Yargnit

Can you tell me how do disable or at least make toggle-able the mouse over part data showing up in the VAB? I can't seem to make it go away even if I switch engineer to require the module while not having the module on the ship. If I missed it somewhere, sorry but I promise i did look. If I didn't a toggle in the settings menu would be wonderful. I love the new 1.0+ engineer, but this little thing is just making me nuts. Thanks.

Is it bad that I keep hitting refresh every 10 minutes to see if it's posted yet? Been stuck using dynamic warp as it gets buggier with each KSP update, but I just can't give up it's ability to boost physics rates or to fix KSP's buggy resetting of phys-warp rates.

That would be lovely

I'd like to strongly suggest going with the option that maintains existing compatibility with already designed packs, for the reason that there is no way to guarantee the makers of them are now, or will be around in the future when EVE v8 is released to update for compatibility. I think the fact that you've been putting out beta's of EVE 8 for weeks now, and neither of the two main packs for it (Better Atmospheres of Astronomers) have released compatibility patches for those who wish to run them with EVE v8 beta's speaks to the need to keep EVE v8 backwards compatible with EVE v7 configurations, especially taking into account issues that keep pushing the final release of v8 back to an unknown timetable, making it impossible for the designers of these packs to plan for. Not having these packs ready for EVE v8's release will be a huge hit to it's adoption imo, because as great as the EVE v8 changes are looking, comparing EVE v8 with stock config, vs EVE 7.3 with Astronomers/Better atmospheres, EVE 7.3 with those packs is going to win every time, and therefore keep people from wanting to update to EVE v8. And that would frankly suck to see. Ensuring EVE v8 is compatible with the v7 config files would solve this issue completely and allow the packs to update (or not if their creators are AWOL) without issue at their convenience.

Can someone please walk me through what I need to do to make http://kerbal.curseforge.com/ksp-mods/220335-astronomers-visual-pack-v3-beta work with the new EVE overhaul please? It seems like the EVE default clouds and such load, but not the Astronomer's versions. The same thing happened when I tried Better Atmospheres with b8 of the EVE overhaul. Thx

So I tried it with the EVE v8 prebuild, doesn't work properly, which is really a shame b/c it really does some neat stuff. Overall I've got to say I see a mixed bag of some amazing looking stuff, along with a few things that really tend to stick out. This picture from Laythe looking toward Jool sums it up pretty well, Jool looks amazing, as does the aurora clouds above, but the cloud layer atmosphere line is really jarring. Here's another You can see two of the layer lines, but Jool looks stunning if you look past it. Beyond that, I think my general feedback would be Duna and Eve especially look better from ground than orbit. Eve looks sweet from the ground, orbit just doesn't convey it's turbulence though. Duna looks almost resorty from orbit, and while the ground shows much more in the way of sandstorms, it still isn't really intense enough. I can't wait to see stormy Laythe. Jool's rings seem to have lost any texture and basically are just a dark shader now? what happened to the particulate designs we saw back in May? The rest of the bodies for the most part just appear to be made sharper from orbit is all. I'd love to see more down in the way that Minmus got the ground cover effects. I'm not sure if you've checked out the astronomers pack for EVE, but the way it added additional particulate even to places like pol was neat, and I'd love to see that adapted here. Otherwise, Jumping to support EVE v8 beta's, even if it means not supporting 7.3 anymore would be great. I was actually rather surprised when u said u were building for 7.3 after u talked so much about wanted features from v8, I'd figured for sure you were building around the betas for it. Hope I don't come off sounding too harsh. What you've done looks great, I just cant help but compare it to astronomers pack, which I was hoping BA v5 would be a big step up from, overall it seems like each pack has it's leads though. looking forward to seeing the tweaks u make going forward.

Just curious, is there any reason you're linking to http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/76402-Plugin-WIP-0-23-5-Custom-Asteroids-0-2-1 instead of http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80483-0-23-5-Custom-Asteroids-1-0-0 ?

Hey Sonic, what happened to the stormy Laythe config? As excited as i have been for this, I've got to say I'm disappointed to see the number of dependencies in terms of secondary mods you need climbing so high. I was hoping with v5 you'd be able to cut the RSS dependency and require only EVE, but instead have picked up several others. Thats the main reason I stopped playing RSS, it just required so many secondary mods. Having BA5 follow that trend in quite discouraging, especially as they are separate downloads now.

I'm currently eagerly refreshing the forums in anticipation. Should we use EVE 7.3, or the latest beta version of it with BA v5?

Just found this and tried it out tonight, loved it. It's neat for doing SpaceX Falcon style rockets, but is really sweet for launching shuttle style craft on the back of planes and being able to re-land the plane back at the runway. - Now all we need is a runway out in the middle of the ocean somewhere so we could land a lift stage there and re-fuel it before returning it to KSC. Definitely adding to my list of used mods. Nice work!

