Jump to content

Sol Invictus

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    144

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Sol Invictus

  1. Sol Invictus
    I don't get why you're saying it to me, as if I was suggesting it to be otherwise. Of course this pack is of high quality, of course a lot of work has gone into it, of course it's up to the mod maker how much time they want to put into it. When I told you that mod makers rarely care about what's going on in their forum threads, I stated it as a fact, not as some accusation towards mod makers. To be honest, I wouldn't even want for mod makers to read trough all the bull crap that people write in here. There's github for bug reports, and that's it. This forum is mainly a place for modders to announce their releases and for users to talk among each other. I don't see how I'm ungrateful while saying this.
  2. Sol Invictus
    Heh, I wish. Last update to Ven's github was 27 days ago. Mod makers rarely care about what's going on in their forum threads.
  3. Sol Invictus
    As @Jiraiyah was saying, a pop-up message about Procedural Parts being incompatible with KSP 1.2.1 is caused by a hard-coded version checker in ProceduralParts.dll plugin. I looked into the source, and found this paragraph inside zzVersionChecker.cs: /*-----------------------------------------------*\ | BEGIN IMPLEMENTATION-SPECIFIC EDITS HERE. | \*-----------------------------------------------*/ // TODO: Implement your own compatibility check. // // If you want to disable some behavior when incompatible, other parts of the plugin // should query this method: // // if (!CompatibilityChecker.IsCompatible()) { // ...disable some features... // } // // Even if you don't lock down functionality, you should return true if your users // can expect a future update to be available. // return Versioning.version_major == 1 && Versioning.version_minor == 2 && Versioning.Revision == 0; /*-----------------------------------------------*\ | IMPLEMENTERS SHOULD NOT EDIT BEYOND THIS POINT! | \*-----------------------------------------------*/ All it would take to fix this issue would be to change Versioning.Revision value from 0 to 1, and then recompile the whole thing. Or abandon the idea of hard-coded version checkers altogether.
  4. Sol Invictus
    There's highly complex Historic Missions Contract Pack made by Whitecat106. There's also simpler Historical Progression Contract Pack by pap1723, which is best to use in conjunction with his Historical Progression Tech Tree. Both of those historic contract packs work in KSP 1.2.x, and are compatible with Real Solar System. Just make sure you have the newest version of Contract Configurator installed. If you need real historic parts, consider those made by Raidernick. For example, here is his Soviet Spacecraft pack.3 edit: Ah, I just realised that it's not at all what you were looking for. I thought you wanted to recreate actual space program history in KSP. Please forgive me for not reading carefully enough.
  5. Sol Invictus
    SVE improves only the visual aspect of the atmosphere. If you want your atmosphere to be realistic also in terms of the correct aerodynamics and pressures, you should look at FAR (sadly not yet updated for KSP 1.2.x) and Realistic Atmospheres. Those two mods work awesomely in conjunction with each other, but you can also try them separately if you want. By the way, if SVE is too memory heavy for your PC, try plain EVE. Personally I like it more than SVE. Ah, and don't forget about installing scatterer first, since neither SVE nor EVE will work to it's full potential without it. Speaking of visual improvements, there's also Real Plume, Planet Shine, Distant Object Enhancement and Galileo Sun Flares for you to consider. Only with all of those installed your atmospheric experience will be truly magnificent.
  6. Sol Invictus
    Yeah, although it will just look like a 10 times bigger potato.
  7. Sol Invictus
    I'm literally dying of thirst for RSS right now. I would go back to 1.1.3 if not for game breaking bugs related to wheels. I tried starting a career in stock KSP, but then I immediately lost any interest after seeing Kerbin from orbit. It's so ridiculously small that it's more of a potato than a planet. I think I'm gonna hibernate myself until my hero NathanKell will save me from despair.
  8. Sol Invictus
    I don't quite understand. What's the point of releasing Constellations for KSP 1.2.x, if there is yet no sight of RSS for KSP 1.2.x on the horizon?
  9. Sol Invictus
    So, I downloaded new release 1.2.8, that is dedicated for KSP 1.2.1. And yet, during the loading, pop-up window telling me that Procedural Parts is incompatible with KSP 1.2.1 is still popping up. And, to reiterate myself, I'm not talking about KSP-AVC message, it's some version checker inside of Procedural Parts itself that is making this mistake. ProceduralParts.version file has nothing to do with it.
  10. Sol Invictus
    Hallelujah!
  11. Sol Invictus
    I personally couldn't be happier if someone done work for me and released updated version of my mod. If I had a mod, that is.
  12. Sol Invictus
    Does anyone have a slightest idea when @NathanKell is going to return? The more he's gone, the more I appreciate how much he had given us, and how pivotal his role in the community is. He's probably the only person in the known universe who can almost single-handedly turn KSP from a kiddie game* into the most amazing rocket science simulator under the Sol. *after I stepped into the light of Realism Overhaul, stock KSP seems almost insulting to my intelligence with it's absurdly small celestial bodies, half-baked aerodynamics etc.
  13. Sol Invictus
    So, it is intentional that every single part in the whole tech tree costs exactly 1000 funds? Can someone tell me what is the reason behind it? Why not just leave it as it is in the stock game?
