SpannerMonkey(smce)

HI thats not quite true. Why? Well take for example a stock cargo bay that you want to give a texture switch, IIRC a stock cargo bay is four individual meshes that form the floor , main hull and doors. In order for a switch to work you'll need to list ALL the mesh components in the model you want to change the texture on . There is no way to select individual meshes in sph or vab, so failing to list all the mesh parts will leave items uncolored with no way of applying a texture. You can also use many individual texture switch modules to do the same job, but that's only really useful (imo) when dealing with mesh parts that have different textures than the main mesh , so that instead of switching the whole model texture you can for example , in the case of the cargo bay have a stock color hull and black doors ALL those underscores, you know that they cause problems in parts names? The underscore is translated as a period (.) and MM doesn't seem to play nice when underscores are present . Have you got a simple switch to work? Id use a stock structural panel and do a couple of textures and try that, it seems that you're making life difficult for yourself trying it on a complex part first. Crack the easy one and everything becomes easy AND the object names need to be the name of the MESH not the part unless the mesh is called white_long;black_long;blue_long;green_long;red_long;white_long;black_long;blue_long;green_long;red_long And you have the division between names wrong it needs to be like this YourMod/Parts/Folder/texture; YourMod/etc commas or periods will not work and it will not read the textures or parts names correctly

I'll recheck the function and get back to you.

Hi Sadly not, it still throws the same error, and pretty much for my purposes is useless, the only thing I have not tried is to go way back an try building another from an early save and see what happens, but can't see that it would change anything, as i've already changed everything and it still fails. No , they look like NAS turrets to me, although it's a terrible angle to tell what exactly they are.

There is a large sea water pump in HullBreach using the resource convertor method. I use them by setting them to switch on at launch, that way they stand the best chance of keeping a ship afloat, the sooner you start removing water the better chance you have of renaming afloat. They will ,if you have enough of them ,stop the ship sinking while you escape hostilities, do note that they will not keep a ship afloat that has reached critical condition as that simulates a massive breach and they will not stop you sinking while still being fired upon, as the water ingress will rapidly exceed the water removal. . Hope this helps

Hi thats yet another oops, by now it should all have switched to CAL++ but admin issues elsewhere have messed up the plan. IF you fancy a little copy paste, below is the resource definition for the 203's , just browse to SM Armory Resources and paste the below into the Ammo.cfg RESOURCE_DEFINITION { name = 203Shells title = 203 mm (8") Shell abbreviation = 8" density = 0.06602 flowMode = ALL_VESSEL transfer = PUMP isTweakable = true } OR you can install CAL https://spacedock.info/mod/291/C.A.L++ (Community Ammunition Library for BDArmory) If either means is not to your liking I can release a patch, that will simply add the new/old resource. The whole ammo thing is being reworked to take maximum benefit from the new bullet type and penetration systems, and it''s a bit messy right now, unfortunately. On second thoughts Here is a patch for the Ammo issue, simply extract and merge the SM_Armory folder with the existing version in your GameData folder https://www.dropbox.com/s/6uh1j2bxpx077je/SM_Armory Missing ammo patch.zip?dl=0

Hi, your cluster tank, do you intend for it to be surface attach or node stack attach, as it stands your attach rules will nullify any stack nodes as it set to dis allow stack mounting but allows parts to be stacked on to it. 01101 = stack 0 / srf attach 1 / allow stack 1/ allow srf 0 / allow collision 1 , maybe you should go with 10101, but if you go with 11101 you could use ed extensions to turn off the srf attach if it gives trouble when placing

Hiya, I have to say your experience of the texture tag is very similar to mine, whatever I tried it simply refused to find the texture, I tried as you have literally everything I and anyone one else who had a clue could think of and it never worked for me, admittedly I've not retried for a long time,, "know when you're beat" I'll take another look and see if it works now

I'll go along with the sentiments already expressed by the other modders, I think it's a good idea. I'm certainly always interested in reasonable parts mods to resurrect. Especially as I missed a few while hiding from modding.

In that case did you install it correctly,? it's difficult to tell from your awesome bug report . See first post for bug reporting details

Hiya, Re the negative scale box colliders. This has absolutely nothing to do with being modeled in U4 compared to U5, It is caused by one thing and one thing only, simply that there are indeed negative scale box colliders, a negative scale box collider is created when adjusting the size of a box collider in unity, The problem only usually occurs on small thin colliders. It is all to easy when adjusting a collider to be, for example 1 x 1 x 0.01 for that tiny 0.01 to flip to - 0.01. It's quite an insidious error as in scene unless you actually note the values, there is no visible difference between a pos scale box collider and a negative scale version There is nothing else I've found that will cause it except this, and I have had a load of them to fix. The fix is quick but needs access to the scene, usually it can be fixed by simply deleting the minus sign in front of the relative scale value. ( there may be another way to fix it though, as this value is recorded in the mu but that requires investigation) I do grant however that prior versions of unity did not report this as an error , which explains why so many mods and parts including stock ones are producing this similar error, there's a good chance that many parts in many parts mods have actually been around for many unity versions without problems, which has been great for mod makers all around, but now a lot of old parts will need a revisit. For my part I simply redid every single one that shows up, Being a hoarder of unity projects means I have access to everything I've ever done, some of the projects have gone from U3 to U5 in upgrades The hardest part of the whole job for a mod maker will be finding the damn scene the part is in after so long .

