dclarion

Very good, then. I was hoping that the KSP developers had had the foresight to use a directory precedence in the search for parts, resources, etc. such that all subdirectories except 'Squad' are searched, then 'Squad' is searched, ignoring any name collisions. Oh, well. So, if I need to make a part unavailable by editing its cfg file, might that not tend to make game users unwilling to use the mod, since they would have to do actual work -- make a backup of the cfg, edit the original, drop in the mod, then if they wanted to remove the mod, restore the backed-up cfg? Or does CKAN provide for post-install and post-remove scripts?

liquidhype: I was looking at that, and that was what prompted my "so much all at once" comment. I'll try to keep digging to see whether I can find something more structured. - - - Updated - - - Freethinker: I'd like to do that. I'm curious: Is it possible to "override" an existing part by placing a part with the same name in a mod? I've got some ideas on how to try to make the LES useful.

I suppose that this has been asked a billion (as in 10 to the power 12) times already, but is there a single reference that details modding for KSP for one who has not yet done anything like it? I'm currently running KSP-1.0.4 under Ubuntu 14.04/Mono (which took some work to set up), I'm a very well grounded C programmer, have done some small work in C++, have never touched C♯. My initial focus would be making small changes to behaviours of stock parts, to get an idea of what's going on under the hood of KSP, then on to loftier goals. I've looked at some of the sticky threads here, and it seems like everything is thrown at you willy-nilly; I'd like something a bit more structured, if possible.

I will look into CKAN. Danke schön!

I'm running an Ubuntu 12.04 64-bit system, and am looking to run the Realism Overhaul mod and everything that goes with it with KSP. Having downloaded and looked over RO-10.0.0 it appears that I'll need at least make, python, and a C# compiler to build it. For this and other mods, what would be the best way to go? I've seen some mention of IDEs, but is an IDE absolutely necessary? I'm an old-schooler and am most comfortable using a CLI and make, but I'll learn how to use an IDE if necessary. I take it that I would still be installing build-essentials? Would an IDE include a C# compiler? If not, which would be recommended? Side note: I'm rather disappointed that KSP and its mods are written in C#, but it is what it is, I suppose.

I bought KSP through the KSP Store. My thought was that I wasn't going to get too complicated right away. - - - Updated - - - I ended up invoking KSP.x86_64, and all appears fine.

Absolutely sure. Tux the Penguin was on the download button.

I'm probably being a ditzy broad here, but I just bought and unpacked KSP-1.0.4 and already I'm a bit confused. Looking through the top-level directory, I see five files that would qualify as executables (by the way, the executable bit is set on everything, which is overkill; only directories and files that can actually be run should have that bit set). I'm not sure what KSP.exe is for, as Linux doesn't employ the .exe "extension". Then, we have KSP.* and Launcher.* Does one invoke the Launcher.* appropriate to the host, which then exec()s the corresponding KSP.* or do these executables serve separate functions? I've looked over the readme.txt but it appears to be more a ChangeLog than anything else.

I'm not a big fan of homeschooling because teaching a subject is a rather speciaized endeavour. Now, port that to a parent who would have to teach *every* subject in a curriculum, and you've got nothing but trouble. Seriously, if the curriculum leaves you bored, hit the library (assuming that you have a decent library, say, in a reasonably large city). Bone up on the area in which you want to specialize. It will keep you challenged, and give you a head start on college courses, to boot.

Manymuch congratulations!

Windows is up to 10 now? Wow, shows you how far out of that loop I've been. I haven't used Windows for anything serious since XP. It's not that I'm an anti-Windowist, I just happen to like Linux. I even designed a Linux distribution, which I used on routers and servers for probably ten years or so.

As it happens, my birthday is 20 July. I turned 12 the day of the landing. Each year, I try to remember to raise a toast of The Glenfiddich to all who made the mission possible. Then, I cry.

Hi folkses. July is upon us, and with it some fond memories for this lady. For any of you interested in such things, I have a video tribute to the Apollo 11 mission in the can and ready for release on 20 July. Last year's tribute was reasonably well received in the "Mercury, Gemini, Apollo" Facebook group, and I am hoping that this year's offering does at least as well. Here is last year's production: Per aspera ad astra!

I'm speaking of the blue ball. (Take that and run with it, guys, as far as it will take you ) What I think I'd like to do, once I buy the full game (hopefully next week) is go with the RO mod. I don't mind difficult, it gives me more to learn. - - - Updated - - - I've noticed the part about faster being more difficult to fly. As well, I believe that aerodynamic drag varies with the square of the velocity, so you really don't want to be trying to go like a bat out of Hell in the lower atmosphere?

I'm still fooling around with the demo, which is purported to accurately reflect the operation of the full version; I'm hoping to have the funds to consider buying the full version next week. Anyway, in building launch vehicles, I was turning on the center-of-gravity and "center-of-lift" (which seems to be misnamed; center of lift applies to winged vehicles, while center of pressure applies to vehicles with and without wings) indicators, but not seeing the center-of-pressure marker. After stumbling upon shift + right-click to raise the launch vehicle, I found the CP marker. It was approximately half the launch vehicle's length behind the first stage engine bell. I designed small rockets ("model" rockets) for many years, and the rule of thumb I learned was that the CP of a symmetrical launch vehicle roughly corresponded to the CG of its silhouette. Considering that I rarely had CP-related stability problems, I took this rule to be a good one. So why is it that I'm seeing a calculated CP well aft of where I'm thinking it should be (which would go a long way to explaining why my vehicles are pretty much unmaneuverable right off the pad)? Do I have it wrong, after all?

In what way is installation tricky, viktor? And would I be adding to the peril by running KSP under Linux?

This is Bosco Hern with a few pointers on money. Well, not really, but those of a certain age and disposition may get the reference... At any rate, I'm currently playing the KSP demo and am looking forward to buying the game sometime during the first week of July (when I get my Social Security check). On a personal note, my most treasured birthday gift was Neil and Buzz landing on the Moon; I turned 12 that day. As an aside: To those of you who have played with the Realism Overhaul mod, what are your feelings on it?