Ippo

It is linked, though: check again. Do you also want me to link the post where I threaten to sabotage your mod Gregtech style? Not that I'm proud of it, but I ain't trying to hide anything. It's all public. Fair enough: what about the removed part? Was that equally non-provocative? I remember it, you know. But the solution to your problem has a great potential to cause problems for others, and that's why you should have acted a lot more careful than this. This is something you keep saying, but it makes about as much sense now as it did the first time (not much). Taking control of your system? Why would I want to do that!? Because no one has made it, including you. He's not the one who was rejoicing at the thought of modders getting angry over his proposal, though. He didn't say "hey, all those pesky modders want to coerce you into unzipping files, and a mod pack would make them real mad", you know. Regarding me? Yes. I got mad at you because of your behaviour, which is really poor and hostile towards all the rest of the community. P.S: you are going to dinner, I'm going to sleep. How about I wake up and find out we can now work on fixing this mess, uh? That would be cool.

Abuse and condescension, according to Khatharr's view. Meanwhile, it's his post that had to be edited for "language".* Actually you just argued with ferram4 in six posts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6: that's literally it), then decided that his personal opinion was the position of all the modders and then immediately burned the whole thing to the ground, instead of trying to support your idea and maybe give specific details about how to improve the current CC to make it more user friendly. * P.S: and the OP of this thread still has this line in it: "[Removed by the Moderation Team]". Can you tell me why, again? I suspect it was the part about enjoying the rage it was going to cause, or something like that. Care to correct me?

I am listening and with great interest too!

Here is one recent thread made by a guy that was, in fairness, pretty responsible and definitely not clueless: you'll see how warm the reaction has been, generally But yes, the system you described in the rest of the post is pretty much what CKAN will be able to do: it's currently in development, but I've been in touch with the guys and they are doing an amazing work. We just need to be patient, and then start nagging every modder for ckan support

CKAN is going to make modpacks an obsolete idea anyway in the near future. Since it works as a package manager, the idea of modpacks will be superseded by meta-packages, so another discussion is going to be kinda pointless imho.

Eh, let's just say that this horse has been beaten to death and then well beyond that point. Short version: the majority of modders are against it, especially all the authors of the mods that you most likely would like to include. A search on this forum will show that each time this idea has been suggested, it has always been shot down in flames.

Yeah, that's why I am postponing it until the very end, so that I can have a clear picture of how it's going to work, how people expect it to work, and so on. Not to mention that I need to find an effective way to implement it without having to resort to black magic code... I am thinking that I could abuse the on rails converters from TAC for this task though. I'll see about that, in the meantime the near future is already planned Eh, this is a bad side effect of things not being able to fail on rails: but yes, by all means, avoid comm sats

I'm sorry, I think I'll need to improve the OP to make it more clear, but at this time, ships on rail are absolutely safe. KSP just doesn't provide me with any mechanism to act on them: I have some ideas for a workaround, but at this time, unless you are flying a ship nothing can happen to it.

not planned at the moment, although it is not completely out of the question

Now taking odds on how many mods will decide to disable their plugins entirely on incompatible platforms (i.e, win64).

Alpha 4.4 is out! Fixes the negative cost of parts containing Spare Parts. Unfortunately, I had to rollback to making Spare Parts full again. I have yet to figure out exactly how KSP computes the cost of a part, so that I can leave them partially empty without causing negative costs, but so far, no luck :/ Re-adds the 1 spare per click mechanic. Not yet configurable at the moment, sorry, but I had to kinda rush it because of the costs issue. Resolves compatibility issue with mods that add resources to asteroids. Increases the reliability of ion engines to balance them against LFO engines, as suggested P.S: yes, the glow is being disabled by far. I'm working on that issue at this very moment, but it's in FAR, not DangIt. P.P.S: I think I have a fix for the part highlight issue, I sent a pull request to ferram P.P.P.S: unfortunately, I had missed Sandworm's post earlier. He actually managed to get the partially full containers config working, unlike me, but I didn't notice until he pm'd me after the release :/ I encourage everyone to grab that file, it will be in the next release by default Thanks Sandworm!

Update: it seems that the incompatibility between Dangit and Bahamuto Dynamics cannot be reproduced anymore, not using their latest versions anyway.

Implemented in the upcoming update MTBF = 17520 (two years), LifeTime = 20 (hours). Sounds good? Could not reproduce: what engines, from what mod, on what platform, log?

Thanks, you saved me some time

I'm sorry, I had decided to stay out of this but I just cannot leave this unanswered. He did not modify another mod to make it work the way he wants, and he did not improve the Compatibility Checker to make it more user friendly. What he did was to write an external plugin that interferes with the behaviour of others. But this isn't the problem: the problem is that the modification he makes is to remove a safety feature. That's what causing the outrage here: there has been a discussion spanning months and 100 posts, that involved some of the biggest names of our community (ferram4, Majiir, Greys, regex, NathanKell, and sarbian... and these are just the first 2 pages) with the intent of making a tool to improve the quality of our modding community. Compatibility warnings are intended to be helpful for modders AND for users*. And then this guy decides that a popup during the loading screen is coercive and then tries to break what was intended as a safety measure. I think you will understand why this has upset quite a few of us, and it doesn't qualify as "modding another mod". * what if the popup that you just suppressed wanted to warn you about a potential save-file corruption? Are you gonna come and ask support here in this thread, or are you going to complain with the modder that didn't even want you to let you run that version?

Valerian suggested me that it might be due to FAR, specifically to the aero-force tinting that came in the latest releases. Are you also running FAR, perhaps? I am kinda full + demotivated these days for a lot of stuff, I'll see if I can figure out something but before that I should hurry and fix the negative costs bug.* * Which is actually just a matter of setting the default amount of spares to be equal to the max amount, if anyone wants to fix it for himself before I get around to a new release.

"Hey, please keep in mind that your platform is unsupported, my mod might crash and burn at any second: you should really be careful!" This is not the same thing as DRM: I'm not stopping you from using it, I'm just trying to remind you that there may be problems, and you should watch out.

I'm not saying they can't or shouldn't have fun. Go ahead, enjoy it all you want. I still feel the game is lessened at a fundamental level just by this idea existing, though, and no amount of fun you are having will make me enjoy this monstrosity.

Yes it is. No, I don't really care. I haven't taken a final decision on that matter: if this mod will see any significant adoption, I will *surely* move the compatibility checker somewhere where he can't touch it, which will result in more annoyance for the players. Full-blown sabotage will be a last-resort option, and also a very entertaining idea. Yes, I said it.

#lolphysics, basically. As much fun as they are (and they really do: I love the kerbals), I think I made my views clear on the matter of magic buffs.

Sure. These guys can take command of a mun lander, but they don't have the common sense to ask about a button. #believable

There is no post-it on the throttle, for that matter. Yet everyone seems able to find it, just like they find every other control in the craft. And if everything else fails, they can just call mission control on the radio and ask "hey mc, what does this button does again?".

So every kerbal should be well capable of reading a post-it that says "this button unlocks overthrottle".

Plus, they seem to think that the "realism crowd" is against mechjeb. The funny thing is that mechjeb is a lot more useful in RSS than stock... to the point that mechjeb is a recommended mod for realism overhaul. Let me stress it: the same overhaul that makes engines not reignitable and not throttleable recommends mechjeb.

A rookie that is trained enough to fly a rocket into deep space hasn't been told what that big red button right next to the main throttle does?