Akira_R

Ckan is trash!! JK it really isn't but I still can't understand why any one would want to use it considering how simple KSP is to mod and how much more control you have over everything when you do it all manually. While unnecessary for just installing mods I highly recommend that anyone that wants to seriously get into modding learn .cfg structure and MM syntax, it's really really easy and it opens up so many possibilities for customizing your install to perfectly fit your play style and the experience you want, from part welding too integrating mods together that weren't explicitly designed to work together, but i tend to go a little crazy with the mods

This is actually very realistic, one of the limitations of setting up real life heavy duty vehicles with standard suspensions (standard metal springs) is that you can't optimize them for both loaded and unloaded states, when optimized for heavy loads then when unloaded the vehicle experiences a very harsh rough and jittery ride as the springs are far to stiff for the low weight. This is why most modern semi's utilize pneumatic springs (air bags) instead of standard metal springs because as the spring gets more compressed they get progressively stiffer allowing for reasonable ride and control when unloaded but still able to support a heavy load. So basically the only solution to this would be Shadowmage implementing some progressive spring curves which sounds like a pain in the a** to code, or have the ability to adjust the spring stiffness while in flight.

@taniwha I'm sure you are aware but I am also unable to access the DL at this time

No??? No what????

I don't think that would have anything to do with the mod... all welding does is reduce part count, which leads to a frame rate increase in some cases because fewer parts means fewer physics calculations and less strain on the cpu, nothing the mod does is going to change that. Now with the updates to the game engine KSP performance has increased so you may see less of a benefit from reducing part count as you did previously, but aside from that nothing is changed.

Good to know I'm not the only one that sees a use for this. So for getting it to work outside of KSP you would have to make sure the program is loading all of the part .cfgs and all of the MM patches and applying those patches in the correct order and checking for any changes to the techtree and make sure those are loaded properly. As I said my coding experience is fairly limited so I'm not sure which would be more complicated, dealing with KSP/Unity UI nonsense or writing an external editor that will load everything properly. I'm hoping someone with more coding experience and knowledge could weigh in and give some pointers so I know what direction I should start in. Or you know to do it themselves and I can be like yay you're amazing! lol

Yes, for antenna parts that weren't made for 1.2 you would need to go in and update the .cfg for the parts, deleting the old antenna MODULE and adding in the new antenna MODULE. Very easy to do with a simple text editor, I always recommend Notepad++ for editing .cfgs

Woooo!!! Thank you for your amazing contributions Shadowmage!! hopefully we will see a return of Adjustable Landing Gear, although according to @BahamutoD's profile they haven't been on since July, if Baha doesn't return here is to hoping one of the other talented members of our community picks this up, if only I had the time to teach my self C#

I have to agree with @Darael on this one, I mean no offense or anything but as this is an underdevelopment dev branch not intended for use by the general public if you are having problems figuring out how to install it then you probably shouldn't be messing with it.... But make sure you have the FAR folder and a copy of Modular Flight Integrator in your Game Data folder.

Dev build!! Sweetness why did I not think to check the branches on Git, @ferram4 sorry to poke you but does the current dev build have the pull request submitted by Shadowmage to help SSTU parts play nice with FAR merged in it?

Awesome! Thank you for the quick reply and all the info, I think I can probably figure it out, I will do more poking around tonight after work and class, I may have stayed up far too late last night poking around cfgs and been mildly delirious as well as inebriated when i was trying to figure it out lol, I do remember seeing the min and max size things in the layout but didn't want to poke them until I found a way to change the diameter interval. I am very aware that any problems caused by my poking are my own to deal with, I may stop by with the occasional "is this broken or did I break it" question though As for what I am trying to do: I am building out a career install that is utilizing a 3.2x rescale and is set up with minor realism in mind, so the early tech stuff up to about the 90+ science level is all small sounding rockets and airplanes. I have set the fuel tanks and solid boosters to start out at a min diameter of 0.3125m and increment by 0.3125m. I have some very early liquid fueled sub-orbital sounding rocket upper-stages with a 0.9375m tank diameter, one of the very early upper stage engines (can't remember name, I'm at work atm) fits to the tank perfectly when no mount is selected. However the auto shroud for the engine is tied to engine mount size (or at least it appears to be) which only goes down to 1.25m so I'm kind of assuming that if I can set the engine mount diameter lower then the engine shroud that is generated will match that lol. Now that I think about it I have another question lol, is it possible to add engine shrouds to one of the SRBs via cfg? I have a fuzzy memory of your engines having a MODULE for the shroud... could be misremembering though. One (or maybe all I'm not sure) of the SRBs has a bottom attach node but no shroud and I don't think I saw an option to turn shrouds on in the VAB.

