John Nowak

I think you're on to something there. It's about how comfort stacks against living space. It seems to me that while living space gives a linear benefit (all else being equal, Living Space 4 is about twice as good as Living Space 2) while Entertainment stacks exponentially. Thanks very much! I was speculating offline that Kerbalism presumes a "pre-colonial" stage of space flight; extended missions are possible, but living on the mun is not, any more than anyone "lives" on an oil platform.

Apologies for that last post; the forum software inserted a quote and I couldn't figure out how to get rid of it. Anyway, thanks again for the mod; it's a fascinating piece of work, and I think I've been able to get it to do some things it probably wasn't intended for; I had an odd incident where I'm pretty sure it added oxygen to a solar panel, but that's entirely on me. I did have a question, though. I've been looking at Quality of Life, as I have some 3rd party parts that seem they should provide some Entertainment; adding that in seems fairly straightforward. I was able to "go back in time" add 100+ days worth of Stress to one Kerbal by updating the kmon > Stress > problem field in the persistence file. But I'm puzzled by how Stress is removed from a Kerbal. Looking at persistence, it seems that the only way to reduce Stress is to land the Kerbal on Kerbin, which apparently resets the process. Of course Kerbals can be moved into more spacious quarters, but all that does is reduce the rate Stress increases. Am I guessing correctly? Thanks again,

Excellent! Thanks!

I'm curious about the Shielding mechanic. One suggestion I've seen for crewed spacecraft is to provide a small, radiation shelter the crew would move to in the event of a storm. Would Kerbalism model that? Suppose, for example, I had three kerbals on a station with a Habitat module and a heavily shielded 2-kerbal orbital module. A storm comes, Jeb and Bill hop into the safe haven, while Bob is stuck in the unshielded habitat module. Obviously, Jeb and Bill are going to spend some time under cramped conditions, but Bob is going to get radiated. Does Kerbalism handle things at that fine a level of detail? edit Also, please accept my thanks for this amazing mod.

That was with the default profile. Ran out of power within an hour or so.

Ah, excellent. Thanks, that's exactly what I wanted to make sure of. One minor point I ran into: like Kerbalism, TAC-LS makes more use of electricity, so it edits the tech tree to make the small Z-100 battery available early on. With either mod, I'm really not sure if it's possible to survive an orbit in an early pod before batteries are available. As it happens, I have SoundingRockets installed, which comes with a very early 20 point battery. That was an enormous help in the pre-Z100 days of my new career. So I'd suggest you consider some sort of early game electricity boost; either make the smallest battery available early, or provide a small battery early on.

This is a brilliant mod. Am I correct in assuming you conceived it as a generic resource usage mod, so changing up its behavior is mostly a matter of modifying the Profile CFG? And my apologies, but I'm a little confused by your instructions in _readme. If I want to enable TAC, I rename TAC.cfg-disabled to TAC.CFG; that much is clear. But do I also need to rename default.cfg to default.cfg-disabled? Basically, does the mod assume there is only one active profile cfg file, or are they intended to be cumulative? And forgive me for asking a very specific question, but let's say I wanted to modify crew reports to be biome dependent in low orbit. I'd assume we'd add the following to ScienceTweaks.cfg: // Crew report biome-dependent in space @EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[crewReport]]:FOR[Kerbalism] { @biomeMask = 48 } Is that correct? Is there a list of what codes are used for which biome / situation mask? Thanks again, and sorry for troubling you.

I think I reported the issue prematurely. The Spud isn't "broken" - I've been able to re-enter with it successfully, as has the other person reporting issues on this thread. I'm okay with the Spud being a bit trickier to re-enter with. It's still possible, it's just a bit more difficult. Right now, I wouldn't change anything.

Yeah, that's very much a problem with the way experience is implemented. Pilots should get EP for piloting, engineers for engineering, and so on. Not for riding a bus somewhere.

That makes sense, yes. There is something strange going on, and I'm not convinced it's a problem with HGR. kadavi1202 reports his problem stopped after he removed Kerbal Joint Reinforcement; for me it stopped happening after I uninstalled and reinstalled Kerbalism. That all just sounds too weird to make sense, although I'm confident kadavi1202 reported what he saw happen correctly. Has anyone reported any camera issues with HGR? Ships zooming off the screen in the atmosphere?

