Jump to content

ferram4

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,132

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ferram4

  1. ferram4
    It's not buy-in from me. It's buy-in from users and screw ups on their end putting me in the position of having to clean up someone else's mess lest I get support issues down the line. Mod managers are supposed to serve mods, not demand service from them. Yes, yes, I know, it's based on some great wonderful thing. Doesn't counter any of the issues that it's had, that it is having, and the rather sketchy way it's been pushed or the future influence it will have over what mods can and cannot do. I fail to see any current or future benefit to the modding community from CKAN. Well, there are a lot more NREs in there, so I can't even be sure that this is ultimately BB's fault. Nevertheless, the github repo's dev build has some additional null checks in it now if you wanna try it out.
  2. ferram4
    Does that come with a list of required mods? Because it's certainly not stock, and I can't load it. In any case, unless there's something special about that ship, I still can't reproduce the issue. 2, 6, 20 decouplers, they all fire at the same time.
  3. ferram4
    *sigh* Does everyone really think that these reproduction steps are complete? I've followed them about a million times, more before the release of any of these versions and I have not been able to hit any of them. Alright, new idea: I need to know who's making manual installs and who's using some package manager / mod manager shenanigans. Anyone using mod managers, don't. Install it manually, see if the issue occurs. Because I've always installed manually and never had any issues.
  4. ferram4
    Wait, all of the reports require already-existing ships? If that's the case, why didn't anyone else mention that? That could be really important! But KJR doesn't save anything that could be reloaded anyway... so what?! How?
  5. ferram4
    And, as I mentioned, this does not reproduce the issue. I gather that from this, a Mk1 pod, a decoupler, and an SRB should run into the bug for you, yes? Does it? If no, then you are leaving out steps. Those steps are important.
  6. ferram4
    Can't reproduce using those steps. Some step is missing.
  7. ferram4
    ...yeah. CKAN has always kinda rubbed me the wrong way. There's the near constant download and installation issues it seems to have (that can be seen from its thread), the fact that it's heavily focused on knowing exactly what's going on in the GameData directory (which basically means that it assumes that mods only act within certain bounds, which are limiting to what can be done and it's only a matter of time before they make it explicit and set themselves up as gatekeepers), the fact that it can still screw up heavily when upgrading mods (I had to change how FAR saves user configurations to get around its screwups), and it's being pushed so damn hard (it was stickied the second it was released, and on KerbalStuff it's actually impossible to opt-out of CKAN participation; the checkbox does nothing). The only reason I don't ask them to take my stuff down (yet) is because I know if I do all my threads will get completely buried in, "CKAN? CKAN? CKAN?" so there's simply no point in fighting; they're our overlords and mod gatekeepers now. May as well just accept it, even if I don't like it.
  8. ferram4
    It's not like everything in stock is fixable or moddable. Let me give you an example of what would kill FAR and all other aerodynamic mods off completely: The new aero model is coded with all its variables hardcoded. At this point, short of removing all atmospheres and trying to add my own, there's nothing I can do to remove the model. The new aero model is coded so that all its fields and methods are private, and they are reset every frame to handle the aerodynamics changing. At this point, I'd need to run multiple reflection calls every frame, and that would be laggier than FAR has ever been. The new aero model isn't private, but placing 0s in fields results in NaN errors everywhere and there's no way to shut it off completely. Depending on how they do things, any of these are possible, and if they happen, there's not much I can do to keep FAR and NEAR alive. It is in their power to kill FAR and pretty much the entire realism-focused modding community with this. I really hope they don't, but I know better than to hope; it just makes things worse if it all falls apart.
  9. ferram4
    @NuAoA: I haven't been able to reproduce it in the latest build, even while coming out of high timewarp at ridiculous velocities near Minmus. I suspect another mod is to blame. @Galane: Ah, I see. Yay, stock bugs. I'm not exactly sure how to fix it, tbh. @mike9606: No output log, no support. I have been unable to reproduce the issue on my build, so I will need full reproduction steps using as few mods as possible. If it is due to KJR, you should be able to cause it with no other mods. Anyway, KJR v3.0.1 is out, fixing some of the new multipart joint shenanigans, particularly with USI drop tanks and sounding rockets.
  10. ferram4
    Bug reports without reproduction steps are like going to the mechanic with a car and saying, "it's broken!" and then walking away. Please provide them or your reports will be ignored as utterly useless.
  11. ferram4
    The save doesn't help me, I'm not able to derive what went from from that, nor am I sure that I can get the exact install that you have there (maybe some things aren't updated, who knows). Follow this
  12. ferram4
    @NuAoA: I cannot reproduce the issue following the little information you have provided. I will need full reproduction steps, a full copy of the output log, and a full list of all mods that you have been running in order to address the issue. Less than that leaves out critical information and makes fixing the issue impossible. Why do people never provide logs?
  13. ferram4
