Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    That's the first time someone has told me casting to an object was dangerous. We've all been doing it for years in the KSP modding community (RO included) when doing null ref checks and I even asked years ago if this was a safe thing to do before I adopted the practice myself. If it's null then you just get null object out of it, which you're checking for and then you don't execute your code, or otherwise deal with the null object.
  2. Starwaster
    I'm not in touch with the RO community anymore so if there are any bugs that you guys are aware of over there please create issues for them on the repo. Thanks!
  3. Starwaster
    I want to clarify a few things. As far as I'm concerned, this is still the official release of Deadly Reentry. It prioritizes the stock game first with support for other mods (including those with more realistically sized planetary systems) second. Although I myself prefer larger sized systems (which affects the mod a lot) priority will always be for the stock game. Regarding the update frequency of this mod: Although I have been at reduced activity levels in KSP, I am still here. I respond to issues created on the repository and address player concerns there and on the forum. Rightly or wrongly the mod is just less likely to be updated for a given KSP update when I see that the mods functioning has not been impaired. Compatibility warnings have always been just that: warnings. Those warnings do not come from KSP itself which has no idea if installed mods are compatible or not. Those warnings come from version checking code in the mod itself. (there is a common version checker which most mods out there share) Bugs on the other hand will be addressed and an update issued for those when those bugs are submitted to me and when I can verify and track those bugs down. I am still here.
  4. Starwaster
    Deadly Reentry update version 7.8.2 The Barbie Edition Updated versioning Updated version checking code: All version minor from 8 or greater will be accepted. This effectively means the version checker will ignore all further updates. This edition is in memory of Barbie Doll, an FeLV+ cat who passed away recently. https://github.com/Starwaster/DeadlyReentry/releases/tag/v7.8.2
  5. Starwaster
    Banned for not enforcing the rules!
  6. Starwaster
    @SciMan The LV-N is actually insanely overpowered (aside from the heat issues; heating for that part is not handled in a realistic manner) isp of 800 for a propellant with the density that LiquidFuel has? That's hardly a piece of junk. That's unrealistically overpowered. Ok so it wont get you off the ground into LKO but it was based off of real technology that was in development until funding cancelled and the resulting engines would also have been orbital class only. That's what the LV-N is. Nuclear light bulb engines are still conjectural only.
  7. Starwaster
    @NathanKell @linuxgurugamer If you're going to maintain and run a separate repo (even if it's the original from which this one was forked) please discuss any issues with that repo in a separate thread.
  8. Starwaster
    @NathanKell and yet it worked flawlessly when upgrade configs were written the way I intended for them to be written when I implemented the system.
  9. Starwaster
    @Tybot btw I tried reproducing your issue and I can't. I investigated the Unity error from the log (just before your crash) and I just don't see how Deadly Reentry could be linked. It's an error associated with UnityWebRequest and Deadly Reentry doesn't touch that at all.
  10. Starwaster
    @JebIsDeadBaby the slider affects ONLY heating resulting from supersonic (and above) heating such as you get from reentry. And no, I do not recommend changing the shield config. It's not the same at all; those configs control how the shield responds to heating (temperature threshold and ablation rates) but only the slider will affect all parts such as space plane parts. Maybe after I look into the issue with JNSQ and see what kinds of changes (if any) they've made to physics, I might change my mind about the shields.. For instance, if it's just using the stock thermal settings then physics needs to be addressed. If JNSQ's developers actually paid attention to physics in their x4 system then I'll make changes to the shield myself to let DR shields work properly with JNSQ. But those fields you're chomping at the bit over should only be changed if you have access to the equation that they are used in and understand what effect they have.
  11. Starwaster
    @Tybot Nothing in the log really explicitly singling out DR or stock code that I can see. I.e. no exceptions are being thrown. There is a Unity error mentioned which is unfamiliar to me. And there is another file referenced which it says has more information about the crash. You should find it at %LocalAppData%\Temp\Squad\Kerbal Space Program\Crashes
  12. Starwaster
    @JebIsDeadBaby a little of both actually. Multiple things get adjusted both in thermodynamics and the heat shield configs. first because lower reentry speed second because much shorter reentry period. third because KSP players who aren’t playing RO expect to actually see their heat shield depleted to dangerous levels or else it’s not a deadly reentry. Realistic levels of shield depletion would be something like 10% depleted for a lunar mission reentry. Seriously. So DR by default has shields that suffer serious degradation.
  13. Starwaster
    @Tybot I’ll check that log out tonight @JebIsDeadBaby try using the DR menu to decrease heating. Try 50% to 75% or go ahead and use the x10 values but increase heating. By default the max limit is 200% but that can be bumped up in the config files. (If the max limits are increased beyond stock then you must ONLY use the DR menu to override heating and never touch the stock menu setting whose max limit I can’t override)
  14. Starwaster
    @SesshakuI’ve seen that happen with stock. Persistent rotation not required.
  15. Starwaster
    Sounds like a new bug in Real Fuels. I can't repro that in an older version.
  16. Starwaster
    Ignore it. It's just detecting that it was compiled for a different version of KSP and is warning you that there *might* be compatibility issues. To all, I am not gone and will be putting out an updated version on DR's official repository.
  17. Starwaster
    You need to post logs. Your lag is very probably due to excessive error logging which is resource intensive. Without the logs it is impossible to know what error is being generated.
  18. Starwaster
    Sorry guys, no excuses. Gotten way behind on everything. Release page for 12.8.5 has been updated. I'll try to get to the rest of it. (all of it) https://github.com/NathanKell/ModularFuelSystem/releases/tag/rf-v12.8.5
  19. Starwaster
    Maybe it GOT corrupted during the download from spacedock. I don't think that happens all that often but it's possible. I redownloaded from Github as it was the surest way but I'll see if I can get around to trying Spacedock again just to see what happens
  20. Starwaster
    The zip file on Spacedock is corrupted. Windows Explorer can't open it at all. WinRAR opens it but reports errors in the file. Internally, many folders/file are duplicated with CRC values of 0. What did you use to create the archive?
  21. Starwaster
    No, you're right. It's not MY responsibility. It's EVERYONE'S responsibility. It's a shared sandbox where developers inevitably are going to step on each other's toes and the right thing to do is bring attention to these matters when it pops up.
  22. Starwaster
    Yeah I'm doing a 1.10 pass on everything right now
  23. Starwaster
    It's not passes in this mod that I'm concerned about... There's a lot of mods patching things out there. Just because you haven't found any doesn't mean that none of them were depending on patch order or dependency on Raptor's original mod. It's generally a bad idea all around to make needless changes that can affect Module Manager patches. And that's not even talking about individual players who might switch over to this and then have no idea why things suddenly broke on their end and then they'll be unsure as to what broke or why or who to go to for support. I personally have patches like that and I'm knowledgeable enough to deal with it since I do a lot of modding myself but a lot of players are not. like that. (in point of fact, this was not a chance find on my part; I knew to go looking for just this situation when evaluating if I should switch over to your branch)
  24. Starwaster
    @ValiZockt Why did you change the mod's folder name? That breaks any Module Manager configs that depend on it. (specifically it breaks NEEDS and it breaks any BEFORE, FOR and AFTER passes)
  25. Starwaster
    Right, I probably should have specified that but I thought it would be obvious that it was the RF extended engine
×
×
  • Create New...