Apoaps 101, periaps 38. I suspect, but I'm not convinced, that the culprit may be Kerbalism. With Kerbalism installed and Kerbal Engineer displaying thermal data, the critical thermal percentage hit 85%. Valentina was killed when her parachute failed to deploy due to damage. On a second attempt with Kerbalism pulled, the critical thermal percentage topped out at 50%. And now I've got to reverse myself. I just re-entered successfully with Kerbalism installed, and I pretty much matched the profile I saw without Kerbalism. Right now I'm leaning towards "It is difficult to re-enter with the Spud capsule." Much easier with the Mk-1, which doesn't even have ablator. Looking at the config files for the Mk 1 and the Spud, they don't seem to have the same parameters defined, so I'd guess they're using different heating modules.

Sure; I can make a start on this tonight. Thermal information debug option? Is that through F12?

I have also run into a spate of Spuds exploding like taters in a microwave. I do have 200 Ablator in the capsule, but despite that, I haven't been able to ride one all the way down yet. No issues with the stock Mark 1; Shepherd must be laughing at Gagarin. I do have a heavily modded game, but do not have Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. edit: I am aware this isn't a formal bug report, but I'll be more than happy to co-operate with you to track this down. The exploding capsules are equipped with a small inline HGR parachute, and no other attached parts.

When was Minmus captured?

Set up a Patreon and I'm in.

I have to admit that an IVA without windows would suit me fine - would you really put a window in a rotating structure? I'd imagine that the public phone in 2001 spent half the day being cleaned up.

Fascinating idea, and I'd love to see it. A random suggestion, though. If they are too hard to find, add a visible flag. Scientists can see them from further off, with the range based on their Level. [Scientists are able to spot potentially interesting formations]

This does sound like a useful mod, and there might be some overlap with something I was wishing for today. I was maneuvering a ship near a space station, got the relative speed down to 0.1 m/sec, and by the time an engineer was able to spacewalk out to it with a pipe, it had drifted completely out of position. Some sort of "Maintain present position relative to vessel" mod might solve both these problems, especially if it could be set to use monoprop so you still have to keep them in monoprop.

This looks like one of the most intriguing new mods out there, and I'm looking forward to playing with it. I do wonder, though, if you intend to add some sort of gas-venting / ballast drop mechanism to give the players some potential control over altitude. While zooming up to altitude and popping is a good simulation of an uncontrolled balloon, there are mechanisms that work around this, typically a barometer triggering a release of gas if the air pressure gets too low, and another that drops ballast if it gets too high. Systems like this were in use at least as early as World War II and allowed uncrewed balloons to stay aloft for days. Also, please consider some sort of "random drift" mechanism that would give balloons a random ground speed and direction. I'd suggest making this feature toggle, since someone might actually write a full-feature wind simulator at some point.

[quote name='Skalou']tourists (so in career mode) can control the ship if there is a probe even without any connections (no antenna on this test ship) and the "require connection for probe control" parameter.[/QUOTE] What a neat observation! I don't know if that's a bug. It seems that having a tourist fly is possible. It's just a really bad idea.

I think this will make an incredible addition to the early phases of a game. I could really see some long-term LKO missions run to confirm that Kerbals are going to survive a flight to the Mun and back.

Thanks very much edrobot and Gryphon; I'll certainly look into these.

Something came up in my game recently, and I'm curious if TACLS supports this in any way. I've got a flying RCS tank with some solar cells and an external seat, called "The Celestial Throne of Wan Hu." Jeb took it out for a Thrilling Space Rescue recently and was away for a bit longer than planned, so a Second Thrilling Space Rescue was launched to rendezvous with him before his suit gave out. Is there a way to add TACLS to an external seat? Imagine a second PLSS that Jeb can plug his suit into

I agree that distance should be a bigger factor. Water and deserts should reduce the money returned because anything landing there is likely to be damaged by sand or water, while mountains would have a chance of destroying the stage outright because they tend to be dangerous places to land.