Immashift

I get it, I really do. But I think the same people who don't RTFM, are instead of coming here to list a bug that may only exist on 64 bit, now come here wondering why their parts are bricked. All it does is shift the reason for people posting, instead of eliminating the fact that they do. The people who don't RTFM aren't going to go digging around the forums like I did to figure out why their stuff isn't working. They're gonna come right here and post looking for a direct answer. I'll admit when I first encountered it I thought it was a bug. But having encountered it with ferram previously, I was a little more well informed. It doesn't help that the "I hate win64 and so does my mod" message is fairly far down the initial post. Typically I read change logs, see [.25] in the thread title, and assume it'll work, taking into the account that it's 64bit and any and all bugs are on me for using it, I'm fine with that. It would help if that message was a) higher up, and in the thread title. I may disagree with hard disabling it, and feel it causes just as much confusion as unwanted "bug reports", but it's the author's decision. I just think it might be nice to see that message clear as day right above the download button and/or other visible spots. Good example: Nertea's near future mods. Granted s/he doesn't hard disable (thank god), but that message of no support is right at the top in nice big red text. Sort of hard to miss when it's the first thing one's browser loads. I'm gonna shut up now, since this has been rehashed probably a few thousand times.

#rolleyes Why can't the mods that dislike 64bit simply have a config option to re-enable rather than bricking parts and confusing a pile of people? Do I love the mod enough to recompile myself without that irritating checker? Yes, thankfully.

Bumpity bump. This link is either incomplete (the ...'s in the middle of it make me question it), or the file is deleted. Does anyone happen to have new configs for Sido's pack? I'd love you forever.

I'm not sure if it's trouble with PF or other mods, but when I tried it on .25 (64bit, mind you, I know it's already a bit crash-happy), I was also using Kethane, and the Kethane overlay started doing that thing it used to do in map mode that got fixed a long while ago. When you moved the map around it (the whole map) would jitter around a lot and the Kethane overlay would shrink to a small ball in the center of the map regardless of whatever celestial you were viewing. I then tried Karbonite as an alternate resource system and found that with PF:CE installed the orange resource hotspots never showed up. Even on stock planets (I'm aware ORS doesn't procedurally generate resources (yet)). Can't remember if it broke resource extraction though. I'm not sure if these are problems with PF itself or interactions it has with other mods. Sorry I can't be more specific. I'm gonna test it out again soon as it's done downloading and see what it does with .25 for me. Onedrive is slowwwwwwwwwwwwwwww....

PF:CE Umm.. well I've tried it with the 64 bit version of ksp and it did load. The thing is it didn't play well with other mods. Any resource adding mod sort of broke PF. It had the same bug as kethane did a while ago where the map would jitter around when you move it, and the kethane overlay breaks. Kopernicus of course, would be completely compatible because it's doing what vanilla ksp does, just expanding on it. Anyway if all you want to use is PF, go ahead and try it on your install, it's just not going to like it if you ask it to be friends with all your other mods.

I don't believe in its current iteration it's capable of creating planets without a great deal of manual effort and a lot of knowledge. However, the aim, as far as I understand, is to be able to do what you're asking, it's just not at that point yet.

Far as I know it's just config implementation and such that they're still working on. So looking forward to it though, if only to have my PF stuff working with .24.5.

Monoprop is quite often quite toxic (Hydrazine), I doubt anyone would want that stuff on or anywhere near their suit. You'd probably want to use a compressed inert gas like Nitrogen or CO2. It'd be a neat mechanic to take waste CO2 and compress it down into EVAPropellant for Kerbals to use. That would be difficult for me though since I usually have ways of getting rid of waste products. Perhaps a priority system or something.

I had this issue. I took TAC out (deleted the folder from gamedata), redownloaded the newest pre-release, put it in my gamedata folder, and my Kerbals on EVA now consume and have proper resources. I had the problem with the same version I ended up installing. I guess another mod overwrote something that TAC didn't like. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/40667?p=1327963&viewfull=1#post1327963 Agreed. It would give me a reason to care more about monoprop. At the moment I just pack as little as possible because I'm fairly good at docking. I really wish Kerbals didn't just pull EVAProp out of their proverbial rear ends.

