Jump to content

RoverDude

Parts Hero
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,074

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by RoverDude

  1. RoverDude
    It already works in 1.4.x, and I expect works fine in 1.5
  2. RoverDude
    Now that 1.5 is out, I'll be doing a release this weekend of everything (including CRP).
  3. RoverDude
    tbh I always take PRs But Firespitter will get it's rebuild after a major release (i.e. 1.5).
  4. RoverDude
    Not sure which parts you are talking about here? Partially incorrect Drag cubes are calculated off of the mesh. So a change in the mesh will result in a change to the drag cube. We override these in certain cases (like decouplers and other hollow parts), but the starting line is always the numbers generated off of the mesh itself.
  5. RoverDude
    That is going to be an issue with KIS/KAS, not MKS
  6. RoverDude
    Nope. It's compiled for 1.4.x
  7. RoverDude
    If you can toss over a PR, I can merge it as I have to rebuild anyway for 1.5.x
  8. RoverDude
    I'd try it in a save without RT to be honest.
  9. RoverDude
    Yep - you pay for convenience.
  10. RoverDude
    'Here' is very vague, also given the latest versions are 1.4.x only.
  11. RoverDude
    Sounds like a bad install. Need more specificity
  12. RoverDude
    tbh, once you plug in recyclers, supply weight drops significantly. The behavior being driven is that you should not count on lofting massive water tanks into orbit
  13. RoverDude
    @quasitonality - Hey, glad you like the mod One thing your calculations miss. The vast majority of water is not for drinking, it's actually for hygeine, food prep, etc. - NASA restricts their astronauts to about 3 gallons (11L) per day. It's the reason water recyclers (which MKS has, for example, and the balance sheet includes calculations for) can drop supply usage by a significant amount.
  14. RoverDude
    Just repeating what was noted above. Running while generating EM is pretty much an intentional non-starter. The drive works perfectly fine with stock parts.
  15. RoverDude
    The volume value is in liters. Stock LFO is 5 liters per unit (which ties out if you look at the stats for stock LFO tanks).
  16. RoverDude
    Still here :). Other than item one on that list, I disagree with the others shown as they are all there by design. Same as I strongly agree with the kerbal first approach stock takes. If you want to do a PR for better parachute values I would be happy to merge that.
  17. RoverDude
    Yes... the USI Tools Repo
  18. RoverDude
    Yup
  19. RoverDude
    Yes
  20. RoverDude
    @FreeThinker - as I have stated previously, CRP should be optimized for stock. Your use of a custom harvester is irrelevant here. And I have yet to see any compelling argument here (and in reality, quite a few to the contrary) of @Nertea's proposal. I feel like I am repeating myself... but if you want Helium3 reduced to an infinitesimal range... use the harvester parameters. That's exactly what they are there for. To be clear... that PR is rolling on on Monday. I'll leave it to you two to hash out any differences, but ultimately those would be reflected in the final PR that Nertea provides, and we call it a day. (Edit for further clarity) I am not going to play dueling PR's. I'm deferring to Nertea's pull for this one.
  21. RoverDude
    I agree with @Nertea - there's no reasonable gameplay value in that extreme of a difference in concentrations, and ultimately CRP should enhance the gameplay experience. I would suggest finishing discussions with the assumption that I will be moving in Nertea's PR, and wrap up any other disagreements on final numbers with that in mind, as well as the constraints Nertea has put forth. Nertea - I will merge the PR at the tail end of the holiday weekend, so just ping me when everything is finalized and I will merge it in.
  22. RoverDude
    You can have multiple modules (even stock has this).
  23. RoverDude
    Per other commentary, I just don't see the value in a concentration that low.
  24. RoverDude
    Pretty much what @JadeOfMaar said. The correct way to have super-rare stuff that extends to super-low concentrations is to adjust the harvesters, not the abundance numbers. With both of those levers, you have an almost infinite level of variability. And at this point, I am seeing no compelling arguments against this approach.
  25. RoverDude
    It *should* work but let us know
×
×
  • Create New...