LatiMacciato

I see your doing hard work on your KJR fork. I hope you don't mind I go test it with WorldStabilizer or is this known to be an issue or not working together? Regards

So far @Flupster's recompile works as intended. Great to hear mods are updating finally .

I actually ment [x] Science! but nonetheless cool to hear!!

All are possible to archive, Waypoint Manager is a very useful tool to help, also "FieldResearch" & "AnomalySurveyor" contract packs are a great hint. Just FYI it is possible to splash down at Kerbin's Highlands. .. sadly this mod is not quite maintained anymore, nor updated to latest KSP.

on Linux I'd try parsing the log file like this: cat KSP.log | grep 'err ' > errors.txt

Soil is produced from Kerbals. The recycling plant ISRU's now convertes that into Dirt instead Recyclables so I updated my repo for the snacks-recyclers on gitlab.com. I might add a patch that enables snacks-recyclers on the Regolith Sifter if both MKS & USI-LS is found and only Recycling Plant if MKS only is installed that also get the the 250-ISRU-features. USI-LS is a great mod in the USI universe and people should be encouraged to use it. However, I personally just prefer snacks because it is lots easier and saves some parts in my install. To have an easier usage of non-USI-LS installs I believe the Recycling Plant is also ok to use for recycling soil back to snacks. snacks into Resources that MKS and USI-LS uses, e.g. adding it to the chain. I hope this makes sense tho. Regards! EDIT: updated

First of all Thanks for reply, I appreciate it! True, an additional processing step would be needed in reality. I just might update the conerters of my snacks-recyclers to convert soil to dirt, since it seems the most plausible solution. They already convert only to Mulch if no MKS is installed and USI-LS is found. What you think of I just swap out Recyclables with Dirt at the same rate? (might just also solve Recyclables exceeding issue I spoke about earlier) some OT: I personally think playing a game shouldn't feel like you're at work doing things for money IMHO. Another thing is that KSP is already very time consuming so I try making things not stealing my free time. This can differ from person to person I'm aware of that! I accept your argument taking Dirt in account, regardless. Some questions that came up considering Snacks: Would in reality recycling soil to their elements produce any of MetallicOre, Substrate, Minerals, Silicates, ExoticMinerals, RareMetals or even Water? Is Snacks not aimed to be a simple LS? Would recycling Soil to Dirt be easier than to Recyclables? I noticed MKS aims to be a realistic thing, I also noticed the heads of the Kerbals are most likely not but EXTREMELY cute! However, I'm glad there is a conversation about it! EDIT: updated commit (it feels like it makes more sense now)

ok .. np This is why I asked in first place, my approach was most likely not quite the so called "fine british way" as we here in geremany say. I hope the upcoming things just don't stop the fun to play with MKS

Hi again! I assume my suggestion and the question I had (still have) have not been seen yet. Just want to drop some props about seeing the upcoming features and that I hope the changes are not too dramatic. I can understand when people are busy with .. *things* instead of reacting to what people say/write in general. Same happens to me too so I understand. I also noticed that lots of changes for MKS has been discussed but critics or mod-breaking or uncomfy things are beeing ignored. I still believe every mod or add-On should be as it own flow. Well for me MKS always loooked like it is built to coexist with USI_LS most likely and thatfor the decisions made and things are setted, right? Regards, I come in peace!

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[Needed],!MODULE[NotNeeded]] { } searches for MODULE with name = Needed but filters (excludes MODULES with name = NotNeeded) I wrote a little patch file where I use MKS's internalDampener @PART[*]:NEEDS[MKS&ConfigurableContainers]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleTankManager],!MODULE[USI_InertialDampener]]:FINAL { MODULE { name = USI_InertialDampener } } this might be helpful too Regards

I hope this time my approach was not that sheesh-like inappropiate.

Mind I ask, will the Orbital Logistics change too? The current orbital logistics parts dumping TransportCredits, will this also change?

speaking of screens, here is something I created with also MKS (fully functional orbital stations beeing just below the 70 part limit):

I agree text is sometimes hard to understand and to interpret! I'm not speaking english in my main language, however It was not my intention to sound passive-agressive. After I read my written text I agree that it sounded worser than it was in my head before I typed it. Its good to have a conversation about ideas and glad and thankful I'm not completely unheard and sorry if my words sounded like me beeing a jerk. I understand the principle of balance therefor the reason for Recyclables in MKS. That is the reason i was thinking about not wasting them. I took the argument @RoverDude wrote that he disagrees because it would stop the converters and parts doing their job. I can accept that. My Kerbals might just need to work harder then >.<

aye. Ideas can be good or bad. Obviously mine was not fitting in and that is totally ok to me. My approach in first place was asking here in the forums with the words "I hope this might just be a feature to toggle all dumping or for specific parts that has the nodes/output resources.". This was not ment as request or a must apply thing rather a statement of me in hope seeing such feature. As said, Its ok to me if you don't think it fits.

Was not trying to, just tried to make a suggestion and there is no problem at all, I accept things as they come. I just disagree in opinion thatfor the suggestion. EDIT: I take it, there not any chance any suggestion that adds minor optional things to MKS? Thanks for reply.

It was not my intention to kill anyone by making a suggestion to add an optional option. I see status quo 4 the win.

Hmm. I'm not here to cause damage regarding headaches or anythng! Adding more engineers or more recyclers would cause the chain be more efficient too, right? Thank you for your reply! EDIT: There is also the option to implent thing like this via PatchManager written by @linuxgurugamer

ok, but what about a toggle option for those who don't want to waste things? Since I wrote the patch for snacks-recyclers I convert Soil to Recyclables which integrates perfectly into the MKS production chain it sort of makes sense? I just try to make a useful suggestion, Ideas can be good or bad. I think having a toggle option can be a good thing because recycling is a good thing while wasting resources is always bad.

flexible corridors!

Well, it works out both ways. Say having is such thing as toggleable option for each part or enabled/disabled for all parts at once a bad idea as suggestion or prosposal? EDIT: btw for me the multi-converter parts only take one converter type per part in 1.5.1 like multi-bays don't exist which make many converter parts useless in latest KSP GTI caused this issue, I uninstalled it and all went back.

aye, ty! I assume the patched update should apply soon™

Hiyas, I accidently went into some thinking towards the wasting of Recyclables (meaning the "DumpExcess = true" value). I hope this might just be a feature to toggle all dumping or for specific parts that has the nodes/output resources. thatfor I wrote a little cfg to disable the wasting: // disable wasting of Recyclables on all capable modules @PART[*]:NEEDS[MKS]:HAS[@MODULE[*]:HAS[@OUTPUT_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]]] { @MODULE[*]:HAS[@OUTPUT_RESOURCE] // :HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]] { @OUTPUT_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]] { @DumpExcess = false // default -> true } } } Feedback is always welcome!

@allista I believe you already noticed #PR 30 (aka Update SnacksLS support), but without pushing I wanted to ask the community about feedback. I just noticed the way we implented the Snacks support is only fitting CC but not correct because Snacks and Soil have the same cost and weight. The numbers might just not be exact but I was guessing from the other life support systems to align with so this is "ok" for now. I hope @Angel-125 doesn't mind I work on this implention for CC which makes using more reliable (e.g. lesser parts in KSP lesser problems in KSP). Regards

having equal issues: