Stratickus
-
Posts
255 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Stratickus
-
-
On 12/9/2023 at 8:37 PM, EnderiumSmith said:
i didnt work on ksp stuff in a while. by LF mode you mean Ox afterburner? That doesnt look so bad.
I meant just the straight LF mode. I was also specifically referring to the Restock+ NTR, which I now realize isn't necessarily what this patch was for. You would also have to have the Kerbal Atomics extras folder installed giving the Restock+ NTR the multi engine mode to use just LF or LH. As far as I know, you need two separate Water Fall configs, one for each fuel type. Essentially the same thing for the Squad NTR. I'm not sure which WF mod I have that gives me two distinct WF cofigs for the respective LF and LH modes for the LV-N.
Cheers,
-
Anyone else having issues with Engine Cooling? I have 0.6.0 installed and the engine cooling % in the VAB Part info is blank as well has not displaying in the PAW in flight. As far as I can tell the engine(s) aren't producing any cooling effect when at throttle either. Which as I understand was introduced somewhere around 0.4.0.
I did a brief test and installed System Heat 0.6.0 & 0.4.0 on a fresh install with no other mods and the Engine Cooling info was displayed in both the VAB and PAW with 0.4.0 installed (but not 0.6.0). I didn't do much beyond that because now I'm worried its some other mod conflict or something on my end. Just wanted to double check before I started down a rabbit hole.
Cheers,
-
On 10/8/2023 at 10:16 AM, EnderiumSmith said:
I do plan to bundle a fix for those too but i want include FFT in that fix and i would like to find a better plume for gas core rockets.
Any progress? I am eager to see the results. Now that I've started using your configs, I don't like using the LF mode on the Restock+ NTR anymore..
-
On 9/12/2023 at 8:23 PM, Stratickus said:
I'm having an issue with the Launch a new Space Station mission. According to the requirements I need either a deployable solar panel or a curved solar panel. I have multiple deployable solar panel's researched and purchased, but the contract requirements are still saying unmet. I have used this contract pack through many saves and I do not recall coming across the this issue. I have looked at and even attempted messing around with the config file myself, but no avail.
I fixed it. I kind of glossed over it when I first looked into this, but it had to do with Kopernicus. In the config file for this Contract Pack the line for the Kopernicus solar panels is blocked with the double slashes (//). Unblocking the line(s) in the config file fixes it. I vaguely remember Kopernicus renamed their Module Part name for the solar panels and I'm guessing it was blocked out in this config file while it was getting sorted out.
Cheers,
-
On 9/15/2023 at 3:03 PM, linuxgurugamer said:
so you have Near Future Solar installed?
I do. I did not think this was a conflict/issue. The way I read the config file anyway is that I only need one or the other with NFS installed.
SpoilerREQUIREMENT { name = Any type = Any REQUIREMENT { name = PartModuleUnlocked type = PartModuleUnlocked partModule = ModuleDeployableSolarPanel } REQUIREMENT:NEEDS[NearFutureSolar] { name = PartModuleUnlocked type = PartModuleUnlocked partModule = ModuleCurvedSolarPanel } }On 9/15/2023 at 3:03 PM, linuxgurugamer said:This is something you should ask in the Contract Configurator channel. It's in the file:
StationCoreCombined.cfgI need to bring up the NFS conflict in the CC thread?
On 9/15/2023 at 3:03 PM, linuxgurugamer said:It's odd, it's been working before, but you certainly have enough mods that there can be a mod conflict. Please provide the ModuleManager.configcache file for analysis
Odd indeed. I have several personal Module Manager patches, but I havn't changed any of them that would effect solar panels or this contract pack. I don't think.. I was hoping someone more savvy at reading log files could point me in the right direction. I suspect the issue lies in one of my personal MM patches or possibly another mod.
Appreciate the help.
Cheers,
-
I'm having an issue with the Launch a new Space Station mission. According to the requirements I need either a deployable solar panel or a curved solar panel. I have multiple deployable solar panel's researched and purchased, but the contract requirements are still saying unmet. I have used this contract pack through many saves and I do not recall coming across the this issue. I have looked at and even attempted messing around with the config file myself, but no avail.
