Jump to content

danfarnsy

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    399

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by danfarnsy

  1. danfarnsy
    I've been contributing bits to the B9 maintenance, and @blowfish has taken the lead. I haven't been playing with DRE, so I'm not sure what needs to be changed in the configs. As it stands, the entries in the B9 patch file look like this: @PART[B9_Cockpit_S2_Body_RCS]:FOR[B9_Aerospace]:NEEDS[DeadlyReentry] { @maxTemp = 1700 MODULE { name = ModuleHeatShield direction = 0, 0, 0 reflective = 0.25 } Which config files in your download should I be looking at for an example? Follow up: would borrowing these pieces from your Mk2Essentials.cfg be appropriate? @PART[mk2Battery] { @maxTemp = 850 @emissiveConstant = 0.85 skinMaxTemp = 2706 skinThermalMassModifier = 0.436 skinInternalConductionMult = 0.0000105 // 0.00013518518 skinMassPerArea = 0.815 MODULE { name = ModuleAeroReentry leaveTemp = True } }
  2. danfarnsy
    Welcome to the forums! Edit: I was going to spread some rep on both your posts, but I'm all out of "likes". You're not allowed to like too many things in a day, apparently.
  3. danfarnsy
    Thankfully, if you have a Steam release, rolling back to previous stable release will land you on 1.0.5. I can't speak to what's available through non-Steam channels. That said, I'm glad to see you care so much about the game. It really is awesome. I hope you will also realize what the game represents. It is a reflection of the awesomeness of the people behind it. Yes, there are still some issues. Yes, it's frustrating. Yes, we paid money for it. Heck, in addition to my own copy, I've bought several others for friends and family. I've received my money's worth many times over. But this is not business support software. This is not a matter of losing hundreds or thousands of dollars for every hour a bug is preventing you from playing the way you'd like, particularly when there is a stable version available. Moreover, this is a community-driven game. Most of Squad's current make-up is people who came from the community as users and modders. They're here because they care about the game being awesome. The community's strength lies in people being proactive, helpful, and results-oriented. Many features and bug-fixes that are part of the game originated outside of Squad. Squad may have the final say on what the code is, but we have driven this. It is ours. Squad, wow. What a sprint. You guys must be exhausted. Enjoy some vacation time, and hopefully we'll have compiled some constructive complaints and approaches for resolving them when you're back in gear.
  4. danfarnsy
    I love your blunt communications style.
  5. danfarnsy
    Then I'll take this as an opportunity to learn how these things work. It's low priority, so probably safe for me to play with it. I'm also looking at modifying some of the MFDs to use some more background handlers available in RPM, in place of the text-based ones we're using now. When I have something to show for it, I'll share it. I don't know if you saw the update to my message above on the RPM 0.26 behavior in 1.1.1... sometimes I get frustrated with how additional comments get folded into previous ones if they're made in quick succession without providing either an "edit" or "update" tag on the original. BLUF: 1.1.1 broke stage resource variables, so the newest RPM (0.26) turned it off. In 1.1.1 the updated RPM configs I provided won't be useful yet. They work fine in 1.1.0.
  6. danfarnsy
    That would be interesting to tackle. The texture files are clearly designed so they wrap and mirror according to some switchable transforms. The new Mk2 parts have textures where the switching behavior just references a different section of the .dds file, correct? I wonder if we can use the mesh switch to simply refer to a different section of the texture file the way the Mk2 subtypes do? That way we could either mirror the "top" texture on the bottom for heat-shield-less parts, or we could even put the heat-shield on the cargo bay door exteriors. Obviously, I'm coming from a position of extreme ignorance, which is usually where bad ideas seem like good ones.
  7. danfarnsy

    Brother, I was a little late to the Kopernicus *****-fest, and contributing my own 2 cents after others put it so well. I remember as a junior enlisted whining (the genuine type-3 kind) about something stupid, and this warrant officer pulled me aside and set me straight. It wasn't harsh, it was just to the point: "Negativity is always caustic to an organization." The thing I was whining about was genuinely stupid, but whining about it was far worse. Anyway, I liked your description of the types of complaining. It sounds about right. Thanks for that post.

    1. Jacke

      Jacke

      Thanks!  The first 2 I'd heard about from a woman who'd never been in the CF but had hear about the big distinction between those who complain saying "It's...." and those who say "I'm...."  But it was completely obvious once I heard it.  The other 2 kind of filled in the blanks and brought it back to the petty complaining I've been tempted to do and others have certainly given into.

      I'd be careful about being on-topic, brief, and to the point in the forums.  Should be all the time, but take a care this next while.  With KSP 1.1.2 incoming in a few hours and a lot of tension already built up over the past  2 weeks, I'd find something simple and constructive to do.  Read a lot of the good stuff posted.  Watch and learn.

