DStaal

It actually sounds like something that could be a whole separate mod, to me.

I think a better way to think about is that it's intended to be a hard dependency. It's fairly recently been added, but RoverDude is going to be developing assuming everyone will have it installed. At the moment nothing relies on it - but there's no guarantee that will hold true with the next version of MKS, or the one after that.

That's not that different from my MacBook Pro w/ Touchbar. I'm guessing it depends quite a bit on which mods. Hmm. My SSD is also encrypted, which could be part of it.

And while you're at it, make sure your NFP (and other mods) are all ones for 1.2.2. While parts are pretty much fine in 1.3 from 1.2.2, the opposite isn't true if they've been localized or something.

It appears to be being overlayed by specialized landers:

Mine currently takes 14 minutes to start up. ~160 mods, with a SSD.

The problem with saying 'there should be a standard' is pretty well explained here: Though if Squad puts in one, that should gather up a lot of the low-hanging fruit on this. I'd expect Firespitter and Interstellar would likely be superseded, at least.

MOLE has some (of both) with it standard. And I know I have some larger ones with CLS, but I can't remember which pack they're from.

Well, *I* don't...

Do the stakes have different names? (By default they don't.) If no, EL is averaging them into one launch area. And if it's further away than you were before (and you don't have the appropriate level pilot in your survey station) then it may be out of range.

Somewhat unlikely, since there's no use for RocketParts with MKS installed.

Thanks. Yeah, I think I took an export of the github to make the beta 2 - which is fine, except that it didn't include the models and textures. But they hadn't changed, so just using them from beta 1 should be fine. (I noticed this a while back actually - but since no-one was commenting I didn't do anything about it...) One of these days I need to circle back to this. I've got the configs for stage 3 pretty much in place - they just need an intensive balance pass.

Well, I've never seen that show so I'll assume that's a compliment.

Not a problem. I've been following on GitHub as well. Let me know what you decide.

There's a variant embedded in MKS.

PatchManager allows you to specify that patches are mutually exclusive. No need for complicated work-arounds if you're going that route.

I tend to think of NFE reactors and USI reactors as being designed for different use-cases. NFE reactors are designed with NF parts in mind - deep space probes, long-duration exploration ships, and space stations. Power use is fairly static in those, with occasional bursts. A probe that puts it's reactor in 'standby' just ticking over for the trip, and then ramps it up for the insertion burn before going back to standby or to a slightly higher 'active' state to power instruments is expected - and is only changing the output rate a half dozen or so times per flight. On the other hand, flights are typically of defined and definite length, so it's fairly easy to plan what you need. USI reactors are designed with MKS parts in mind - mining stations, sprawling surface bases, maybe a few colony ships. Power use will depend on resource levels, machinery levels, numbers of Kerbals, professions of Kerbals, levels of Kerbals, the time of day, the number and type of ships nearby, etc. Literally every time you look at them they'll need a different output rate - and they'll need to basically be running forever as part of the colony power system. It's a very different use-case. (Now, I haven't checked how they're balanced against each other - I'd have USI reactors heavier and more expensive for the same output if I were balancing, personally. I tend to act like they are.) Of course I routinely remove the NFE patch that makes USI reactors work like NFE reactors, so I have both.

Ok, PR up. Note that this gets rid of the 'Extras' folder - using PatchManager to do the same thing using an in-game UI instead. The decaying RTGs patch is still there, it's just been moved into different location.

I've got some PatchManager integration I want to throw in on NFE, which branch do you prefer PR's against?

Worth noting is that if you have PatchManager installed, the next version of MKS (the PR was just merged) will have some customization options on EL - the ability to set which resources you use, whether to hide the parts, whether the MKS-specific classes can build, etc. They are set up so that PatchManager is optional - if you don't have it, all patches will default to the current situation.

I have a couple that are the full height of the screen.... Thank you.

While I believe there's a small tax to PL, what you're seeing is mostly consistent with not having enough storage. You need to have enough storage to half-empty it every six hours - so my rule of thumb is 13 hours worth. Larger single containers are a bit easier for KSP to work with, so you can trim that closer to the ideal 12 hours, but if you have less than that you *will* lose production as your production parts will effectively *shut down* for remainder of the time during catch-up. And yes the PL totals should only get moved by the ships currently in-focus. (Note that if you have a logistics unit in your current physics area, everything within ~2km is potentially 'in-focus' for this.)

Yep. They should fill them to something in the 85-95% full range, IIRC. (And of course if you have power distribution parts around you can use them to feed power to other ships - which may mean the steady-state will be lower yet.)

They will - but not all the way. That way if you have solar or some other power source it'll be preferred, and you can use reactors as backup.

Also: Deleting part of the download and then having things not work has an obvious next try: Put back in what was deleted. Most mods don't include things randomly - there's a reason why the files/folders are there. (Though some can be optional or removable depending on your configuration.)