Nozza
-
Posts
18 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Nozza
-
-
On 1/11/2022 at 2:35 AM, PiezPiedPy said:
Thanks, seems you have the common problem of mods that are not up to date, you will have to find which one it is.
[Trajectories] Error: Error creating config - Exception of type 'System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException' was thrown., usually caused by a mod failing to load before Trajectories loads.
Please let the author of the offending mod know about the issue. Can you also let me know what mod is causing the issue, just in case the original author does nothing about the issue I can then do something about it, usually I have to make an unofficial release of the offending mod.
Hi, I'm having the similar issue of it seeming like Trajectories doesn't load (no toolbar button, no trajectories in the map view), but I did a quick search of my log and couldn't find this error message. I recently reinstalled KSP, so almost all of my mods are fully up to date, with the exception of two or three small parts mods that I've seen people say work without causing problems in the latest update. Was wondering if perhaps you'd have an idea what's going on. I'm no expert on this stuff but when I was looking through the log I didn't see any error messages related to Trajectories, the only ones I saw seemed to just be unimportant texture bugs related to Tantares.
Here's my log file.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jDL1yMtfI5WwtJ58DqC_ncnF60f31JO_/view?usp=sharing
-
Where IS the stock indicator anyway? I've played a few hours of 1.6 now and still haven't found it whenever I'm doing maneuvers.
-
How does the Logo Screen config actually work? No files are selectable when I try to change it.
-
Y'know, I don't know why everyone else started off with nothing but a flea and a capsule. My very first rocket (second if you count the fact that I forgot oxidiser when I launched it the first time) made it to an escape trajectory... from the Sun. Yeah. I THINK it bugged out.
-
1 hour ago, klgraham1013 said:
I want 1.5 to be the update I've been hoping for. A good, stable version that kills bugs without introducing other major ones. I would personally love for Squad to release a final, rock solid version. I know some want updates forever. That's not me. I like to own finished products. Whether it be books, movies, or, yes, video games...
I can agree with that, but its not what I mean. The fact is that we don't have a stable version, and yet the same people who ask for one are the same ones constantly complaining about the development previews. The old parts are bad, give us new parts. Oh no, not those new parts, I don't like those. I want one particular style of parts. You can't have your cake and eat it too, because if development just stops on KSP tomorrow, what do you have? The far from perfect version that is 1.4.
I'm sorry, but this statement is so, incredibly wrong. To assume that Porkjet was some sort of savant and completely incapable of being copied is somewhat absurd...
Yes, but there is no obligation to hold Porkjet on a pedestal either and assume that all future KSP assets MUST be "Porkalike." You can't say that criticisms of the assets aren't directed towards the art team when there's a clear bias against anything that isn't an imitation of Porkjet parts.
He constantly gives details on his complaints...
The obvious ones that everyone else complains about. But saying that something is worse than what it is meant to replace "because I have experience" when more work and detail has gone into it simply because "it isn't Porkjet" is not a valid complaint. Like I said, I don't particularly like the new HECS2, but the dev team is still trying to improve the old assets. I'd rather have the new parts, even if some of their textures have been "recycled" from other parts, then something like the old HECS probe cores, where the "foil" (is it foil? I can't tell, it looks diseased) is absolutely awful.
35 minutes ago, passinglurker said:We've seen even as recent as last week that I've been positive when there is something to be positive about no one can rightly fault me as one who hates everything without a reason so you're wasting your bytes trying to lecture me about this.
Whether or not you can be positive is irrelevant. If you're going to criticise something, you have to actually provide a valid argument.
Look I can get where this is coming from you think it's unfair to judge squad for some exhaustive myriad of reasons...
I don't. There's nothing wrong with criticism. "This isn't Porkjet" is not a criticism.
I think this is related if they are cutting corners here where we can see them then why would we assume they aren't cutting corners everywhere else?
How are they cutting corners? If you're talking about re-using other assets, to make the new parts, then is it really? If something is an improvement over the old version, I don't think it matters if one of the textures already exists somewhere else. Considering you keep calling for "standardising" everything...
Either way a small minute "improvement" is insufficient because it means in all other regards they are cutting corners...
How?
-
I'll admit it, I'm not too impressed by the new HECS2. That end cap, or lack thereof, is too similar to the gaping hole on the flea and hammer SRBs, and those are just absolutely disgusting.