    2. danfarnsy

      danfarnsy

      Nah, I didn't post in Kopernicus because what needed to be said already was. What I meant to say was "contributing my own 2 cents after others put it so well would have been pointless." I hear you, though. I've been around the forums since early 2013. I've made my own few pleas for civility and gratitude here and there, but I try to stay focused. We're all here because we enjoy the game and we enjoy the community. I think most people's disappointment is a function of unmet expectations and poor perspective. I'm not trying to kill anyone, no one is trying to kill me, I get to sleep in my own bed, I live with my family, and I didn't have an MRE for dinner. Are we really supposed to get worked up over mod updates?

    3. Jacke

      Jacke

      Say again my last, with correction.

      I was more speaking about all the other stuff rather than Kopernicus.  Saw your last post there was on Thursday.  And the rest of your comment is spot on.

      People can get real attached to their games, stock and mods.  When they don't work, and they really want them to work, and they can't see why someone hasn't made then work.  And they're used to really being caustic 'cause they think that's the way to go....

      For me, I had to check and I posted to Kopernicus 3 times today over a couple of hours.  Went back and read them again. I was trying to pull it back to reasonable discussion on topic.  As well, I was trying to pass on some ways for players to avoid getting messed up by stealth software updates, newfound bugs, and corrupted save files.  And then I watched bad just get worse.

      Kopernicus is just something I want to monitor for possible future games, like some other mods.  If I know something that I can add that will add to a mod, I'll comment.  But there's a lot of stress right now.  Kind of time to duck and cover?

      And I just hit CRA (retirement) from the Canadian Forces Primary Reserve, which I've been in a long time.  While pulling together kit to clear out, had some bread out of an IMP (our acronym) that was rather long in the tooth.  Dry, but no really drier than they are when fresh.  Nice as something different.  But that's stuff is behind me and only memories now.

  8. danfarnsy
    I agree with this. There are a number of things different in real rockets, but FAR makes it a lot closer to real life. FAR doesn't adjust the awfully heavy dry masses of the stages (realistic mass fractions would shift your center of mass forward, but they're also game-breakingly cheaty in anything but realism overhaul). There's a mod which adjusts this, SMURFF, but I haven't kept up with it. I'm willing to be wrong on this, but I don't think the aerodynamics of FAR is the issue so much as the rocket designs available to us. We can optimize what we've got, but it's not the same thing as having realistic rockets.
  9. danfarnsy
    Eh, proportionally the width of your payload is (by the Mk1 danfarnsy eyeball) is quite a bit wider than the Titan IV example, and the Titan IV is also much longer in the booster stage. I'm fairly confident any rockets I built like that needed a lot of control authority in 1.0.5. I could go back and try it. But, seriously, instead of trying to defend your design as a point of pride, why not try to add fins stabilizing both pitch and yaw, like blowfish suggested? He's a talented dude. As long as you make sure your center of mass is forward of your aerodynamic center (or center of lift, loosely), your rocket will try to align itself with your velocity vector rather than squirreling away from it.
  10. danfarnsy
    Bruh. Just kidding. People get frustrated because, while you are just one person who is asking this question, there are many others who ask the same questions on many mods without doing some reading. The direct answer to your question is "yes." Where do you find it? It's in one of WeylandSmith's posts within the last few pages. I know this because I read the last few pages. But I'm going to stop short of directly linking it, because, like the others, I am a little frustrated at how many people fail to do a little reading before asking a question that was asked and answered. It's not personal. A lot of people do it, and it's an innocent mistake. But it's a matter of courtesy to do some homework of your own before you come and ask others (who are users like you) to do your homework for you. Would it have been easier to just give you the link than type all this out? Absolutely. But I thought it was worth making a point.
  11. danfarnsy

    Enceos, your awesome profile gif is a distraction. I have caught myself sitting and grinning at your dancing cat at least three different times.

