MartGonzo

I thought of a vaguely related idea recently, integrating simulation mode into career as a building at the moment you can design and test a rocket in simulation and then copy it across to your save folder, maybe having a simulator building you can test rocket designs in during career would be more streamlined and you could get a little kerbal experience in the simulator before attempting the real thing.

me too, but it's going to be a big job tracking it down so I'll probably leave it and maybe come back some time after the 1.0 release if this mod is still working Thanks for your help spacejuice

phew.. I suppose I could but it seems likely that the same problem would arise, unless I ditch mods and I'm not willing to do that quite frankly this is the just about only mod I had that I didn't consider essential so if comes down to using this or using any one of the other mods I'm using then this one would have to go

hmm, admittedly I've only bought a couple of games digitally that weren't steam but both of them were fine to download multiple times (I reinstall OS sometimes so I have tried)

ok, I'll give it a try - - - Updated - - - ok I just tried and when switching to the first person EVA there is no message in the log, I was wrong about it not moving or zooming, it seems to work exactly like the camera should work from the first person perspective except the camera is in the wrong place. when I clicked on disable camera the log produced this message [Exception]: TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'System.Func`2' from assembly 'mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089 and the camera went very weird at that point, stuck to the runway sideways. After clicking on Activate Camera After clicking on Disable Camera

The memory is not the issue, when it runs out of memory it crashes, it seems pretty unlikely that a memory issue would just shift the camera of the first person EVA mod with no other effects. Thanks for your help though, I might give it another try at some point and see if I can narrow down what's going on but it's not too big a deal.

Really? I've never heard that, I thought in the pre-steam early days of digital downloads codes were used so that if your OS became messed up or you got a new computer you could download again if you had the code? That's certainly been the case for all the non-steam games I've downloaded

32bit version of 0.90 If it's any help I can put the mod back on, test and then upload the logs but I have a suspicion that the logs wouldn't mention it as there doesn't seem to be an error exactly.

No, nothing like that, I've tried many times in many situations in both career and sandbox I had the mod installed for the last couple of weeks because it wasn't really causing any problems and it was definitely trying to work because the button was there for changing camera. I just took it off If you have any ideas what could be causing the problem I'd love to give it another try but if not it's ok I suspect a mod conflict so maybe one of these will stand out Toolbar Active Texture Managment x86 basic Aviation Lights E.V.E + Astronomers Edge of Oblivion pack Chatterer Collision FX Deadly Reentry Distant Object Enhancement Haystack continued Kerbal Engineer Redux Kerbal Joint Reinforcement Kerbquake KW Rocketry Infernal Robotics Planetshine PreciseNode Laser Docking Cam Raster Prop Monitor Scansat Stage Recovery Stock Bugfix Modules Stock Drag Fix Texture Replacer Time Control Kerbal Alarm Clock Tweakscale ModuleManager 2.5.9

Well that didn't work for me, the mod is installed but the camera is not in the right place when I try to switch to first person it switches to a camera view about 10 feet behind the kerbal and can't be moved or zoomed.

has anyone done any tests with the in game antialiasing versus the control panel method? at the moment I have mine set to enhance in the control panel and FXAA turned on and AA turned off in the KSP launcher but I've not done enough testing with both to know if it performs better or not.

That's intriguing, you don't like music? EDIT This was supposed to be a separate post, not sure why but the forum combined the posts - - - Updated - - -

I have had scansats do weird things when left around other worlds, I'd be surprised if this was something specific to Moho. In my last career before the beta, three of my scansats around Joolian moons completely lost their scanning equipment, the parts just dissapeared, the pistons they were attached to were still there though.

Thanks Starwaster, sorry for the slightly angry tone of my last post. frustration and tiredness is a bad combo, I do appreciate your help

That might as well be in Japanese, I'm not a programmer. I read the first post, it said read the first post for how to change the settings then didn't go on to bother saying how or what file just some mention of the debug menu with no instructions on how to access it other than the toolbar and I checked there is no option to access from there so I'm assuming that's only in the latest beta? I looked in the folder and there are about 20 cfg files in there and I have no idea which if any I'm supposed to modify or how, that's what I thought the easy button was for.

Is there any difference with easy mode in 6.4 or is it not implemented? because as far as I can tell the only difference is that the (undeployed) parachutes burn off faster and I lose all the rcs ports on the spaceplanes quicker. I'm guessing from your recent replies that this is supposed to be this way. I've tried had plenty of advice and tried every sort of reentry there is and it's become obvious that this mod is geared towards a level of realism that doesn't interest me, while that's absolutely fine, obviously it's your mod, I do find it a shame because more casual players like me are now excluded.

thanks, not sure what the issue is, quite possibly something about tweakscale as most of my ships have lots of resized parts.

Is there somewhere I can find an earlier version compatible with 0.90? I updated to 6.4 and like an idiot didn't keep the old version, I also tried the new beta but it's no good, on any difficulty, regardless of number of aerobraking passes and using delta-v to slow down I can no longer get ships back through the atmosphere, ships that worked perfectly fine in the earlier version I had.

I don't get the argument, what does it matter to you? We aren't worried for our own player experience, we are worried for squad's reputation and sales Look at what happened with Rome 2 Total War, after 15 patches it's one of the best games CA ever made. but that's not how it's perceived, it's perceived as it was in it's initial release state, buggy, unoptimized and generally broken.

I always find it a bit jarring to watch someone play stock KSP, it can be so beautiful with EVE + Astronomers pack, planetshine, Distant object enhancement and most important of all texture replacer to get rid of that truly hideous starfield. I'm not sure about how others feel but I honestly would stop playing the game completely without those mods, visuals are important and it seems like the dev's just don't see it that way. I want the game to do well, but I'm more than a little concerned by this proposed release

Number 6 is dependent on Squad making money on this game, and I fear that is by no means guaranteed with the game in it's current state.

I'm happy, we aren't just a set of biological impulses I don't find that drive particularly strong anymore. each to their own, but chasing happiness from companionship with another is doomed to fail you have to be happy in yourself first

oh god no! I use minigames and quicktime events as an example of how game dev's are really just sadists who like to annoy players as much as they can.

Thanks sal_vager, apologies for deleting the post as I just realised I was talking about something different.

This ^ I've been hoping for tweakscale integration since I first came across the mod, it increases the variation of parts available without significantly adding to memory requirements. although I don't see any reason not to include cockpit's, engines etc. it makes sense to me to maximise the variability of parts available across the board.