Unfortunately, I am not very adept at reading logs. Any help would be appreciated.
Cheers,
-
23 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:
Yeah, your CKAN is not able to access the file where it stores its settings. Maybe a permissions problem? You could try deleting that file and trying again, to see if it's able to re-create it.
This worked. Thank goodness. I have a handful manually installed mods that I can manage okay, but I'm not even sure I could play without CKAN. Thanks @HebaruSan
-
I'm afraid I did something to my computer and now I cannot run CKAN and I'm not sure how to fix it.
I think its an error on my end and not something from CKAN. I'm guessing it has something to do with the unauthorized access bit. Any help would be appreciated.
Cheers,
-
On 1/3/2016 at 10:08 AM, linuxgurugamer said:
This contract pack offers two new missions:
1. Rover Deployment: encourages you to send rovers to planets/moons where
you don't have them.I saw in the config file:
SpoilerDATA
{
type = boolmoonsReached = @mun.HaveReached() || @minmus.HaveReached()
dunaReached = @duna.HaveReached()
}DATA
{
type = List<CelestialBody>
hidden = true
requiredValue = false// Make sure first rover is deployed to Kerbin
easyPlanets = bool($RC_roverDeployed) ? HomeWorld().Children() : [ @kerbin ]// First line: get planets depending on orbited or not
// Second line: get planets depending on if any rovers or not
mediumPlanets1 = OrbitedBodies().Where(b => b.HasSurface()).ExcludeAll(@easyPlanets).Exclude(HomeWorld())
mediumPlanets2 = @dunaReached ? @mediumPlanets1 : @easyPlanets------
I'm interpreting this as after I have reached Mun & Minmus, I can start to get Rover Deployment contracts on other planets, but only if I have also gotten to Duna. Is that correct? I went to Eve first and keep canceling offered contracts to Mun and Minmus over and over and cannot get one offered for Eve. I'm guessing its because I have not gone to Duna yet. Is there a simple config file change that can make it Eve or Duna? I've tried messing around with it myself, but I have little experience editing Contract config files.
Cheers,
-
On 5/30/2023 at 6:51 AM, Stone Blue said:
@Stratickus If not the original OP's, & not Jade's, mebbe it was mine? vOv
https://github.com/StoneBlue/KSPLanguageforNotePad--It was this one! @Stone Blue & @JadeOfMaar thanks for the help.
Cheers,
-
On 5/26/2023 at 9:48 PM, JadeOfMaar said:
I have one. I've updated it to some extent and made a dark mode version.
Thanks. I think I came across yours in my search for the one I have used for almost a decade. I think it is the most similar. Unfortunately, I got a new computer and can't for the life of me find the Notepad++ language that I've been using in KSP for many years. It's almost hard to look at config files now. Anyway, I think the OP's language was the one I used for all these years, but I haven't been able to verify it since the link is broken for me. Thanks again for the help.
Cheers,
-
Does anyone have a copy of this Notepad++ language config file? The OP's link does not work for me.
Cheers,
-
On 5/9/2015 at 1:26 PM, zengei said:
I've seen this happen once, somehow the game settings get persisted while in plane mode. I've never been able to replicate it, or devise a scenario in which it could occur.
To fix, just reset your input settings.
On 9/7/2022 at 2:53 PM, worir4 said:Sorry to bring back an old thread but does anyone have an issue with it working backwards? As in when in rocket mode, the roll/yaw is configured like a plane and then swapped the other way around. It just means I need to swap it everytime when starting a flight.
See top from the mod creator. This happens from time to time. You need to go into the master settings outside of the game play menu to fix it. Just reset the controls to 'normal' and Plane Mode should work fine.
On 3/16/2023 at 4:52 AM, angulion said:I also have plane/rocket mode swapped and need to switch to plane mode before every launch for it to behave as a rocket.
You can edit this in the VAB/SPH. If you create a craft in the SPH and bring it into the VAB and further edit it there (or vice versa) the mod typically assigns it either plane or rocket based on where the craft was originally built. Or you may have the same problem as the previous poster. In which case you should just be able to go into the settings and reset it..
