PocketBrotector

October 19, 2016

On 10/19/2016 at 9:55 AM, ZentroCatson said:

Could you please put that in a .zip for download? It's been a long time since I've worked with .cfg files, so I'm quite lost. Thanks in advance!

Here you go - Dropbox download with readme.

Edit - Updated. I decided to give most of the probe cores OKTO2-equivalent KerbNet access based on their position in the tech tree.

October 19, 2016

Are there balancing guidelines for incorporating life support functionality into other parts under the new v0.5 system? i.e. the ratios and capacities for recyclers, converters, multipliers, etc. to assign to parts based on their mass and other considerations?

Asking because I had created configs for earlier versions of USI-LS to support other part packs (e.g. Nertea's Stockalike Station Parts). Want to make sure I am following the current balancing logic if I submit updates.

October 18, 2016

Here is a quick and dirty cfg to add the 1.2 features (antennas, KerbNet, hibernation) to RLA probes and to move the decoupler/separator to the new Coupling category.

April 7, 2016

I like these tiny payloads - satellites are getting smaller in real life, so there's no reason they shouldn't in KSP as well!

I found that the stats of some of these parts (mass ratios, engine performance, etc.) compared unfavorably to stock (or top-tier mods like RLA), so I started tweaking them in ModuleManager... before long, I found that I had rebalanced most of the pack. My suggested values are here:

Spoiler


//Increase SAS levels of probe core & SAS chip
@PART[MicroSat] {
  MODULE {
    name = ModuleSAS
  }
}

@PART[SASupgradeChip]{
  @MODULE[ModuleSAS]{
    @SASServiceLevel = 3
  }
  @TechRequired = advUnmanned
}

//Balance battery against stock
@PART[MICROBATSQUARE]{
  @mass = 0.003
  @RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]{
    @amount = 60
    @maxAmount = 60
  }
}

//Balance liquid fuel engine against RLA Aphid
@PART[microsatEngine]{
  @cost = 60
  @MODULE[ModuleEngines]{
    @maxThrust = 1
    !atmosphereCurve{}
    atmosphereCurve
    {
       key = 0 310
       key = 1 70
       key = 3 0.001
    }
  }
}

//Balance upper stage engine against Near Future Spacecraft TV-95
@PART[upperStageEngine]{
  @cost = 450
  @mass = 0.12
  @MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]{
    @maxThrust = 13.5
    !atmosphereCurve{}
    atmosphereCurve
    {
      key = 0 335
			key = 1 190
			key = 4 70
    }
  }
}

//Balance liquid fuel tanks against stock
@PART[microlqdfuel]{
  @mass = 0.0084
}

@PART[625liquidFuel]{
  @mass = 0.05
}

//Balance RTG against RLA/stock
@PART[micrortg]{
  @cost = 3700
  @mass = 0.013
  @MODULE[ModuleGenerator]{
    @OUTPUT_RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]{
      @rate = 0.122
    }
  }
  @TechRequired = experimentalElectrics
}

//Balance solar against stock
@PART[microSolarUnshielded]{
  @MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]{
    @chargeRate = 0.8
    retractable = false
  }
}

//Balance decouplers against stock
@PART[625decoupler]{
  @mass = 0.015
  @cost = 300
  @MODULE[ModuleDecouple]{
    @ejectionForce = 15
  }
}

@PART[35decoupler]{
  @mass = 0.005
  @cost = 25
}

//Balance xenon tanks against stock

@PART[microXenon]{
  @mass = 0.012
  @TechRequired = ionPropulsion
}

@PART[radialXenonmicro]{
  @mass = 0.002
  @TechRequired = ionPropulsion
}

@PART[microIon]{
  @TechRequired = ionPropulsion
}

//Balance fairing against stock
@PART[fairingSize0]{
  @name = AE-FF1 Airstream Protective Shell (0.625m)
  @mass = 0.04
  @MODULE[ModuleProceduralFairing]{
    @UnitAreaMass = 0.01
    @UnitAreaCost = 2
  }
  @TechRequired = advConstruction
}

//To do: balance SRB against RLA/SpaceY

April 7, 2016

2 hours ago, funkcanna said:

That doesn't make sense. How many months? if each month is 30 days, that would be 14.2 months.

