Bit Fiddler

I have found that something like half of the part mods I have installed have CLS support, and some of the CLS support I have for them is from other users who made their own MM patch. so to say most mods have CLS support is a bit of a stretch I think. Due to the fact I load every part mod I can find that will work in my current version, as I like to build new and interesting things. I hate it when all my craft look the same. thus I have many parts that have no CLS support for them in my gamedata directory, and therefore I am always searching them out to make a MM config.

am I correct in my assumption this one is not ready for 1.3? I went to GitHub and downloaded all the mods there, but his one seems to kill 1.3. not sure if it is due to not compatible yet or a conflict in another mod however.

just looking at USI Life Support compared to TAC as I am thinking of switching for my 1.3 career. and it also has an EC per Kerbal value tied to it already. thus if TAC or USI life support systems are installed you will want to remove your EC/Kerbal to avoid this double charging the crew for their EC usage. as it is now, I have just made a MM patch on my system that says if it detects TAC or USI-LS it removes the EC/Kerbal from all the Kerbal health modules.

in reality the percentage of parts that I add CLS passable to is a very small percentage. mostly just parts that are big hollow things, or some part that was aesthetically placed and the function of this part was not intended. as I may place some part just to add a bit of flair to the craft and the "function" of that part is meaningless. like for instance I have in the past made the "engine pre-cooler" passable to make them the arms on some rotating station thing. as they have some sort of detailing on them that is more interesting than the plain blank cylinder of a normal hull or fuel tank etc. but the odds of ever making an engine or truss passable is basically 0%. thus if having the module attached to a part during flight scene is going to add overhead to the game engine, it would be best to remove the module from any part that does not have any passability set true when you save the craft to the persistent file.

and if nothing is set to passable remove the module from the part at load time if this will save processor cycles. as many parts would never get them set. like engines, trusses, most fuel tanks etc.

are you still working on this mod? no real traffic here since I posted last November on the Ap/Pe changes I requested. still would like the display changed to not show speed. thus the Ap/Pe text lines would be bigger and easier to read. The reason is if we know our Ap/Pe the speed value is not important. We just need to see these to burn prograde or retrograde to circularize our orbit or adjust Ap/Pe etc. the actual speed we are traveling at this time is not important. so having these numbers bigger would be great as my navball is rather small so the numbers get hard to read.

well windows does that natively no need for a new program. that is how I do it now, however the problem is the .cfg file name is not always named similar to the part in game.. so it becomes a game of digital hide and seek.

win 10. the problem I have is I am running over 400 mods. all the usual gameplay stuff and then every part mod i can find that is listed as compatible with 1.2.2. so not only do i need to track down the actual part the game takes around 20 to 30 min. to start each time i need to test a change. but if you have any ideas on how to make this go faster let me know.

hmm so I am slow on the uptake I guess as I never realized that there was a "here and now" function to this mod. so with this in mind i'll ask the next logical question. is there any plan to make this mod do the job of automated science sampler? as in automatically run the experiments and transmit the data etc.

yes I checked that and restarted but still missing many parts that I feel should be passable. like the probe core mentioned above... it Is not that there are "MANY" parts I guess, but that it takes so much effort to track down what the part is named so I can make a MM patch for it that really makes it bothersome. I have had to track down about 5 parts on this latest long term mission ship I am making. and each track down and MM patch takes an hour or so. not a big deal just frustrating. but yes engines, 90% of the fuel tanks, struts, ANY part smaller than a Kerbal could feasibly fit in, etc. all not passable. it is just those random parts now and then that a mod adds that have no config for CLS that keep causing me headaches.

actually I would like this a lot. I have been trying to figure out how to make the flight plans for this mod for a while now

oh yes KAS and KIS both installed and working fine. I will need to try it on a install without the community tech tree I guess. not a big issue, I will get around to it one of these days. I just noticed it was gone the other day, and figured I would see if the part was supposed to still be in the game, or if it was removed from the mod or something.

