voicey99

Looked on the git pages for some of the NF mods, I think they are from Near Future Construction (you don't know how badly I needed some kind of size 2 structural element, of which there are none in stock or MKS). And @RoverDude, have fun at the conference!

Where are those trusses from? I don't recognise them but i do need some kind of size 2 structural element like them.

It's only utilising about 2GB of that memory as well, I'll toy around with the settings a bit and see if it changes. As you said, this isn't MKS related, so this thread isn't the place for it any more.

@dboi88 Strange. I wouldn't classify 16GB of RAM (on 64bit KSP) as a potato.

Also @dboi88 I tested the base with everything turned off, and it still slideshows at 3fps and 1/2 speed, so it isn't that. A nearby tiny probe rover gets 15fps and an also nearby (2km) medium-size manned mining outpost gets 7fps, increasing dramatically when moved out of physics range of the main base but crashing further when coming into local logistics range of the main base. Another, slightly smaller mining outpost on a faraway flat gets a beautiful 50fps. If it was the various environmental mods causing the lag, it would be experienced in a universally constant fashion-the differences between your base and mine is that mine is about half the size of yours, comprised entirely of wheeled (for manoeuvring during installation and absorbing physhop forces) Tundra modules and contains several large NFS solar arrays. I also tested it with the barebones minimum of mods needed to load the save, but it still ran at the same speed. Could you test the save with the Full ComplementTM (listed below) and see if it lags for you as much as it does for me?

I think MKS Logistics only interfaces with containers that have the ModuleWarehouse tag so if you want to move ore around then put in a kontainer or similar (but don't quote me). As for the machinery, as @DStaal said, the immovable nature is intentional. If you want to refill your modules with machinery, you will have to have a kontainer of it nearby and 'Perform Maintenance' on the part on EVA with an engineer (unless you have a workshop that does it automatically).

[oops, didnt see the page had turned over, my bad]

@Kobymaru I have a lot more USI mods than you do, as well as several CPU-intensive eyecandy mods that would likely bake a certain potato with integrated graphics (no offence). What I don't understand is why the lag only kicks in and tanks my fps (80% reduction) within the MKS local logistics range, since none of them have anything to do with MKS.

@Kobymaru The file you dropboxed was the contents of your save file consisting of thousands of lines of config code, not the file itself. No matter, it worked fine as a save after being copypasted into a notepad file called persistent.sfs. On a side note, I wonder what it is in my usual compliment of mods that makes bases so fps-destroying, since your base ran perfectly smooth with the barebones modlist, but as soon as I loaded it up with the full lot it crashed to 5fps but ran smooth everywhere else (outside of local logistics range) Still, back to logistics. The 2km logistics range by the rover modules seems pretty small, since that's just a couple of minutes' drive. Maybe buff it to 5km so it can perform an intermediate function between 150m scavenging and planetary logistics?

@Kobymaru So i've tested your base out and the contact errors I get are tiny, with almost all ~5cm. The only appreciable error is for one of the KIS kontainers sitting around, at -1m. The tether button has been renamed to dampener, and none of them seem to engaged on your base (or did they just not carry over with the wall of text you gave me that i had to copypaste into notepad?). The Ascent Vehicle, which is 90% stock, gets an error of ~7mm. And @jd284 that isn't really possible, its almost entirely made up of MKS and KIS parts.

I think the ground tether works by effectively disabling physics for all MKS parts on the vessel, locking them and all attached parts in place. My base used to do a stock physicshop of a couple of feet, but after installing the tethers it didn't get more than a fraction of an inch before being yanked back down to the ground before it went anywhere. Tethers are way more powerful than needed to anchor a small base moving at 1.17mm/s, so that and the enormous physicshop suggest another mod is overriding the tethering system. If you give me a save and a modlist I can test that. Either that or the patch is showing the fact that it is still highly experimental and released as essentially an emergency hotfix.

@Kobymaru Are you sure you've actually attached the tethers? Assuming you have PRE1/2 (page 6, sorry) installed, the option to do so is in the rightclick menu of any MKS module.

On Page 7 you can find a link to a prerelease MKS version Rover uploaded, this version (PRE2 certainly, not sure about PRE1) features ground tethers as a clickable that lock the craft in place firmly enough to eliminate physics hops entirely. It is beta though, but might be coming through into a main patch soon if you are prepared to wait for any potential bugs to get squished.

