bigyihsuan
-
Posts
582 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by bigyihsuan
-
What decouplers are we supposed to mount the Atlas V SRBs onto? Using a small stock radial decoupler has the pin outside of the hole. Side note, it'd be cool if the bottom Atlas V tank had part switches for each SRB configuration where you can attach a decoupler and the SRB onto nodes like with the Titan and Castor SRBs and their decouplers. -
I have BetterSRBs installed and it's working fine; I've been using the Titan/Prometheus boosters for dozens of rockets now and they've been working as intended. I actually made a pull request (that's now merged as of 1.0.1) that adds compat for it. With the science requirements you'll need all the science you can get, and setting up permanent stations for these experiments will help with that.
-
I'd imagine if you install SMURFF/Real Fuels and configure it for RSS you'd probably have the same experience as stock+KSRSS.
-
According to the Planet Pack Support wiki page, looks like RSS should work. I'm doing GPP which isn't on the list, but I've been doing fine in that save (probably because of the Iota essentially being subbed in for the Mun/Moon). Any planet pack that has a Mun/Moon-like moon to the starting planet and has stock-like science values could probably work with the tree, since the tree (and BDB) has the Kane parts right about when you've exhausted all the science you can get with probes from the Moon.
-
A giant rocket filled with toxic hypergolic propellants used for tourism? How Barbaric! A Barbarian-class rocket, launching Egg Head 4, featuring broken Titan textures on the upper stages: Mhm, broken textures:
-
I think the quick fix would be to add "-dev" to your MechJeb folder, and report back to see if it works if you can see the MechJeb part upgrades in the tech tree, then that means the patches work
-
Honestly I have no idea what's going on with my patch and it needs to be tested to verify it actually works and whether or not unlocking mechjeb in the correct node will do anything AND I just noticed that the selector in the repo is "MechJeb2-dev", but I have MechJeb installed under "MechJeb2". Maybe this is why MechJeb support wasn't working for me initially.
-
lemme blow all you out of the water I sit at my poor, poor laptop for 25 minutes at a time waiting for the game to initially start up. KSP 1.12.3 on a HDD. Mod List:
-
it does, but my info windows were erased for some reason so i had to remake them as custom windows from the presets
-
May be because I applied it in an existing save where I unlocked MechJeb first
-
The tree was built around BDB; however @CessnaSkyhawk is open to pull requests, so if you want to contribute Tantares support you can make a pull request on the github repo
-
Should be, the patch is based off of the patch in the "MechJeb and Engineer for All!" mod, which does something similar.
-
I'm using Skyhawk Science System, which adds hypergolics, hydrolox, and methalox, and reflavors liquid fuel and monopropellant to kerosene and hydrazine. It also has a BDB-focused tech tree, and it's very fun so far. I'm up to prepping for Iota landings with Gemini parts, which will be fun. (I'm using Galileo's Planet Pack, and it's close enough to stock for the Mun/Iota that the tree still works.)
-
You'll still need to unlock the MechJeb part itself (which I have), or use a patch that gives MechJeb to all pods/probes (which I'm using). Once you unlock the MechJeb part itself you should have the features.
-
I seem to have done something wrong from accidentally installing both Magpie and Bella at the same time lol, the fix is most probably removing BDB config for Magpie (since I want everything else to be shiny too). EDIT: aaannnd it borks on some of the texture options. Interesting indeed.
-
Been testing out the tree in a career save with 2.5x-scaled Galileo's Planet Pack, with Kerbal Construction Time and a whole slew of other mods. I'm currently about 100-ish days in and having great fun. However, the fact that many of the parts for rocket families, such as the parts for the Agena GATV, are spread across many nodes on the same level makes it a little more tedious to do stuff with. Thankfully, Kerbal Construction Time has a semi-passive way of generating science, as well as Kerbal Environmental Institute for grabbing the KSC science, but it is interesting when I need to kitbash a bunch of part families together to get a rocket up.
-
I don't really get how you build the Apollo lander into the petal adapter. Do you build the lander from the bottom up (lander first on the inside node, then ascent module) or do you build top-down and attach the docking port to the inside node and rotate it back upwards?
-
Made a pull request on the repo (https://github.com/CessnaSkyhawk/SkyhawkScienceSystem/pull/37) for Ae50/NTO tanks for Procedural Parts. Here's the patch: @PART[procedural*Liquid]:FINAL { @MODULE[TankContentSwitcher] { %TANK_TYPE_OPTION[Hypergolic] { %dryDensity = 0.1089 %RESOURCE[Aerozine50] { %unitsPerKL = 391.139189 } %RESOURCE[NitrogenTetroxide] { %unitsPerKL = 478.059 } } } } In my (admittedly small) knowledge of MM patching, and based on how the Procedural Parts defines tank configs, there's both "unitsPerKL" and "unitsPerT" for defining tank configs. It seems all the configs I've seen that add unitsPerKL calculate out their amounts as about 173.xxx * amount. I based the config off of Kerolox since the hypergolics patches use the same dryDensity as kerolox.
