Mossconfig

Cryoengine's new methalox engines don't have configs, would anybody here be able to share, or help me out in making some?

Thanks to both of you for making these patches. the little dots don't show up well against the gas giants, is there a way to scale them for those zones only?

no it turns out that realfuels stock has a patch that manually changes the ratio back. https://github.com/ValentinBischof/RealFuels-Stock/blob/master/GameData/RealFuels-Stock/000_NeedsRework/NFPropulsion/Stockalike_NFPropulsion.cfg I had deleted the 000_depreciated and NeedsRework folders to fix a broken plume.

Are you saying that my most recent screenshot still has incorrect EC cost? These numbers are way lower than they used to be before I reinstalled realfuels, but its still installed. Even if they're still high its still better than what I was getting. Edit, nope, it was the 000_needs rework folder that I had deleted when I was trying to find a strange always on particle effect and didn't put back. There's a patch in there that reduces the EC ratio manually for all the engines.

I think its something even stranger. a clean install works. Edit, a clean install of only realfuels and realfuels-stock, everything else same

I think it got bundled with ROengines. Yeah but plenty of my mods touch the xenon, which is the larger problem I'm having, all xenon burning engines have funky EC requirements. The vasmir engines are better than most, they use the correct amount in flight, just a wierd tooltip. The other xenon only engines actually use the crazy EC amount in flight. Edit, it's definitely either realfuels or realfuels-stock.

Do you think it could be realfuels? Here's my logs. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Tt-7C9a97Y-TsycYbmuRKFN9FKLGzaqa?usp=sharing So, the vasmir engines use the correct amount of EC in flight, but the other xenon burning engines in flight and tooltip use the crazy amounts of EC.

really, are you sure? looking at the .cfg file it says this. and all the multimode engines have diffrent EC consumption. the argonmode and xenonmode use clearly diffrent ratios of EC. it did get fixed without me doing anything, now every xenon mode uses the same crazy amount of EC, but if both modes are actually supposed to use the same EC as argon then somethng is really broken for me.

I checked the log, and as far as I can tell there's a CTT patch and waterfall being applied, and nothing else. Look any the "near future systems manager" window. It shows argonmode and xenonmode using the same 100ec/s for some reason. When I launch it it uses the 100ec/s in both modes too. *Reloading the game fixed it. High strangeness is happening around these parts. I'll go sacrifice a Kerbal to the kraken. So xenon is supposed to fit in between the lithium engines and the argon engines? Idk, the little boost in ISP and thrust is kinda crazy compared to 30x heavier generator required... Maybe that niche should be reexamined, or at least the power requirements reduced from 30x to 3x.

So, I'm getting weird values for some of the xenon burning modes on engines. The Helicon is the worst, as the xenon burning EC weird number isn't showing up in game at all. Also, is this EC amount correct? I checked the .cfg files and that's the correct ratio of Ec to Xenon but it seems impossible to generate. I'd mess around with the tweakpatch but the argon and lithium engines are working perfectly fine?

I notice there isn't argon, and xenon gas harvesting on the exoscoop. the normal miners dont have lithium, and the atmoscoop still has xenon, but none of the parts have a lithium or argon production pipeline? Is there a simple way to add that? Looks like. The extent of the ISRUis avalible on the first page.

No, I'm not blaming you, I'm just complaining generally. Nertea likes to do their own thing, write a new mod that does exactly what is needed, which is probably great for that specific use case but compatibility with others isn't really a priority.

Having radiators that could be tweakscaled to provide adequate cooling without ballooning part counts would be ice, but near future mods have very janky tweakscale compatibility. I'm not holding my breath.

I was hoping to get this mod to replace far future technologies janky space dust isru system, but I got the b9 spam and a bunch of fatal tweakscale errors. Is there any hope for some far future integration? There's a lot of parts that are cool in that mod, tieing it to this comprehensive of an isru mod is very attractive, but I'm not savy enough to do it.

so each planet pack needs a config to work? do i need to do this for everything in RSS? also, the atmo morcessors cant suck out deuterium.

This is what I'm doing right now. Exotics to hopper to recoverable rover to funds. Maybe have a middle man part that can automatically take the hoppers and rovers out of the equation? Idk, my current system works.

Could we get a building that sells stuff automatically? Funds for reasources? Might be cheaty, but what in this game isn't?

Could you use tweakscale to reduce the logistics parts? Lots of them are simply scaled copies, maybe fold all of them under one part that can be scaled?

Could you allow ckan to install the most recent versions on lower verions? This mod works on my 1.8 install, but ckan throws errors.

What does the dumpExcess line do? Does it stop supply is one or the other is filled, or does it turn any unused oxidizer into LF?

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1nUbZZ39XlWttOyoBwjAGZd-c7vOkXn9q?usp=sharing So, my hubris might have caught up to me. I am trying to take a swing at running USI on a RSS install, which means I needed to take an axe to lots of config files. I haven’t gone after B8 partswitch or realfuels, so imagine my surprise when my capsules started disappearing. As far as I can tell, putting any capsule down in the VAB causes this message to show up, and that’s the end of it for capsules without fuel tanks. Thing is, if the capsule has a fuel tank and I try to put it down in empty space, the part disappears. Just “poof” not there anymore. Another weird thing, if I put the part down first it's fine, and if I attach it to an available node it's also fine. Any help? winx64 KSP 1.8.1 x64

So, realsettings does change tank mass, but you need to set the option "use realistic mass" to false before your changes happen. that took me an ebarrasing time to figure out. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1nUbZZ39XlWttOyoBwjAGZd-c7vOkXn9q?usp=sharing So, my hubris might have caught up to me. I am trying to take a swing at running USI on a RSS install, which means I needed to take an axe to lots of config files. I haven’t gone after B8 partswitch or realfuels, so imagine my surprise when my capsules started disappearing. As far as I can tell, putting any capsule down in the VAB causes this message to show up, and that’s the end of it for capsules without fuel tanks. Thing is, if the capsule has a fuel tank and I try to put it down in empty space, the part disappears. Just “poof” not there anymore. Another weird thing, if I put the part down first it's fine, and if I attach it to an available node it's also fine. Any help? winx64 KSP 1.8.1 x64

So, as I understand it the Tcredit cost is a reflection of how much mass is lost form point A to B. Could it be made to run off cost lost to destinaton? Somehow capture the cost at the start and finish, and use that? That way SSTOs and SRBs can provide the benefits they are supposed to.

Hi, I noticed that there is a file called Realsettings, and there's a variable called "%tankMassMultiplier", and a number, 4.something. Could I edit that to make tanks weight less? If not, is there something that I could tweak to make it easier on me?

I think that would still run into the problem, you would need to ensure that only superfluous modules are removed. A checker would be time intensive to build.