Cheers,
-
21 hours ago, Starwaster said:
It's not that KSP or MM care, it's that ModuleScienceLab specifically cares. It doesn't try to locate a suitable container module. Instead it relies on being told what location (what index) the container is in.
In this case, index 0, which is the first module. If it's pointed at a location and the module at that location is not a ModuleScienceContainer, then it fails. I think it also prints a warning or error in the log but I forget. I actually didn't look at the log yet. But I know from past experience that it will fail if given an incorrect index.
Curious; it still doesn't make sense to me , but then again I'm not a programmer. But, in other good news, I changed containerModuleIndex = 1 and magically it works!
Thanks for the help! I never would have figured this out on my own.
Cheers,
-
14 hours ago, Starwaster said:
Sorry, took me longer than anticipated to get to this. Didnt look at the log yet. But in the cache, I see in ModuleScienceLab containerModuleIndex = 0
That is wrong, because the container is clearly the second module (0 = first)
Interesting. Can you expand on this? I didn't think KSP/MM cared about which order the [MODULE]'s were in. FWIW, the stock MPL-LG-2 has ModuleScienceLab as the second module in the PART config with containerModuleIndex = 0.
Cheers,
-
-
On 2/23/2019 at 11:47 AM, DrJinx said:
So, I have a very heavily modded install of KSP
On 9/19/2019 at 2:57 PM, Starwaster said:sorry for the necro
I too have a heavily modded install. I added a Science Lab via ModuleManager (MM) to a part (from another mod) with the expectation that the part would behave similarly to the MPL-LG-2.
Unfortunately, I am unable tp transmit science; and I am unable to determine why.
I suspect it is because I added the Science Lab via MM; but I am unsure because the patch appears to be exactly the same as stock.
Has anyone else had similar issues?
Cheers,
-
On 11/20/2022 at 4:37 AM, SwiftSlayer said:
What I see in game: https://i.imgur.com/Ue3FkgO.jpg
I'm seeing the same on my install as well.
Cheers,
-
On 9/3/2020 at 3:18 PM, toric5 said:
Just realize the restock+ NTR, the cherenkov, does not have an NFE patch. Should that be reported on NFE's end, or here?
On 9/5/2020 at 3:09 PM, Nertea said:NFE, but that set of patches will be no longer maintained in the future.
I understand that Nertea's mods are essentially feature complete. Does anyone have a community MM patch that adds the NTR to the Restock+ 2.5m nuclear engine? I realize this may be a better question in the NF Electrical thread, but I figured more people that play with the NTR extras patches for the LV-N and Kerbal Atomics would notice that the Restock+ nuke doesn't have it. That's how I noticed it anyway. I may mess around with it, but I figured some other intrepid Kerbalnaut may have already done so.
Cheers,
-
I know this thread is quite old, but it is relevant to what I am attempting to do. I'd like to improve the performance of a parachute from a mod. I have tried MM patches on the parachutes from the mod as well as stock parachutes, but what I've attempted does not work. Is MM unable to modify certain parameters of parachute config files? Is there more to the underlying config file for parachutes that I am not seeing/understanding? Am I just missing something completely obvious?
This is what I've tried so far:
@PART[parachuteSingle] { @MODULE[ModuleParachute] { @fullyDeployedDrag = 250 // 175 (original value) } }As well as:
@PART[parachuteSingle] { @MODULE[ModuleDragModifier]:HAS[#dragCubeName[DEPLOYED]] { @dragModifier = 25 // 1 (original value) } }I have also tried both in combination and neither seem to work. I believe I've reached my ability to troubleshoot this on my own.
Cheers,
-
21 hours ago, darthgently said:
I'm only throwing out this voodoo as your issue has lasted a bit with no resolution, but I've had luck deleting ModuleManager.ConfigCache (or similarly named, not able to look right now). This will force ModuleManager to rebuild its cache. I have zero idea if this will affect your issue and is complete voodoo. I just know that it helped me twice with mysterious mod part issues. Maybe it was coincidence, but it made me feel empowered to do something and have the problem go away. Maybe it will work for you also. Make sure you close your eyes and say three times "There is no game like KSP" before you hit enter
I can try it. I haven't looked into it myself, but since I've loaded the game more than a few dozen times.. I've noticed that MM only seems to load from cache when there are no changes to any MM patches. Since I'm seemingly always making changes, MM 'appears' to rebuild the cache quite often.