-
I made an issue on the Github repo, but I'll post in here as well. (see https://github.com/CessnaSkyhawk/SkyhawkScienceSystem/issues/35) Mechjeb support is incomplete; the mod features (ascent guidance, SmartASS, etc) don't have their techs set correctly. In the module MechJebCore there is a thing called MechJebLocalSettings. In the latter the technologies for each feature are set like MechJebModuleCustomWindowEditor { unlockTechs = flightControl }(cf. MechJeb2/Parts/MechJeb2_AR202/part.cfg). The parts that you've assigned to techs in ModSupport/MechJeb2/MechJeb2.cfg are just the placeholders for the features being unlocked in the tech tree. EDIT: A quick MM config to move all the techs to the starting node, for now, based on a config in MechJeb2/Parts/MechJebNoCommandPod.cfg: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[MechJebCore],!MODULE[KerbalEVA]]:AFTER[MechJeb*] { %MODULE[MechJebCore] { %MechJebLocalSettings { %MechJebModuleCustomWindowEditor { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleSmartASS { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleManeuverPlanner { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleNodeEditor { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleTranslatron { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleWarpHelper { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleAttitudeAdjustment { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleThrustWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRCSBalancerWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRoverWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleAscentGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleLandingGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleSpaceplaneGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleDockingGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRendezvousAutopilotWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRendezvousGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } } } }
-
Tried loading into my save again with OPM, AKR, and ExplorationPlus, all I got was a black screen and a loading circle, both clicking "OK" and "Ignore Exception". Pressing escape after doing the "OK" option leads me to a blacked out KSC screen, and the tracking station doesn't work. Looks like I won't be using OPM.
-
It won't nuke my current contracts like the CC menu says?
-
This is an error from a Contract Configurator popup I'm getting from combining Outer Planets Mod, Alternis Kerbol Rekerjiggered, and Exploration Plus. Once I uninstall OPM this error goes away. Exception occured while loading contract 'ExplorationPlus.ExplorationPlus-FlyBy': System.ArgumentException: 'AKR_Jool' is not a valid CelestialBody. at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseCelestialBodyValue (System.String celestialName) [0x00046] in <ef0243a06f2841fe9bf57034a334902e>:0 at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseSingleValue[T] (System.String key, System.String stringValue, System.Boolean allowExpression) [0x00179] in <ef0243a06f2841fe9bf57034a334902e>:0 at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseValue[T] (ConfigNode configNode, System.String key, System.Boolean allowExpression) [0x002bc] in <ef0243a06f2841fe9bf57034a334902e>:0 at ContractConfigurator.ConfigNodeUtil.ParseValue[T] (ConfigNode configNode, System.String key, T defaultValue) [0x00012] in <ef0243a06f2841fe9bf57034a334902e>:0 at ContractConfigurator.ConfiguredContract.OnLoad (ConfigNode node) [0x00121] in <ef0243a06f2841fe9bf57034a334902e>:0 This may be related to how AKR 2.6.0 does Jool modification? "Jool has been replaced with AKR_Jool (behind the scenes) to allow it to be modified by Alternis Kerbol again." (https://github.com/GregroxMun/Alternis-Kerbol-Rekerjiggered/releases/tag/2.6.0.0) Strange how this error appears with OPM installed when it seems related to AKR instead. Is there a solution? The best stop-gap I have for now is simply not using OPM.
-
I just spent like an hour writing Python code to parse and convert the tech tree nodes file into Mermaid code for some reason. Here is the code: https://gist.github.com/bigyihsuan/03d2a2b6a930dbf91198f66fee96d836 All of this is for trying to figure where these upgrades would go, but that would mean needing to spin up a new KSP install with nothing but this, its dependencies, and PF/PP + dependencies and examining the tree in-game and noting where these upgrades should go. Fun. EDIT: I've made a pull request for Procedural Parts/Fairings support. I followed the Squad locations for parts.
-
I did some research regarding what would be needed to rejigger Procedural Parts/Fairings for this tech tree. I've found that the following parts need to be moved from these nodes: And these upgrades would need to have their tech changed to the "proper" nodes: These are the nodes on the vanilla tree that the parts and upgrades are assigned to. I'm not sure which nodes on your tree correspond to these vanilla nodes (I should go look into that), but I would recommend placing the parts where it's logical to unlock them, and the upgrades where the BDB/vanilla/etc parts are equivalent or superior to the Procedural Parts if the upgrade was in that node.