    1. Enceos

      Enceos

      Meow :3

  12. danfarnsy
    That's hilarious. After your help earlier today, I got the B9 MFD's staged resources working properly. Now they're (for the time being) useless again. I'm still trying to figure out JSIGraphingBackground, but I may aim at some other places to play with that. On that note, are you aware of any mods I can check out as examples of that being implemented? It doesn't appear in either your basic MFD or in ALCOR (fairly old, never dull) config files, and the separate initialization and implementation don't appear common to the rest of your background handlers. In short, I was doing it wrong: I was doing this with KSP 1.1.0 and RPM 0.25.1 (second hotfix)
  13. danfarnsy
    The issue appears to have disappeared in 1.1.1. Just to make sure, I went back to the 1.1 install I was using for testing the B9 stuff, and it's definitely there. It's also definitely gone in 1.1.1. Hooray! (and how bizarre) Also, RPM updated for 1.1.1 and (for however long it lasts) turned off the stage-resource settings because of a bug in KSP. That nullifies the changes I made. I mean, still commit them, but "stage-only" resource view will be a no-go until that's fixed on the Squad and/or MOARdV side. Not that MOARdV could fix the stock bug, but he mentioned looking for a possible workaround.
  14. danfarnsy
    Sounds similar to what I reported a few days ago (got lost in the shuffle). It can be re-created by going IVA, then pressing 'c' to go back to external view, and the cutaway view no longer works. It starts working again by re-loading the scene. It also doesn't appear to happen *every* time.
  15. danfarnsy
    But is it 1.1.1 compatible?! <joke>
  16. danfarnsy
    Yes, and maybe no? I'm going to take a look at seeing if I can make them into real graphs. Maybe I shouldn't, as I have a habit of getting distracted and taking too long to deliver the goods. Otherwise, this just restores functionality that was present in KSP 0.92 that got lost in B9 through RPM updates I didn't understand.
  17. danfarnsy
    I created pull requests (a day late and a dollar short?) just now on github. This resolves the resource page format issues. Were there other RPM issues I missed?
  18. danfarnsy
    Update: I was simultaneously providing support via private message. Flatbear didn't *quite* follow at first the instructions I gave. He still had an outdated version of ModuleManager. Deleting it and installing a fresh one resolved his issue. He stated in that conversation that everything was working fine now. Issue is closed.
  19. danfarnsy
    Flatbear, try downloading and installing manually via the github link provided on the first page. If it's not updated/indexed on CKAN, then unless MOARdV provides the CKAN support himself (many mod authors do not), you can either go to the CKAN guys directly and ask them or do manual installation yourself. For what it's worth, I've been holding off on using CKAN, as it's been having issues on a lot of my key mods. Edit: It looks like your GameData folder probably has a number of holdovers from 1.0.5, if you still have Astronomer's Pack in there (which only works with an old version of EVE which is incompatible with KSP 1.1). I strongly suggest starting over: uninstalling everything via CKAN, then going into your GameData folder and removing everything EXCEPT the Squad folder. From there, you can reinstall compatible mods via CKAN and find the others (like this one) to install manually. And when you manually update a mod, don't overwrite the old folder. Delete the old folder and then install the new one.
  20. danfarnsy
    Thank you kindly. This looks like the starting point I need. I'm also familiarizing myself with the .NET string handlers from the SteveX link you gave (I come from a C/C++ background along with math programs like Matlab and Mathematica, only now trying to get my bearings with C#). Edit: Just saw your edit. Purrrdy! I'll give it a try.
  21. danfarnsy
    Lo @MOARdV. When @blowfish took the lead on updating B9 to 5.3, I pitched in with some help with the RPM bits (as RPM updates at the time broke some of the graphical alignment). There was one issue I didn't resolve in KSP 1.0.5: the first two pages of the resource screens were supposed to show stage information with progress bars, but no longer did. It's still an issue that I'm trying to fix. This was functional in B9 as of KSP 0.92, but stopped functioning afterward. Here are three images. The first is from KSP 1.0.5, running B9 6.0.1. The second is running a dev version of B9 for KSP 1.1 (similar issue, but appears different). The last is from B9 in KSP 0.92 (yes, I still have it) which shows what the intended functionality is. The third screen (on the right) shows total resources, and it is functional in all three. It's the staging pages that are broken. I've been looking at your help pages, but as they say at the top, with great power comes a long developer's manual. Honestly, I find it a bit daunting, like looking at the table of contents in a General Relativity textbook. The functional pages have lines like this: The non-functional staging pages appear like this: and Clearly, these two don't look quite like the one that works, but I'm not sure where to start fixing them. Any help with where I should be looking in the manual, or if there are obvious changes to fix this off the top of your head, I would appreciate it. In the meantime, I'll keep trying to get edumucated.
  22. danfarnsy
    Even better, MM's license permits redistribution, and most mods which require it also bundle it. Including MM is an easy fix, and it doesn't cause conflicts with differing versions of MM.
  23. danfarnsy
    @RoverDude has maintained FS for 1.1, here. Hopefully that will help.
  24. danfarnsy
    Update: this seems to be a Kopernicus issue, so hopefully it's fixed in the dev version. I'll follow up in the Kopernicus thread.
  25. danfarnsy
    I'm popping in to report a bug (not because I'm asking for support in playing this in 1.1, but simply to share the information in case it's useful). I had just started a new career and had done a couple of early missions to rake in some science. As the flight center scene was loading (it had successfully loaded a few times previously), I had a weird CTD with a memory access violation, running this under Kopernicus 1.0.2, 64-bit windows KSP. I also had the latest version of Sigma Binary installed. My log has a host of errors associated with OPM, which I wouldn't think is significant except for the fact that the CTD happened in the middle of these errors. Here's the relevant snippet from ksp.log: Here are links to my logs: error.log output_log.txt ksp.log crash.dmp I'm playing heavily modded, but this issue is spurious enough that going through and trying to recreate it under careful conditions is meh.
×
×
  • Create New...