But it's not all bad. The new gold section, for instance, is an improvement. The other new parts like the fuel tanks and the HECS, again, improvements. I might not like some factors of some of the new models, like the hole on the gold HECS, but it's not the end of the world. I can still cover it up with something (who really leaves an end cap without something on it), and even after that I have a nicer model. At the end of the day, the people complaining the loudest probably won't be affected, because they more than likely won't update to 1.5 anyway.
i think that's your problem @passinglurker. You seem so keen to race into the development previews every week and denounce whatever's been put up as "not Porkjet enough." I think you need to realise that Porkjet doesn't work for Squad anymore, so you're not going to get Porkjet parts, because it seems like you haven't figured that out yet. Not to mention that you rarely point about what the problem actually is. Your "criticisms" of the new parts can be summed up as "it's not Porkjet and I hate it. I thought it looked like an improvement (maybe that's because, no matter how small the change, the new parts are still an improvement. That's why they're being updated.) but then I saw too many problems that made it look lazy. Anyone with my experience could see these problems and how they make this part worse than the original, but I don't have to say what they actually are or how to fix them." You may as well be a bit grateful that this game's been getting updates to fix and revamp some of the ugly old, (gasp) non-Porkjet parts for the past five years.
-
Well, I dunno why, but the bug's gone. I updated the mod to the latest version and jumped back to the craft that had the problem (reaction wheel not moving with the extender). It worked fine.
-
14 hours ago, Katten said:
bug #1: hmm, interesting.
1 Do you know the version of AnimatedAttachment? v2.0.3
2 Are there wheels on the craft? No, but there are some of the triangular landing legs further up on the command pod. I'll post a picture of the ship later as well with the logs; computer had updates to do yesterday so I never got to KSP.
3 Is KJR installed? No
4 Any error messages in the console? I didn't see any, but I'll have another look tonight.Bug #2: Please disable AnimatedAttachments for the animated part while fine-tuning the position and rotation. Then turn it on again afterwards! This step is annoying, I will see if I can find a way to detect if the user has selected the fine-tuning tools and handle it automatically. Yeah, alright. Thanks, that might have something to do with the 1st bug too.
Updates are done, so I should actually be able to check KSP tonight. I'll update the mod while I'm at it, it might fix the problem (who knows).
-
Updated to 1.4.4 the other day, so I've had a chance to test some new parts. So far, I've noticed 2 bugs and thought of a few suggestions that should be relatively simple to implement. Regarding the bugs, I'm about to leave my PC, so I'll post logs and my mod list in about 6 hours or so when I get back.
Suggestion #1: Add options to toggle and retract animated parts in action groups such as the extender and hinge, instead of just opening/extending.
Suggestion #2: Flip the deploy limit on parts like the spherical probe containers, so that it is more in line with stock parts (the mk3 cargo ramp comes to mind). 90 should be almost open, rather than almost shut, in my opinion.
Suggestion #3: Right now, the hexagonal probe container has 2 options in the editor, whether or not it has a lid. I think there should be an option to remove the lid in flight, like the Apollo-style service bays added in Making History. This would make it more versatile, as there is a larger space to extend things (Rather than relying on 1 hole in the middle), while still protecting the parts inside during ascent. It also means you don't have to go to the trouble of, say, adding an animated open/close feature.
Bug #1: I decided to test the new extender part by plonking a generic, small reaction wheel on the end of a small extender. In the editor, it correctly moves with the extender; however, in flight, the extender would simply go through the reaction wheel, which remained floating in place at its original position.
Bug #2: I was putting some of your new, tiny landing legs (the vertical ones, not the triangular ones) on the smallest spherical probe container (Also from the mod). Parts placed inside the container can be rotated and offset freely; however, when I tried landing legs on the outside of the container (I also tried the smallest stock landing legs), they could not. If I placed landing legs on the exterior and attempted to offset or rotate them, they would revert to their original position whenever I changed back to the place tool or selected another part. I also attempted to place a Commutotron HG-55 on a large extender and offset it slightly so it would be perfectly in line, but the bug occurred again.
-
Absolutely loving it so far. Any chance we can get tweakscale compatibility to mess around with the parts a little more?