I believe that one was in one of your videos if I'm not mistaken. You know I hope you plan on eventually doing something like your Jool Adventure series again. Full stock all the jool moons in one go was definitely impressive. Perhaps Eeloo or Moho? So I've got this small issue... I'm attempting to design a dropship style lander for a planet that requires approximately 15k m/s from /to orbit. I'm trying to get that without dropping stages. No droptanks, nada. Naturally I just went bigger. Bigger tanks, engines, everything. The problem I'm running into is that on things like orange tanks, as the fuel drains, the craft becomes extremely unbalanced and just progresses till you smash into the ground. On small landers my solution is to simply overpower that with SAS modules. Thing is the big ones don't scale too well and just can't keep up. I guess the only solution is to have symmetrically draining tanks, but I was wondering if there were any tricks you know of to stop that balancing issue on large VTOLs.

Jool.. oh I've been there many times This ship is currently at Laythe. Landed on everything up to it + a planetfactory planet called Ablate. This lander did Tylo too. was easier than I thought it'd be. The droptanks on the lander are actually Xenon tanks from the Near Future pack. They're basically the fuel for the drive stage I used to cart the lander across the solar system. The drive stage towing the lander has about 25k m/s (almost all of which is necessary for Ablate, which lies well within the orbit of Moho). The lander is designed to take the fuel modules from the drive stage, and refuel them from a planet's surface. The tanks to the inside of the round ones on the lander are the Oomph pods which normally stay docked to the drive stage because the lander has a decent amount of delta v without them. But in the picture I posted before, I had just come to Pol from Tylo so everything was running a bit empty.

EDIT: I found out that the RCS blocks are indeed 5way. God I love this pack. Know what I'd really love? The coolness of the jet that's included (vectoring, animated goodness) with the RAPIER. So basically a recracty awesomely animated RAPIER. Oh god wait, RETRACTABLE INTAKES. Pleeeeeeeeease!

Yup yup I'm just saying that some mods have odd folder structures and people who only glance quickly before copying sometimes miss the correct structure, and that's why their mods break. I'm guilty of it too. I know we're only at pre-pre-alpha here, but you can't help being excited Cause... planerts... and things. It comes from PF breaking my 64bit .24.2 install with my piles of mods so I can't use it and am now planet starved lol.

I'll try to replicate it, but it's a really complicated craft first off. The bit at the bottom is a lander on its own, and I was designing a drive stage for it (at the top). I was attaching three radial hydrogen tanks to the drive stage when that happened. KER gave up just when I hovered the tank over the attach node, so I left it as a ghost part for that screenshot. Like I said I'll try to replicate, but I can't guarantee KER will perform the same way. EDIT: Ah, it appears I was poking holes in the one part of KER you forgot to put duct tape over I'm using the latest build, was going to update to the unofficial build in the Kopernicus thread, but if there's a new official one coming soon-ish I shall wait. No big deal either way, KER has always understood even my most outlandish builds. Just that one last night got it confused. I'm not even sure what I did that annoyed it that much. Hooray I found a thing.. that you fixed. Thus I am useful. /proud I broke your toy Thanks for catching that by the way. I was more amused at it than anything.

Also thanking Cybutek for KER. Gives me a reason not to use MJ but still have all the statistics I want to know. I finally did manage to break KER with the fun near future ginormous hydrogen tanks and variable ISP engines.. Yeah, I'm not surprised KER gave up on that one. I think I would have too.

Just gonna throw this out there... Jeb/bill bombing around Pol in a Cupcake inspired RCS tug/scooter: And returning to the mostly stock but not really stock, also Cupcake inspired lander, in full refuel mode (normally only the middle section lands, the drive unit stores the Tylo-Crash-Prevention-Oomph-Pods ). Normally the huge xenon tanks on the side are on the drive unit too: Honestly I want a cupcake certified sticker on the side of my landers or something.

You know I just watched that again last night (mainly for large ship inspiration), along with the Grand Tour vid (honestly, I would pay to see that finished ) I think we're missing more cinematic videos of KSP. Perhaps sometime soon I'll do a huge video project like that. The only thing I'm always afraid of is that people won't think my ships are pretty Usually my designs are sort of functional geometric designs that don't have any really artistic aspect. My best attempt at an artsy looking vessel yet, my most recent grand tour vessel "Rigel". Currently at Laythe, has done Ablate (planetfactory, landed), Moho(landed), Eve/Gilly(landed), Kerbin's moons(landed), Duna(landed), Dres(landed), Pol(landed), Tylo(landed): The center section is inspired by Katateochi's Kopernicus vessel, in the way it holds the lander. The lander is inspired by one of Cupcake...'s dropships, as is the little RCS tug the vessel carries for moving things around. The lander even has a built in rover (supported by KAS): Also WOOSH: Landing at mach 2 though, not that great an idea:

I get those problems with either Kethane or ORS installed. Installing PF also borks the kethane overlay. I think it's related to the jittery map thing. Seems the mods are colliding with PF in a way it doesn't like. It's unfortunate because I really love custom planets. Here's to hoping the guys working on Kopernicus release soon.

