Jump to content

Jognt

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,076

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Jognt

  1. Jognt
    I meant with Uni though I guess you can apply it to this aswell
  2. Jognt
    I'm just a user. But sure. Whatever floats your boat. Regarding the "needlessly" bit. Just read the thread.
  3. Jognt
    No idea sorry All I can say is the usual base advice: Clear caches, reinstall CKAN, reboot PC, sacrifice a turnip at sunset, that sort of thing. (actually, clearing the CKAN cache might work? Maybe?)
  4. Jognt
    I don't run Kopernicus, so I haven't tested it. I just have recent experiences with HAS experimentation that made me notice it. I've only had OR statements fail in nested HAS statements. But that's because those apparently just aren't supported. AND statements should work without a problem. Having said that. I'm sure the patch works fine because all that happens if it were to drop the 2nd HAS is that it spams the KopernicusSolarPanel requirement on anything that fulfills the first HAS. You may even be able to fulfil any requirement with Kopernicus Solar Panels now. Hmm.. Versatile panels.. Thanks for the description on 1.6.1. Maybe I'll give this one a run when I start my new career.
  5. Jognt
    Well, this mod works by adjusting every EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION node, so I opened up the ScienceDefs.cfg file for the expansion to see what it looks like. I noticed that there were a few experiments with VERY large differences between baseValue and scienceCap that had an accompanying comment saying that the baseValue was used to calculate the per-hour science return. Then it was just double checking to see what experiments had this huge difference due to the per-hour thing. When I was sure that the only experiments that would need to be left out were the deployed* ones (the other ones actually already have 100% return I believe, or close to it) I just needed to adjust the patch so it leaves those alone. Which took me a few iterations and some help from the Module Manager guys to get to the pretty bit in my previous comment. TL:DR - Like you I looked around. Unlike you, I spent waaaaay too much time on it xD. Now.. 3:30am.. time for bed. edit: the ScienceDefs.cfg for Breaking Ground is in the SquadExpansion/Serenity/Resources folder if you're curious
  6. Jognt
    I can't help but think about how that fits in with the "Men are from Duna, women from Eve" line. So much fire!
  7. Jognt
    Hi again, it's me, that guy with a log filled with errors that made it hard to gauge what was going on. I've tested Bon Voyage on a clean 1.7.1.02539 install with both Making History and Breaking Ground. Only Patchmanager and some personal MM tweaks (non BV related) were active: BV throws a Nullref upon starting a new game; BV Main window freaks out with Nullrefs upon reloading controllers if you decouple a rover. It'll also show two controllers where there is only one. At that point the "Show BV Control Panel" button will stop working on the BV part; BV is under the impression that a rover with the Making History foldable wheels can do 120m/s. Speed for other wheels (except the smallest ones) are also incorrect, though not as much as these; How to reproduce: For bug 1: Start a new game. For bug 2: Grab a Rovemate, slap on wheels (the MH wheels if you want to combine it with bug 3), plonk on a BV module. Attach a decoupler followed by something else (I had a Mk2 Landercan with wheels), launch it, decouple the rover, and it should bug out; For bug 3: Check the speed of the rover from the above craft. Log file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jqwk4wxecp6zutx/BVoutput_log.zip?dl=0 Craft file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/il7hwo37zft7h72/BonVoyageExample.craft?dl=0 I hope my log is clean enough this time to gauge what's going on. I can't quite recall whether I had the main window open when it bugged out or not. Let me know if you can reproduce it or if you want me to get some more specific steps.
  8. Jognt
    That depends on whether someone comes up with a graphical pyrotechnics mod.. Can you imagine a Kerbin with a burning atmosphere?
  9. Jognt
    You had your reasons, I'm sure. Please note that that does not disprove what I said, and that I said it in reply to someone who wanted to know the Continued users PoV. You seem to be under the impression that there is only one right way to do KJR (yours), which is not true. There is a legitimate usecase for people wanting the Continued variant. I would also like to ask you to keep Next talk in the Next thread, and Continued in the Continued thread. Though this thread is quite young, it's already filled with posts (from you) about how Next is supposedly better in all ways. Next probably is better in ways, but I prefer the safe approach of Continued. And I'm wondering why I feel like I have to defend that in a non-Next thread.
  10. Jognt
    In a nutshell; Continued: Fixes and optimizations that keep stuff working. Next: Youthful optimism and grand ideas for potential improvements, with a side of "Use at your own risk" and "Oops, that wasn't supposed to happen". Yes I'm biased after recent Next experiences leaving me feeling like an alpha tester.
  11. Jognt
    I think Jool skipped its vaccinations.. In all seriousness, no idea, sorry.
  12. Jognt
