Brucey

I was about to install, but my ckan screen is showing version .9.9.9.5 (2 weeks old). hmm

I'm getting periodic hitching. There's a 1/2 second lag about every 30 seconds. It's minor, but annoying. I have no idea what's causing it. Odds are its not this mod, since I have many others installed, but I thought I'd ask anyways if anyone knows of an issue with eve that might cause hitching.

Gene Kerman's face in the mission control scene is white/seems to be missing. Is that from this? Or texture replacer?

I'm trying to build a primitive rover and just trying to attach two rover wheels to the modular girder segment. It seems like no matter how I rotate the wheels (or the girder) the game has one wheel going one direction and the other wheel going the opposite direction. So that the rover just spins around rather then moving forward/backward. This feels buggy to me but I'm probably just missing something. How do I tell the game which direction the wheels should go? Or how can I even just tell which way the game THINKS they should go?

I came across a mission for field research to do an experiment with a "data camera". Anyone know what that is?

This mod looks neat. Think I'll give it a try. Will this.... ...play nice with ETT? btw, the "coherent background simulation" was something I was looking for, and failed to find, a year ago. I'm glad someone's finally figured out how to do it. How did you deal with variable ec production from solar panels? That always seemed to be the difficult part.

Super-duper helpful! Thanks you so much.

I'd call myself a novice. I know enough to go find all the parts with a text editor and make changes manually. I'm wondering if there's code that just says, "for all parts with reaction wheels, multiply torque values by x"

Is there a mm code to apply a universal nerf to all parts with reaction wheels?

The entry probe can't be the starting part of a ship. (Unlike other probes). Minor issue. Or maybe it's by design?

I'm glad to see the official 1.0 version of this game getting released. I had walked away from this game after learning Squad had by and large abandoned working on a stable windows 64 bit version. Still its a great game and I'm glad to see it's still under development post 1.0. Might check out the new features and see if there's enough room for my favorite mods. Congratulations to Squad. I hope they eventually revisit 64 bit with a future Unity 5 version.

I voted 'no' for the same reasons cited multiple times above. Although I don't suspect Squad is having actual financial problems, I would be surprised if money were not at the root of thier decision to go full release. I guess we'll know for sure when 1.0 comes out if they decide to raise the price of the now "completed" game. I haven't played ksp since .25 since the added features from .90 pushed my setup over the RAM limit and forced me to sacrifice some of my mods. I guess I'm waiting for some kind of announcement that they've addressed memory issues before I get into it again. So seeing an announcement like this is disappointing to me, now I question if memory optimization/64 bit support will ever happen.

Thank you for doing that. I am currently updating my KSP from .25 and would not have gotten very far without this mod.

Perhaps a rewording of some licenses are in order. ex: This code may not be forked without written (digital or hard copy) consent of the original author. OR This mod may not be (or may only be) forked for ---- reason. All such forks shall remain the property of the original author and carry the same license. The original author reserves the right to revoke such consent at any time and for any reason. Absence clause: In the event the original author is absent from ---- forum/github for ---- period of time, this license shall revert to an "open source" license. etc... I agree there's a distinction between "legal" vs "right", and I agree it's better to try and side with "right". But if the two don't match, that tells me there is a problem with how the licenses are worded.

Well here's your answer then. Actually I love a challenge. That's why I'm using your mod in the first place. The problem is in the early career mode. Because of my specific settings and mods (FAR thin atm, scaled up planets sizes, nerfed reaction wheels, scaled down science/rep/funds gain, reorganized tech tree, etc) the only way to advance early career is to grind through some test contracts which involve sending a rocket up to a specific elevation and letting it drop straight down. I can get a little horizontal velocity using engine gimbal vectoring, but that gets too expensive in early career and has it's own problems/limitations when doing so with fixed wings in an atmosphere. The only way to profit with these contracts is to salvage parts of the ship using parachutes. Now I can't do that because a straight vertical drop will never slow down enough to be able to deploy the chutes. So the changes to DR have upset that "sweet spot" I had found in my customized KSP. Also I agree with the comment above about there needing to be some type of feedback telling when it's okay to deploy chutes. So yeah, I'll be disabling that feature. Maybe later on I'll add it back when I get flight control tech, but I'm not sure I have the patience to attempt any long duration missions only to have the chute fail in the last seconds of the mission because I had not yet figured out how "temperature of shockwave and density of the air" mechanics work. BTW: Please don't take this as an attack against your mod. It's just a specific answer to your question above, that is relevant to my specific setup. I'm sure others have different tastes and preferences.