rmaine

I may be skirting dangerously close to the line of pseudo-moderation or whatever the term is. Probably the best thing for me to do would be to completely ignore this thread and others like it. Of course, some people might think that ignoring them is evidence of something odious. To the topic at hand: In the end, a game that is or is not good will or will not be released in a time frame that does or does not please. And nothing posted to this thread is going to change any of that. It really doesn't matter whether various concerns expressed are valid or not, so there's not much point in arguing about it. Just makes the forum itself a source of annoyance.

Ya know, I'd think that people (who I'll refrain from naming) who are deeply disgusted with how horrible this all is could possibly just not buy the product instead of continually harping about it. But I guess that's a bit optimistic of me. For my part, well, I guess I'll have more time to play with KSP 1.

Yep; that's typical. I set up the transfer that way and then subtract a few m/s from the maneuver.

Neat. I'd been away from KSP for a while until just yesterday, when I started a new career trying out the snacks mod. Hmm. That seems likely to be incompatible with progressive colonization. Debating whether to scrap that and restart. Ah. Think I'll play that one for a while, but then come back to progressive colonization. P.S. Looks like CKAN still has KSP 1.11.9 listed as the max version for progressive colonization. I know how to override that, but some other people don't.

Since KSP is about rocket science, we should use the scientific definition of "theory". I'm afraid none of the posts here qualify as well substantiated enough to be theories. :-) They barely even qualify as hypotheses. More like what I recall from my NASA days we would label as wags. My personal wag is that we'll see KSP2 about when people stop using apostrophes for plurals. :-(

Glad to see you taking on this mod. There are a few mods that do this general sort of thing, but this one is my personal favorite. I have been using it in 12.3 with no problems, but glad to see it getting more formally supported.

@camacju Aha. The "DLC rotor" bit explains one of my puzzlements. Presumably from Breaking Ground, which I don't have. I have Making History (and I use the important "missing history" mod), but I've never been much into ground operations, so I didn't bother to get Breaking Ground.

@camacjuNeat. I've never managed to get anything from Eve's surface to orbit at any cost or mass. I couldn't figure out what the vehicle was at all just from looking at the picture. The video clarified things a bit. Though I don't see the details of how you put it all together, I gather that the basic idea is that it is somehow helicoptering from Eve's surface up above the densest part of the atmosphere. Right?

Say. This looks handy. I hadn't paid much attention to it because of it being abandoned and listing support only to KSP 1.9. (Being just parts, perhaps it would have worked with current versions, but I hadn't checked). But glancing at it now, I'm thinking it might be a big help on Duna. My Duna missions kept having problems with Jeb and friends being unable to get back into their craft. Jetpacks won't do it on Duna, and I keep having difficulties with stringing multiple ladders together in that it's hard to transition between the ladders. Seems like the long ladders here might help.

One of my favorite bits of science ignorance is people talking about quantum jumps as though they were big things. Instead, a quantum jump is the smallest jump that something can physically take.

Not enough data to understand what is happening to you. But MechJeb has absolutely zero to do with pilot experience. I for one use MechJeb all the time. Have never had any issues with pilot experience. Do note that pilot experience doesn't update until the pilot is back at the space center, though there is a game option to change that. It has nothing to do with MechJeb, however. Not sure what leads you to the guesses about MechJeb interaction with pilot exxperience, but I'm confident you are being mislead.

Amen. I glanced at this thread hoping to actually learn something. I've had a hard time getting anything at all to land and get back to Eve orbit, even just cheating my craft into an initial Eve orbit for testing. Yep, if I could get something from orbit to the surface and back up, that would indeed be 90% of the work. Ferrying stuff from Kerbin to Eve orbit I could manage easily enough. Aha. Here I find out that all I needed to do was build a lander. Dunno why I didn't think of that. :-) Getting down to Eve is doable as long as I can keep the heat shield end pointed the right way. Heat shield and chutes do most of the work without much DV expenditure.

That seems a bit, um, demanding. Consider that this mod is done completely for free by a volunteer. And he explicitly noted that he was burned out on KSP stuff for quite a while. I'd guess that demands like this are more likely to fuel that burnout and make him stop bothering to maintain the mod at all. Oh, and textures are a *LOT* of work, as is integration with other mods. I suspect it is pointless to note that it would be more helpful to submit revised textures than to complain about them. :-(

I'd suggest the opposite approach. Rather than changing MJ to detect when a Kerbal is outside the ship, I suggest changing the practice of leaving the ship while automatic controls like MJ are active. All sorts of things can go poorly when you are on EVA. Heck, having the engines turn on is a much more obvious problem if you have automatic controls active. Changing that practice also has the advantage of requiring no coding. Yes, time warp has all sorts of issues. More than once I've had a Kerbal thrown away from the craft because I was a little too fast in going EVA after I stopped a time warp. (Entered space above a biome that I hadn't yet gotten EVA data for; wanted to quickly get the data before leaving that biome; oops.) In general, I find it better to learn how to best use things as they are and to avoid doing things that regularly cause problems instead of hoping for code tweaks to custom adapt to everything I try to do. There are quite a lot of things I've learned to just do a different way.