Kerbin year and day length is part of the stock game. One day is six hours, one year is 426 days. It's based in the rotation of Kerbin on its axis and around its sun, respectively.

The 30-day month is a convention used mostly by USI-LS. It's true that it doesn't match up "cleanly" to the rest of the stock game calendar... But then again, that's pretty much true of the real-world calendar as well, which has a long history of oddities with lunar months, leap days, manual adjustments, etc.

April 7, 2016

5 hours ago, funkcanna said:

So - I'm still confused about what the "months" number means in the Life Support Status Window, and also why a Kerbal-Month is 30 days in the calculations for Habitation days, but is actually 35 when working out the total in game time for habitation.

One month is 30 days, one year is 426 days

4 hours ago, funkcanna said:

Also one more question - when working out Supplies, does the amount of mulch produced per day also reduce by 70% when using a lab for recycling? This will impact the amount of mulch available to input into the Greenhouse.

Yes, otherwise kerbals' digestion would violate conservation of mass.

3 hours ago, Arglebargle said:

Hi, I'm just wondering why a 2.5m can filled with 4.5 tons of food costs more than a 15 ton rocket engine. (By a hefty margin!) Is $67,500 the correct price for the 2.5m nom can? I launch interplanetary probes for less than that. Can I edit the price somehow? I was hoping these would be easy to jettison on deep space voyages.

Excited to use the mod but wow, that's some sticker shock.

The 1.1 update reduces cost of Supplies. Also fertilizer is the way to go for interplanetary voyages - saves mass and is also cheaper per unit

(Have you seen what they charge for astronaut ice cream in today's science museum gift shops though?)

April 3, 2016

@RoverDude, quick question re: adding USI-LS support to parts from other mods: are there any issues with adding KerbalMonths and/or hab multipliers to parts that don't actually have a crew capacity? I had a brief conversation with jofwu about it here and I don't anticipate any problems, but I figured I would double-check with you to make sure. Thinking about submitting some updated pull requests to Nertea for USI-LS support of the crew tubes in Stockalike Station Parts and Near Future Construction, which are habitable but don't actually have seats.

April 1, 2016

59 minutes ago, Loren Pechtel said:

Except it's showing the recovery of a stage that doesn't exist and not mentioning two stages that do exist and were successfully recovered (at the speed given for stage 6.)

There are some aerodynamic parts on stage zero that are blown off as soon as the engines shut down and I'm out of the atmosphere. Could they be confusing it?

Well you've only shown the StageRecovery readout, not the actual craft in question. Without any information about what's actually on the stages, I doubt anyone will be able to answer questions about them.

April 1, 2016

48 minutes ago, Loren Pechtel said:

What is it thinking???

It is showing you the terminal velocity (at sea level, presumably) and expected fund-recovery fraction for each stage, assuming fully deployed chutes. Looks like everything is working fine here.

March 30, 2016

On March 25, 2016 at 6:51 PM, teag2 said:

Sorry if I'm late, guys, but it looks like somebody uploaded this to the Spacedock.

http://spacedock.info/mod/366/Stock%20Fuel%20Switch

Looks like that is a different mod that was initially named the same.

If you want to use StockFuelSwitch, it's just this config plus the dependencies (InstellarFuelSwitch and ModuleManager):

Spoiler


// Code by Badsector, Nertea and veryinky
// LF tanks added by Bigglesworth, 24th July 2015
// Keep resource nodes, fix LF changed by SpaceNomad, 23rd August 2015
// moved to InterstellarFS, refactored, cleaned log warnings and made to work with tanks that aren't full by default by TRauMa, 29th August 2015 

// we could add :NEEDS[InterstellarFuelSwitch], but as we only touch the InterstellarFuelSwitch node, it's not really necessary  

