Grimmas

OK I get what you mean now. You're talking about all the infrastructure that you need to feed to the WOLF, Kerbals included, to produce TCs in orbit for the follow-on routes. BTW you can easily set up zero-TC routes if you want. I think the only thing taken into account is the total mass - so if your mass at the end is higher than at the start (because you refueled, at the end, for instance) then your TC cost will be zero. Whether this is 'gaming the system', 'cheating', or w/e, is another matter

WOLF routes don't need pilots though. What am I missing here?

After your comment I finally get why they decided to call it WOLF. It's so obvious in hindsight! As usual.

It's for scanning asteroids and comets. You can blame Squad for this one - the asteroid part is actually called PotatoRoid in KSP.

You can clean it using a standard science lab, not on EVA. For instance, try attaching the included K&K Planetary Laboratory. Deploy it, transfer a Scientist kerbal inside, then you should have the option for cleaning the experiments from the laboratory PAW.

I finally took a stab at local logistics using rovers today. Funny how I ended up doing WOLF before doing local stuff. Some things I noticed the hard way through trial and repeated rapid unscheduled disassembly, may be obvious to veterans but some of it wasn't that clear to me so I leave this note for future generations of Kerbanauts Many Kerbals died in bringing you this note. Jeb alone died at least five times due to suddenly finding his rover teleported high into the air above the runway by KSP when coming out of time warp. Rest in pieces, Zombie Jeb. Valentina's still scrubbing the runway after that. 1) To participate in local logistics, the scavenging vessel's containers (that will store the delivered goods) must also have the USI Warehouse module - not only the containers being scavenged from. I think I spent about 30 mins on this alone until I finally got it 2) The rover itself doesn't actually need any containers for the transferred goods (as was stated in the wiki, so no surprises there, though for 'immersion' one could choose to nevertheless add one). 3) I originally interpreted the wiki as meaning that I'd need two rovers, each within 150m of the producer/consumer, however one rover within range is enough. The rover also does not need to be within 150m of anything - the distance between each of the rover, the producer, and the consumer, must merely be less than 2km. So they can basically form a triangle, and consequently a star (hub and spoke) formation with the rover in a central location 1km away from and between a bunch of consumers/producers should be possible if desired. 4) Consumer doesn't necessarily need a crew (for instance if it's an automated MPU). But it must have the Logistics Consumer module and be turned on. 5) Rover-enabled local logistics won't show up in the Kolonization dashboard; that only shows vessels within 150m. 6) Finally, your rover pilot will starve without supplies (obviously). They will scavenge for supplies up to 2km away so you don't need to park them right next to their snack boxes, but the catch is that - as per point 1 above - your rover needs a separate storage part for supplies with the USI Warehouse module - the Karibou cockpit has built-in supplies storage but not the module so it won't start filling up unless the vessel contains another warehouse-enabled supplies container. So just attaching a MiniPak to the Karibou is enough.

There's a certain appeal to doing it all the hard way, but you can also use the cheat menu to teleport your craft directly from the launchpad to the asteroid until you figure out how all the parts work together.

But weirdly enough it does touch some other mods that touch the Kerbol system. I had GEP installed at one point and when I first added GU to that save I noticed that it turned Grannus into a different star that was quite a bit further away from Kerbol.

Real Kerbals will of course do all three. Be a real Kerbal

That looks nice... and quite a bit laggy haha. You're secretly trying to kill our PCs, right? :-)

It should work even without life support, I think. I haven't tried playing it that way. But in theory they are semi-independent mods. If you are into the construction stuff then you really want the March pre-release, it added a new orbital shipyard and new in-situ construction options. Previous versions of MKS relied on other mods like Extraplanetary Launchpads and/or Global Construction (Global Construction is still a great mod though, worth checking out). You'll just need to delete USI-LS from the pre-release if you want to stick with TAC-LS (go into GameData/UmbraSpaceIndustries and delete the LifeSupport folder, that should do it).

Yes, they are converters. But you will completely lose the benefit of the life support integration with MKS which gives you predictable life support timers on a per-Kerbal, per-colony basis. Basically half of all MKS windows will become useless or give you wrong info. Your MKS parts will be just like another parts mod and it will be completely up to you to make it all work together in a coherent manner, which would involve a lot of modding work. Which is fine if that's what you're interested in. Just saying. In fact, if you do write a new integration for MKS and TAC-LS I am sure there will be some people who are interested in playing it.

