Jump to content

JadeOfMaar

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,736

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JadeOfMaar

  1. JadeOfMaar
    The MM patches for re-tuning the engines for scaled systems have errors in them.
  2. JadeOfMaar
    On the other hand, the point of the exclusives may be to kiss up to the console players because they have been treated particularly horribly, firstly by making KSP available on console in the first place, and secondly because mods aren't available (or possible at all) on console. Kerbal Konstructs and its many content packs existed before Making History's launchsites....And they have gotten far better since. The Mun launch site can be implemented far better as a Kerbal Konstructs package (with a different array of buildings and pads, and easily be something other than a KSC instance) once a modder finds the motivation to do so. Do pardon my answer. I fear I may be derailing this thread.
  3. JadeOfMaar
    Probably no. They wouldn't be "exclusive" otherwise.
  4. JadeOfMaar
    Hai. :0
  5. JadeOfMaar
    @Cruzo Converter controls will not appear in the PAW, they will appear in the Ops UI (PAW --> click Manage Operations --> Converters tab). Once you know how to use MM and you know the location and the contents of the file containing what needs to be patched, it's straightforward. Edit: Oh right. You've already seen them but they don't work. Perhaps you're missing some of the new USI modules released with the recent game-breaking mega-update to USI? I can't imagine why those modules don't want to work in flight.
  6. JadeOfMaar
    I like where this is going. Well, that's where template tags come in, and having a device carry several omniconverter slots like a Hacienda in OmniWorks mode. Angel makes his mods to be incredibly customizable. Take full advantage of it. If/when you can, use MM to clone a given part and re-tune it so it runs only your brand of converters.
  7. JadeOfMaar
    Umm... Phrasing. But I think I get it. You'll want to add an extra WBIOmniConverter module to the given part and set it to recognize new nodes (choose whatever you want, like SQUID_CONVERTER lol, and not OMNICONVERTER) (that is, set templateNodes = SQUID_CONVERTER ) and then populate a SQUID_CONVERTER like it was just another OMNICONVERTER.
  8. JadeOfMaar
    Of course. For example, you can make new non-Omni resource templates by making a new STORAGE_TEMPLATE definition, or a new OMNICONVERTER template, and you can customize an omniconverter module to recognize only templates with certain templateTags just like how WBI science parts will only ever show a certain few omniconverters to select from, hab parts will only show another set of them, but certain parts like the Hacienda IMF will let you select from all of them.
  9. JadeOfMaar
    The latter is how things are. Look under GameData/WildBlueIndustries/<ModName>/Templates/<PlayMode>/ for the files that contain the template definitions, then look at the part configs to find the WBI storage modules (particularly WBIConvertibleStorage) and the key templateNodes that forces the module to recognize only the desired template nodes.
  10. JadeOfMaar
    Note that except for the [airplane engines; the most powerful of the rockets; the tiny rockets] all the stock engines use the same barebones plume. The airplane engines and the big rockets (Vector, Rhino, Mammoth) use ModuleEnginesFX and link to the special plumes through EFFECTS{} --> effectNode (running* ...can be any name) {} --> MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE{}. Engines that use ModuleEnginesFX don't need the array of fx_whatever = status or sound_whatever = status keys found at the top of the config. ModuleEnginesFX requires the companion keys such as runningEffectName = effectNode; powerEffectName = effectNode, (usually just runningEffectName) in order to connect to them.
  11. JadeOfMaar
    @Redacted It looks alright without the drop tanks. Of course, it can't be called SSTO if it decouples anything at all from itself like the wheels too. A black variant is actually a great idea, especially since Restock happened.
