Neutrinovore
-
Posts
776 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Neutrinovore
-
-
So, as far as I can tell, there's no version of TweakScale that actually works with KSP 1.1? Because the version I have, v2.2.6.1, that I got from GitHub, doesn't work at all. My output log says, quite literally: "Cannot find a PartModule of typename 'TweakScale'". Even though I most definitely have TweakScale installed. Of course, it does the same thing for quite a few other plugins that are supposedly updated to KSP 1.1, including FSFuelSwitch, so I don't know what's going on. Just thought I'd mention this.
-
15 hours ago, DarthVader said:
Calm down on the caps.
Way to be encouraging. His mod, his thread, he can format his posts any way he likes, as far as I'm concerned. I'm more interested in the CONTENT of the mod, and while it's obviously still early days, it's looking interesting, I'm looking forward to seeing how it develops.
@LordOfMinecraft99, good luck and keep on keepin' on.
-
11 hours ago, MichaelV2.0 said:
yes this issue was due to redundant faces on some parts, this has now been fixed as far as i can tell.
Excellent! Because, well, reasons, I wasn't able to play KSP last night, but I'll definitely check it out this evening.
-
Hmm. I checked this out on your first test release, and had problems with MAJOR lag in the editors any time I selected or moved around one of the parts, and they didn't even have textures at that point, just uniform gray surfaces. I'm hoping that the new textures are far better optimized, and frankly, if they're not .dds format already, they need to be converted ASAP. Anyway, I've downloaded the latest version, I'll check it out right now.
Looking forward to future developments from this interesting-looking mod.
-
19 hours ago, Padishar said:
I presume that "My opinions are worth nothing" isn't actually what you were trying to say, otherwise there was no point in posting them...
Well, did you pay ATTENTION? If so, then they were worth that, at least.
-
Well, first, glad that things are being worked on and developed and stuff and things. But, I find that there are fewer and fewer things in this thread that I understand, or that I feel are applicable to me in regard to actual improvements to the GAME itself. Yeah, I get it, you're fixing things about how things work in the background, Unity 5, wheelpocalypse imminent, etc., but I don't really get how what you're talking about will matter TO ME when I eventually update the game to 1.1, or whatever you're going to call it.
Here's what I'M looking for regarding development and improvements to KSP, in the order of their importance, in my opinion:
1. More THINGS on Kerbin. I mean more objects to interact with on the planet Kerbin itself. It boggles my mind that the ONLY 'Kerbal-made' structures on the ENTIRE PLANET are still just the KSC and the Island Runway, that's just sad. We need more places to go, more things to see, and...
2. More things to DO on Kerbin. Well, everywhere, every planet, actually. Same for #1 as well. Anyway, even if you add more THINGS, there's still really nothing to DO with them. Yeah, I get it, SCIENCE. Who cares? I don't play career mode, I only play Sandbox, so I feel that the least Squad could do is to make the (very few) structures that there are actually DO things, I'm talking about, say, being able to pull up to the Hangar and have the hangar door actually open so that I can pull inside. Or even just to have there be vehicles and Kerbals moving around the KSC, the way they're depicted to be when one is IN the VAB or the SPH. But when I launch, where did all those people and vehicles GO? I feel like I'm the only person
on the entire planetin the entire UNIVERSE as soon as I launch a ship or rover or anything. All I can do is drive or fly around and say 'Yep, those things are sure sitting there. Not doing anything at all, interesting or otherwise...'3. More stock parts, and I mean more KINDS of parts that allow me to build MORE than just a big round rocket stack with a kerbbed capsule at the very tippy top, or an airplane or spaceplane that looks like the Space Shuttle (R.I.P.).
So, these things are what I look for every time I read a 'Tuesday Dev Notes' post, and obviously I'm disappointed every time. In conclusion, and specifically for the reasons listed above, I really don't think that you should be calling the game 'Released', or 'Done', as in 'Version 1.anything'. To me, the game is more in a state that I would call about 'Version 0.93'. At BEST.
My opinions, worth what you paid for them.
-
This thing is gonna be pretty cool!
-
2 hours ago, RaendyLeBeau said:
hi all who think they have what get promised
1 page before I have already explained that there are delays, and I also happen to pay bills.
- So I sacrifice my free time for that? wow, I have to think about whether I even want to do that to me in the future. there really people (immature people) that one do not want to make it easy .. from what reasons whatsoever.I'm with you, brother! I hope you didn't take MY comment about the 'Procrastination Society' thing as a criticism, I was just trying to make a joke because my signature has that quote... Well, anyway, my apologies if I offended, it was certainly not my intention.
You keep doing what you need to do, at YOUR OWN pace, my friend.
Things will get done when they're done. Or not. But I agree with you, you've PROMISED NOTHING to anyone, so don't feel pressured if we, the great unwashed, get impatient sometimes. In fact, you COULD look at it as a compliment, if you like. We've seen something here in your mod that we like, and are eager and excited to have a chance to play with it. So kudos to you for creating something that is in such demand.
Keep the faith, Brother! I'll still sign off with the following:
STILL looking forward to future developments from this mod.
Later!
21 hours ago, Stone Blue said:Unfortunately, it seems my motto has become "Why do today, what you can put off till tomorrow..." LOL
Lol, didn't you know? That IS the motto of the NPS, welcome! Actually, the true wording is "NEVER do now what can be put off until LATER" (emphasis added by me). Har!