I gotta be honest, I don't like the aurora's or the rings. Specifically I don't like the aurora's from space. They's way too in your face. The look great from on the planet, but form in space, bleh. The rings are also way to bright and solid. Thet remind me or the crumbles you put in yogurt or something. I'd done the opacity way down on them for a start and see how it comes out.

It's probably hanging trying to render the scaled space meshes. If I remember what nathan was saying earlier correctly, if you don't use his default configs, the other configs try and do this every time KSP starts in 6.1, which is about a 15 minute process that looks like it's hanging on loading. I believe a few pages back he stated how to disable this, but I don't remember what it is off hand.

Personally I may cry if you change Laythe from v4, the Mun looks MUCH better in v5 though.

That looks amazing! Same thing I ask for all the cloud packs, any chance for altitude values to match the various RSS configs? (10x & 6.4x atm) It sucks having to choose between having a big planet or a pretty one.

It works pretty well with the standard clouds with just altitude tweaks, but Better Atmospheres has so many different layers I'm not having any real luck getting the tweaks right. especially stuff like the dual layering of clouds it uses to get shadowing doesn't respond to my attempts to tweak them.

I don't suppose anyone's come up with a tweak of this that works with regex's 6.4:1 scale Kerbin mod? I've tried tweaking some of it myself with various degrees of success, but nothing that's actually to my satisfaction.

Not quite on topic in KSP discussion guys.

You guys can all blame any such flaws on me. I contacted Nova with about 15 minutes notice today asking him for the new version because I wanted to stream it in the Squadcast timeslot, so I pretty much nuked his whole testing period. #BlameYarg

Dude, Nova, this is crazy awesome! Just did a mission to Comet Ike at the request of the KSP-TV viewers, it looks stunning! The way the whole sky lights up when you're landed on it or in close orbit is beautiful. Here's some shots from the trip, we spent a good 10 minutes just floating around taking different screenshots of the visuals. Nice work. Can't wait to check out the other planets. is Tylo's atmosphere capable of supporting air-breathing engines?

Unfortunately I don't know nearly enough about the under workings of mods to say specifically what could cause issues. Part only mods I would expect to be fine, the others will be hit and miss.

Saves work fine from everything I've seen, mods are hit and miss (more-so than 0.22), but getting the major modders the opportunity to ensure compatibility prior to release is becoming more of an effort. Of course depending on their schedules that doesn't mean they will have necessarily been able to make tweaks in time, and compatibility cannot be guaranteed as a last minute fix could always break something.

Wow, seeing my face on the forums is weird. Couple notes; You don't have to air-hog the RAPIER's to make basics SSTO's. The plane you saw me fly was designed with enough fuel to circularize orbit around the Mun and return back to KSC. Just building a basic LKO space plane won't require that. Also keep in mine, radials are much less efficient than Ramjet intakes, so if i were to use those it wouldn't have as many intakes. The other picture was a cargo SSTO shuttle, which is why it was loaded with intakes in the manner that it was. Plus, the nacelles looked awesome like that. As for saying the RAPIER is OP, a Turbojet & 2 48-7S's is actually lighter for SSTO design than going with a RAPIER. Part of the general tweaks included re-working flame-out mechanics, which gives the impression of the RAPIER being better than it is, because it's being compared to .22 mechanic engines. & Yes, The ability to reduce the oxidizer levels in your tank to account for burning LF reaching orbit in SSTO's is very beneficial. Thrust limiting is just a % of your max thrust, no terminal velocity automation. ISP of RAPIER is under a LV-t45 in vacuum, but better than a Mainsail. Stay tuned guys!

Yay, I get my turn to close one too! Lets save the .24 speculations threads until after .23 guys. Especially since a thread with this exact same title was locked just yesterday.

Basically what regex said. Both crazy dense and crazy light atmospheres have trouble in KSP. I did a lot of the testing for Real Solar System, 5% and 15x would work technically (though both wouldn't really be much fun to play in) but going much farther toward the extremes such as what Venus and Mars have would be unplayable. A Venus like atmosphere would be like trying to descend/ascend through oatmeal. You're literally talking so think (especially with how KSP makes atmospheres soupy atm) that your terminal velocity would be low enough that landing gear would almost have enough cushion for you to land w/o a parachute. On the other hand, ascent would be completely impossible because the atmosphere would be be so think it'd be impossible to get through it before you ran out of fuel. At the other end of the spectrum, KSP's parachutes physically won't deploy at all at Mars's atmospheric levels. you basically need to double the atmosphere of Mars at minimum, and even then drogue chutes only stage open about 5km above the surface, and standard chutes around 2km. Basically you're stuck with the negatives of an atmosphere (being limited to physical warp as opposed to regular) without the benefits. Their current atmospheric levels (1/5th and 5x) are basically at the limits of what's fun to play in. A bit less or a bit more would still be playable, but just wouldn't be any fun. (Also heavy atmospheres have an engine issue where you run into a harsh edge where you go from significant atmosphere to none instantly because of how it does the calculations. (Nathan is going to have to write a completely new atmosphere model to fix it)

Yup, that was it. Just forgot what all I had to change to make it work.