koksny

One more thing tho - could you please provide link to latest version source code? I tried to find it on Github but even the latest forks seem to have not updated compatiblity checker since 0.23. As far as i can tell, KAS generally speaking works (you can move parts on vessel using "attach" button), but the odity generating code seems to be: Of course i can be totaly wrong, but i assume it knowing that, for example, MechJeb in KSP64 reports distance from target in pico-meters. And the part behaviour after grabbing looks like it's hitbox is spawning inside kerbal (Or just generaly bugs out, because it doesn't attach to it after all). Is there for example possibility that some variable should be defined in different way for 64bit build? Really just shooting blind here trying to pinpoint some hotfix. Maybe it's just some simple case of turning float Vector3 somewhere into double Vector3d? (Yes, i have no clue about C#, just really want to fix that god damn satelite with KAS) EDIT: Also i'm assuming this one is the latest code-changing fork? https://github.com/angavrilov/KAS/tree/76ca2cd2c5fae469817e17ad04538a4c1d9adc5a

After some testing i have found that last version of KAS is not compatible with KSP 64bit. Problems with exploding parts/flinging ships and Kerbals are only present in KSP64. No fork or other, older version works as well. Surface attachment node seems to work different in KSP64, or maybe it's just case of much higher floating point precision making stuff collide. One way or the other, can we hope for 64 bit fix for KAS?

Exactly same problem here, renders KAS unfortunately useless. Log of this happening below: Also symptomatic is the grabbing itself dont work - part is just detached from vessel and not attached to Kerbal. Help? EDIT: Can confirm it's problem with KAS and not with other mods - running stock and grabbing anything with KAS still results in same behaviour - ship is flinged hundred meters away, explosions inducing, kraken inviting. EDIT2: Incompatiblity with KSP 64. See below.

Oh, thank you! I'm sorry, i have never yet used LazTek mods, wasn't expecting it's not standalone part. That's it for 99%, i guess it would be nice to get some big and red disclaimer for other people on front page (Since i'm pretty sure it was written somewhere but i just didn't noticed in rush to play with new parts)

Indeed, but trying to pinpoint the one incompatible mod is quite problematic when it's around 30-40 loaded. I'm trying disabling one after another to find the culprit, but no luck yet. EDIT: Ok, so at this moment i have fresh install of KSP 0.23.5, there are only Squad, Nasa and LazTek files in GameData folder, and all previously reported bugs still happen. Cant revert flight, staging gone, full stock. Any help? Log below: And that's from, unfortunately, stock install, brand new save. EDIT2: And there is another report of same problem from Reddit. Looks like it might be direct problem with LazTek part. And as i wrote earlier - it's very similiar problem to what was happening when Porkworks Habitat Pack had badly configured interiors. So i would wildly guess there is problem with IVA config/dependency somewhere. EDIT3: Checked also HD and non HD version. Same. Looks like i'm not gonna play with new shiny Dragon.

Well, so it looks like its some interfere problem, i'll check it in moment on fresh install. Meanwhile, there is same issue reported on Reddit: Obviously that's not a biggest issue, but inability to revert flight is kind of gamebreaking.

It looks like there are some issues with the new Dragon V2 part. - Kraken invoking: If using the capsule, flight cannot be reverted, at all. - After loading the capsule it's engine is not listed in staging (Bug or feature?), only way to use it is to manualy activate it. - Even after manualy activating engine, it's still not starting until hitting menu button and getting back (Esc). - As default, gear is not bound to gear action-group. - From log, there is issue with playing "disabled audio source", and TAC Life Support is seemingly loaded at random points. Might be kraken inducing. Except above, stellar job. Hope we will get at some point nice IVA with RPM support. EDIT: There is generally some wonkiness happening after loading the vessel with DragonV2. Game refuses to save, and even the gear cannot be deployed without hitting menu and back. Last time i had simmiliar issue, it was related to lack of IVA RPM files for one of the Porkwork habitat modules, making staging also dissapear, but this time i dont see any errors in log. EDIT2: It seems it's not any kind of mod interfering problem, same behaviour happens on stock. Can't revert flight, no staging visible. Suspicious output log:

I just noticed flying back from Minmus that reported radiation in Minmus orbit is... 250 Sv/h. And that is really insane, it's 5 times Chernobyl meltdown. Is it intended? Or is there just some radiation belt? And how to shield from it? And i know it doesn't kill Kerbals (yet), but it would be nice to have at least some early tools to counter it. Or is it just bug? Because, really... 250sv/h? The hell? Suddenly Minmus is one of the most deadly places in Kerbol system...

Just as i noticed in edit and Starwaster wrote above - simplest solution is to change HabitatPack directory name back to "PorkWorks", eventually modify the RPM config so it relates to proper directory name.