    Well, I came up with a fix for the intake issue, but I have no idea why it keeps thinking the parts are clipping. Dammit Squad, why'd you have to declare part clipping a feature rather than treating it as a bug like it is? The requiring a second pass of the AoA Sweep was fixed. What the hell? *sigh* I'm at the point of about-to-give-up for all of this. It's just not worth it, and let's face it, whatever Squad comes up with for their stock aero will probably make FAR incapable of working anyway, so FAR is probably a dead-mod-walking right now. Edit: Found out why the editor GUIs were wrong; I was being overly paranoid about setting the initial conditions right and actually messed things up; dev build has it fixed. FAR v0.14.6.1 will be out whenever I get confirmation that there aren't more bugs that require fixing.
  14. ferram4
    It will make trying to do ditching difficult, but I see no reason why it should mess with the FX. Maybe Linux requires special handling for effects or something?
  15. ferram4
    @tetryds: I can't see anything wrong in the logs, and the graphs are now more accurate than they've ever been. @Elthy: Did your test install include the MJ FARExt? There were exceptions thrown by that, which means it probably needs a recompile to work with FAR 0.14.6. @Behemoth1702: I see the issue; for some reason the circular intakes and ram air intakes always cause this issue. I'll see what's up. Also, for future reference, providing a craft file without stating the required part mods for it makes testing using it a bother. @Wanderfound: Welcome to "the orbital velocities are tiny" issues of KSP. Take it to the DRE thread, they're already making reentry heat harder than reality to make it work with stock KSP, it'll need to be made even harder, I guess.
  16. ferram4
    There is no way to change that. Hardcoded means, "you can't change that." Your only solution is to somehow edit the game's dlls to make it not hardcoded or hardcoded to a different value, but then you run into sections of modding that may or may not be banned by the rules, depending on how you do it.
  17. ferram4
    Well, that means that your plane is pitch-unstable at that flight condition (high angle of attack, high Mach number). You'll have to do the same thing that's always done when something is pitch-unstable: shift the CoL further back. Alternatively, avoid that flight condition; high AoA high MAch number flight is often difficult to stabilize.
  18. ferram4
    @Volodyuka: This is why you never turn off logging; bug reports without logs are simply unhelpful, and I don't even know what's going on on your end. @Zeenobit: Well, then I don't know what's wrong on your install; I've actually found the number of splashes to be frequent enough that it slows by PC down a bit. Kerbals do float, but not quite as much as they did previously, simply because they've got accurate volume measurements now, and they're really damn heavy.
  19. ferram4
    @FlynCow: If you are trying to use a mod that requires KSPAPIExtensions and you don't have it, then you will have issues. If KSPAPIExtensions is the issue, FAR is not; FAR has no dependence on KSPAPI whatsoever. @tetryds: I cannot reproduce the issue; do you have a log?
  20. ferram4
    @ModZero: Nah, that's on my side; I see what's happening. OnPartJointBreak doesn't fire for decoupling events, and since USI drop tanks and sounding rockets go around that, KJR doesn't clean up like it should. Dev version should have a fix. @Galane: Hmm... I just tried playing around with that, and I wasn't able to reproduce it. Could you throw together a small test vehicle for me to mess with? I'm slightly concerned that I'm missing something important in throwing it together. Edit: You know, just once I'd like an x.0 release to be bug-free.
  21. ferram4
    @DaMichel: Expected behavior for high altitude flight; the Data+Stability GUI does not account for Reynolds number. @cicatrix: Never seen it happen before. Need a full mod list, full copy of the log, and full reproduction steps, otherwise, I can't help you. Also, if it's talking about aerodynamic failures occurring, you didn't disable them. Aerodynamic failures only occur if they are enabled; it is impossible for them to occur if they are not.
  22. ferram4
    I need full reproduction steps and output logs in order to address any issues. I have not sen any issues with regards to clamps or decouplers, and nothing has changed with how they are handled at all.
  23. ferram4
    No, actually. Just me forgetting to account for a specific case for a very, very long time. Dunno how I missed it.
  24. ferram4
    More Late-mas gifts! KJR v3.0 is now available, with a bunch of minor bugfixes, a fix for a really old, major bug in stiffening radial connections where the parent part is smaller than the child part, and another method of stiffening connections in stacks that should help with large-mass ratio part connections.
  25. ferram4
    This mod is obsolete as of KSP 1.0.5. Do not attempt to install it on KSP 1.0.5 or higher. The links remain below for users still on 1.0.4 and earlier. Better Buoyancy is a mod that tries to make a few simple changes to make water behave somewhat better in KSP. This was originally intended to fix a well-known bug in Real Solar System, where planets with very large radii (read: Earth-sized) would end up having very... "bouncy" water as a result of the precision used at the water surface. However, it also allows removal of the insta-water-death effects, so it is a stand-alone mod for stock KSP users. Features: Buoyancy calculations are now done at double precision rather than stock's single precision, resulting in much smoother behavior at the surface. Ocean density can be configured per-body; they are currently set slightly higher than reality-based values due to the rather high density of command pods and such in stock KSP. Moderate speed (~15 m/s - 20 m/s) impacts are only unsurvivable if the velocity is vertical. Otherwise, much higher ditching speeds are possible. That capsized plane above was ditched at 60 m/s. It's very much like landing on land now, except that the water will either grab you and flip you over or cause you to skitter across the surface before capsizing and losing parts. Land is still safer. Download Better Buoyancy v1.4 from KerbalStuff!Download Better Buoyancy v1.4 from GitHub! Powered by ModuleManager. Licensed MIT. Source: https://github.com/ferram4/BetterBuoyancy Note: Plays best with FAR v0.14.6 or higher, but FAR is not a dependency.
×
×
  • Create New...