-
On 6/8/2018 at 8:17 AM, Laie said:
This can shuttle between Kerbin and Laythe; you could probably join at least seven and start several bundles per launch window. It then becomes a question of how many you can fill on any given year. I also wonder how it's supposed to put into any weight class.
By the way, have you ever heard of Laythe Capitalism?
Not really sure of what you mean, but keep in mind everything needs to be done in 1 launch. Never heard of Laythe Capitalism either, I only joined this forum like a week ago.
22 hours ago, zolotiyeruki said:Question: is it allowable to launch from Kerbin with some Ore onboard, and then refine it into LF/Ox once out of the atmosphere?
Nope. The tanks must be empty on launch.
-
55 minutes ago, Laie said:
I'm in the middle of craft design and notice that there's a point I'd like to have sorted out... will ISRU be okay? I mean, of course I'll have to mine for ore on Laythe, but can I bring a converter and make fuel for the return trip? If so, can I make (and use) oxidizer as well?
You can, but only on Laythe, and it obviously won't count towards the final score. You won't be able to use the oxidizer engines before refueling too, keep in mind.
-
3 hours ago, ManEatingApe said:
This challenge is coming together nicely...could I suggest a little more time allowed, say 10 years?
6 years is pretty tight, even with direct Hohmann transfers and doesn't leave much wiggle room to derp around the Jool system.
Yeah fair enough.
-
Implemented a system for different weights, plus some bonuses and a six year time limit.
-
After numerous complaints from construction workers at the Kerbal Space Centre, the Kerbal Construction Union has successfully campaigned for a total ban on Oxidiser created on Kerbin. Despite the R&D Department's best efforts to convince the strikers that their recent breathing difficulties were simply due to a bad case of "The Sniffles," the workers believe that the abundant use of oxidizer in ascent stages has caused a lower oxygen concentration in Kerbin's atmosphere. Without the ability to create oxidizer using Kerbin's oxygen, the KSP has turned to a new source: Laythe.
Your challenge:
Design a craft capable of landing on Laythe, mining, and returning to Kerbin without using Oxidizer. Any other engine or form of propulsion (excluding Kraken drives) are permitted. Due to Jeb's short attention span, the mission must be completed in one launch in ten years or less. This challenge must be accomplished in a stock game, though Making History and mods that do not affect gameplay (Scatterer, TextureReplacer) are permitted.
Scoring:
You will gain points for every ore tank you fill with ore mined from Laythe. These tanks must be empty on launch, filled on Laythe, and returned to Kerbin to be scored.
+1 point for each radial tank.
+4 points for each small tank.
+20 points for each large tank.
Bonuses
+25 for not using NERVs.
+25 for not using SRBs.
+25 for not using parachutes.
Weight Categories (on launch):
Ultralight - 25 tons or less
Lightweight - 50 tons or less
Midweight - 100 tons or less
Heavyweight - 200 tons or less
Ultraheavy - 500 tons or less
Behemoth - Over 500 tons
-
For some strange reason, some of my kerbal modifications reset back to unset/generic on loading in a save, or occasionally just going back to the KSC. Here's a fresh save, for example:
Yuri Kerman here is set to have the Clean Shaven head and the KCNVeteranPilot suit. For some reason; however, every time I load to the KSC, he reverts to the picture shown. Valentina and Victor also have this problem, but none of the other Kerbonauts (including the default options down the bottom) are affected. Any idea what's causing it?
Here's a copy of my TextureReplacer folder in case something's wrong with it:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lIbOwd37C9cqvi0zrXLTs0YdaNgdTQq3
(Request) "Interstage Decoupler"
in KSP1 Mods Discussions
Posted
Just dropping by with a quick request. Does anyone know of any up-to-date mods, or even somebody who would be willing to whip one up quickly, to add a part (or rather, a pair of parts) similar to in this mod:
The parts in question are referred to here as interstage decouplers. They're a pair of parts that lets you put something like a parachute inline with the rest of your rocket rather than radially, while still letting you attach things on top without needing to mess around with struts and multiple decouplers. I'd just use this mod but it's not up to date and some of the other parts seem to be causing glitches, so another potential solution depending on licensing could be if somebody would be willing to do an unofficial update of this mod, removing the pre-BG robotic parts and their dependency, since it has some other nice parts like that rover container.
Thanks