BudgetHedgehog

"This new engine is OP, it makes the Mainsail obsolete etc etc!" Where have I heard that before? Oh yes, back when 0.23.5 introduced the Mammoth, Twin Boar and Rhino. Do people still use the Mainsail? Yes. Because, while on paper, it's worse, but in practice, it's sometimes better. If they make the Vector have a high cost (entry and unit), whack it in the last couple of tech tree tiers, no bottom attach node, I don't see a problem. Are you going to use something that costs 40k Starbucks on a 1.25m stack that, by it's very nature, won't be taking heavy loads to space? Chances are that engine alone will be 75% of the cost of the rocket (my current 2.5m LKO runner costs about 55k) and without mods, you're just going to be staging it away to be deleted - boom, 40k down the drain. In early career, you won't have access to it and in later career, money doesn't matter as much (but it's still important - why spend 40k on one engine when I could send a whole rocket to LKO for the same price?), and you still have the problem of it being just a terrible 1.25m engine - it's 3.75 tons and has a ridiculous thrust. You'll end up losing out on dV with the weight and likely won't be able to even launch a 5.0 TWR rocket (so even if you limit the thrust, you still have the dV loss). 1.25m stacks are usually light and having a massive, high power engine on the bottom does not work too well (because aerodynamics and CoM balancing). So, with the high cost, there's more incentive to return it and get a refund - say, while attached to the back of a Shuttle? Ok, so put it on the bottom of 2.5m stacks. Well, it looks rubbish then and you're still running into the money barrier, expect it's about 40% of your rocket rather 70%. Plus, a not-insignificant amount of users play with FAR and having that sudden cross-section change will kill you in drag. Sandbox, I don't care about balance - why not use a 3.75m tank with a Mainsail for lifting anything? Why bother trying to keep within restrictions when there are none? It's a sandbox - same deal with stuff like Unlimited Money, or All Weapons Unlocked or whatever; the gloves are off, it's a free for all - there is no balance when you remove most of the restrictions that balance things. In short, there's nothing to worry about, the Mainsail will still be relevant. If it's not, then.. so? Don't use the Vector then. If, despite all the reasons given above, the Vector still comes out on top of literally every other engine, then harness the same self-limits that stop you from enabling Infinite Fuel and Hack Gravity and just don't use it. Or, if you want to use it, use it in a situation it's designed to be used - on the back of a Shuttle. People use the Mammoth and Rhino exactly the same way - either career balancing stops them from using it in place of others, or they use it because it fits the role or they don't care. Goodness me, you'd think Squad had introduced a 100000 isp ion engine with the thrust of a Skipper with the amount of naysayers the Vector has.. (Edit: engine stats subject to change, of course. Also, down with tankbutts and a mk3 - 3x2.5m adapter would look awful. We already have a mk3 - 1x2.5m adapter, but I don't see a lot of them used on Shuttles - could it be the Mainsail hasn't got the thrust to lift a 40ton plane and the fuel required to get it to orbit but 3 of them do?)

Awww yeah, that's been frustrating me more than it should...

Well, use the coffee I just donated to fix it! Just kidding, I'll give it a whirl. Worst that can happen is I have to revert to a quicksave just before attempting reshuffling, no biggie.. It's good enough for me, hold my port, I'm going in!

Remind me in a few days to look for them.. I am quite adept at the art of Foley, I'd love a chance to contribute to this. So yeah, remind me!

Like what, what weird results and how small are we talking? Because the hotel is only like 80ish parts with docking ports.. I take it by the manual hyperedit option, you mean load a copy of the desired end product to the launchpad, hyper edit that to the desired orbit then delete the previous version via savefile editing.. right? BTW, I love SensibleScreenshot and FieldExperience

@PART[partnamehere] { @description = put new part description here e.g. optimal radiator setup is XYZ } You can add on the desired text to the current text if you want, RP-0 does it, check that for the syntax.

Parts that have high skin area (that is optionally clipped inside their parent) but low thermal mass, e.g. the CubOS or even a docking port, oscillate their temperature, increasing every timestep, out to infinity degrees. Part A heats up, wants to transfer to part B but part B has a low thermal mass and a high skin temp tolerance so it accepts the heat, part B is now very hot for its size and wants to transfer to Part A to remove the heat, Part A accepts the heat but becomes very very hot and wants to transfer heat to Part B which becomes very very very hot and so it oscillates out to infinity.. Or something like that.

Question: how buggy/WIP/alpha is Re3? I want to remove a few docking ports on my space hotel but I don't want to do anything that'll permanently break it...

I've not seen that caused by PlanetShine. Other mods, yes, but not PS.