@Shadowmage the torus models are looking awesome!! I have a quick question regarding your engines! In the cfgs for your tanks we have the ability to define the min. diameter and the min. interval for changing diameter, is there any way I can convince you to put the same functionality exposed in the cfgs for the engine mounts as well?

Where is that found?

Ok good to know! Yeah I was deleting all of the MM cache files every time I reloaded the game just to make sure that wasn't happening, it does look like it is loading them straight from the disk which is weird. This is the first time I've seen the PARTUPGRADE stuff so I thought it was something you had implemented, I'll take it over to the MM thread and see what they have to say, if it's stock code then it's got nothing to do with you lol. Thank you! I like the look of the thinner ones personally

Is PARTUPGRADE a stock thing or is it something that you implemented? I guess I will, the only reason I asked here first is because according to the output_log and the MM config cache MM is doing it's job properly. I don't really know anything about c# nor do I know how KSP handles things, but I have written just barely enough c++ to suspect that it would be a fairly easy mistake to make to have a class pulling it's variables from a file location instead of from a cached copy of the file, or maybe having the plugin grab it's data from a file when it is initialized which from my understanding plugins are initialized prior to MM doing it's thing, now maybe with something like KSP or c# that is not at all an easy mistake to make, that was just what made sense to me given that based on all the diagnostic info available to me at this time indicates that MM is working as intended. The cached config loaded by the game has changed, but something doesn't seam to be respecting that change.

Is there a reason that :AFTER[SSTU] and :FINAL would have a different effect? Not necessarily doubting you lol, but from my understanding of how MM works it shouldn't, using :FINAL just makes it apply after all other patches have been applied. I will have to wait until I get home from work and class but I will give it another shot to see. Yeah I know about the tech tree persistence thing, I have been starting new saves every time to verify my parts are moving to the nodes I want, and all the parts have, it's only the PARTUPGRADE things that aren't moving when I use MM.

I am only trying to hide that one in particular, as I have set the min diameter for tanks to 0.3125. Removing the techRequired to hide the upgrade should work just fine, doing it manually works, it removes the upgrade from that tech node so it never gets applied. I am also using MM to try and move some of the other upgrades to different nodes with essentially the same patch: But it doesn't work, if I manually change the techRequired field in the upgrade cfg it works just fine. Yes because I want to hide that upgrade as I have already set the min diameter lower than what that upgrade does. I have tried :FIRST :AFTER[SSTU] and :FINAL and it doesn't change, none of the MM patches an the @PARTUPGRADE's have any effect. EDIT: FYI the only reason those patches show :FIRST is because when I was using :FINAL nothing was happening, so I wanted to see if maybe that would change something, and it didn't The MM patch is working as designed, the config that is output in MMs config cache reflects the change, however it has no change on the actual upgrade nodes in the tech tree. If I change values in the .cfg manually the changes do take effect in the tech tree in game. Which is why I suspected that either your plugin is grabbing the data from the config before MM has a chance to do anything to it, or your plugin is pulling the data straight from the file and not from the loaded config that has been changed by MM.

@Shadowmage Is there a reason that changes made to the PARTUPGRADE nodes using MM wouldn't actually change anything in game? Currently I am trying to change a number of things but for example this: With this: MM is supposed to work on config nodes other than just PART, and according to the logs it is applying the patch with no error: But it doesn't remove the upgrade part from the tech tree, and the other ones that I am trying to move around aren't moving either, I am asking here first because it looks like MM is doing it's thing properly. I was wondering if maybe something one of your plugins is doing is doing it's stuff before MM has a chance to do it's thing? If you need any more info like the complete .cfg I have made or my output_log let me know. EDIT: Oh and changing it manually does have the expected results.

That still doesn't explain why you want the launcher.... I don't use steam either... EDIT: Oh you want to update to 1.2.1? Just download the .zip from the KSP website. If you go to the official website and click store and then log in with your account you can click on the My Account button, it will show you all the things you have purchased from them, there is a download button next to KSP, if you click that you can choose what you want to download.