Cheers,
-
On 3/22/2022 at 3:06 PM, UnanimousCoward said:
There's a post there that says the values that need to be modified are only the ModuleDragModifier values, and another that says you need to delete PartDatabase.cfg in KSP's root folder if you modify chute values to force KSP to recreate it.
I don't know if it applies in this case, and I don't know if it's still valid, as it's from 2015, but it's worth a try, I guess.
I tried modifying only the ModuleDragModifier as well as deleting the PartDatabase.cfg. but alas, no luck. The end of that post seemed to indicate, that Sarbian added whatever was needed to MM to remove the necessity to delete the PartDatabase.cfg file.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Cheers,
-
On 3/4/2022 at 4:02 PM, Stratickus said:
I'm not entirely sure if this is an issue per se, but the Modular Docking Port Jr + Tiny Modular Parachutes seem to be underperforming from what I would expect.
@Coldrifting is busy with school as I understand it, so perhaps a temporary community fix?
I've tried messing around with the Tiny Modular Parachutes using Module Manager, but have been unsuccessful.
I've tried:
Spoiler@PART[ExtraDockingPorts-TinyModularParachute]:AFTER[ExtraDockingPorts] { @MODULE[ModuleParachute] { @fullyDeployedDrag = 250 // 175 (original value) } }As well as:
Spoiler@PART[ExtraDockingPorts-TinyModularParachute]:AFTER[ExtraDockingPorts] { @MODULE[ModuleDragModifier]:HAS[#dragCubeName[DEPLOYED]] { @dragModifier = 25 // 1 (original value) } }I've also tried both of the above in combination and neither seem to do anything that I can tell. In the past I have successfully improved the performance of parachutes using the first MM patch by itself. I do not use FAR or any other mod that changes the characteristics of the atmosphere/parachutes etc.
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
-
On 1/9/2022 at 7:36 PM, Coldrifting said:
Please let me know if you run into any issues while using this mod. I try to test things thoroughly, but it can be easy to miss things, so feedback is greatly appreciated.
I'm not entirely sure if this is an issue per se, but the Modular Docking Port Jr + Tiny Modular Parachutes seem to be underperforming from what I would expect.
Big picture I would expect the full Modular DP Jr system to be able to support/ensure reasonable survivability of the Mk1 Command Pod + Heat shield as well as the Mk2 Command Pod + Heat shield at Kerbin at sea level.
After doing some rudimentary testing, this is not entirely the case. With both the Mk1 and Mk2 CP, the heat shield does not survive. The Mk1 is impacting at approximately 7.1 m/s (+/- 0.1 m/s) with the Mk2 impacting 10 m/s (+/- 0.1 m/s). For reference, the Mk1 CP + heatshield using a single Mk16 impacts at roughly 5.6 m/s.
Just looking at the Tiny Modular Parachutes visually, as well as the stats for the Parachute itself (Fully deployed effective diameter), I was expecting the Tiny Modular Parachutes (x3) to perform somewhere between a single Mk16 and two Mk2-Rs, if not equal to two Mk2-Rs.
Or put another way, the Mk16 can support weights up to approximately 2,000-2,500 kg depending on impact speed, part impact tolerance, land vs water, etc. while 2x Mk-2R can support 3,000-3,250 kg. I would expect 3x Tiny Modular Parachutes to be able to support 2,500-3000 kg perhaps?
For what it's worth, the Modular DP with 3x small modular parachutes seems to perform as I would expect, which is at or near a single Mk16-XL.
Lastly, and I have no idea if this is related, the Stage Recovery mod reports incorrect values in the VAB for the expected impact speed for both the tiny and small modular parachutes.
If my expectations are misplaced and/or don't meet the intent of the mod, then please disregard.
Cheers,
ReStock Nuclear Engines Waterfall Configs
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
Makes sense. With the KA extras folder, the default engine mode is LH; which uses your config. When I switch to LF mode it reverts back to the stock (non WF) engine plume that comes with Restock+.