Ah, then i see where might be problem. You see, Porkjet changed recently directory name to "HabitatPack", it's no longer "PorkWorks", i guess that's the reason of kraken unleashing the moment i load Orb. Going to check it out, but i'm pretty sure that is related. Out of curiosity and to prove thesis from above - what is the name of your Pork-stuff directory? Do you still use the old upload by any chance (Without the new FLAT)?

Do i have to download some additional part with internals for PorkWorks Habitat Pack? Atm game crashes after loading craft that includes Porkworks Orbital Orb (with RPM installed). Log below: After it everything just goes full kraken. Am i missing something, or did 0.23.5 broke compatibility? (did not had that problem in last version between Habitat Pack and RPM)

Just to update on my last post - it seems there is some incompatibility now between Habitat Pack and Raster Prop Monitor. Game crashes while using Orbital Orb and RPM at same time. Log: Am i lacking some internal part? I don't remember downloading any additonal internal parts for Habitat Pack i 0.23.0 EDIT: Looks like RPM might be incompatible with the new directory name. "PorkWorks" directory name is atm included in standard config to RPM, and since the directory name changed to "HabitatPack", it might spew out krakens. Have yet to check it out but seems reasonable.

Any chance on getting it up to date with 0.23.5? Right now the Orb just straight up crashes game for me. After loading craft (with attached Orb), staging is gone (until i manualy decouple something, by using right mouse click) and when i try to Eva Kerbal - Kraken's just getting all over place, 666m altitude, planet exploding etc. This pretty much renders any Sojuz-based craft pretty unplayable for me now. From what i saw in the log and on Unity forums - it might be related to some Animation Module with wrong values (probably 0/NaN).

If you installed precoolers correctly (next to EVERY air intake input, not only the Sabre ones, since air temperature will be very high in all of them) there shouldn't be an issue. Check the status of precoolers in flight, they all must be active. Anyway strange to see problem without Interstellar. Are you sure it's not other mod conflict? Did you updated Firespitter and Kinetech plugins? To be honest, i dont remember any issues with temperature on stock B9. Precoolers (stock and B9) without KSPI doesn't do jack. And they don't need to. Fix the wheels with config setup posted 2 pages ago.

Update KSP Interstellar, or delete B9 config files from KSPI folder.

I dont really understand why do you need very quick food production process. Right now, with greenhouse full of biomass and one Koylent generator you easly generate more food than the amount that will be deplated by Kerbals in same time. You just need to plan with KAC some short sessions of BM generating/biocake conversion. I mean, food really isn't deplating THAT fast. I was really afraid at the beggining of using BM+S that it will be too much hassle, but it really is not. Within one base you really should be able to keep it up without any cargo/maintenance interaction for at least few months, and so far managing this way my own stations/bases seem to work well. That said, i did not yet emptied any of my large greenhouses, sending them in space already prepared and full. I can understand frustration of people who like to play with heavy time-warp or brute force transfer windows, but right now there is really not that much point in leaving Kerbals for years in one place anyway.

Do you have seed container mounted on vessel?If yes - try changing in BioMass_b.cfg flowMode to "ALL_VESSEL". I'm probably wrong, but last time i had similiar problem with food resource and it helped.

Select "Generate Seeds" from the Greenhouse menu, instead of generate biomass.

