philotical

My Biggest object is 17Km diameter and has a weight of 6'000'000'000 tons.. I've made 2Km diameter walkable stations with dooranimations and lights.. KSP has no such limitation - trust me.. And may I suggest, that you have a look at NCI? if you add some minor technical details to the mesh (actionpoints) and an NCI-CFG, the way to orbit is solved and one could even include it in NCI-missions. Intrested? I can help you with the interior... This onject would fit well with NCI.

CT is very easy to use, but KC was/is more to my taste.. I appreciate that this does not die.. Especially I like the ability to save camera paths and reuse them. if you mean that with "tracks", don't remove them completely please.. Sorry, not sure about your terminology. PS: I'm intrested in this project, so if you feel, I could assist in any ways, PM me without hesitation..

I would put this in fixedUpdate if(anim = null) { anim = part.FindModelAnimators("Scene")[0]; } this will throw some errors until the part is loaded, then it runs once to prevent the NREs you can wrap it in try-catch I call that "pragmatic init" - it tryes until it works.. no more headache.. - just keep all following dependent code in an "if != null" thingy..

thanks :-)

and now it's gone :-(

this is a cool project.. will be heplfull for many things.. I've read about the performance question with the loops on every frame.. in my experiance, you can easely reduce it to once every 0.2 seconds.. you will not "feel" muh difference but gain a lot performance.. especially if there are many vessels in the loop.. just my 2 cents..

If you send me a blend file with info's on what you want done, I can give it a shot - but to call me an "artist" would be exagerated.. ..but for what it's worth, I'm willing to help if I can.. you can see my level of "art" in the links in my signature btw..

Vessel leader_v = FlightGlobals.ActiveVessel; // add here your positioning code without the "facing" vector // Do stuff // this will do the rotation Vector3 LeaderHeading = (Vector3)leader_v.transform.forward; Quaternion newRotation = new Quaternion(); newRotation.SetLookRotation(LeaderHeading, leader_v.transform.up); thisVessel.SetRotation(newRotation); hope that helps..

overheat the root part if it intersects with a trigger-collider.. onTriggerStay is your friend..

disclaimer - I have no "real" clue what I'm talkin about.. It seems you try both in one step - facing and positioning.. Did you try to use "Rotation" for this instead of position? I would suggest either of these ways.. - create a quaternion-rotation to make it in one step or - first position your ship with one vector, than align it with the LookAt function.. I hope it helps - but usually I just keep trying until it works - and usually I am not really sure why it suddenly works.. my vector math knowledge is 2 decades old and was generally ignored for that long.. ..hence the disclaimer..

The video still shows one or two glitches - but I guess you can slowly see the idea behind the project.. Today it wouldn't be possible to record this (it's two days old), I fixed 200 small bugs and it seems I broke the conversation system (again).. This first version of NCI is even worse than the first LCARS was.. I guess a complete rewrite will be inevitable sooner or later.. The whole structure is that complicated, that I wasn't able to plan all ahead and now it's a patch work mess.. but I guess I figured out enough to make the second version more straightforward and clean.. Shall I try to get this fixed first for an initial release or shall I start with version 2 right away.. your thoughts are appreciated..

no, the player "starts" it - it should end automatically when the ship reaches the end of the ramp (in my view).. depending on the selected speed, the player might not be able to hit the button in the right moment at the end of the ramp I think.. With cycle I ment the time you accelerate the ship - bad wording

that should be possible - but it needs a plugin for sure.. I see a problem with the decoupler thing - well "problem" is relative.. but that decoupler will add complexity.. KSP works well with positioning in thin air, as if a magnet would hold it.. a fixed connection adds unneeded complexity.. basically you don't want to make an animation because afaik animations do not move attached things.. you should move the vessel with forces as the real thing would do.. Then, at the end of the "cycle", you give the vessel a direction vector and a speed. To add the sled as animation is no big deal but that would only be eyecandy with no function..

I'm not sure anyone cares, but: >It will be under the GNU Lesser General Public License, because I think it suits the mods characteristics. It won't be proprietary, you can feel free to change the mod to your liking, BUT!, only for personal purposes! ..is a contradiction afaik.. you can't prohibit any kind of usage with LGPL - anyone may even relabel and sell an LGPL mod.. correct me if I'm wrong.. If you use GPL instead of LGPL, it will stay GPL.. ..but who cares about a license for an empty forum post with no download hahha my twisted sense of humor..

I never added to the officil wiki, because of one simple reason. How do I know/confirm, that what I think is "correct" - I had to realize dozens of time, that what I thought at first, is not how it is at the end. The only thing I could contribute usually would be "it might be", "I think", "probbably" it's sad I know lol.. However - I'd appreciate an updated wiki too - if it's the official or a new one, I don't realy care..

if I remember correctly, they tried once to build a artificial gravity thing that rotated so you could drive/walk inside.. it failed on the driving part, because wheels break if the surface speed is too high.. in space that makes no sense, but wheels break because of that. it only worked in geostationary orbit because there was the surfacespeed low enough.. It might be, that is the cause here too.. just found the video..

