Sol Invictus

Will there still be an official release of RP-0 for KSP 1.2.2, or will it just go straight for 1.3.0, leaving RO 11.5.0 without it's stable RP-0 counterpart?

@Bornholio I could just upload it here, but it would become obsolete in the day or two as RP-0 master gets updated. Considering how simple it is to generate it by yourself, it makes much more sense for me to just tell you how to do it. By the way, I highly doubt whether someone who didn't even once use command line in their life could be of any use for developers when it comes to testing. For such person I would just advice to wait for a stable release, or return to KSP 1.1.3.

Don't use tree.cfg from a previous release. It's really simple to generate an updated tree.cfg from master - just install Strawberry Perl and then run command "perl bin/yml2mm" from within RP-0-master folder using Windows command line.

I don't think it's any particular mods fault, it's more likely for me that you messed something up during installation, as all of the mods on the spreadsheet work fine if installed/compiled correctly. I would suggest to do a fresh install, carefully with only the required set of mods, as Phineas Freak said. By the way, those are called filter categories no matter if you're using Filter Extensions mod or not. Uninstalling Filter Extensions may currently break your game, as you may be unable to access antennas using stock filter categories alone.

By "stuck" you mean that you can't change the filter category? Do you have Filter Extensions 2.8.1.2 installed?

@JeeF No need rolling back. RO for KSP 1.2.2 is in it's pre-release stage, and it's working perfectly for me. Just download the latest master from github repository, then go after dependencies. Just don't use scatterer v0.0300 with it, as it will obliterate the framerate. Scatterer 0.0256 + RSSVE is fine however.

https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/releases there's also this spreadsheet with links to all dependencies of both RO and RP-0: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19_dhwSioZODCCtMFD0kZOtbmbg--ryoE0nzoWJL2cRc/

@demonloadz I am flying in Realism Overhaul on KSP 1.2.2 right now. You can have it as well if you know where to look for updated dependencies. Start with this spreadsheet by @rsparkyc,

It would be awesome if someone could add this mod to RP-0 configs:

It is if you know how to find it. There's a pre-release available; I have a perfectly working complete install of RO and RP-0 right now on my KSP 1.2.2.

I already provided several ways of performing EVA without stock jetpacks. Let me list them for you: building real Manned Maneuvering Unit out of parts: external command set, structural elements, two nitrogen tanks with 5,9 kg of nitrogen each and 24 miniature nozzle thrusters; building robotic arm similar to Canadarm on ISS out of Infernal Robotics parts, then using it to move Kerbals around; creating pathways on the external surfaces of your ship/station out of handrail parts, just as it is done in real life on ISS; You see, that's the thing. Real EVA is NOT safe. Cosmonauts are risking their lives every time they're performing a spacewalk. Only through hard engineering work can this risk be somewhat managed. And that's what missing in KSP, as it's unrealistically safe to enter endless void of space and then return to the spaceship. I believe that extravehicular activity would be much more exciting and rewarding for the player if build-in jetpacks were to be disabled.

Apart from MMU made of parts, it's possible to construct robotic arm with Infernal Robotics, somewhat like the Canadarm on ISS, and maneuver Kerbals with it. Oh, and there's also this mod - https://spacedock.info/mod/49/EVA Handrails Continued

I wonder if Kerbals in Realism Overhaul should have EVA thrusters enabled at all. Couple of reasons against them off the top of my head: In the entire history of space walks, Manned Maneuvering Units were used only three times, and were retired in late 80's after being deemed too risky. Real life Manned Maneuvering Unit is not so much a light jet pack as depicted in KSP, but more of a personal spaceship that you sit into. As such, it's impossible to walk on planetary (or lunar) surface while wearing it. If one wanted to simulate actual Manned Maneuvering Unit in KSP, it would be far more realistic to do so with parts (external command seat, couple of structural elements, two tiny nitrogen tanks and miniature thrusters). it would make space walks much more exciting, as there would be real danger of being lost in the expanse of space. As of now there's not only no real risk to space walks, but maneuvering Kerbals is far too easy and doesn't require any ingenuity out of player.

From what I just read it's not an overkill after all. Supposedly NASA's Manned Maneuvering Unit had two tanks with 5,9 kg of nitrogen each, which makes it 11,8 kg of nitrogen in total.

My guess is that I should also change "maximum amount of fuel that will be transfered between ship and EVA" in EvaFuel from 5 to 5000. I just realized that while you changed amount of EVA propellant to 5000, at the same time you multiplied fuel consumption by 10, so effectively there should still be 100x more fuel in EVA pack than originally. Is this based on real life Extravehicular Mobility Units specifications?

@Phineas Freak Have you perhaps tested it with EvaFuel?

Does anyone know if Realism Overhaul has any configs for RCS thrusters in Extravehicular Mobility Units? They are far too powerful in stock game, as they are able to lift Kerbals from the ground on Duna. I suppose that it would be fairly easy to nerf those down to some reasonable values using Module Manager.

Besides, there is already thread for 1.1.2 Realism Overhaul on the forum. What went missing is thread for 1.1.3, as rsparkyc said. Now it's even more confusing than before, as there are two semi-identical threads for 1.1.2 RO.

I just installed Strawberry Perl and ran the command from Windows command line.

What I meant by my previous comment was that I didn't compile anything from source that's in cloned 1.2_CCupdate RP-0 branch of yours. I just ran command "perl bin/yml2mm" to create Tree.cfg and copied content of GameData folder. There is already RP0.dll plugin inside it, isn't it? Or is it an old plugin from 1.1.3. release, and I need to compile it from source after all to get the updated stuff? I might been mistaken when saying that everything works fine, I haven't tested much beyond looking through contracts and tech tree.

Doesn't RP-0 just need it's Tree.cfg to be built using command "perl bin/yml2mm"? I did just that with a clone of 1.2_CCupdate branch of @rsparkyc's RP-0 and it seems to be working just fine on my install of KSP 1.2.2. I have tech tree, contracts and everything. It even correctly recognizes which parts are supported by RP-0 and which are not, hiding the latter if "NoNonRP0" folder is found in GameData.

I'm confused. Doesn't jwvanderbeck work on Test Flight 1.8.0.0 for KSP 1.2.2? He even released a Beta on official Test Flight github page. So now there are two parallel Test Flight mods, both with the same number designation, but developed by different people?

Is there some reason why MechJeb would be preferred over Kerbal Engineer* in upcoming Realism Overhaul? *there's a KER for KSP 1.2.2 available.

I had the same issue after installing RSS v12.0. What I did in order to solve this problem was deleting Kopernicus and RealSolarSystem folders from my GameData, and installing manually latest master from Kerbas-ad-astra's RSS repository and latest release from official Kopernicus repository. After I done it, RSS worked properly again.

I always assumed that PlanetShine is compatible with RSS. However, I just looked into "CelestialBodies.cfg" file and found out that there's not a single entry for any celestial body from Real Solar System. There are only entries for stock bodies such as Kerbin, Mun and Duna. So, if I may ask, how exactly PlanetShine accomplishes compatibility with RSS, if it is compatible at all? Scratch that, I just found the answer for my question. There are configs for PlanetShine in RSS file "PlanetShineColors.cfg".