I'm using the test planet, and everything is in the Kopernicus folder within Gamedata. Check whether you have the correct folder structure inside Gamedata. Some mods like doing something like MODNAME -> RELEASE NUMBER -> GAMEDATA -> FOLDER YOU ACTUALLY COPY. Perhaps you just *dawns sunglasses* need to go deeper.

I guess he wants all the things now I'm curious how the test Kopernicus was made too but I won't push it I'm perfectly happy having the test planet to mess with till this is ready. I installed scansat since I'm playing with karbonite, and it immediately detected Kopernicus, though Karbonite resources are based on grayscale PNGs, so obviously there's nothing on Kopernicus till I make one. Karbonite's author is already talking about procedurally generating them though, so that's pretty cool. Now to see if I can break Kerbal Alarm Clock.. Pretty sure it can't calculate arbitrary transfers to and from planets it's never heard of. Ah, you are a sir. Thanks for that. It bugged me I couldn't see my TWR for the new planet because engineer got all confused.

Making my day here then. PF borks so many things in my install right now I can't even use it, and this would load existing PF planets in a way that's probably 99% sure not to bork things, since it's actually sticking a planet in the system, rather than photocopying one, duct-taping it to space, and hoping it sticks The only problem I currently see right now is that Kerbal Engineer doesn't show custom planets, though that isn't a Kopernicus issue and I believe one of you (or someone in this thread somewhere) did a pull request for that particular change.

That's fantastic. The only other thing I could hope for to make this even more awesome is the ability to use premade PF:CE packs with this mod. Even if it required a lot of manual edits to make them work, I honestly wouldn't care. I just want more plernerts. Pretty pleeeeeeeeeease do. Ascension was so much fun to get to and Thud was gratifying to finally land on and take off from. The more difficult planets that can be made, the better. Kopernicus seems to be even less restrictive than PF:CE was by the sound of it. Instead of just cloning things and messing with values, being able to create celestials from scratch is going to make the outlandish ones even better. As long as this mod continues to be 64 bit friendly I don't even care how much RAM it uses. More stuff to go to > everything else. I wanna see some really wacky hard to get to and play with planets as soon as this mod is ready for showtime Also don't hate me... I forgot to remove Kopernicus before trying to fix my PF install again, and I'm quite surprised nothing broke

Definitely looking forward to this being released, even in an alpha state. Currently PF on the win64 bit client borks a couple of my mods, and Kopernicus floats there serenely with no issue whatsoever, though I have yet to travel to it I imagine if this mod is as straightforward to create planets for as PF it'll have the same massive following, which I look forward to. I'm curious as to how these new planets will react to things like Ferram Aerospace. I play with Ferram / Deadly Reentry, and it'd be cool to have planets that are automatically compatible with those mods (I imagine Ferram works off things like atmo scale height, which would probably make it automatically compatible already). There are a lot of mods with hardcoded planet data though, as you've discovered already.

Also looking forward to updates During testing the most annoying thing so far has been the converters looking for tanks to dump things into in the same stack. This makes things like docking vessels and converting into their tanks sort of hard to do. It took me about four tries to get a craft capable of converting to everything within itself

Nice idea for a thread. I'd also like to save on cost with a pile of mods installed. Getting lower stages to successfully land without either disappearing or exploding seems to be a challenge for me. Orange tanks and mainsails really dig into my funds right now, especially when I drop them 2300m up and they go poof.. I've been resorting to spaceplanes and SSTO's for smaller lifts due to costs. Scott Manley put up a good video on cost savings, in case you haven't seen it: Long ago in modland there was the Lazor system, capable of extending craft despawn range with voodoo magic. This functionality would be extremely useful in career now, cause then I needn't worry about stuff going away and could just recover everything after a launch. As a side question, what are those soyuz-looking boosters from? Can't be Bobcat's Russian pack right? To my knowledge that hasn't been updated in ages.