Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    I'm sure you did But I've only just fairly recently started using SSTU
  2. Starwaster
    What's the damages going to be as far as craft files and save files?
  3. Starwaster
    Squad really needs to fix that. (I kinda thought they had but clearly not) Try this mod: Even though it says inflatable it's for any hatchless part that contracts spawned Kerbals in.
  4. Starwaster
    That's what I do with my rescue ship for those rescue contracts you get spammed with in early Career. Except that I used the SSTU stackable probe core, wafer thin, between my Mk1 pod's decoupler and the engine. Made it nice and shiny (finally switched over to 1.3.1), send it up empty and rendezvous with the stranded Kerbal. (love how they get up to orbit before I even get done launching the first space traveler.
  5. Starwaster
    It does duplicate those buttons.
  6. Starwaster
    The most likely reason there was no reply is that there isn't enough to go on. No log, no ModuleManager.ConfigCache file... just two guys (NOW... back then it was one guy) saying they have this problem. That makes this an edge case. And Chris doesn't even want to try to support unless logs are provided. That's his call and he's not alone among modders. He even says explicitly in big bold red underlined letters on the front post that he requires logs to do support. It's not the end user's place to second guess that and decide not to provide logs. Maybe if this happened more often and there were SOMETHING to indicate a starting point but there's not. Where do you suggest to start looking for the cause? Pretend you're the modder in charge and think about the information being provided. P.S. Not trying to rag on you but seriously... given the lack of data here, where the heck do you start. P.P.S. Suggestion. Start with a clean install with just Module Manager and Real Chute. Duplicate the problem. If it's duplicated, logs, ModuleManager.ConfigCache and a save file. If you can't duplicate it, re-add one mod at a time until the problem happens. Reproduce the problem with the absolute minimum amount of mods to make it happen (assuming it doesn't happen with stock + RC) and then provide those files. Then MAYBE someone can try to figure something out for you.
  7. Starwaster
    Not an issue of comms, the part either requires resources to be usable as a control point or it doesn't. Or... do you mean IRL? Because IRL, it would definitely be dead in the water Add two ModuleCommand modules. One configured the way you would configure a command module (crew req, no power req) and the other as a probe (no crew req, power req) It will work. I can't say for sure it might not cause some weird issue but no moreso than having MJ on a command part alongside the stock command code. You MIGHT have to add the crewed portion after the probe portion... but I think it will work the same regardless. But probe section then crewed section in the config did work. I tried it.
  8. Starwaster
    Wasn't he played by the same actor in Saving Private Kerman? And Good Will Kerman?
  9. Starwaster
    Essentially correct, except that it's minimumCrew that determines whether the control state is probe or crew. (not sure if pilot skill is counted or not... yeah it is) If resource is specified then the part can't be used for control if the resource is exhausted no matter whether it is set to be crew controlled or probe controlled. (which as you say is really how it should be anyway. No electricity = dead in the water)
  10. Starwaster
    His point is that he's trying to avoid using multiple parts....
  11. Starwaster
    It does bind to a vessel recovery related event, not that specific one but close enough, and it's checking the vessel parameter's crew listing to see if any of its Kerbals are on it
  12. Starwaster
    It also occurs to me that there must be some event that gets triggered when recovering Kerbals that isn't fired when Stage Recovery returns the Kerbals... maybe it would be prudent to fire that event off when SR recovers the Kerbal?
  13. Starwaster
    I hadn't noticed it was absent from the 1.3.* versions... probably because when I'm running 1.3 It's usually for developmental purposes
  14. Starwaster
    I just had some tourist Kerbals disappear from some capsules. It was a mass tourist event with several Mk1 capsules where all of them landed safely but some of the Kerbals vanished from their capsules before I could retrieve them. I would swear that I had seen this reported before and supposedly fixed but I can't seem to find that. Could it be linked to the pre-recovery option? Maybe some additional code to ensure that parts are actually off-rails before recovering from them?
  15. Starwaster

    9bQxaY2.png

    1. Show previous comments  6 more
    2. Superpenguin160

      Superpenguin160

      I'm making one for my Vulcan SMART reuse so it will not look like that picture. The one in the picture also needs some holes so I don't know what you can do with it once released.