That's what I previously mentioned as the difference of substance between limiting TWR and thrust. I just don't think it worth cluttering things up with a separate option. I won't argue further, though. My opinion might (or might not) be useful; argument certainly isn't.

Just my personal opinion, but I think MJ's ascent guidance is, if anything, already a bit too overburdened by options to add one like this. There are other ascent/descent options I'd put a lot higher on my personal list, though I recognize that my personal preferences don't translate to the author's. (For example, the lack of autostaging on descent causes a fair number of crashes for me; other people have pointed out tricks that help, but not enough to keep me from quicksaving before every landing). The only difference of substance between limiting TWR and thrust is that the TWR increases as fuel burns off. I don't consider a simple factor of diving by mass and local gravity to be "of substance". Note that there are already displays of TWR in various places if one finds it too much trouble to divide.

Well, if you don't have the dependencies installed, things aren't going to go well. It's pretty much not worth investigating anything else until you fix that. Some people dislike CKAN for various reasons. Fine, but handling dependencies is a big plus of CKAN. Not that it catches 100% of all situations, but it sure catches most of them - a lot more than the few problems it has. Some mods have added dependencies in their later versions; in particular, quite a lot of them have added dependence on Toolbar Controller. The fact that you might have installed some mod in the past without Toolbar Controller doesn't mean that you can necessarily get by with it for a later version of the same mod. If you don't use CKAN, you need to at least read the mod threads to see if things like that have changed before installing new versions. Yes, that can be a bother.

Well, I wouldn't be able to solve whatever your problem is anyway, but I suggest that the first line of the first post in this thread is at least a start. (That's the line about needing logs for support). I also note that you say absolutely zero about what your problem is. I use both ClickThroughBlocker and McJeb all the time with no hint of a problem; I suspect many other people do as well. I guess I just assume you are talking about McJeb, as you didn't even actually mention it. In short, darned little for anyone to go by in helping you.

That's a hard call. I hadn't really put much thought into the details. Time would make sense, but that would be a pretty trivial penalty. Trying to think of something that wouldn't be trivial. By the time it comes up, money is getting to be not much of an issue. The same with science; it's pretty easy to max out science before leaving Kerbin and its moons. And as you note, prestige doesn't seem to have much use at all (unless you are using a mod like strategia, which I recently tried out). Hmm. What would actually have some non-trivial cost? Needing to cart more complex parts up from Kerbin can be enough of a bother to be a noticeable penalty without being impossible. I struggle to come up with a rationalization for that, though. Maybe require a higher level Kerbal of some sort to reset things?

Just for kicks, I temporarily added restock, restock+, and near future IVA props to my game (and I see the habutils dll must have been in there somewhere because now I see that I have it). Launched a craft with just a command pod, that lab, and something to boost it up a bit. Right clicked on the lab with no problem. Guess it will take someone who knows more about this stuff than I do. (And I'd guess they would want the whole log file. Posting those directly to the forum never works well. Even if you manage to post it, the moderators would likely delete it because posts that long tend to break viewing the forum for everyone. The usual thing to do is to put the log on some site like dropbox or similar and put a link to that file in the forum post.)

Restock (and restock plus) is one I had in mind with that comment. I also see near future props in your log. And I'm not sure where the habutils dll is from, though that sounds familiar. On the other hand, if you say everything except for right clicking that particular part is ok, I might just not have run into it because I haven't launched anything with that part; suppose I could go try doing so...

Afraid I have no clue as to how to debug your problem, but I can report that I'm using both SSPER 2.04 and TAC-LS 0.18.0.0 in my current KSP 1.12.2 game with no hint of problems, so it must be something deeper than that. I do notice that you are using several other mods that I don't use, so there might be some interaction there.

See the OP, where it says (though I grant it is quite a ways down on the page and thus perhaps easy to miss) "Due to the directories where files need to be installed, CKAN is unable to install this". Yes, I agree it is a nice mod.

Because it is optimizing for the sum of two nodes - one at the start and one at arrival. It doesn't automatically make the second node. That would probably be pointless because you often have to make a midcourse correction for various reasons, so the arrival node is likely to be different enough from the initial guess that auto-creating it won't be wise. Even without a midcourse correction, the difference between the instantaneous impulse that MJ computes versus the finite time of the actual maneuver is likely to make a significant difference in the needed final node. But the delta-V of the predicted final node is still part of the optimization... unless you select the option for flyby/impact only. I forget exactly what it is called and I'm not looking at it right now, but that's basically what it does - optimize ignoring the final node. Often the difference is trivial, but there can be cases where it isn't. Caveat - this is just my 3rd-party understanding. It's possible I have it wrong, but I think this is what it's all about. Ah. Ninja'd while I was typing I see. But I'll leave this here as I elaborated a little more.

Here you go. BTW, Google gave this as the 2nd hit from just googling MechJeb; I didn't even have to mention KSP, though that helps with many searches. I find Google a lot easier than the forum's search tool, which I also find painful.