// -----------------------
// LFOX tanks
// -----------------------
@PART
[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel],@RESOURCE[Oxidizer],!MODULE[FSfuelSwitch],!MODULE[InterstellarFuelSwitch]]:FOR[InterstellarFuelSwitch] {   

    // temporary variables - if you add one here, add it below in cleanup, too
    %tempVar = 0
    %resCost = 0
    %totalCap = 0
    %dryCost = 0
    %LFCost = 0
    %OXCost = 0

    // Total tank capacity
    @totalCap = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
    @totalCap += #$RESOURCE[Oxidizer]/maxAmount$

    // compute cost of fuel fitting in part
    @tempVar = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
    @tempVar *= 0.8
    @resCost = #$tempVar$

    @tempVar = #$RESOURCE[Oxidizer]/maxAmount$
    @tempVar *= 0.18
    @resCost += #$tempVar$

    // and get dry cost as total cost - resource cost
    @dryCost = #$cost$
    @dryCost -= #$resCost$
    // we don't really use dryCost yet, but as LF tanks are more expensive in stock than their LFOX counterparts, this may change

    // Now compute tank costs adaption as new res costs - old res costs
    // - LF
    @tempVar = #$totalCap$
    @tempVar *= 0.8
    @LFCost += #$tempVar$
    @LFCost -= #$resCost$

    // - OX
    @tempVar = #$totalCap$
    @tempVar *= 0.18
    @OXCost += #$tempVar$
    @OXCost -= #$resCost$

    MODULE {
        name = InterstellarFuelSwitch

        # the first option should leave the tank like it is in stock
        resourceGui = Rocket Fuel;Liquid Fuel;Oxidizer
        resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer
        resourceAmounts = #$../RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$,$../RESOURCE[Oxidizer]/maxAmount$;$../totalCap$;$../totalCap$
        initialResourceAmounts = #$../RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/amount$,$../RESOURCE[Oxidizer]/amount$;$../totalCap$;$../totalCap$
        tankCost = #0;$../LFCost$;$../OXCost$

        displayCurrentTankCost = true

        hasGUI = true
        showInfo = true

        availableInFlight = false
        availableInEditor = true

        basePartMass = #$../mass$
        tankMass = 0;0;0;0;0
    }

}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel],@RESOURCE[Oxidizer],!MODULE[FSfuelSwitch],@MODULE[InterstellarFuelSwitch]]:AFTER[InterstellarFuelSwitch] {   

    // temporary variables cleanup to supress PartLoader warnings
    !tempVar = DELETE
    !resCost = DELETE
    !totalCap = DELETE
    !dryCost = DELETE
    !LFCost = DELETE
    !OXCost = DELETE

}


// -----------------------
// LF tanks
// -----------------------
@PART
[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel],!RESOURCE[Oxidizer],!MODULE[FSfuelSwitch],!MODULE[InterstellarFuelSwitch]]:FOR[InterstellarFuelSwitch] {   

    // temporary variables - if you add one here, add it below in cleanup, too
    %tempVar = 0
    %resCost = 0
    %dryCost = 0
    %mixCost = 0
    %OXCost = 0
    %LFcap = 0
    %OXcap = 0

    // compute cost of fuel in part if at capacity
    @resCost = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
    @resCost *= 0.8

    // and get dry cost as total cost - resource cost
    @dryCost = #$cost$
    @dryCost -= #$resCost$

    // Now compute tank costs as dry costs + res costs at capacity
    // - LFOX (also calculate caps: 45% of full cap for LF)
    @LFcap = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
    @LFcap *= 0.45
    @tempVar = #$LFcap$
    @tempVar *= 0.8
    @mixCost += #$tempVar$
    @OXcap = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
    @OXcap *= 0.55
    @tempVar = #$OXcap$
    @tempVar *= 0.18
    @mixCost += #$tempVar$
    @mixCost -= #$resCost$

    // - OX
    @tempVar = #$RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$
    @tempVar *= 0.18
    @OXCost += #$tempVar$
    @OXCost -= #$resCost$