Isn't it now 1.25m? If it is - i'm asking for 2.5m wide. Basicaly, it would be nice to have wider but maybe shorter version. It again comes down to part count - right now, every Koylent generator in my project adds at least 3 - 5 parts, including adapters, cargo bays and things to just mesh it up with standard, 2.5m parts. It's probably not that bad, as i don't really see use in more than one per base, but still - as someone who takes biggest available battery just so it's in single part (Same with with KOSMOS Solar Panles, god bless that behemoths in 1 sweet part), using adapters just so i can nicely connect it to Hitchhiker or one of labs takes performance a little bit down. As Nachocuban wrote: And i generally agree with it. One large greenhouse to sustain 3 Kerbals seem to me as bare minimum from gameplay perspective. Right now operable space station requires at least 6 Kerbals to work (3 manned crew for RemoteTech local control connectivity, 2 Kerbals in stock laboratory to clean experiments and 2 Kerbals in KSPI Lab to generate science). That means 3 greenhouses to keep up. And i would really like it to be cut down to 2 for the most simple reason ever - symmetry. Especially that there is no other part in game atm with similiar mass/shape. And... that's true. I mean, i realized it (as it's logical), but really deep in my head was still the idea - i need constant amount of seeds to get constant amount of biomass. Guess i was thinking of it more as of fuel than i should. To be perfectly honest, i can absolutly imagine a small room filled with loads of cuckooflower able to keep up 3 adult people alive as long as it's regenerated. And i'm talking here cuckooflower, not space algeas powered by nuclear reactors contained in cutting edge technology, where every inch is probably filled with it. But i would be absolutly fine with the idea that one 2.5m greenhouse provides food for 3 kerbal mission. Still, then i would love 3.25m greenhouse part, just so it would be more convieniant at space stations and surface bases, where as 2.5m double greenhouse would be still great for motherships, where symmetrical load balance matters. That is absolutly sensible and i wish i had them for this sole testing purpose at the beggining of my 0.23 career mode. Indeed, great way to introduce technology and look how it works on first life-supported space station. And more science is always great. Ok, now i'm a bit confused and i guess i have overthinked again. So aquatic greenhouse is same part as normal greenhouse, except it does not produce seeds? I was sure it's aquatic in the sense it works only when submerged in liquid on Kerbin/Laythe/Eve. I'm dumbass. If i would do it, and launch it fully filled with BioMass, do i need more than one seed container on ship? If not, and it would just make it work immidietly with high efficiency... Well that's a great feature design, and again, i'm dumbass for not using this method earlier. Looks great on paper, since it allows for sending "ready to deploy" heavy weight Greenhouses, and compact DIY-on-orbit "IKEA" versions. Well done, i guess? It's kind of problematic in playstyle that requires setting a lot of Kerbal Alarm Clock events, since you dont want to just time warp at single vessel and look for it (because it means that life support on other vessels is running out too), but personally i don't have any issue with this, it just requires now setting up from time to time another event alarm for refilling food containers. That just adds requirement for interaction, something that will be probably gone when you introduce out-of-range resource generation (And i dont think i like it?) Well, so TL;DR, my specific suggestions this time would be 2.5m Koylent maker and 3.25 greenhouses. It solves in my opinion quite few issues, even balancewise, and just increases part creep by 2. Obviously can't wait for greenhouse repair feature too. Seriously tho, great thanks for this awesome support, it really helps to understand the reasoning and ideas author had in mind when pretty complex systems are involved (And at this stage i really think the only one more feature complex mod is FAR, because of sheer amount of maths required in aerodynamics)

Is there any way to fix broken (as, in game status of part is "broken") greenhouse? Can i edit part file somehow to include "repair" action, just like with wheels? Because right now, trying to land it, drive attached to some hideous construction rover and dock to base is huge PITA without breaking it. And it would be ok, if kerbal on EVA could repair it, but right now... would changing "breakingForce" help? Balance wise - i really dont see why it should be so fragile, at least when closed. While open i can understand that solar panels could get maimed by enviroment, but in closed state it shoud be really kinda sturdier. It's basicaly metal tube with some electric engines, dont really see reason why they should magically break at one or two m/s impact. Or they indeed should, but just to require EVA interaction, since it's cool to be able do things with Kerbals themselves. Also, in last GitHub release the small greenhouse is borked, as reported earlier. I was able to unlock it in R&D but it's greyed out in VAB. And since i'm just implementing these parts into base - can i somehow get Koylent generator functionality and attach it to other part model? For now i keep it in cargo bay, just because the texture stands out so much (Also, 1,25m). Can i get, for example, model file from TAC, copy it and change "mesh" value from config to use it? Or would it be easier to just rescale it and replace texture? As someone who broke thousand hours into KSP but plays really casualy, i would be really against such balancing. Getting one large greenhouse anywhere is pretty difficult already. But it's ok - it's not difficulty that's problem. It would mean that for every decently sized base/station you would need at least 6 of them (!) on "Easy" setting (!!). What means that for "normal" half of my space station should be forest. And that would be great, if not... Part count. In the state of the game right now, i'm absolutly against requiring player to use multiple instances of same part. It is simply too hard to keep up basic usability of base/station as it is now, when the game can drop down to really low framerate after reaching over 150, 200 parts. Right now, to provide simple space station to dock, refuel and possibly do some science in labs, you will end in the range of 100-150 parts. Things are fine as long as there is no ship trying to dock. When another 50-100 parts loads, framerate will drop. And the game fun value drops too. Vastly. Trying to provide infinite support of food to my station by docking multiple copies of same part is not fun nor difficult. It's just tedious. It's basically grind, and if i have to fly 6 times to provide food supply by greenhouses, i will probably pass, because i can simply transport 6 times required cargo, just as i would do it before BM+S. If you are really concerned about keeping things balanced, consider at least revaluing your take on difficulty settings. I'm not simulaton freak, as i don't use Real Solar System mod, but as someone who plays with FAR, DeadlyReentry, RemoteTech and TAC i'm really gonna use... Easy setting. Probably even further moded, just to be able to support up to 6 Kerbals from one greenhouse. I know you really did the calculations, and that it's the proper way of implementing it, but i would really consider the mathematicaly correct take as "hard" setting. It's just not fun to spam same module, it drops down framerate and it makes small greenhouse basically useless. Unless i want to feed the Goo. Personally i would just make greenhouse and equipment required to produce food much, much heavier. Like, 5 to 10 times heavier. They could also require the KSPI megajoul power supply, instead of just slapping some solar panels around. Make them bite and scream obscenities at player, but dont require me to send dozen copies of same rocket just to provide Jeb with some algae cake, at that point it would be easier for Kerbals to just evolve into photosynthesis (back). EDIT: Also after some thought, i'm against the idea of seeds being required to grow plants (at least at low difficult level). It's more logical for me to think of the Greenhouse as already prepared to production before start - and it's just to vessel crew to jumpstart the reaction (with water and light). After the reaction is started, the grow should provide seeds for next grow cycle indefinitly. Thinking here about seeds just as material for cake and reaction starter for greenhouse, if the grow was stopped for some reason. Again, seems counter productive to send dozens of seed boxes, just to get very little in terms of mass back in food, while losing a lot in terms of framerate. God damn, i'm just realizing i probably should do something that specific of mod myself, instead of providing useless "mewanna" rant.