Like everything in the pic apart from the Kerb I make them The helmets in the fps mod btw

Hi as of 1.2.2 Kerbals are impervious to weapon damage from any BD armory powered mod. ( the only available weapon core) There has to this date been one mod that providing Kerbal first person shooter style weapons and that is BD FPS linked in my signature below. NO development has taken place since the 1.2.2 release as there's literally no point. ( which is sad as it was hilarious) The BD team are aware,I'm one of them, and it's not anywhere on the priority list given the infinitely small user base and mod pool

Hiya, took a while for me to work it out too, however it's become pretty standard fare for most things i do now, here's the MM patch I currently use , @PART[TruckIntake]:NEEDS[Firespitter] { MODULE { name = FStextureSwitch2 moduleID = 0 objectNames = IntakeActive // this is as mentioned is the name of the mesh not the part, if you are working on someone elses parts and dont know the mesh name, open the .mu in notepad and usually the mesh name is the third or fourth human readable block of characters textureNames = SM_AFVs/Parts/OSHCab/OshKabS;SM_AFVs/Parts/OSHCab/OshKabDC;;SM_AFVs/Parts/OSHCab/OshKabOD;SM_AFVs/Parts/OSHCab/OshKabUC // this the texture path and in this case translates as foldername/foldername/foldername/texture textureDisplayNames = Stock;Des;Grn;Urb // this is the list of names shown in the gui nextButtonText = Next Color prevButtonText = Previous Color statusText = Current Color showPreviousButton = true updateSymmetry = true showInfo = false debugMode = false showListButton = false } }

Hi Nothing good, several poor attempts later, it's OK but not as smooth in operation as the ab anim was previously. Investigations into what debug stuff was showing, it seems to have trouble displaying certain colliders, It's a fairly safe bet, that if the collider was actually as being shown then you wouldn't be able to surface mount the engine (and you can/could , which proves there is/was collision where debug stuff says there is not) and would have difficulty in simply placing it. Regardless it needed a fresh coat of paint, and it'll be refreshed shortly. Cheers

The trouble with NAS is that he guns are better than laser accurate, and as such any fight using them is usually a one shot affair. IF every shell from a salvo hits' which it will with that set up, then there is nothing anyone can do about it, apart from making ships indestructible for everything else in game. ( which I'm not going to do as It's not my number s that are wrong) Compare NAS turret deviation to the WW2 turrets in SM Armory, they have real world deviations, and the shell fall is as you'd expect from 14/16 inch guns. With proper deviations the guns work very well though. It is because of the over accuracy of NAS that i don't recommend using it with LBP in it's better balanced form.. Below is what a ksp WW2 salvo should look like , not like a solid stream ANd as for making battles more interesting , you need destruction FX from the BDA thread and HullBreach to let your ships sink when damaged

I wouldnt i I were you , the method of construction and texturing is not well suited to reworking , Gerspace btw has full and exclusive rights to the KK assets

Hi all, little update to rectify the missile problem, remove the still broken 88's and fix some colliders. Now available on SpaceDock SM_Armory0.99.13.03

Easy peasy and pretty cool idea, you know my stuff , statics are fairly easy in all departments, and KK is not difficult to work with. The hardest thing is really the placement , finding just the right spot for your static can be more time consuming than making the parts themselves Drop me a line if you need assistance anywhen

Yup Hi along with 1436 other exceptions none of your core plugins are loaded, some of the mods you have installed will NOT work in 122 having been complied for ksp 113. You seriously need to update your mods ( all the Roverdude stuff in particular is badly outdated ) and report back when you have

It is searchable by manufacturer the logo looks like a small one of these And just checked in game and as you see it is there,

Hi, I'd like to see your log, as I've only ever had reports of non appearing parts when the mods not been correctly installed . You would have to do something fairly major to stop ALL parts being loaded as PEW does not use a lot or any texture sharing or dispersed files. pretty much everything would work OK standalone even if you put each one in an individual folder in gamedata . So check that you do have it installed correctly and that you don't have multiple nested GameData folders. If all that checks out and still no parts are showing up in the BD tab please make available a zipped copy of your KSP.log, no other log will be required or useful

Hi thee only log that will be of any use right now will be the KSP.log from you main KSP folder, Make it available in the same way as you've done the output log, and I'd imagine it's a fairly simple fix unless your GameData folder is a horror show

I think JR meant that BDAc would not work with LMP as it is still highly undeveloped and no other current multiplayer option works well enough to fully represent the work that goes in to BDAc and it's true capabilities ( JR ) or fits with the current development plan for BDAc going forward.( of course that presupposes there is one ) . Running demanding software on inferior equipment or platforms leads to user dissatisfaction, and more importantly erroneous bug reports.

Hi well it's more that likely your problem lies in installation of elsewhere as there are very few recorded issues . First make sure you are running in 64bit , the full kerbinside pack is very demanding. Check you have installed the mods correctly , and if it still crashes provide a zipped up copy of your KSP.log (no other log will tell me what i need to know.)