    I've been thinking about that wall-of-resources thing and was wondering if you've implemented some sort of system that only 'initializes' resources that are actually used by mods? If so, you could use that to slightly scale up Ore abundance if no other resources are initialized so RR is 'Stockpatible' yet ready for any mod that can make use of it. It would also reduce overstimulation (insofar that's a thing for regular peeps) of those installing RR or JNSQ for the first time. With regards to engine configs: Depends on whether you want the scope of RR to contain that or if you want it to be a framework others can build on top of. I for one am interested in any tweaks/overhauls of the stock ore system, and it looks like RR could be the 'gateway drug' to stuff like RealFuels (which goes way too far IMO). Edit: In the end the key aspect is not the name of the resources or fuels and whatnot, it's whether it's enjoyable/challenging to play with in a way that you cannot get with vanilla. Though I admit I'm biased on that one as a User Experience guy.
  13. Jognt
    Thank you very much!
  14. Jognt
    Wait, do you mean key or value? If I write "~id[software]" is it going to ignore anything with an "id =" key/value, or is it going to ignore any "id =" that have "software" in it? Edit: Thank you for the reply
  15. Jognt
    Just a heads-up, but @REQUIREMENT[Any]:HAS[@REQUIREMENT[PartModuleUnlocked]]:HAS[#partModule[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]:NEEDS[Kopernicus] should throw a warning. It's an unnested HAS so MM is going to ignore the second one. I'm guessing you want to filter for requirements that have both? I think @REQUIREMENT[Any]:HAS[@REQUIREMENT[PartModuleUnlocked]&#partModule[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]]:NEEDS[Kopernicus] is what you need there. Other than that, have any of you encountered problems with the pack? I've stopped using them since they appeared unmaintained but am wondering since this thread received semi-recent attention.
  16. Jognt
    Question about HAS: How do I target 'stuff' that does not have the HAS? Reason I ask is because of the new deployed experiments. I've always played with Maculator's Science Full Value mod which sets the baseValue to scienceCap, but Breaking Ground's deployed experiments use the baseValue for the amount they create per hour. So I was looking to target all EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION:HAS[!id[deployed*]] which does not work (tried several versions of ! placement with/without #id instead of id). I ended up adding a oldBV value to all experiment_definition's, targeting all of them, then setting them back for those with deployed* in their id, and removing the oldBV from all definitions afterwards, but I am wondering if there's a better way.
  17. Jognt
    I'm curious what the "@Atlessa Approved" slider % is going to be
  18. Jognt
    This looks sweet! One question though: What happens to the "Lander", "Shuttle", "atlantis", "endeavour" bit of the name? If it's left out completely, is there any reason to supply it at all in the first place? Edit: I already know how I'm going to call my first launcher: The [Splaturn]!
  19. Jognt
    @maculator Heya. Seems we can't get away with a patch as simple as this one was anymore have to expand the patch slightly. The Breaking Ground DLC added 4 experiments that have a trickle effect to them, the baseValue for them is used to determine the amount of science they generate per hour, so they have values of 0.2 to 1 for baseValue and a scienceCap of 80 to 100. This version works without messing up the over-time science from the deployed science parts: @EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION:HAS[~id[deployed*]]{ @baseValue = #$scienceCap$ } The existing version indeed causes some problems with the deployable ground experiments. If you feel comfortable with a text editor, open up the mod's .cfg file and replace what's in it with what I posted above. (it should look mostly similar, just an added bit behind the DEFINITION part)
  20. Jognt
    Guys... this mod is the simplest of MM patches you can imagine.. It does have a slight problem with Breaking Ground (giving all the science is a bit.. much for that) and I'll check that out. Tekaoh's release isn't yet updated for Breaking Ground though. It'll work fine in 1.7.1 with Making History, but hold off on using Breaking Ground with it. Edit: The problem this has with Breaking Ground is that the new ones are aimed at trickling science over time and this mod by default will give you the whole deal in one go, which is a bit over the top much. Any other problems are more likely to be bugs in the game itself.
  21. Jognt
    === Previous content broken by the forum, RIP === Here's a version that works with the new Breaking Ground ground experiments: @EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION:HAS[~id[deployed*]]{ @baseValue = #$scienceCap$ }
  22. Jognt
    I don’t know about how KSP sees it, but with NPP: select KSP Module Manager from the Language menu. Or set CFG as extension for it.
  23. Jognt
    Thank you for the polite reply, I know I can be.. difficult.. at times. I like the concept of RR and I’ll probably see if I can hide some/most of the resources while I’m getting acquainted with it so I can take it one step at a time. I also realize that it would’ve been a better question to ask in the RR thread, so my apology for the off-topic comments.
  24. Jognt
    It's set as a code folding marker in the accompanying notepad++ ModuleManager language config. So I'm guessing he uses it to fold code.
  25. Jognt
    Your Outputlog.txt file should be able to tell you what mods/files edit the landing gear. Do a search for "SmallGearBay" or "gearsmall.cfg" to find any entries for it. Outputlog is in %appdata% one folder back up, then LocalLow, Squad, Kerbal Space Program.
×
×
  • Create New...