    MODULE {
        name = InterstellarFuelSwitch

        # the first option should leave the tank like it is in stock
        resourceGui = Liquid Fuel;Oxidizer;Rocket Fuel
        resourceNames = LiquidFuel;Oxidizer;LiquidFuel,Oxidizer
        resourceAmounts = #$../RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$;$../RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$;$../LFcap$,$../OXcap$
        initialResourceAmounts = #$../RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/amount$;$../RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]/maxAmount$;$../LFcap$,$../OXcap$
        tankCost = #0;$../OXCost$;$../mixCost$

        displayCurrentTankCost = true

        hasGUI = true
        showInfo = true

        availableInFlight = false
        availableInEditor = true

        basePartMass = #$../mass$
        tankMass = 0;0;0;0;0
    }

}

@PART
[*]:HAS[@RESOURCE[LiquidFuel],!RESOURCE[Oxidizer],!MODULE[FSfuelSwitch],@MODULE[InterstellarFuelSwitch]]:AFTER[InterstellarFuelSwitch] {   

    // temporary variables cleanup to supress PartLoader warnings
    !tempVar = DELETE
    !resCost = DELETE
    !dryCost = DELETE
    !mixCost = DELETE
    !OXCost = DELETE
    !LFcap = DELETE
    !OXcap = DELETE

}

Copy and paste that into a text editor like Notepad, save it as something like StockFuelSwitch.cfg, and drop it and the dependencies into your GameData folder.

March 27, 2016

On December 6, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Dreamixpl said:

It's not working for 1.0.5. Can't create new saves, or load existing ones. Without the mod, saves work just fine. Through, there may be some incompatibilities: http://pastebin.com/R1a0WGqW

It looks like this is working as intended in 1.0.5 for me - are you using the latest version of the mod, and are your config files in the correct format for the new version?

Here is a config to add some (first) names of real astronauts, per Wikipedia's list:

Spoiler


KPseudonym
{
  // Real astronaut first names per en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_astronauts_by_name

  // fileWeight is the relative chance of this config being selected for name generation
  fileWeight = 100

  //The percent chance of a proper name being picked!
  properNameChance = 100

  //The percent chance of a root being placed in a random name!
  randomRootChance = 0

  // Female Names
  fProper   = Anna Barbara Bonnie Catherine Chiaki Claudie Dorothy Eileen Ellen Heidemarie Janet Janice Joan Judith Julie Kalpana Karen Katherine Kathryn Laurel Linda Lisa Liu Mae Marsha Mary Millie Nancy Naoko Nicole Pamela Patricia Peggy Rhea Roberta Sally Samantha Sandra Shannon Stephanie Sunita Susan Svetlana Tamara Tracy Wendy Yelena Yi Yvonne
  fPrefixes = fPrefixPlaceholder
  fRoots    = fRootPlaceholder
  fSuffixes = fSuffixPlaceholder