No idea why the launcher isn't working for you, but mods shouldn't affect the launcher. Why do you even need to open the launcher though?

The haze is caused by scatterer, scatterer doesn't work in map view or in the tracking station, only in the flight scene. Unrelated to your question but I would also recommend installing planet shine along side those visual mods

So I started a thread over in the Add-On Discussion forum and I am realizing that it might have been better to ask here if I want some responses from actual plugin developers, so here is the short version: Idea: A mod that creates a UI window with the tech tree in it similar to how it appears in the R&D building, but you are able to move parts around between different nodes, you can then save the layout and it will generate a MM patch file that will change the techRequired for the parts to the nodes you put them in, or just a log file that you could use to make a MM patch. For a more detailed description and reason why i think this is such a good idea please check out the thread linked above. The Question: Just how feasible is this? Would this be something that would be fairly easy to get working or would this be quite difficult? I have zero C# experience and my C++ experience is limited to two classes in high school almost 9 years ago, so while I have a high level conceptual idea of how it would work I don't actually know how to go about doing it. If someone thinks this is just a swell idea and wants to try writing it themselves then by all means please do!!

Yeah i have not experienced any crashes either, are you using the 64 bit version of ksp? Have you checked the debug log for NRE spam? Ever since the 64 bit conversion ram crashes should be a thing of the past (unless you are running into the limits of your system) and that is the only kind of crash i could see SVE causing.

I'm going to preface this with the fact that I have zero experience in C# and my C++ experience was like two high school courses going on 9 years ago, so while I have a general idea of how this might work I have no idea how feasible it is. The problem: I run with a very large number of part mods, and I like playing realistic-ish progression career games. The problem is none of the maintained tech tree mods satisfy my particular needs as far as part progression go, I like the CTT but the way most parts are organized doesn't quite fit my needs, plus I always have quite a few mods that lack support and need to be patched into the tree, this is an incredibly frustrating and time consuming process and is one of the longest parts of me building out an install. The solution?: So while sitting at my desk staring at the tech tree in the R&D building thinking of ways to make this easier this is what I came up with. mod has it's own UI window and it loads all the data on the techtree, it would need to be visually structured similarly to the tech tree in the R&D building where you could see all the nodes, prerequisites etc. (it actually doesn't necessarily need it's own ui window, it could be done from the actual tech tree itself but I feel like for the functionality planned that would be harder to do than giving it it's own window) able to see what parts are currently in each node and their description and stats, if we can have images of them just like in the R&D building that would be super friggin awesome. Now here is the nifty bit You are able to grab a part and move it to a new node in the tech tree have some "node" that contains parts that don't have a specified tech node or whose tech node is not present in the tree currently A "save" button that either writes out a MM patch file that would reassign the parts to the nodes you have them in or just some log file that gives the part names and the node they are in that you could use to quickly write a MM patch file. This seems like it would be an incredibly useful quality of life tool not just for users like me with massive part lists but also modders that want to support multiple tech trees and modders that want to make tech trees. Obviously this wouldn't be a simple save your config and everything works perfectly situation, I think of it as more along the lines of something like ubio's welding tool, it gets things situated but the end user will still likely have to go in and tinker with the config manually before everything works "flawlessly", but it will still be way way way faster than arranging things manually. So my questions to the modding community is how feasible does this sound? I would love to try my hand at it myself but as I said I will basically be starting from square zero with C#, while I have a general high level understanding of the coding process I have forgotten a lot of stuff and the most complex thing I ever wrote was a game of snake and a small 3D solar system you could move a camera around in, and that was 9 years ago, so it will likely take me a long while to even get started on it. So if any one else wants to try their hand at it then please by all means do so!!! I could also see this being an external tool, like it doesn't actually have to be run in KSP, as long as it loads all the pertinent information you would need like MM patches and such, I don't know if that would make it easier or harder though.

If you want more of a fanciful / sci-fi look I would suggest keeping an eye on Astronomers new visual pack Astronomer has made arguably some of the best EVE packs out there, I don't know if any of them are working with the current version of EVE but some google and forum searching will surely point you in the right direction. Combine them with Scatterer and I am sure you can come up with something absolutely gorgeous if you are willing to put in a little bit of effort getting everything set up.