Let me see pics pls *dripping* Never saw S.H.I.E.L.D. so far - but it sounds like you should join the team of NCI (see signature)!! I'm currently in the phase, where I could use guys who play through my test missions and see if that works.. intrested? You can also create own missions for what it's worth.. Let's see if shield can be a mission in NCI.. EDIT: I forgot to answer that.. Well - to prohibid certain flight manuvers is not on the scope.. if you have enough power to stay in that position, you'll have enough to fly higher.. But you can do that with a small plugin for your copter, would only need 10 lines or so.. it's not much more than this pseudocode actually.. if(current.height > atmosphereHeight/2){ LCARS.thrust = 0;} your plugin can use the LCARS API to controll/override such things.. I can be of assistance with that - once it come to that.. One of my Rule of thumbs I used for LCARS MarkII: LCARS can not and will not be able to add special solutions for every conceivable thing.. But LCARS can and will be enough generic to allow other plugins to override LCARS in what ever manner they desire. result => It's 100% open on the API side - everything can be accessed.. That was the main reason for MarkII in the first place - NCI needs that ability. PS: The "not despawn in atmosphere" part is not something to rely on btw.. It was unstable to such an degree in v1 that I'm not even sure I'^ll implement it in MarkII..

I have no experiance with adding parts to existing vessels.. My project has to do with spawning one-part-vessels.. there I use ship construct.. ShipConstruct newShip = new ShipConstruct(); newShip.Add(newPart); not sure if that is relevant for you though.. - if you need the joints, I failed with them myself last time, so I can't help.. however - you should take a look at KAS git repo.. They do that new-part-on-the-fly thing quite stable.. Look for the "attach" code that's used when you attach a KAS pipe or something..

Can you post the exact error? maybe the code that makes the error? from what you wrote, it's quite hard to guess where the problem is..

there is not "the solution"! I mean it's stated above allready - but some seem to need it twice.. So here we go again: you both have a mod installed that bugs the boarding process - find out wich one and go to the developper or update that mod or remove that mod. If you inform the autor of that mod, the chances are it'll get fixed.. if not, nothing will happen and you will keep that issue. Open your log, find the culprit - done..

To say blender is "not user friendly" is frankly "missing the point"! Blender states on it's website, that the GUI is unconventional and different then what you are used to. But they are right when they claim: "After two weeks you'll wish all other apps would use the same system" I do! Beginner hints: 1) learn hot-keys!!! 2) learn hot-keys!!! 3) learn hot-keys!!!

Modular star ship parts? cool.. - looking forward to it good luck.. Redistribute: For the time beeing the answer is "no redistribution"! Make it a requirement.. In each version I upload, you can be assured, LOT has changed - and LOT is incompatible with previouse versions.. Once LCARS is done - it might become feasable - but now, it's not. Features: Well MarkII has that ability - I have not decided on the right way to handle it in cfg, but MarkII can turn off any detail individually. That can even be done remote.. So - the propulsion matrix and scanner and transorter for example are all bound to be disabled in close range of certain anomalies. You can even attack "FullHalt" alone if you like.. MarkII has modularity in it's vains.. but it's not finished enough to be redestributed.. RPM: when all is done, it's planned to hve a look at such options - right now integration with NCI is prioritized.. You know: MarkII does not rely on IVA at all actually - the goal is that you can fly your ship in EVA!! Somehow I like that better.. Combined with my walkable stations and ships, that makes more sense to me.. Please keep me informed about your project - maybe we can take care about details while your doing it - so the code can reflect the needs.. I have certain concepts for modularity in my head allready (and some stuff is allready implemented) - I guess they totally differ from your ideas - might be a good idea to work together on this instead of creating unintentionally incompatibilities..

Glad you like it :-) No, one is enough.. it might even produce problems to have more then one.. Why you still use Beta7? MarkII is much more stable and more fun.. It just lacks stuff like weapons and transporter by now.. but I'm working on rewriting them too.. So it's just temporary missing..

Just stumbled over this through MegaUZIs signature.. I love it :-D *dripping out of mouth* May I submit a thought for consideration concerning the star map discussion? The star maps are heavely inspired by elite and games like that - so even if you want to recreate the mindcraft thing (never played minecraft), the map as suggested is very compatible with your idea, at least historicaly. Additional - a fixed star map (same for everyone) does not negate the ability to type in ulimited seeds on your own. but it would allow for things like: Scott Manley flyes a mission and everyone can recreate it! - with everyone I mean even those who are scared of terms like "seed" hahah I think - if this is possible, you would love it too - no matter how your initial idea was.. That's the right way to go in my opinion.. The biggest amount of possibilities is achieved like that.. People can colaborate in multiplayer and still have unique systems for them selfes. The star map would be a convenient GUI.. I guess I'm Cpt. Obviouse right now.. oh well.. - your mod is a huge idea! Thanks and keep up the good work :-)

http://www.curse.com/ksp-mods/kerbal/222344-daedalus-v1 MJY did some good work there - has no internal and is not walkable, so you missout the best of LCARS though. And you need to replace the module code in cfg - it's made to work with old LCARS (Impulse Drive Beta7) afaik..