Jump to content

garwel

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,111

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by garwel

  1. garwel
    Yep. No change. The KSC window shows up ok, but the VAB one doesn't and the Launch Pad (stock) window disappears immediately.
  2. garwel
    However, I have a problem in the Editor: the KCT window doesn't open. Clicking the button (in Blizzy's Toolbar) doesn't do anything. It may be connected with the flickering problem as most other buttons have also disappeared. Clicking the Launch Pad brings up its window for like 0.1 sec, which then disappears and nothing happens.
  3. garwel
    Any idea why KER items are tripled in the Start node? Is it ETT or is it KER itself? I'm using the dev version of the latter. Besides, don't you think Communotron 16 is not needed at the Start? Probe cores all have built-in 5 km antennas, which should suffice for the first few missions.
  4. garwel
    @JeffreyCor Yes, exit & reload worked for me too. A heavily modded install, Windows 10 x64.
  5. garwel
    Great! Made a small Patreon pledge for all your labors. Besides, is it bad to have both ETT and CTT in my GameData? CKAN forcibly installs CTT together with Interstellar Extended, which in turn is in ETT's suggested mods. It sounds like a trouble, especially for new players who will simply follow your suggestions and encounter a tech trees conflict. I deleted the CTT folder manually and hope it won't break anything. PS: CKAN still lists ETT's max KSP version as 1.1.3.
  6. garwel
    Any plans to include the latest changes in USI mods (UKS and Konstruction in particular) in ETT?
  7. garwel
    ^ This.
  8. garwel
    Looking at other people's playthroughs, I found that everybody has their own naming conventions for their vessels. Some use real space program names, others borrow from science fiction, yet others come up with completely made-up words, etc. As to me, I'm trying to be as practical as possible. So I came up with a naming convention that helps me find the right ship in the VAB/SPH to use as a template for the new one, and also helps me understand the purpose of a vessel in the list. So my ships' names are quite nerdy, even boring, but tell me a lot. For instance, AWI 001 is the first interplanetary rover, M3LM 005 is a Mun/Minmus lander with a crew of 3 (vessel 5 in this class), etc. I often add a brief name like "Eve CommSat" or "Duna Low Orbiter" to better describe the purpose of the craft. It's not very beautiful, but it's worked well for me. However, with KSP Craft Organizer and Persistent Dynamic Pod Names, I think I can come up with something better. So, how do you name your great - and not so great - vessels?
  9. garwel
    I saw somebody mention KSP in a Paradox Interactive forum (of all places) and googled it out of curiosity. Have already scored more hours at KSP than at any other game (Paradox included).
  10. garwel
    Would it be easier to implement just the part tracker and leave the inventory for later? IMHO, the former is more important than the latter. Both in KSP and in the real world, only a minority of rockets (and rocket parts) are actually reusable, so the difference should not be that big. But economy of scale does exist and if you keep producing similar parts over and over, you should learn to make it faster. I guess you can also just disable tracking/inventory of procedural parts for now if they are hard to deal with. Again, most parts in all vessels (well, at least in my game) are ordinary and it's always the player's choice whether to use a mod like TweakScale or RealChutes. So you can significantly reduce the amount of work with just very slight (if noticeable) effect on gameplay. As to the launch button, can you just disable it and instead have a big fat red BUILD button in KCT window? And just make sure that window is always displayed when editor is opened.
  11. garwel
    I like the new modular structure. I think it's the way to go. Without compatibility with stock mechanics, RT would just eventually die (not many people would want to install such a complex mod just for signal delays and directional antennas). But seeing it as an enhancement of the CommNet may actually make it more popular and accessible to new users. But I'm also worried how this compatibility is implemented in practice. I haven't played the 1.2 yet, but I understand that its math and balancing are very different from those of RT. Can we expect backward compatibility between RT 2.0 and 1.8? In other words, will my RT-powered probes and relays continue to work after the upgrade? Or should I use stock mechanics for now without RT for now, and then just add delay and other stuff on top of it with RT 2.0?
