BudgetHedgehog

It's not childish to suggest that content planned for 0.90 gets released in 0.90 (indeed, it was planned for 0.25 I think, but they pushed it back). We've known for a quite a while that the Mk3 parts would be overhauled (ever since Hugo got hired, actually so for a few months, at least) and that they would be large enough to hold 2.5m parts (you know, if we had cargo bays...), what wasn't known was the shape and texture (though with PJ on the job, it's reasonable to have expected they're the same style and standard as the Mk2 parts). As for "I want my cargo bays and if you don't give them to me then don't give me anything at all", it's very much the opposite, actually. I would like them to give me cargo bays, along with everything else Mk3 shaped and I think slightly delaying the release to include things that would otherwise only just miss it is a perfectly valid suggestion and not childish at all. Also, don't misread a suggestion for a demand. If it was a demand, I would have said so. It wasn't even a suggestion per se, it was more of a discussion. It's a small change that Squad could make that would A, make a lot of players very happy and B, be better for them as it's more time to test and QA other aspects. Even if it gets to the point where they're all just sat at their desks waiting for PJ to send the files over, I'm sure they could find something productive to do.

Can a third option be added to the poll? "No, because the editors sometimes disallow perfectly valid attachments in symmetry and the only to make it work is by part clipping or attaching each one individually". If I can attach individually, I should be able to attach symmetrically yet the editors still sometimes don't let you. Also, no, it's not a cheat (single player offline sandbox...) and yes, it allows more creativity and aesthetically pleasing designs. I don't clip fuel tanks together though - anything that in my mind would not be realistic, I don't do. Clipping batteries or RTGs inside command pods, sure. Putting a 1-2 adapter inside a cargo bay because there's no Mk2-2m adapter, go for it.

I'd like for there to be a poll added to the OP. "Should 0.90.0 be delayed until the Mk3 parts and landing gear are finished?" with "yes, I would like a complete set even though it may take longer than anticipated" and "no, I would like the update first and the extra content not critical to 0.90.0 to be in a later update" or something. One thing I don't want to happen is for Squad to not see that there seems to be a majority of people who would check the first option, especially seeing as words like 'might not be ready in time' are being bandied about. It's not like Squad has a deadline to meet, after all - they're the ones who decide on the release date.

Big discussion here. I think without cargobays and wheels (might not be on 0.90), they're as useful as the current Mk3 set.

So move the deadline by an inch. Without cargo bays and bigger gear, they're about as useful as the current Mk3 system i.e. not very.

Tried converting the EVE textures from tga to png? 0.25s tga loader is little bugged.

Some things I've been meaning to ask K&W for a while but have just been reminded about: 1, why use a negative ejection force on the fairings? Is it due to the way they're assembled? 2, what's with the extra node in the fairing bases? One decouple node on top, one attach node on the bottom and one just slightly above the bottom for... reasons.

Yeah, KW decouplers tend to act a little.. annoyingly at times. I can confirm the fairing decoupler bug (probably because they, for some reason, use a negative force. I don't think it's related to ModuleAnchoredDecoupler as I have a MM config that changes all those to ModuleDecouple and it still happens) and the stack decouplers never seem to decouple - they fire, smoke puffs out, but all that happens is the icon moves to the current stage. Nothing is decoupled and then I end up with a big expensive rocket heading back down towards Kerbin with no hope of recovery or reverting.. just as an example.. I will note that the stack decoupler problems have been around for me as long as KWR has, but the fairing decoupler problems appear to be related to Claws fixes. No worries, pFairings are cheaper and lighter on part count anyway.

Specifies the shape of the curve so it's correct. Fine to use in stock. Search for KSP Float Curve Editor for more Info (pressed for time and on mobile here).

.. and have you checked the dropdown menu at the top (where the altimeter would be in flight view)? Made sure the class you changed your ship to is visible in map view (the icon is white)? Here's where screenshots would be a lot more helpful than descriptions..

Just for completeness' sake - you have the Toolbar mod installed as well, right? I don't know if the button appears without it. I say this because I'm using ENB perfectly fine, sliding and all, on 0.25.

I don't care about rockets or whether an engine should be loud in space, it's the blasted launch clamps I can't stand. Put more than say, 4, on a rocket and: KKKKCCCCCHHHHHHUUUUNNNNGGGGG!!!!

Simple - just delay 0.90 until they're done. Don't care when it comes, but having the awesome Mk3 parts with no cargo bay or suitable landing gear will be... frustrating. But yeah, excellent work on the parts. Ya done good, son.

Hmm... I'll reserve judgement on that. I might end up using them separately more often than I think I will, so we'll see. That's pretty much my only gripe with them though - they are some pretty snazzy parts. I wonder if Squad has decided to start sharing textures on these parts? With the many new parts added in a similar/exact copy of the Mk2 style, it would be a little odd and annoying to have to load them twice. Ok, the race to make the most awesome and capable Mk3 shuttle will commence as soon as 0.90 drops!

My only question would be why separate out hte raised tail into two pieces? I can't see many uses for using one and not the other.

I'm going to guess Deadly Re-Entry.

Tried replacing the entire LV-N folder? Or the Squad folder? Not just overwrite, but delete then put the backup in.

No worries, just replace the LV-Ns cfg with your backup copy. You did make a backup copy before changing any cfg files, didn't you?

Seeing as a dependency of CSS is KM_Gimbal, have you installed the optional modules for Mechjeb for KM_Gimbal?

Nope, and I can't help you more without you providing a output_log.txt (or OSX/Linux equivalent) and following the guidelines set out by the How To Get Support sticky (though KVV has been known to play silly buggers with making parts not opaque - I'd uninstall that first to see if it helps).

So, for the notifications, Dismiss still doesn't do anything for me (still on Chrome). I have 4 notifications pending, but I can only see the first one about KX being updated. No way to see the rest as the only other options are to cancel or dismiss all notifications :/ EDIT: (un?)fortunately, Internet Explorer handles the Dismiss button correctly. So it's something to do with Chrome, hmm...

Indeed - the CSS dearly needs proper FAR compatability.

Regarding symmetric flameouts, have a chat with LordFjord, see what he did with his (it looks good, but I'm unsure if I want it to require a keypress combo thing.. I'd rather it just did it upon launch or something). EDIT: Sweet lawdy lawd, you just fixed one of my biggest bugbears with KSP!

Alt+Enter to go fullscreen, click Accept, ALt+Enter to go back to windowed.