Kaa253

Whatever the abomination is, it is not discernible in KSP Linux version because the stream of NREs relating to window-back.png prevent the game from loading

If you need a bit more variety to your orbital stations then I suggest that you consider enhancing your MKS/USI-LS based station with some extra flare from Nertea's Near Future Solar, Near Future Construction (simply awesome) and Stockalike Station Parts. The MKS parts make for really good looking core habitation areas and then Nertea's parts add on the docking facilities, integrated trusses, solar panels, etc.

By non-deployable I presume you mean a Radiator Panel which acts differently from the Thermal Control Systems. You don't need to extend them but you do still need to activate them. Did you activate the Panel? Sorry if this was obvious already.

I wonder, is anyone on linux using this mod successfully? I use only linux and am thinking of giving KSS a try. However, I have been following @TaintedLion's troubles and wondering if the problem might be messed up upper/lower case configs.

@JadeOfMaar I don't seem to be able to use Blackheart's mod with stock stickers. If I select a GPP sticker all is fine. However, if I want a stock sticker it shows in the VAB correctly but in flight it gets replaced with a GPP one. Am I missing something or is it broken?

Please tell me, how to do that?

Ah! I was wondering about Kerbal biology. Now we know

@Starslinger999. If you are using OpenGL/Linux (and MacOS?) then it is a well known bug/issue with no known permanent fix. However for some people a temporary fix is to go into the in-game settings change your texture quality level and change it straight back again. ESC key Settings Video & Graphics Texture Quality: change to Quarter Res (for example) Apply Texture Quality: change back to your normal Res Accept You might be good now until the next time you start the game.

@RoverDude I think that perhaps the KA-400LA and KA-800LA Low Altitude Scoops from Karbonite have not had the IntakeAtm updated for the current KSP atmosphere model. Could that be right? It seems that the Karbonite jet engines become starved for air intake at altitudes/pressures too low for Duna flight. Perhaps this was intended? I once (KSP v0.9?) enjoyed flying Duna on Karbonite. (Sorry if you have started a new Karbonite thread somewhere)

Does that mean I should honour my country (and yours together?) and go on to model an accelerating expanding universe?

I have to wonder if the fps drop has any relationship to the NRE spam in map view under Linux https://github.com/Kopernicus/Kopernicus/issues/158

@Supermarine MKS now has built-in KSPedia which helps in the earning process a lot.

Unless my install is bugged? Take a probe core slap on an empty 2.5m flat Kontainer tank. Set it to specialized parts and leave it empty. Cost in VAB is now 2,345 funds. Save the vessel. Start a new vessel. Grab a DIY Kit and pack the saved vessel - bang! Now context menu shows Kit Cost 146,445 funds which is basically the cost of a 2.5m tank full of specialized parts. Make certain you touch the DIY kit in some way as I see a lag in the VAB cost computation. Is this a symptom of something wrong with my install? Should I start pulling mods one at a time? Nobody has confirmed this in either forum thread at all.

Hi @RoverDude. I am watching your twitch stream from a couple of days ago. I generally miss them live (time zones for one reason) but very much enjoy watching them when I can. Anyway, I am currently watching you draw out a plan to build a big commodities return vessel using GC on the Mun and fly it back to Kerbin for "profit ???". My own findings are that GC calculates the cost of a DIY kit container for any ship based on the cost of that ship with all the containers being full, regardless of whether the ship was saved in the VAB with those containers filled or empty. Consequently, it seems to be impossible to build anything with GC that can be filled with any resource (or not) and then returned to Kerbin to sell for any profit at all (with one exception I can think of... eg. make a DIY kit full of dirt containers and then change them to a more valuable type of resource container after GC construction - then fill and return). Maybe you realise this later on in the stream? I hope my message on @allista's thread last week made sense? and maybe this one too?

Ah. OK. I was only discussing the documentation. The documentation is really the only thing I might ever change. And I do that rarely and simply in the hope that I might help folks get the most fun out of USI and perhaps free up Rover a bit to work his best magic. I leave all the mod balance, design, innovation, planning and all-round thinking to the Maestro, i.e. @RoverDude.