  12. garwel
    There is a mod for that: Hide Empty Tech Tree Nodes. I've recently had problems with it though, but it used to work well before. Don't think it's got updated for 1.2 yet.
  13. garwel
    Well, it sounds very ambitious. I mean, it adds to the space sim stuff like hit points, different types of damage (collision, thermal, bleeding, etc.), healing... You would probably have to modify the game and other mods a lot so that your injured kerbals could not (or could) control ships, operate ISRU, do IVA and EVA, and so on. You would need to create parts like a medical bay (seems RoverDude has already made one) and medical equipment containers. Another thing in this avenue is illness and, more specifically, infectious disease. What if kerbals could spread one? It would be a serious problem in long-haul flights, stations and bases. You'd need to build quarantine cells to isolate sick crew members and/or heal them. What I worry about is that it will be just not so fun and way too frustrating.
  14. garwel
    Great! Has MRS Lite been updated as well?
  15. garwel
    @RoverDude mentioned medical facilities and I thought about USI-LS' implementation of mental health (i.e. homesickness). Would it be worthwhile/easy enough to make this thing a bit less predictable? I think it would be more fun and more realistic if you didn't have all of your kerbals simultaneously going nuts after N days in space. It may be a random event with mean time to happen dependent on a kerbal's courage (as proxy for self-control). If such random accidents are hard to code or against mod's philosophy, it can still be calculated for each kerbal individually. Imagine having a ship or a station that's been in space for too long and the astronauts are going crazy one after another! Sounds like a plot for a space drama to me.
  16. garwel
    Cool, something like that was definitely needed. But aren't they OP? They can do everything all the roles can do except the multipliers (for labs and drilling). I would expect this role to work with colonization mods to fulfill special tasks (like growing food).
  17. garwel
    @Probus Great, thank you! I'd love to see the new Konstruction mod and the updated UKS in the tree. Hopefully, @RoverDude himself will help with correct placement of the new/modified parts.
  18. garwel
    For those who's already tried this mod. Do you think it can substitute Infernal Robotics for the most part? I have very little experience with the latter (usually restarted my career too soon), but my understanding is that IR may be overkill for 99% of your usual tasks.
  19. garwel
    Gotcha. I submitted a feature suggestion on Github.
  20. garwel
    Wow, it looks great! For realism & balance purposes, I wish you could only weld parts with an Engineer on EVA (and maybe with a KIS welder).
  21. garwel
    What about the PR I sent a few months ago with rearrangement of RT, kOS, Ven's Stock Revamp etc.?
  22. garwel
    @Suedocode In RT, there is an option to target Active Vessel. Isn't it what you are talking about?
  23. garwel
    @Artfact, do you need any help updating ETT for 1.2? I haven't used the pre-release yet, but I think I can try to look at the new parts and find a place for them if you are short on time. I'd also like to see support for Rover Science. They have one or two parts only, so it shouldn't be hard (probably should go into Field Science or something).
  24. garwel
    Yep, I'm talking about a situation where a player would just burn all the money on "useless" (career-wise) projects as opposed to doing something "useful" (i.e. fulfilling contracts). They would then have little or no reputation penalty, even in hard mode. It may not necessarily be a bad thing: say, you've completed all your interesting contracts and are now just building stations or exploring stuff for fun, but it's against the point of career mode as I understand it. As for not showing the correct amount in GUI, it's quite easy to solve. Just reduce the reputation after giving the money. Then you will have the correct predictions and all.
  25. garwel
    Maybe I got it wrong, but I thought hard mode meant that you get less money if you haven't spent your budget. It is sort of like many real government-subsidized agencies work (unfortunately), but it makes you spend more, not necessarily achieve more. E.g., I could make a lot of big, expensive, but pretty useless rockets or I could make them cheaper and more multi-purpose and accomplish more at less the cost.
×
×
  • Create New...