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
    Same answer - save file helps me sort things like this.
  2. RoverDude
    Ok can I get specifics on what exactly is flickering? And what your log spam is? Screenshots are good, save files are better.
  3. RoverDude
    Sure, a blacklist also works just as well. Either via property or part module.
  4. RoverDude
    In what scene? Are you getting any log spam?
  5. RoverDude
    Ahh ok - what we're seeing is a lot of the MKS parts (which are large) get this so there may be more workshops than intended My ideal would be the ability to have a specific 'Workshop' part that I can whitelist for MKS and balance against the mobile workshop that comes with GC (since all of the MKS bits are mass/volume balanced based on capabilities). This I really like. I can totally see having a specific 'disassembly' type part that if you invest in it, you get the option of better yields. In general, stuff where the parts chosen reflect the function (i.e. a ground based assembly facility kinda looks like one) are, IMO, always good. (Addendum) in the above scenario, the instant explodey-type demolition is better for bootstrapping, but the version that requires infrastructure is better for yield, resulting in balance. Which is good.
  6. RoverDude
    A suggestion - maybe have workshops be a white list vs all command parts?
  7. RoverDude
    @allista / @DStaal - my only feedback would be that it would be odd for similar processes (stuff -> MaterialKits) to have different return rates. It makes things really weird for interop since GC will be bundled with MKS, and starting that off with a conflict is probably not a good idea. Also, time is really never much of a lever in KSP, so people would just choose the path with the best rate. Now, if it is a different process (i.e. stuff-> stored parts) then that's a different story.
  8. RoverDude
    There's also a separate part module for demolition there that's queue based that may also help. Handles full and partial vessels.
  9. RoverDude
    Yup, that is exactly how part scrapping works in USITools. The relevant module is USI_ModuleRecycleablePart, and I just added you as a collaborator on the USI repo EDIT: Currently complexity is not a factor, but something that can be added in, and passed down the dependency chain to GC
  10. RoverDude
    @allista - I have some code that does this already in USITools (which bundles with all of my mods). I think some of the bits also RE logistics, etc. (i.e. being able to push and pull from disconnected containers) would also be useful as folks on the MKS side are already used to this and will be taking advantage of it with GC as it will be bundled. Since USITools is a separate download, and if it is (close) to what you need, feel free to bundle it, and I can give you write access to the repo if you need to tweak anything (and avoid some wheel re-inventing). (Some addendum) If we're talking mass->materialKits, this is what USI Tools does. If we're going down the path of Parts->Parts then that is a whole different kettle of fish (Last addendum) I'm going to be doing the GC bundle with USI this weekend, the only thing to see will be if I can texture the new mobile workshop in time
  11. RoverDude
    Short version as I am on mobile. I have no intention of using the stupidity and courage attributes as it would overcomplicate things unnecessarily, hence why I dropped using them in 0.50.0
  12. RoverDude
    Sure, but assuming they can just hire from the Kolonization dashboard, if the price for a pilot was the same as a default new hire in the AC (with a cap of 250K) that should solve the issue (I may ping @TheReadPanda and see if I can borrow his astronaut complex code - tho my concern with anything that modifies the AC is conflicts)
  13. RoverDude
    More thread catchup I've seen a lot of orbital stations using the ground (Ranger) parts. Curious why folks do that vs. using the newer Tundra inflatables... @dboi88- the Osprey (my Eagle clone) will have swappable pods. Tho day one it will probably just be the Ground Construction workshop. @Tyko- No plans for a Tundra science lab since Tundra modules are pretty stock alike and blend well with the stock one. But not opposed with a Github issue. Also, log a github issue if you want some surface-mount windows @jd284 - remember there are no bespoke IVAs for MKS (yet), so transparent pods would not be very useful. @dlrk - Tundra bits are great for surface bases, and pretty similar to some of the new surface base concepts from NASA. @Gilph - if you are still having issues and have not done so already, a Github issue with a save is what I need to sort stuff like this. @WuphonsReach - Log a github issue if you want more nodes, or if @dboi88 can do a PR, all the better @Stratickus- the Kolonization and Logistics tabs are managed by manufacturer @baldamundo - which module is giving you grief? Basically you're missing the USI-LS converters hence the index issue (tho I thought this was sorted before... apparently not) @DStaal - RE the mini hab, sure. It should really have a new texture (logging a github issue will help me not forget!) @Omnipius - you might have the multi-hub upside down. The +0.6 node is for 3.75's. The +0 node is for 2.5's, and the -0.4 node is for Ranger-style parts. @jd284 - There are some upcoming updates to the 'Kolonized' status. @DStaal- RE Kolonists, I am going to look and see if I can do a more intelligent default for their price. Also, at this point I plan on doing a release next weekend. So now is a good time to log issues and toss PRs
  14. RoverDude
    I was not aware I had any terrible parts. But sounds like you have an installation issue.
  15. RoverDude
    It's certainly possible a change got missed. Are you compiling from Master or Develop?
  16. RoverDude
    Nope Works for me
  17. RoverDude
    Are you running USI-LS?
  18. RoverDude
    It has a rollcage - one that fits exactly on the two-part chassis it already has As I said, this one has a very specific design, the only variance is the payload. If you want something of a similar form factor with a bit more versatility, consider the Malemute:
  19. RoverDude
    The entire point is that it is not there for customization - it's a specific set of parts meant to be field assembled. The only customization is what you toss on the chassis nodes.
  20. RoverDude
    Nope. That's one of the unique bits about it - figure something involved in heavy construction with lots of bits flying around probably makes more use of cameras than panes of glass.
  21. RoverDude
    aaaand... a new model I expect this will be the final form (unless @allista has additional feedback). Those flaps above the wheels are also solar panels.
  22. RoverDude
    Easy fix. If for some reason you end up with tourists in the AC, just launch them in a vessel and they will revert.
  23. RoverDude
    Yes please, and I can take a look
  24. RoverDude
    More details please. Are they landed? Recovered? In orbit? etc.
  25. RoverDude
    FYI - 0.5.20 is up. This fixes the recycler issue
×
×
  • Create New...