves use more or less the same way for stock engines (and many mods' engines I guess): with this config: mass = 0.2 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.18 minimum_drag = 0.05 angularDrag = 1 crashTolerance = 12 maxTemp = 1200 MODULE { name = ModuleEngines thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform exhaustDamage = False ignitionThreshold = 0.1 minThrust = 0 maxThrust = 30 heatProduction = 80 useEngineResponseTime = False //engineAccelerationSpeed = 0.24 //engineDecelerationSpeed = 0.42 useVelocityCurve = True PROPELLANT { name = LiquidFuel ratio = 1 DrawGauge = True } PROPELLANT { name = IntakeAir ratio = 8 } atmosphereCurve { key = 0 0 key = 0.68 0 key = 0.7 10 key = 0.9 1000 key = 1 2000 } velocityCurve { key = 400 0 0 0 key = 300 0.05 0 0 key = 0 1 0 0 } } What I was looking for was to make a low performance enigne which can't works over a "fair" altitude (~ 6000 feet), I made this atmo curve as a first trial, as I'm not sure 0.68 match about 2000m, and can't go too fast. But what I got is this magic engine which have a negative Isp and refuel itself instead WHILE keeping pushing up ! Take a look here for more detail. As I wrote in this same thread: all stock engines in KSP are most probably messy and can have very weird behaviour under some conditions QA team may are fully unaware of. EDIT: to Squad devs: Isp may (should) be reset to 0 if it's become negative in ModuleEngines* code, it doesn't make any sense to have a negative Isp, unless Isp in KSP means something a bit different than I assume.

@snjo: There is a little issue in your FSEngine module as fuel consumption is calculated from requested throttle (the control), instead of being calculated from actual speed of the engine. So if I set throttle to 50%, fuel consumption will remain constant whereas speed may increase from 400 to 800 rpm. And in fact, it's worth than that, speed of the engine stay as it is (even setting throttle from 100 to 50 %, speed stay at maxRPM !) Also "activate engine" button from context menu stay as is despite engine has been activated (by stagging key). (I think I understand why FSEngine module is not so used with your engines ) Firespitter v7.0.5398.27328 Config: MODULE { name = FSengine maxThrust = 60 maxRPM = 1200 atmosphericThrust = 0,0;0.05,0; 1,1 velocityLimit = 0,1;300,1;600,0.05;800,0 fuelConsumption = 0,0.0001; 1,0.01 throttleThrust = 0,0; 1,1 resources = LiquidFuel,1; IntakeAir,10 thrustTransformName = thrustTransform maxThrottle = 110 flameoutThreshold = 0.7 smoothFXSpeed = 0.1 powerProduction = 35 engineBrake = 15 powerDrain = 10 debugMode = false } And with FSEngineSounds, fan sounds is still playing when blades doesn't move at all, and overheat alarm sound is "never" played (at least when overheat condition are met and engine is overheating, even when it explode !) MODULE { name = FSengineSounds useDebug = False showVolumeDebug = False //engage = //running = power = Kerbice Group/Sounds/fan_running //disengage = //flameout = warning = Firespitter/Sounds/overheat_alarm powerPitchBase = 0.8 thrustAddedToPitch = 0.3 powerFadeInSpeed = 0.01 powerFadeInDelay = 0.0 powerVolume = 1.0 engageVolume = 1.0 warningSoundThreshold = 0.8 warningCooldownTime = 2.0 } EDIT: the FSEngine module also doesn't let KSP knows engine have been activated, stage icons are like inactive engine, no fuel jauge at all.

ok, you're right . hiding site is already "available" (AlphaAsh has played with updatecache method which can be tweaked again to achieve this and it is also planned in discovery mechanism). @AlphaAsh: if you're in, I think adding a new item for sites like a boolean "found_by_contract", then updatecache or other should ignore/hide the sites if it's true. The only issue maybe is to update site by the contract . KK<->contract code "communication", contract code have to call a KK method to unhide launch site.

aerial surveys could be great, but with a flatness target maybe (calculate slope for a path, it needs to be < x %, so mountains = contract completed but failed to get useful location), but it's completely different from the discussed discovery mechanism, which involved to get very close to a site and maybe activate it. Contract can be done to do anything, it just needs to get KK interface from a contract (which is no needs to be linked with FP or made in FP but can benefits from some kind of API/utils from it), here, the specific contract would be linked to a specific launch site, so I guess launch sites could have a new item ("get_by_contract_first" or any other name) then all sites list as to be processed to choose one, get the coordinates for the survey, ... all in generate method of contract. I took a look at this before thinking of delivery contracts.

nice, I just thought you've took a break but it's definitely not the case ! Just need a bit of discovering and "refurbish" launch sites now I guess

you can use HTML::Strip perl module, very simple: my $stripper = HTML::Strip->new (); my $line_no_html = $stripper->parse ($line); ($line can also contains more than one single line).