  // Male Names
  mProper   = Abdul Akihiko Alan Albert Aleksandar Aleksandr Aleksei Aleksey Alexander Alfred Anatoli Anatoly Andre Andreas Andrei Andrew Andriyan Andy Anthony Anton Arnaldo Aydyn Barry Benjamin Bernard Bertalan Bjarni Boris Brent Brewster Brian Bruce Bryan Buzz Byron Carl Carlos Charles Chen Chris Christer Christopher Claude Clayton Clifton Curt Curtis Dafydd Dale Daniel David Deke Dick Dirk Dmitri Dominic Don Donald Donn Douglas Duane Dumitru Edgar Edward Elliot Ellison Eric Ernst Eugene Evgeny Fei Fernando Francis Franco Frank Franklin Franz Fred Frederick Fyodor Garrett Gary Gennadi Gennady George Georgi Gerald Gerhard Gherman Gordon Gregory Grigori Guion Gus Guy Hans Harrison Henry Igor Ilan Ivan Jack James Jay Jean-Francois Jean-Jacques Jean-Loup Jean-Pierre Jeffrey Jeremy Jerome Jerry Jim Jing Joe John John-David Jon Jose Joseph Jugderdemidiin Karl Karol Ken Kenneth Kent Kevin Kimiya Kjell Klaus-Dietrich Koichi Konstantin Krasimir Lawrence Lee Leland Leonid Leopold Leroy Lev Liu Lloyd Lodewijk Loren Luca Maksim Mamoru Marc Marcos Mario Mark Martin Maurizio Michael Michel Mike Mikhail Miroslaw Muhammed Musa Neil Nicholas Nie Nikolai Nikolay Norman Oleg Owen Paolo Patrick Paul Pavel Pedro Pete Peter Petr Pham Philip Philippe Pierre Piers Pyotr Rakesh Randolph Ravish Reinhard Reinhold Rex Richard Rick Robert Roberto Rodolfo Roger Roman Ronald Roy Russell Rusty Salizhan Samuel Satoshi Scott Sergei Sergey Sheikh Sherwood Sidney Sigmund Soichi Sonny Stanley Stephen Steven Story Stuart Sultan Takao Takuya Talgat Taylor Ted Terence Terrence Terry Thomas Timothy Toktar Ulf Ulrich Umberto Valentin Valeri Valery Vance Vasili Viktor Vitali Vitaliy Vladimir Vladimír Vladislav Vyacheslav Wally Walter Wang William Winston Wubbo Yang Yevgeny Yuri Yury Zhai Zhang
  mPrefixes = mPrefixPlaceholder
  mRoots    = mRootPlaceholder
  mSuffixes = mSuffixPlaceholder

  lastNames = Kerman

  //First name will be regenerated if it contains any of the following
  rejectionCriteria = Kerman Kerbal eee rrr lll dildo Jebediah Valentina
}

If this mod is still under development, I'd like to request a feature that attempts to avoid duplicate kerbal names if possible. Something like: make up to ~10 attempts to regenerate a kerbal's name if it duplicates an existing kerbal's name, then fall back onto the default prefix/suffix name-generation if every attempt resulted in another duplicate. That way we could (e.g.) set up configs to bias name generation towards lists of "proper" names, but fall back on the default "goofy" names as we start to run out of unique proper names.

Edit: a couple more for characters from The Martian and Red Mars.

March 23, 2016

On March 16, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Plecy75 said:

i just wish i could use the LES engines to do a propulsive landing, like the SpaceX Dragon v2.

Totally possible with a little tweaking. To get the 200-300m/s atmospheric dv needed for a purely propulsive capsule landing, I had to improve the Isp substantially (using the Thud as a template) and bump up the fuel storage. The heat shield adds a substantial amount of weight, so I added a decoupler to it.

I just hope you're comfortable making suicide burns, as there's not much margin for error...

Spoiler


@PART[TaurusHCV]
{
  @MODULE[ModuleEngines]{
    @throttleLocked = False
    !atmosphereCurve{}
    atmosphereCurve
  	{
      key = 0 305
      key = 1 275
      key = 9 0.001
  	}
  }
  @RESOURCE[MonoPropellant]{
    @amount = 250
    @maxAmount = 250
  }
}

@PART[TaurusHeatshield]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleDecouple
		ejectionForce = 100
		explosiveNodeID = top
	}
}

I incorporated these changes into some miscellaneous tweaks I have here - there are a few Taurus parts that are a little too heavy compared to stock, and the Quadroodle's Isp is somewhat too good IMO.

March 19, 2016

On March 17, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Kowgan said:

Rover, quick question: When adding KerbalMonths/HabMultiplier to a part with mass < 1, will the "0.xx" result decrease the overall vessel habitational value? This question is based off assuming that when multiplying things by something < 1, the result is smaller than the original. Thanks.

I believe that the vessel's hab multiplier equals (1 + the sum of all parts' hab multipliers), before overall habitation time is calculated. I.e. multipliers are additive (and the vessel has an intrinsic multiplier of 1). So more multipliers are always a good thing, even if < 1.

Same thing for KerbalMonths.

