Nachtwind

Basically this is a nice pack... but honestly.. i dont like the Swastika Faction here... In the light of current developments in germany as well as the well known history i'd like not to see this inside the game/modpack.

I dont know thatSETImod well enough to answer that.. but if you want to have an unmanned focus in your techtrea there are other mods for the community tech tree that surely work without thatSETImod. *edit* You might have a look at "Better than starting manned". In the past at least that was a great rebalance mod but i havent used it in the last few months.

I may lean a bit far out of the window here...but this sounds like not all the mods are compatible either with each other or with KSP. First of all i would remove SETI as this is just a massive module manager "mod"-file and changes pretty much everything beyond recognition (and the name just plain and simply sucks big time). IF KER, chatter and ResearchAlert (Science Alert?) work afterwards as expected, then i would move the whole thing into the SETI thread. Why i am bashing that "mod"? Well, simply because it is the one which has the most variables attached.. KER, Chatterer etc wont change a lot on the Tech tree and are well tested while virtually a minor typo in that seti thing can screw up the whole "mod"...

Sorry for necromancing: There is NO way getting this to work on linux as far as i know (and i deal with g15/linux for a long while now)... The official Runtime for the g15 does not work on linux and the linux runtimes cant handle plugins created for the original api (never understood why they didnt reverse engenier it in the first place..) So long story short: NO, it doesnt work on linux.

Your System looks very similar to my setup i had for like ages.. the 6750 is sort of.. problematic with Gigabyte Mobos (mine was crashing a damn lot, changing the mobo helped there). One thing to solve crashes on my setup was to enable(!) intelligent overclocking in the BIOS. As counterintuitive as it seems this helped me a lot. I was given the advise to do so as the gigabyte power saving features might have choked the cpu to death.. i was experiencing BSODs on high load scenarious in various games, but especially when doing cpu-heavy stuff (you may want to try SuperPI!). If possible you could try this.. it helped me to get only about 1/10 of the BSODs i had before.. then again i swapped mobos and the BSODs were gone. Good luck!

Dont forget that for x64 compatibility the engine has to be switched from unity 4 to unity 5 - which sure is not a trivial task for a game of that scope.

Just did a double triple stability test... This Plugin works on Windows 10 x64, KSP 1.0.2 using unstable drivers for the G15... I would consider this plugin rock stable now or in other words: Seems fully compatible with 1.0.2

WOuld you mind uploading a Screenshot? That really sounds weird...

Still i think thats a bad idea.. The simple reason is: Who would really participate in the "Beta"? A greater majority of people would just enter it as a way to obtain a release before it hits retail. Only a minority of those would go and hunt bugs.. most would just play and either send a rant to the forum or just not write any USEFUL bug report at all... Those who would go on a hunt for bugs and have the background for doing useful bug searching and tracking do that now anyway or are part of experimentals/qa anyway. Sorry for being rude and arrogant here but i think that crying out for a "Beta" release between exp and retail is just a lame excuse to test the game before it is relased. Nothing more.

Damn.. you finally found out how the QA Team works.. now we have to even introduce bugs to make up for the lack of not testing stuff anymore and honestly you disqualified from discussion right here.. right now..

Well... so what difference does it make to wait for the final release and get a fix afterwards? The point just is that any RC wouldnt really change anything. People, and this is yet another fine example of eliterism, would just use the beta as an excuse to get a bleeding edge version of KSP and complain about the bugs instead of filing bug reports. Just see what happened here when 1.0 was released.. Nothing else would happen if a 1.1RC would come out. The change U5 will be heavy but it is not the first change of Unity Versions we had so far and till now we handled that stuff quite well, dont you think?

Ahem... by playing Alpha and Beta versions you basically were playing Alpha and Beta Versions of KSP.

The question just is: How useful could that be in the end? Lets face it - the general community is pretty lazy when it comes to submitting bugs, are they not? Also versions can change a few times per day on qa/experimentals so how to keep track of users and their bugs? People may submit already solved bugs and keep people busy finding this stuff just because they were no longer up to date. It may sound trivial, but that would be a major problem i guess. Its just the old manpower problem. What 10 people do in 1 hour cannot be done by 600 in one minute.. There is a certain threshhold beyond which the amount of testers would become ineffective if not a burden on the (streamlined) process that has been established a few ages back. Of course people could find gamebreaking bugs, but they'd so so on the final release... and then? Well, if you create a hotfix one day after release or during the "third stage of testing" would come to the same point: You have a fix for a problem, dont you? I dont want to be rude or arrogant here, but in general the whole testing business is quite streamlined and people work like a clockwork during testing periods and just putting a ton of unexpierenced testers could be a burden on our back rather than help.

Just between the two of us... Ted once wrote a nice article on how QA works, therefore i wont break the NDA here right now.. but dont think we have access to the same product you receive when it goes public in QA. We test "branches" - more or less one feature at a time.. only in Experimentals the game is "nearly" comparable to the final product and even then only a few dozen testers can test it and first have to run down a lengthy list of bugs to test against. Sometimes tracing a bug, even severe ones, takes hours - and we are not speaking of fixing it at this point. So with limited time and testers only a limited amount of bugs can be found, especially since we test on multiple platforms and hardware sets all the time. Some bugs happen on AMD GPUs, others only on german Linuxes and yet others happen to everyone. Gladly we can say that we find a lot of bugs during QA and Exp but of course some can slip and if yuo crunch some numbers its obvious why: Say 1% of all windows 7 x64 users have a certain bug - that makes maybe 1 person in Experimental experiencing it.. yet when the game is released there can be hundreds who have that bug and think it went unnoticed. But no. If we only have like 50 people on that configuration the chance is quite low womeone experiences it.. but if thousands of people run said configuration a lot of users will see it.. And how many exactly report it the way it would be right? Not all too many.. Therefore i would like to ask of you some understanding of how things work and how we do our stuff.. for the past three years it worked very good and fpr 1.0(.x) it worked great as well, especially in 1.0.ish since i never saw Devs and Testers work that closely before. unfortunately NDA prohibits handing out old testing versions or even changelogs/buglists.. but regarding this ....storm it would be nice to show some evolution from first QA versions down the road to 1.0 final.. and many people would understand and accept the work that was put into this seeminly "rushed" release. But even that wouldnt satisfy some noisy people i guess.. so we wont put our efforts into this than rather keep improving he game beyond 1.0...

As yet another senior (3 years and counting!) member of the slave workers caste i would like to give a few words on this matter as well. I think Hyratel brought up the most important point: We test and help improving the game for the simple reason that we love it. None of us is perfect and i am glad that SQUAD offers us the opportunety to work on KSP the way we do it. Especially 1.0 was a greta example of the dialogue between testers and devs in order to create a great final game. As for regarding people who say they are entitled to a bug free version... just ask yourself if you have ever submitted any bug report to the forum or if you have just keptplaying/restarted the game. There is a lot each and every user can do to help improving the game - but flaming is not a valid option.