@TauPhraim I see what you are driving at and you are quite correct. The kerbal professions matter not the modules for earning kolony bonuses. I copied that text over from the KSPedia in a hurry last week as life was very busy. I just wanted to make the page to get it started as the wiki had nothing at all on the Dashboard. I guess this indicates that the KSPedia needs an update here too. Please, as Roverdude says "changes for defects are welcome" so go ahead and make it better. The page you mention is really intended as just an introduction to the Dashboard as people often post here having trouble finding it and the associated Recruit Kolonists (soon to be replaced with TRP) tab. This page https://github.com/BobPalmer/MKS/wiki/Crew-Skills-Impact-on-Parts may be in better shape with regards to professions and how they relate to bonuses. By the way, there is another forum thread which may (a mixed blessing) have some value in keeping this thread from filling up with wiki and KSPedia discussions?

@dboi88 Basically I just copied the KSPedia as the text there is perfectly fine . Gosh, I got lost in the KSPedia github, simply because it is so huge! Amazing. I couldn't find an image Blizzy's toolbar icon. On my KSP it appears as GameData/UmbraSpaceIndustries/MKS/Kolony24.png .

I like @LatiMacciato's image. Big red arrow. Can it go in the wiki? Maybe there should be a topic about "The Kolonization Dashboard" between "Kore Design" and "Parts" on the home page?

Yes it is. Remove ISRU_Patch.cfg from inside the GroundConstruction folder and it goes away.

Has anyone else observed that the kits cost more than the fully resource stocked original ship before it is packed? For example; in the VAB make a first ship which consists of a probe core and an empty specialised parts container how much does that cost? start a new second ship with a probe core and DIY kit and pack the first ship into the DIY kit how much does that cost? detach the kit from the probe core and then stick it straight back on again how much does it cost now?

USI Modular Kolonisation System is currently changing from off-world construction based on EL to GC based system. Given that ShipYard may also be an option as well as potentially other KAS original or KAS v1.0 mechanisms for ship construction it is hard to say at present what might be the best way to balance these parts within that spread of mods. If the parts can be made available then hopefully the community will contribute MM patches that interpret them as space docks for use in EL, GC, ShipYard, KAS, etc. I appreciate any and all of your efforts, thanks. Best wishes for the studies

YES!!! Please

Cheats menu - Infinite propellant? I know, not exactly what you asked but it's all I got.

@blu3wolf I do feel for your thoughts on some parts' node placements in CTT. I have changed the Power Coupler position down from Experimental Electrics to Advanced Electrics for myself. It is not hard to edit the MKS_CTT.cfg file. I found I was needing to use jittery KAS pipes just to distribute EC power. This defeats the whole disconnected bases anti-Kraken idea. The PDU's are high in the tech tree (fine). Then I thought, does it make sense that I need to learn Experimental Electrics (which has the RTGs) so I can have simple Power Couplers? After all this part is really (abstracted) just a box with a bunch of long extension cords! Kerbal version is probably not space-rated nor surge protected either. We could/can always make a pull request for CTT node changes but I like the idea of doing a general collection of thoughts and some community discussion first.

If you have it then you should see the DIY kit container in the "Payload" parts. That's the group with the stock fairings aka the Airstream protective shells. There is also a GC button on the toolbar and several other cool parts by @allista. EL is still there and working correctly. Roverdude has said it will be deprecated eventually. I will be comfortable with that if orbital construction with GC () is made possible. The Ground Construction resource chain is already changed in this release to use Materials Kits in line with MKS. (It would be nice to have some Specialised Parts requirement going forwards.) If you are not using GC already this will not be game breaking. If you are already using GC then there is a "convert old GC resources" function available so no mayhem there either. This is indeed the correct thread to discuss CTT placement of MKS parts but I am pretty happy with its place in the Simple Command Modules node (it is on the same 90 science points level as the stock Hitchhiker with a crew capacity of 4). I have seen and used other mods with 3 man capsules at this level (e.g. HGR). I am really pleased to see the GC bundled release and bursting to get into using it. Thanks @RoverDude