  12. JadeOfMaar
    So close. The new decals are nearly all done so here's another preview: Ponderosa Habitat, *Ore-burning Fuel Cell, *CommNet (dish in a box), Watney Rainmaker MOLE Lab *Item may only be available in the Buckboards and Coach Logistics Modules-- may require MOLE be installed. Note that Claim Jumper is using an old decal. The Omni series templates currently get no new symbol but that can still change. The POTATO [small] greenhouse and CropWorks [large] greenhouse get distinct decals to help distinguish them. (CropWorks not shown.) Along with the new decals, new and/or detailed descriptions will be provided for most if not all of the Classic Stock resource storage templates to make clearer the natures and purposes of these resources.
  13. JadeOfMaar
    @mostlydave @Sabor These points are likely the root of your problem: Your main (rear) gear causing the back of your shuttle to be elevated vs the front. This leads to negative lift or downforce and will unavoidably pin you to the runway as you gain speed. The immense lift ratings of this mod's wings cause the pinning to be far more intense. Your main gear are too far back from the CoM. They should be as close as possible because the aircraft pivots on them when nosing up. Too many airplane designers are not aware of this and suffer this like cattle walking into a slaughter machine. Sometimes your shuttle just needs canards near the nose or tail fins far behind the CoM to create the proper required deflection force to help nose up. This is if by whatever reason, this mod's elevons fail to produce enough deflection force on their own. Check thrust torque in KER, RCS Build Aid or whatever similar mod you use. If you use very powerful engines to push your shuttle, you might be thrusting over your CoM much more than under or through it. Your thrust and thrust torque together may be overpowering the elevons. If somehow none of these apply to you, screenshots in the SPH with markers (CoM etc) and KER visible would be welcome. Then I can possibly tell you that you're just building your shuttles very wrong. (That said I only briefly used this mod so I can't give you a 100% answer.)
  14. JadeOfMaar
    The KSP wiki should not be fully trusted then. Very few maintain it these days, its content is quite dated, and you can get a hang of power consumption by just anticipating the min and max EC requirements by one drill, with or without a level 5 engineer. Also, most usage of the RTG by players is abuse and beyond the scope of its original purpose-- to power a tiny craft that does no more than observe planets, produce science, and beam back that science. It should not be the primary power source for any sort of industrial build or otherwise manned craft. That said I have a good idea it can be trouble to have a net gain on EC in a mining craft powered by fuel cells.
  15. JadeOfMaar
    Engines? Yes please. Engine mounts? That'd be nice but that'd require Squad to enable parts at large to move when attached to animated parts (example, experiments or solar panels on the insides of cargo doors or, bluntly, stockified Infernal Robotics). Modders can easily make their own using the same stock mechanics within the Juno and Goliath engines capable of reverse thrust. But no modder has provided a pack exclusively for VTOL engines. They're always but a very small item in the feature list of a bigger part pack.
  16. JadeOfMaar
    There is a known bug in the thermal system where items that involve Core Heat will require 10x the usual cooling power. To get around it, try experimenting in a new save, or deleting the Squad folder in your Steam install (assuming you use Steam) and using file verification to download it back. The stock thermal system is indeed a very sad piece of work. It's primary purpose is just to make ISRU threaten to overheat and give radiators some purpose.
  17. JadeOfMaar
    @New Horizons You're better off offsetting without angle snap and clipping and hiding a science experiment or tiny structural part for a counterweight.
  18. JadeOfMaar
    Attach the antenna with angle snap off. Then turn on angle snap and offset it and rotate it as needed. Hold Shift to move and rotate in fine steps. You cannot attach onto a node...without a node. It will not, actually. Holding Alt disables surface-attachment and forces node attachment, but, as the antenna doesn't have a stack node, it has nowhere to go.
  19. JadeOfMaar
    @Redacted Ah. Yeah. Caps Lock helps to some degree (that's the toggle for fine control. Works best with RCS and docking) but you're quite right in the "binary" nature of a key press is quite a shortcoming that all keyboard players have to deal with. on second look I think you could have saved the plane if you could pull up more reliably while in the upper atmosphere. But clearly, either the center of drag went far forward or the center of mass went far back, or maybe you needed a bit of forward control surface. The source of your staging problems is in the stock delta Vee. Squad introduced an uninformed assumption about how players (should or should not) build their craft. It assumes stages always end with an engine so it does not measure dV for the not-too-rare cases where a player will attach something after an engine and offset it out of the thrust transform's way. It will not measure dV for an engine attached through or after my ramjet array. So you may want to resume hugging KER's dV panel and even turn off Stock dV.