  14. Sol Invictus
    Every single part in my tech tree suddenly started costing exactly 1000 funds. I'm not entirely sure, but I think it happened after I updated to the newest version of CTT. I use Unmanned before Manned in conjunction with it. Maybe it has to do with something else, I don't know. I should investigate it further, but I'm too damn lazy for it at the moment.
  15. Sol Invictus
    @Yemo Reaction wheels in stock KSP are about 10 times stronger than they should be realistically. Usually, in order to fix it, I just use simple config file like this: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel]] { @MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel] { @PitchTorque *= 0.1 @YawTorque *= 0.1 @RollTorque *= 0.1 } } So, my question is how much is SETI Rebalance weakening reaction wheels in the game? Does it make sense to still use my config file with conjunction with SETI Rebalance?
  16. Sol Invictus
    @nightingale SETI Contracts' newest update didn't correct anything in this regard, the only thing it does differently is that it's now automatically unchecking "Exploration" ballot box in Contract Configurator difficulty settings. I was doing that myself all this time. Problem is that despite of "exploration" ballot box being unchecked, stock exploration contracts, like "Escape the atmosphere!" and "Orbit Kerbin!", are still appearing alongside their SETI equivalents. It starts happening as soon as I finish first SETI contract (reach 18km unmanned). I believe it has nothing to do with SETI Contracts, and all with how Contract Configurator is dealing with contracts in KSP 1.2.1. Here is screenshot of my mission control: https://www.dropbox.com/s/90zdlwgud8u4h73/escape1.png?dl=0 What's interesting is that there's no trace of stock "Escape the atmosphere" contract in the "All" tab of mission control. It only appears in "Available" tab.
  17. Sol Invictus
    @Yemo I tested new SETI Contracts just now, and the bug that I described before is still there. It seems to me that all that was changed in this regard, is that "Exploration" ballot box in Contract Configurator difficulty settings is now being automatically unchecked. That's great and all, but I was doing that myself all this time. Problem is that despite of "exploration" ballot box being unchecked, stock exploration contracts, like "Escape the atmosphere!" and "Orbit Kerbin!", are still appearing alongside their SETI equivalents. It starts happening as soon as I finish first SETI contract (reach 18km unmanned). I'm attaching screenshot of my mission control: https://www.dropbox.com/s/90zdlwgud8u4h73/escape1.png?dl=0 edit: I believe that it has nothing to do with SETI Contracts after all, and all about how Contract Configurator is dealing with contracts in KSP 1.2.1. Thank you for your help nonetheless.
  18. Sol Invictus
    Why is KSP 1.2.1 telling me that Procedural Parts 1.2.7 is incompatible? I'm not talking about KSP-AVC or MiniAVC warnings, it's the KSP itself telling me that during the loading. What's more interesting is that this is the only mod that it's happening to, and I have a whole bunch of mods in my install, majority of which were made for KSP 1.2.0, just as Procedural Parts 1.2.7 was.
  19. Sol Invictus
    Well, that's what I've been doing. Disabling exploration contracts via the difficulty settings in order to get rid of stock equivalents of SETI contracts.
  20. Sol Invictus
    Here it is - https://www.dropbox.com/s/l2nnn758mbxrxfz/persistent.sfs?dl=0 This time there was a stock exploration contract right at the beginning, it was "Launch our first vessel" contract. Only difference between this and previous play through was that this time I had "Field Research" contract pack installed.
  21. Sol Invictus
    So, there's this bug that I'm struggling with. I'm using Contract Configurator 1.21 along with SETI Contracts 1.2, on KSP 1.2.1. I want to have only contracts from SETI in my game, with no stock equivalents, so I disable stock "exploration" contracts in Contract Configurator settings. And yet, after I complete first SETI contract, stock "Escape the atmosphere!" and later stock "Orbit Kerbin!" appears alongside similar SETI contracts. It shouldn't happen, since I disabled exploration contracts in the settings. These unwanted stock contracts appear only in "Available" tab, there's no trace of them in "All" tab. It seems to be bug related to Contract Configurator, but I'm not entirely sure, hence why I also mentioned it in SETI thread.
  22. Sol Invictus
    @Yemo I'm using SETI Contracts in KSP 1.2.1, and even after disabling stock "exploration" contracts in Contract Configurator settings, I'm still getting stock "Escape the atmosphere!" and later "Orbit Kerbin!" contracts along the SETI Contracts equivalents. Perhaps I should talk about it on Contract Configurator thread, but nonetheless, It would be great if SETI Contracts could somehow disable all stock exploration contracts by default. edit: by the way, stock exploration contracts appear alongside SETI Contracts only after I complete the first SETI contract, ie. reach altitude 18000m unmanned, or something like that. Before that, there are only contracts from SETI available.
  23. Sol Invictus
    If so, then the utilization slider should be disabled, and utilization percentage should be assigned per tank by some config file inside RO/RP-0. Otherwise, it's like having "thermal efficiency" slider on an engine.
  24. Sol Invictus
    Oh yeah, I just found 1.2 branch of FAR here. Has anyone tested it already? I will try it now.
  25. Sol Invictus
    I really don't want to be a douche, but isn't there a like button for that? When I'm getting a notification on new content in this thread I'm expecting info on aerodynamics and/or updates on FAR, not this kind of nonsense.
×
×
  • Create New...