March 16, 2016

I realize that this thread has been pretty quiet for a little while now, but these are still some of the best flags I've seen for KSP. Is there any chance of making the underlying artwork available? I'm guessing that they're vector files, so it would be neat to have more to play around with than the low-resolution rasters that KSP uses for flags.

March 16, 2016

On February 4, 2016 at 8:32 AM, Likasombodee said:

Does anyone have a patch for CTT ?

I'm shocked that no one had made one yet, so here you go:

Spoiler


//Small Centrifuge
@PART[centrifuge1]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = longTermHabitation
}

//Inflato Storage Container PA550
@PART[inflato1]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = longTermHabitation
}

//Inflato Storage Container PA330
@PART[inflato2]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = shortTermHabitation
}

//Inflato Storage Container F.L.A.T
@PART[inflatoFlat]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = shortTermHabitation
}

// Low Profile Base Mount
@PART[BaseMount]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = shortTermHabitation
}

//TMA-1 Orbital Orb
@PART[orbitalorb]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = commandModules // or some other command module node
}

March 15, 2016

14 hours ago, Nils277 said:

18 hours ago, Kowgan said:

@PickledTripod USI-LS already comes with a great guide for mod support and @PocketBrotector mashed together a pretty neat and balanced set of configs for USI-LS. So, I'd say it's pretty balanced right know.

This actually is not true anymore. The support for USI-LS is brought up-to-date with version 1.0.0. The package from PockedBrotector is not needed anymore for USI-LS support. It adds, as originally intended, support for UKS.

Also I still need to examine the latest KPBS update and change my UKS-KPBS configs to incorporate UKS functionality in the new/updated parts... right now it probably shouldn't be used yet, as a lot of the USI-LS functionality would be duplicative of the support added to KPBS itself, with unpredictable effect.

March 12, 2016

On November 17, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Nertea said:

Q: How much science does it take to unlock the tree?
A: Lots! I don't have exact numbers for 2.0+ yet.

I can answer this one - about 100k for all CTT nodes (plus the 18.5k for the stock tree). Here is a node list for reference (I transcribed this from the config, so errors are possible):

Spoiler


Nuclear Power	300	Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power	550	Nuclear Fuel Systems
Nuclear Power	550	Improved Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power	1000	High Energy Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power	1500	Fusion Power
Nuclear Power	2250	Advanced Fusion Reactions
Nuclear Power	4000	Exotic Fusion Reactions
Nuclear Power	4000	Antimatter Power
Nuclear Power	10000	Unified Field Theory
Nuclear Power	10000	Ultra High Energy Physics
Nuclear Propulsion	550	Improved Nuclear Propulsion
Nuclear Propulsion	1000	High Efficiency Nuclear Propulsion
Nuclear Propulsion	2250	Experimental Nuclear Propulsion
Nuclear Propulsion	2250	Exotic Nuclear Propulsion
Nuclear Propulsion	1500	Fusion Rockets
Rocketry	1000	Experimental Rocketry
Rocketry	1500	Gigantic Rocketry
Rocketry	2250	Colossal Rocketry
Fuel Storage	1000	Specialized Fuel Storage
Fuel Storage	1500	Exotic Fuel Storage
Construction	1000	Exotic Alloys
Construction	1000	Off-World Robotics
Construction	2250	Orbital Megastructures
Construction	1500	Orbital Assembly
Robotics	300	Advanced Actuators
Robotics	550	Experimental Actuators
Aero Tech	160	Subsonic Flight
Aero Tech	300	Efficient Flight Systems
Aero Tech	550	Specialized Flight Systems
Aero Tech	1500	Experimental Aircraft Engines
Aero Tech	1000	Aerospace Composites
Aero Tech	2250	Advanced Aerospace Engineering
Command	45	Enhanced Survivability
Command	90	Simple Command Modules
Command	300	Heavy Command Modules
Command	300	Specialized Command Modules
Mining	1500	Advanced Off-World Mining
Mining	2250	Resource Exploitation
Science	550	Specialized Science Tech
Science	1000	Long Term Science Tech
Science	1500	Scientific Outposts
Science	2250	High Energy Science
Robotics	1000	Mechatronics
Robotics	1500	Artificial Intelligence
Electric Engines	1000	Advanced Ion Propulsion
Electric Engines	1500	Plasma Propulsion
Electric Engines	2250	Advanced Electromagnetic Systems
Electric Engines	4000	Specialized Plasma Generation
Electric Engines	1500	Advanced Gridded Thrusters
Electric Engines	2250	Experimental Gridded Thrusters
Solar Tech	550	Advanced Solar Technology
Solar Tech	1000	Advanced Photovoltaic Materials
Solar Tech	1000	Cutting-Edge Solar Technology
Electrics	1500	High Tech Electrical Systems
Electrics	1500	Microwave Power Transmission
Heat Management	160	Heat Management Systems
Heat Management	550	Advanced Heat Management
Heat Management	1500	Specialized Radiators
Life Support	90	Recycling
Life Support	160	Hydroponics
Life Support	550	Short Term Habitation
Life Support	1000	Long Term Habitation
Life Support	1000	Colonization
Life Support	2250	Advanced Colonization
Logistics	90	Storage Technology
Logistics	300	Logistics
Logistics	1500	Advanced Logistics