So first of all, that was impressivly fast update, thanks for including this few little (basicaly qol) changes. So far everything runs great, but just as i completed one mission and had some science to spare, i noticed there is no option of unlocking new greenhouse in R&D. I see there is in part config, but it does not appear in any node in R&D tree. It does, however, appear as grayed-out part in VAB/SPH. Any possible fix? I must notice that i have Techtree mode (or something like that, from Interstellar mod) installed, but i guess it should not conflict with it?

I must say that was exceptionally great support, after following these guidelines everything seems at first glance to be compatible and running fine. My Kerbals got food on EVA, and the transfer is actually working. That's greatly appreciated, thank you. And i guess the food disapearing at transfer wasn't actually bound to Microbiome part, but it seems that there is generally some incomaptibility between BM+S and TAC with STACK_PRIORITY_SEARCH, this problem occured also on vessels with only stock Squad parts and TAC LS container. So unless stock parts like Science Jr require food, it seem (at least on my mod setup) that with default BM+S settings TAC food just gets removed instead of transfered without any additional conditions required. Still, i have issue with godawful slow transfer speed of food between parts, but looking at these config files i guess there is not much more to tweak so it could be changed. Oh well, it's a game of patience after all, not big deal. My little bigger issue would be the lightning effects on both AGStudy-2 and GooExp2. Is there ANY way to disable or remove it? Can i somehow import .mu models to 3DS and remove some light source helpers, or is some other software required to modify it? The blue glow of Biological Systems Study looks most of the time absolutly out of the place, and the white glow of Bio Containment Study while nice - glows out of the doors when they are closed, making this part a really iritating "candy bulb". Models in BM+S have really a lot of details to them, but the overall aesthetic of textures and lights brings them seriously down. And while textures are not problem for me and i just keep them replaced, i have no idea how to get rid of these special effects around them. Also, to my surprise, after adding to science part config files, it works flawlesly with stock processing lab. Well done, and if i could just suggest implementing it in actual mod - as i wrote in TAC thread, having to bring back whole containment module just because i want few fern leafs seem pretty absurd

So if i'm using both TAC and BM+S, should i just delete BM+S resource config files, or just replace the variables in them? Because now, if i replace it in TAC settings and config files, BM+S still overrides it with it's own settings (Basing it on fact that food transfer doesn't work when using stock install of TAC, BM+S and these settings, works fine with BM+S food resource setting nulled off in config file, but no other change appears and the resource monitor displays same values as before) Also, does Density setting affects the speed of resource transfer between two tanks? If no, is there any way to change it, or is it somehow staticly bound to size of container?

Guess that's one of the reasons these mods should mash up at some point. Sure, i'll post there about it for other interested BM/TAC users.

I have tried this settings, but i'm still getting BioMass config overwriting them. Should i just delete both BioMass cfg files to get it working? Or replace the values in BioMass cfg? Tbh i would be very keen on getting rid of BioMass (screw balance, but models are just ugly and have hideous lightning), especially that we know TAC Greenhouse is coming. I just hope we can also count on some extra science modules to replace ones from BioMass (And with proper config files that allows taking science out of science module, it's just so ******ed to everytime take back to kerbin few tonnes of science equipment, just beacuse you want to take back some fern leafs, ffs...). I would still take the cow. I mean, seriously. It's a cow on moon, much more amazing than cheese on moon.