This. I've disabled the thermal system as much as I care to (ignore max temp, no conduction) because it seems every single vessel I have that clips parts slightly in (not using the offset tool here - the stock docking port clips half its model in by itself anyway) has that runaway overheating. I try my best, use most massive parts, don't use offset, and it will be working fine. As soon as I dock anything to it though, boom, loads of red bars and a glowing station that, due to a bug, can't be made to unglow without changing scene, which takes forever. It's a bit annoying playing with Ignore Max Temp but I still RP as if it's enabled - I still put heatshields on things, I still attach radiators etc, it's just those are for cosmetic use and so I can say 'well, if the thermal system was working right, so would this'. Like you, most of my opinion of 1.0.5 will be based on the fixes to this.

It's nice to not have to worry about the game running out of memory. Since doing the 64bit workaround 3 months ago, I've had 2 crashes I can't explain. Compare that to the 32bit version which would crash every few hours or so and I'm like 'why would I want to go back?'. Sure, some mods disable themselves but there's programs to change that and, as long as I don't go reporting bugs, everything is wonderful. Because if I ran the 32bit version, well, I'm a mod junkie and see my signature. Like I said, it's nice to see a mod and think 'ooh, having that!' without then having to think 'which one to take out first though..?'

... You know, sometimes, I look at myself and think "Jesus, OWK, why do you have like, no imagination?!" That is a fantastic mission, I'm incredibly jealous of it

Right, you're safe.

DEP. Windows sees a plugin, thinks it could be bad, stops it working (not just plugins, but saving/overwriting files like the settings.cfg or output log). Desktop and in Program Files are (some?) of the places it will act.

RE QuickStart: Does that mean what I hope it means? Because TweakableEverything (or rather, EVAManager) needs to apply stuff at the main menu, and QS used to make it not work, so I uninstalled it.. but yeah, if those plugins work now, then it's going straight back in!

At a guess, it's because of ColourCodedCannisters, which includes mesh/fuel switching. Here's the config it uses: @PART[Size3SmallTank]:FOR[ColorCodedCans]:NEEDS[!InterstellarFuelSwitch|InterstellarFuelSwitch&!CryoEngines] { MODULE { name:NEEDS[!InterstellarFuelSwitch&!CryoEngines] = FSfuelSwitch name:NEEDS[InterstellarFuelSwitch&!CryoEngines] = InterstellarFuelSwitch resourceGui:NEEDS[InterstellarFuelSwitch] = LiquidFuel+Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 1620,1980;3240;3960 basePartMass = 2.25 } } Now, to me, that first NEEDS looks a little iffy and I don't know if MM works on NEEDS as far down as MODULE names, I thought it could do it at the PART and MODULE level, but no further.. hmm..

1 - remove MM, change the techtree to Squads, everything is fine. 2 - keep MM, everything fine. If you change the techtree url to Squad's and don't delete MM, then you get problems. If you do one, you have to do the other.

Remember to install Community Resource Pack as well (it's in the download).

Near Future Spacecraft has some aerodynamic landing legs.

Kerbins map is a flipped version of a royalty-free image (this one) and, given the popularity of planet texture packs (Mainly with UR, not TR, but 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 etc)... you'll be fine. (links provided by Glyphs list of texture packs)

KSP 1.0.4, ladies and gentlemen, a full release, non-Early-Access game that has code that forgets to check if the part is supposed to actually behave like it's supposed to. Sorry, still sore over the asinine jet engine fuel flow behaviour.

Really? I find it perfect - it's not opaque like the main KER window, it's way more minimalistic, I don't find it intrusive (no more so than the HUD itself, anyway).. but each to their own, I guess.

Yeah, I'm really not struck with the new intake either. Just looks.. off. I guess it's supposed to look like the ones on, for example, a JA 37 Viggen, but the major difference is that the increased cross section made from the intake is preserved for much longer on the plane, as opposed to KSP where it tapers back down to 1.25m almost immediately. Squad are probably better off scrapping that look, but I'm not sure what they could replace it with. It'd all look dumb, like a huge Structural Intake.. :/

IIRC, can't you set them to have a slight grey background? It's not exactly what you want, but the HUDs do stand out then.

I'm guessing you're running the 32bit Windows version, yes? Because that can still only access about 3.2GB of RAM, regardless of how much you have. Also, most mods and stock textures have been updated to be .dds textures which your GPU can directly use and that the game now loads as standard and which, unfortunately, ATM doesn't even touch. So unless most of your currently installed mods use outdated jpgs, pngs or mbms etc, there's not a lot ATM can do to help (not even the Aggressive version). TBH, ATM isn't really needed any more, because of the aforementioned reasons - 99% of mods (and 100% of stock) now use dds textures which stock KSP can load fine, but ATM doesn't compress those at all (yet). TL;DR - you have too many and/or old mods. Also, you paid way too much for your computer.