I think that a lot of the more expensive (exotic-science-type nodes) are exclusive or nearly exclusive to KSPI. I have a lot of CTT mods installed, but not Interstellar, and it would "only" cost me about 40k - 45k to buy all of the CTT nodes in my game. It definitely improves the appeal of running science labs...

March 8, 2016

I like the idea of starting out by using tiny rockets to get science, instead of wandering around KSC grinding out experiments at the mini-biomes.

Some observations:

All of the solid rockets have the same Isp curve (140 -> 165), contrary to their descriptions. Also they all seem to produce more thrust than required, to the point where it's possible to stack several of the same stage and keep total TWR well above 1.
The aerospike is surprisingly good on paper compared to stock rocket engines, e.g. the Spark (slightly lower TWR, but much higher vacuum Isp).
The structural adapter is .1 tons, which is actually very heavy in the context of these rockets - it's very much preferable to decouple it than to leave it attached.
The gyroscope has the stats of the .625m reaction wheel, despite being smaller and cheaper.
Grid fins are some of the most expensive items in the pack, at 500 funds each.
The batteries are relatively expensive - they both cost 150 funds, even though the larger one is equivalent to the 80-fund stock battery, and the smaller one has one-fifth the capacity.
I'm getting an odd mismatch between KER readouts and actual performance - for example, this has enough supposed dv that it should be able to make orbit easily, but it is barely capable of suborbital flight. Seems that the upper stage doesn't have the TWR that the readouts would indicate - is there some kind of hidden penalty to the aerospike that wouldn't be visible via KER? Or am I missing something else?

Edit: I decided to try tweaking some of the values mentioned above.

The most significant thing I did was improve the Isp curves of the solid rockets - I changed the upper-stage motor to be Hammer-like and the .625m motor to be Thumper-like. Even with improvements to the SRBs, I found the rockets had a hard time pushing a tiny payload (avionics package, tiniest battery, one experiment, and the .35m nosecone chute) to significant altitudes. I would have expected a two-stage .35m rocket to reach the upper atmosphere (18km), since that's what sounding rockets are for, but instead I needed to use the heavily buffed .625m stage to get that high - and at that point, I could make sub-orbital flights pretty easily by using those stages exclusively. (Even OTRAG-esque asparagus shenanigans weren't very satisfying.)

March 2, 2016

1 hour ago, Alshain said:

I checked one release version of the mod later and no it was not fixed. My computer is down for the count right now so I can't check now. Before my computer did fail, I just kept with FSFuelSwitch.

Bummer, but thanks for confirming. I've logged it as a github issue with a link to your original report, so hopefully this gets some attention.