I didn't understand what you wrote as a request for an arrow object, I can do one. Send you pm when I got something (does the size matter ? Guess you can resize he object as you wish). By the way, using stock "toolbar" could be usefull, I've got trouble with blizzy's one (and it also redundant to have two way to do the same thing but that's another story).

Got a weird issue with one of my 0.25 install: no main button displayed at all in every game scene, and TB create a new entry under MAINMENU, with a new id, in its settings file (x=y=300 w=250 h=0,...) every time KSP is closed. win 7, KSP 0.25.642 windowed mode (1024x768 or 128x960) both opengl or dx mode. EDIT: I got the same issue also on another 0.25 install (also windowed) Looks like I'm not the only one to have the issue, blizzy78, any advice ? 1.7.6 version works (in fact, just the notice on update, no other button showed up, dismiss update => toolbar vanish). No error in log. Got an exception (update KSP with patcher, restart): (medsouz assume it's harmless in Kerbal Konstructs, the GUI error itself, as we got the same kind of error in one case). EDIT2: I've tried a clean new install of the 0.25 straight from the zip archive, no update, nothing, default settings (windowed, if relevant), add TB 1.7.7, start a new sandbox game with all default too, no toolbar button anywhere, nothing in log, toolbar, compat. checker seems to be ok (or at least don't complain about anything), sh object instanciated, settings file created with some, looking good, content.

Maybe you could normalize your DB design, ie spread unique data into their own tables, it will improve the overall size (no duplicate) but it's not really a big deal here. It would lead to tables: authors, ksp_version, license, mod type, ... each one with its own unique index. tables: author (pk id, string name) + enventually team_id for group => team table (id, author_id), with non unique id ex: team_id auth_id 1 5 1 7 1 15 2 3 2 33 so authors 5,7 and 15 are on team 1, etc license (pk id, license name, full license text/link) modtype (pk id, string type) (1 plugin, 2 part, 3 misc, 4 mixed=parts+plugin) misc for texture replacement/MM config, ... The overall table may use its own index, not mod name, internally. The tool I'm working on could also update one column of your DB itself ("mod update notice") so you can just do a simple select to be aware of potential update. (I also think sending email and/or syslog entry).

No if Squad do smart things, ie don't trigger any actions from so called "payload" (maybe it would need a new vessel type "payload", fully inactive when coupled, tank can't be drained, EC stay in batteries, RW/SAS does nothing, ...)

@Ippo and pjf: I've got an idea, for the documentation, keep things simple and just be straight, I mean kindda: { "file" : "dirA/moddir", "install_to" : "dirB" } do: copy all files under dirA/moddir in/from the archive to dirB so from: archive/dirA/moddir/dirC/file1 archive/dirA/moddir/dirC/file2 archive/dirA/moddir/dirD/file1 archive/dirA/license archive/readme archive/something you'll get: KSP/GameData/dirB/dirA/moddir/dirC/file1 KSP/GameData/dirB/dirA/moddir/dirC/file2 KSP/GameData/dirB/dirA/moddir/dirD/file1 KSP/GameData/dirB/dirA/license (note: leaving license file here is useless and disk space consuming, "license" could also be named "misplaced file", "IputthisrubbishtherecauseIdontcareaboutusers" or anything like that) error cases (what ckan do in such cases): dirB already exists dirA doesn't exists etc so, 0% guess, 0% doubt, 100% efficiency, and every one are happy Free feature idea: add a source dir, so plug-ins authors/people interested know the source code matching the installed mod is somewhere (= <KSP_mod_source_dir>/modA/version1/...)

it's not contradict what I wrote, it contradict the way things have been made by Squad in KSP. The edit is more or less irrelevant as KSP, for now, use a 180° rotation on y axis to achieve the symmetry (which is very very bad and dumb ! Why ? Because we have to make both sides of wings identical, or use two separate objects to have bottom and top face in sync)

ok thanks. but... I have a huge doubt, what thes two line actually do ? Does AMEG files will be put into 'GameData/Kerbice Group' (so if archive contains Gamedata/Kerbice Group/etc it will lead to 'GameData/Kerbice Group/GameData/Kerbice Group/etc' or 'GameData/Parts/...' or something else ?