  20. JadeOfMaar
    Joomla? Is not a place. I can't see how you can "fly to it."
  21. JadeOfMaar
    I don't know the answer to that for sure. There should be settings in Difficulty Options to scale up your contract rewards (just like there is one for science rewards). There's also at least one mod around for scaling contract rewards but I don't know its name. Contract Configurator might have this in it.
  22. JadeOfMaar
    You don't need to get the old versions of anything. And SMURFF will cover you just fine. It's THE option for keeping stock parts playable at real scale if you're not a Realism Overhaul and "actual IRL space program" kind of person.
  23. JadeOfMaar
    @Starlord Kerman DDS means "DirectDraw Surface" and is a raw format from the perspective of the GPU. DDS files contain "mipmaps" which are alternate sizes of the same texture, sampled from the actual texture and rendered when an object is different distances away (increasingly further = increasingly smaller) probably to optimize texture use for things that are far away and still in loading range. DDS files can be bigger than any other format due to the mipmaps but it's easier for the GPU to handle so it's preferred regardless of file size vs TGA or PNG (which a few of us have just said) which are converted to DDS on load, anyway. And in KSP's case, maybe the case for all Unity games, the non-DDS imagery are not unloaded after being converted. PNGs are easier to edit up to a point. When you have a transparency gradient (any bits fading or with any opacity percentage other than 0% or 100%) or a lot of transparent bits around, it becomes miserable to edit for anyone who doesn't have the source PSD (and this is granted the given mod allows people to edit and retexture. Assuming this mod has a restrictive license that wouldn't be a problem as then nobody can or will try to retexture your parts). I'm also gonna quote myself here, just in case you didn't notice. Please pardon me if you did.
  24. JadeOfMaar
    @Redacted That's a very nice looking plane, but everything I've seen wrong (from design through flight) is due to pilot error and not a shortcoming in my parts (you should still autostrut my ramjet to grandparent though. I know very well that joints are flimsy in that area.). I can call a somewhat long list of the things you could have done better for a satisfactory test flight but I'll only name the relevant thing(s): You tried to pull up while traveling too fast, too steep, too deep in the atmosphere, with too big a plane, and while thrusting directly towards the ground with epic Nertea engines, which only helps to make the situation worse. This was not a valid test at all. If the wings broke off when you pitched up for the steep climb into space I'd totally understand and to which I would say that's a stock problem and neither a fault of my mod nor MkIV Spaceplane.
  25. JadeOfMaar
    @Redacted That's very unfortunate. I get the same feelings at times, and see related things that you only see when you become a big and passionate mod maker. I'm not out to burst your bubble. I'm rather fond of sci-fi, and things beyond the effectively similar mass rejection of mods by players at large... However I'm not particularly liberal with this mod as it specifically has a narrow scope. I've thought of making parts to help make a Skylon plane body apart from the engines, but I've purposely left that for other part makers to do, like the real Reaction Engines Ltd company who will make only the engines; let the other brands make the body... But that mightn't happen until I release this and they see it, oddly enough. I have a whole fuselage (or several) of my own planned already. Fleshing out SABR3 would be just a distraction. Looking forward to those. I like your point #4. I much rather like advanced engines other than the SABRE. I'm fond of scramjets, the concept plasma jet engine, and a sci-fi jet engine concept I devised based on that and hopefully superior to both. To that end, the concept of the RAPIER doesn't hold my interest much, however, with respect to you, I won't nerf the ramjets too much, then. I want to see this combination.
×
×
  • Create New...