March 1, 2016

On August 30, 2015 at 9:39 PM, dtrauma said:

I tried that and it doesn't work - try switching a LFOX tank to LF, leaving the editor and returning - you now have an LF tank with large capacity (as you left it), but it also has OX again, too. The same with launching. It seems you really need to delete the original res nodes. Since Firespitter contains parts that have a res node and a FSfuelSwitcher config, I assume it's a Firespitter bug and this shouldn't be necessary.

Edit: It works fine with InterstellarFS.

I cleaned the config file and fixed the costs so the base cost of a part will stay the same over all loadouts, and the base+res cost will change as it should. It will also clean up its variables after itself, in a somewhat roundabout way, but the PartLoader will be happy.

This is the best version of StockFuelSwitch as far as I know, but it seems that IFS won't play nicely with resource-locking. Every time a fuel-switched tank is loaded in VAB or at launch, its resources are unlocked (even if flowState = false in the .craft file.)

March 1, 2016

On October 13, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Alshain said:

No, that's the problem. The fuel locking is in stock, but with IFS installed, it's status does not persist. I'll do some more testing and see if I can't confirm it is IFS. It could be the way CCC is configuring it. It's hard for me to tell.

EDIT:

Definitely somehow related to IFS. Here is what it looks like without IFS. If I save the craft and re-load it later, this tank stays locked (that tank is meant to be a refill tank for the lander so I want it not used, using IFS it is supposed to be the only one there with Oxidizer because it is a NERV stage).

Was this issue ever addressed? I really like InterstellarFuelSwitch as I am using it for the latest variant of StockFuelSwitch, but my stock-fuel-switched tanks (and Mk4 tanks) won't/can't load their flowState correctly: even if I can open up a .craft file and see that flowState = false (therefore the resources should be locked), every time the craft is loaded (in VAB or at launch) the resources are unlocked.

This issue doesn't affect FSfuelswitch tanks, or tanks without fuel switching - those "remember" their flowState just fine.

February 29, 2016

@jofwu, those are all good questions - unfortunately I don't have any of the answers yet!

Multipler recyclers should be "cumulative," but I don't really know more about the details other than that the total recycle rate is capped by the best recycler. I'm not sure if everything is working as intended - see my issue report here. Until that is addressed I'm reluctant to venture a guess about expected behavior.

I haven't experimented with how EVA interacts with USI-LS, so I would just say - try it out and let us know what you learn .

For question (3), I haven't tried this myself so I can't make any guarantees; but I think Jeb would last for five months. It's a good question about how the hab timer changes when kerbals are added or removed to a vessel, and so on, but I haven't considered it in detail yet.

Your last question definitely sounds like a bug. I would put together some screenshots of the vessel, plus logs, save file, etc., so that RoverDude and company can investigate. You can post your follow-up either here or on Github.

February 28, 2016

Expanded the wiki again with pages on habitation, FAQ, configuration, etc. If people are directed there it should now hopefully be able to answer most of their questions about how to use the mod.

February 27, 2016

Real-world solar and cosmic radiation is attenuated by Earth's atmosphere and/or magnetosphere, right? It could be interesting to see that incorporated here - for example, Jool is presumably radioactive like Jupiter, but maybe Laythe has an active core while Vall is geologically dead, so Laythe would make a better choice for habitation despite being closer to the giant's radiation.

Regardless, I look forward to seeing how the gameplay strategies emerge with this mod...

February 27, 2016

13 minutes ago, MegaUZI said:

That might sound a bit heretic, but is there a way to disable the usage of LiquidHydrogen and go back to LiquidFuel usage ? Thanks

Yes, it's included in the Extras folder when you download Kerbal Atomics:

On February 11, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Nertea said:

Added new Extras patch converting engines to LF-only. LF-only engines have reduced Isp and TWRs, comparable to those from Atomic Age and Stock

I can vouch that it works quite nicely for stock-balanced NTRs. The 1.25m engines are a bit better and more specialized than the LV-N, while the Liberator is end-game tech ideal for pushing around payloads too massive for stock propulsion to cope with.

Profiles

Forums

Developer Articles

KSP2 Release Notes

Bug Reports

Posts posted by PocketBrotector