LOL yes I found this the hard way... built a shiny new SCANSAT to send to Minmus, the only power source was a reactor. well I get my transfer orbit set and time warp kicks in. Reactor Shuts down. SCANSAT become Voyager.

you should make this into a KSPedia entry.

well what ever... no pressure I am happy with it as it is. I can wait for the switch 1.3 for the new features.

does this imply support for 1.2.2 is over? the new version either can't, or won't, ever be compiled against 1.2.2? no big deal, just asking as I have far to many mods to switch to 1.3 any time soon. so I will be remaining on 1.2.2 and the latest version of the mods I have for quite some time, until all or at least the majority of the mods I use being released for 1.3

yes it would be nice. but he did not say it was not useful, just that the use/work ratio was beyond his level of motivation. which I fully understand I have passed on mod ownership to other in the past as I just could not be bothered to maintain them any more. or I have had to tell users, "do not make any more requests," as I will not be adding any new features etc. so while I wish it was done, I can fully respect his decision to not make it so. for that matter if the use/work ratio was inline with my motivation quotient, I could make it myself. so ya, I never begrudge a mod maker their decision to not add a feature or even continue to maintain the mod.

yes understood i have made many mods myself, and always users want more than you are willing to give... it is a fact of life.

Well the pico port was not my post.... but the way i look at it is this... there is no reason why a 2.5m probe core is not passable. there is nothing in the 2.5m variety that is not in the .625m variety other than a bigger gyro, and more battery storage. however the gyro can be a hollow ring, all you need is mass on the rim of the wheel. and in fact any mass you have in the center of the wheel is detrimental to the performace of a gyro. so the gyro really takes up next to no room in a probe core, just the very outer edge of the diameter. that leaves the battery storage and that just does not need 2.5m diameter by .5 meter or so in height. so yes a 2.5 meter probe core should be passable.

oh yes i found that part causing the split in the living space... once i realized what the CLS control panel was telling me i found yet another part that had to be patched... that 2.5M probe core between the Orca and the Habitation ring. just one more of my headaches. trying to get a manned mission out on long term deployment. and with all of the "realisim" mods i have running it is critical my CLS be set up correctly. so i am constantly finding parts that do not have proper CLS support and having to track them down in my mod list to create a MM patch. lol and with basically every part mod ever made in my gamedata it can be a real pain to figure out which mod it is from, and then find the part.cfg and get the name for MM to patch. so as i said i am ever so tempted to just run that "Change them all" patch and be done with it. @DStaal but if you would be willing to share your CLS patches. i am sure i have all those parts in my install as well. as i said, basically i load every part mod i come across.

I am finding so many parts that should be passable, but the mod makers do not support CLS. I am spending hours tracking down Part names to add to my growing CLS mm patch file. every time I find another I am so tempted to do that patch I mentioned above. and to this end I have a suggestion. If having this module on parts causes overhead for the game and just adding it to every part would be bad. then i suggest a new tactic. make all unknown parts default to have the module on them, but all pasability set to false false. Once it is in the editor on a craft i am making i can open the CLS control panel, or use tweakables etc to set the passability up and then save the craft file. once the craft is loaded into a live game, if a part does not have atleast 1 passability tag set true then remove the module from the part at that time. thus preventing any overhead the game engine may have, yet negating the need to constantly track down parts every time I find one in the editor that will not allow passage. just thinking aloud here as i have no idea what it would take to do all this.. i just know i am frustrated trying to get all my parts to play nice with CLS.

I have a part on my craft named "CSAS-A 2500" does this come from your mod? I can't find a .cfg for it in the folders but I may be missing it in all the sub folders of this mod. asking because I am trying to add CLS support to this part, and need the name for a MM patch. EDIT: oh and is this WIP for US-plus going to be added to the main mod when finished? or will it always be a separate download?

so what sould happen with: @PART[*,!module[ModuleConnectedLivingSpace]]:[NEEDS[ConnectedLivingSpace]:FINAL { MODULE { name = ModuleConnectedLivingSpace } } this would add the module to every part, thus enabling the clickies, but leaving all parts defaulted to passable = false? would this be a bad idea? does this add overhead to the game to process all these modules for parts that do not really need it? EDIT: Also what is up with this? the habitation ring has CLS on it from a MM patch I made, yet it does not show up on the CLS control panel thing. did I do the MM patch incorrectly? @PART[SXTRotatingMk2Ring]:Needs[ConnectedLivingSpace] { MODULE { name = ModuleConnectedLivingSpace passable = true } }

ah yes the you would be missing the surrounding vehicles and the concentrations of the resources... but you could still at least see what the current vehicle would be sans those two modifiers.

oh, I see, well that changes things quite a bit then. I was assuming that tag was not made specifically by the "for" but also the .dll and directory ideas would create the tag as well. must go back and rethink my MM patches. they may not work as expected.