Yes the lightglobe thing was fixed in the 1.4.1 release back in December. I took a look at the 1.3 zip on Spacedock just now and it has a GameData folder inside it which has - as expected - all the folders I mentioned a few posts ago. So your problem above was basically just unzipping the mod into the wrong directory. What you should do - with that version or with any other - is to unzip the archive somewhere else then look inside for the GameData folder, then copy the files inside that folder into your KSP install's GameData folder. On another note, your Kerbal Engineer and your TAC-LS are also incorrectly installed and probably not working correctly (although your KER may work to some extent as the dlls don't rely on relative file paths). KER is also out of date :-) Finally, MKS uses USI-LS for life support so you may want to pick one or the other. If you want to use TAC-LS along MKS it's possible but then you won't really get integrations for it in the MKS parts.

Because RoverDude didn't bother to update it. For MKS you want to go primarily to GitHub.

No wonder I haven't been seeing comets for a while. From the release notes a few versions back: 8.) Kopernicus Asteroid Generator support no longer generates comets, which were being spawned in a buggy way anyhow. Use an external mod if you want these for now. Any good suggestions? KerbalKomets is out of date now. Custom Asteroids seems like it might be a good bet, or at least worth a look.

Take a look on the previous page:

You should really do yourself a favor and use a more recent version of MKS like the one from March instead of the 1.3 version which is like 2-3 years old, doesn't start without manual tinkering, doesn't have the latest cool WOLF features, Atlas parts, or orbital construction parts, etc.

Well, that's not how it should look like. I also recommend that you upgrade to a more recent version of USI/MKS, unless you're specifically targeting a very old version KSP (like 1.8 or earlier). You seem to be trying to install MKS 1.3 while the current version is 1.4.1 and the current-current version is the pre-release constellation from March.

Looks like you pasted the folders wrong, for starters. Try moving stuff from the USI_etc_etc folder to the GameData folder. You should have the following top-level MKS-related folders in GameData directly: 000_USITools, CommunityCategoryKit, CommunityResourcePack, Firespitter, UmbraSpaceIndustries The paths inside the files refer to each other based on this structure, so what you have there will definitely break because KSP can't find the textures, models, etc. On an unrelated note - it has begun.

Are you sure the asteroid has rock to begin with? Did you look at it via the surface scanner? I think they're all supposed to, but I've ran into some that don't (in my case I think it was the special class I asteroid that didn't have any). Also, not sure if it's related to your issue or not but in order to get rid of any rock you mine (which should end up in your dedicated rock tank) you'll need a fuel valve on the ship configured for dumping rock.

That's definitely not what it's supposed to look like. Are you running other mods? Are your mod versions up to date? What version of KSP are you running?

I don't mean to beat on a dead horse but, as someone who has actually looked into this topic and worked a little bit on game code in UE4 at the scale of KSP - let me just say that UE4 is really not well suited for this sort of game. Some people managed to do it despite everything (Helium Rain was published on Steam for instance, and it's an UE4 game - open source, too) but the origin rebasing tech in UE4 isn't that great, it's more of an afterthought. So - like with Unity, I suspect - you quickly find yourself writing custom code (but now all in C++ mind you). And all those great visual advantages you see in UE4 games? They work great for scenes a few km wide that have mostly static geometry - because you can pre-bake static lightmaps - but all that goes out the window when your scene is the size of a planet and/or has a lot of dynamic stuff. So again, you'll need completely custom code to handle planets. Most crucial for KSP though is that UE4 has almost zero support for mods. Imagine you had to download Unity and write a ModuleManager.dll (but in C++) every time you wanted to make a parts mod. It's basically that bad. You need the game creator's devkit (basically a custom version of UE4 that the developer has to package and maintain for you). Any mod support to be added has to be again - you guessed it - 100% custom code, and realistically it has to be code that actively circumvents UE4's packaging and virtual file system (which live in a fantasy console-style land where it's a valid assumption that all game files are static and will never be edited or added to by the player, so you can bake all content into one giant multi-gigabyte file, encrypt it so the player can't open it, and call it a day). But you don't need my opinion, just look at what a pain the butt it is to write mods for Satisfactory. So, it's obvious of course, but there are really zero advantages of porting KSP to UE4 and only a heap of trouble (not to mention it would cost at least as much as it already did to make KSP in the first place).

I would suggest: 4. No FTL drives or jump gates to get there 5. make a self-sustainable MKS colony on one of the planets/moons once you arrive :-)

It goes without saying but I'd love to see more technical posts about KSP2 like this.

When in doubt, nuke your KSP install from orbit and start over.