That's this mod. The mod comes with only ~10 vanilla modules listed, so to add mod parts to the list of acceptable spawnpoints, add the line "part = [name of part]" to RescuePods.cfg in the mod folder. For example. to allow Kerbals to spawn in the Karibou cab, just add "part = KER_RoverCab" to the list (the cfg names for each part should be in their part config files). On a side note, the part description for the cupola actually says "don't ask how they get in here" (Ninja'd!)

Neither. I imagine it's just a missing particle texture.

As I am also having this bug (just with the ME-100. the other two are fine), I'm going to provide my own screenshot and save as well.

I generally find larger kontainers more useful for interplanetary shipping, and the tiny supply-paks as base storage. As long as there is a kontainer/other storage module on the base that can hold 12hrs worth of production, there is no need for anything bigger. Just remember shipping with the big kontainers can get expensive (cost me 400K to ship 16K machinery to Minmus).

Don't turn this thread into a slanging match by arguing over who is correct about the state of the MKS wiki. RoverDude makes the call on whether the wiki is vague or not-if you think it is then please actually make constructive suggestions on how to improve it instead of spamming the thread by perpetually squabbling with each other over something so petty. This belongs in the doc thread anyway.

Parts with the warehouse module can simply distribute resources within 150m among other warehouses, and distributors pull resources from full warehouses (<150m) and put them into storage, and can also pull from storage and push to empty warehouses (<150m) when manned (by a Pilot or Quartermaster). I think the planetary storage concept is designed to emulate kerbals or resident droids just chucking surplus stuff in a big heap outside their base and kerbals from other bases coming over in a rover from elsewhere on the planet to pick it up to stuff into their own local storage. This concept wouldn't make sense for stations unless it's Gilly (where they are basically landed anyway), so orbital stations must be manually resupplied-this is intentional. Maybe in the future some kind of orbital shuttle logistics network could be created (would be really cool and useful) but as of now there are no plans for that (and don't bug RD for it).

You still need a Pioneer module (Tundra or Duna) in order to be able to push resources into planetary logistics and transfer them over distances of >150m (which can only be accessed by landed vessels, so no surface-to-orbit teleportation), assuming both ends have a logistics-enabled storage capability for them.

The EVA bug looks to have been a one-off, since I haven't encountered it since the first time immediately after the original tethering. As I've said before, the boogie bug might be an MKS issue considering the uncannily similar Ranger bug, but it might also be a vanilla problem since I have encountered it in a similar form in vanilla once before. Regardless of whether it is an MKS bug or not, the tethers' brute-force approach restrains this particular kraken very effectively. @tsaven I hadn't even considered it before, but the lag does indeed hit like a brick wall at exactly 150m-the same range at which it loads MKS logistics, tanking my fps to single figures. The fact that my pc continues to chug like a steam train in timewarp discounts the possibility of physics calc overload, the only mem-intensive feature I can think of that keeps operating in t'warp is MKS logistics. P.S. @dboi88 Cool base bro-pity something that big would turn my computer into slag with its sheer awesomeness

Got round to testing out the hotfix, and the new tether has successfully stopped the module thrashing round in the air. As for performance, I haven't noticed any major impacts, but don't take my work for it since Boogie Base normally chugs along at a 5fps slideshow anyway (odd considering it's not huge and my pc is certainly no potato). While trying to reproduce the bug in an MKS-organic save, I did come across another bug with inflatable modules (Tundra certainly, Ranger idk)-placing any radially attachable part onto the side of a pre-inflated module and launching will result in all the radial parts freezing in place and detaching from the vessel. Switching to one of these new pieces of debris will show its speed as the rotational velocity of the body it is on and, on timewarping, all the hanging parts will fly away and explode. EDIT: the tethers are not bug-free! They can bug out EVAs so you can't EVA from the portrait and, when EVAing from the hatch selector, it can propel your kerbal through the ground at considerable speeds.

But the question is: does it boogie? (Ranger hab jittering is also known) I would do the same to purify the save provided for Boogie Base but the combination of its large size and the fact that trying to do anything near it is like watching a slideshow means it boogies itself to pieces before i can do that-I'll have to make a new one for demo purposes Also, like @Gilph, sometime in one of the last three updates, my Industrial Refineries went from producing Chem/Chem/Chem and Chem/Chem/REX to both having the Chem/Metals/Metals loadout (requiring me to reconfigure several bays).

That could take a very long time to make, and no guarantees it will reproduce-will give it a go over the next couple of days though.

Tested that, Boogie Base is still boogieing away.