      You should be able to make the thing on the picture in KSP with some creativity

    3. Starwaster

      Starwaster

      @sumghai I don't suppose something like this would interest you, would it?

    4. sumghai

      sumghai

      @Starwaster - Looks interesting!

      Unfortunately, I'm fully booked on SDHI SMS and RC2, so I'm not sure if and when I can tackle this.

  16. Starwaster
    The assembly version itself is what is being checked there. The message cannot be removed without changing the version in the AssemblyInfo file and recompiling the plugin.
  17. Starwaster
    @Shadowmage Just curious, is there a reason the stock clampotron (aside from the Sr) isn't on the list of docking ports that station parts can be fitted with? Was it just a case of the similar sized SSTU ports being compatible and leaving it at that?
  18. Starwaster
    Maybe, but I doubt it Would one of the terribly ugly hacks have involved leaving the model enabled until after loading and then disable as needed along with removal of modules needing removing?
  19. Starwaster
    Ok here's an idea... assuming a central module that's keeping track of these configurations. All possible PartModules that could be added to the part are added in the config so that they're present in the prefab. When the part is loaded in the editor or in flight mode, the controlling module will remove everything that's not designated as being installed by default. Loading into the editor (whether from the part inventory list or loaded craft) all such modules are removed. Loading into flight scene, same thing. Adding them back in later then should get around the issue of the KSP not finding the modules in the prefab during loading. (ugh, that was supposed to get appended to the last message but I guess I took too long)
  20. Starwaster
    I do that to a limited extent, stuff like cloning KWR 5m parts and making them 10m so that I can make Saturn V type launchers for Kerbol 10x. So when I first installed SSTU I tried to cherry pick parts which was a veritable nightmare (you understand why no doubt), but having tried them, next major KSP install I'll just do a full SSTU install and ditch a lot of the other stuff. Especially now that he's got PBR in there
  21. Starwaster
    Ah, sorry, I guess we misunderstood each other. DRE does add modules but only at the main menu. So what you're wanting isn't just runtime addition but to do so on the fly. Persistence shouldn't be a problem because as long as the relevant fields are marked persistent then they'll be deserialized when a craft with that module is loaded. MM patching would clearly be a problem though if there's an actual need to patch something, maybe you could get by with template parts that exist but aren't usable by the player (no techRequired assigned or a dummy tech so they don't appear) and patch that and then refer to the template when needing to add the module. Unfortunately I can't speak to other problems you may have had since I haven't done that kind of module manipulation before. Adding them and then having them disabled when not present (as @Jimbodiah alluded to) seems easier
  22. Starwaster
    @Jimbodiah I'm not talking about using Module Manager patches. You can add modules at runtime. Deadly Reentry does so when the game gets to the main menu. FAR does so when a vessel is loaded. @Shadowmage The only mods I've seen compatibility problems with were mods with invasive coding practices (which also caused the compatibility issues with multiple other mods)... or mods with just bad code
  23. Starwaster
    Yes it does. Deadly Reentry does that to ensure that every part has its module installed (except for flags and certain others). FAR does the same thing.
  24. Starwaster
    Originally, RF was just set of optional config files that came with MFT to add real resources. Boiloff existed but only loosely grounded in any real world mechanics. Then more and more 'stuff' got added to it at the plugin level until it became its own branch. Not sure I see how either (or both) could affect ship physics....
  25. Starwaster
    Yeah and aside from the double sets of tank def configs, the two plugins probably wouldn't have worked together either. They're basically the same except that they diverged into two different code bases so the classes are the same mostly and the part modules the same name... Not really sure what they would do together but it probably wouldn't be good
×
×
  • Create New...