OOOHHH, I just had a brainstorm!!! If someone could translate that into Latin, "Never do now what can be put off until later", and I mean real true honest-to-God LATIN, along the lines of "Si vis pacem, parabellum", which means "If you would have peace, prepare for war", or "Semper Fidelis" - "Forever Faithful", I would actually pay you real money for that! I mean, I'm broke right now, but as soon as I get a job, I'm totally and completely serious, I want to have it printed on a t-shirt!
-
10 hours ago, Absolution said:
I absolutely do not mind. Although I don't share your vision I am glad that you managed to tweak the First Light to your liking. You have given me some food for thought, though. The Anvil IX came about as a solution specifically for launching the First Light into orbit as a complete assembly. One of the other concepts was to strap boosters on the sides not unlike the Space Shuttle. Your comments made a little light bulb go off in my head concerning a "self launching" package and I think I will investigate it for the current project I am working on. It will most certainly involve the use of boosters and a non-disposed set of engines, again like the Space Shuttle. For some reason I never connected the dots to reason that if I am going to bother launching a set of engines into orbit they might as well contribute, at least partially, to said launch.
I'll also look into making my docking components visually compatible with stock parts. Maybe not 2.5 parts but I'll take a stab at it and we'll see what I can come up with.
Lastly, not going to lie. I made the mistake of downloading Stardew Valley last week and I have been playing it nearly non-stop. As a result work has ground to a near halt on my KSP projects. I'm getting back to work on it this week, though. Stardew Valley is a very enjoyable game; look it up!
Huh, I will check out that game!
Hopefully it's available on Steam, but if not... well, actually, it doesn't matter, I'm currently unemployed, so it's not like I could afford to buy it anyway. 
I'm so broke right now that I couldn't get across the street if it cost a dime to go around the world!
Anyway, no worries about not 'sharing my vision', lol, like I said, I figured out what works for me, and I'll probably end up making changes and tweaks to the NEXT version of the ship as well. That's why I really like KSP, it's one of the few games EVER that lets players, modders, anyone make changes and add stuff so easily. Another one is Left 4 Dead 2, which is the only other game I'm playing right now. But you keep doin' your thing', Bubba, I LIKE what you've created so far, and it's not like I could do any better, so like I said, keep up the great work.
So, anyhow, back to topic. Yes, I think that would be an excellent idea, creating a set of conformal boosters or something like that. I know you specifically designed it to fit INSIDE your Anvil IX rocket, but, again In My Humble Opinion, I feel that the game is already too much about 'Rockets and Capsules and Parachutes' (Oh My!), so that's why I build a lot of horizontally-oriented-and-launched kinds of VTOL ships. In fact, I don't even have any of your CORE Solutions 'rocket' parts installed, just the First Light components. Oh, on the docking ports, I kind of like the way they LOOK now, with the inset 'door' and all.
I had just happened to notice that, in game, they're exactly 2 meters in diameter, so I had the thought to scale EVERYTHING up by 25%, both so that, yes, now the docking ports are 2.5m, but also just so that the cargo bay could actually HOLD 2.5m diameter parts with juuuust enough room left over to have a few small things bolted on to, say, a space station component. In fact, since I scaled it up, the First Light has carried a good 90% plus of my (work in progress) space station modules into orbit, and most of those parts are from FusTek, along with some hubs and trusses from the StockAlike Station Parts Expansion mod as well as DSEV, and they're all 2.5 meters 'plus' just a little bit more.
Well, Abs, enjoy your new game.
There's no real rush from my standpoint for you to get super busy reworking the First Light, but you know a lot of other folks are eagerly awaiting the updated Dune Raider / FireHawk system... well, okay, I'll admit I'm pretty eager to see that get updated too, not so much the 'Ariel Atom' sports-car looking thingy, but a real honest-to-Kerbol UTILITY rover version. Something with an actual cockpit that can carry stuff and has an IVA and everything. Again, requests, you understand. 
Later, and again, looking forward to what develops!
Edit: Wait, what the H-E-double hockey sticks?!? "Stardew Valley is an open-ended country-life RPG..." LOL, okay, from the name I thought it was at least some sort of space-oriented game! Heh, okay man, that's not REMOTELY my kind of game, but hey, whatever turns your crank, you know? I'm glad you're enjoying it, though, I used to know someone who really enjoyed that type of game, so more power to you, my friend!
Later!
-
13 hours ago, Starwaster said:
No that just means its attachment rules don't allow attachment. Age of the mod is irrelevant.
The only real problem this part has is its proprietary dependency on an unmaintained plugin for the wheels.
Yeah, well, ToMAYto, ToMAHto...
-
Yawp, the OP now says March 28th. Bummer, I too am looking forward to this.
Lol, looks like Mr. LeBeau is a member of the 'National Procrastination Society' like me. See my signature for more info...
-
1 hour ago, monkeyemperor12 said:
I cant attach the fuel tank to the command pod
That's probably because this mod is SO OLD that it just plain won't work anymore. Unfortunately it happens, newer updates to KSP break mods all the time, and in my opinion this one is long past its 'Best if used by' date. Sorry.
-
5 hours ago, Buster Charlie said:
I Don't have a mod that lets me tweak the torque value, I used to have one but felt it was a bit cheaty to be able to double the torque with no weight costs (I know no cheat in a SP game but to me it seemed too easy) I'll try disably some of the reaction wheels and RCS and see if it works..
Ah, sorry, I do use the TweakableEverything mod, it does come in pretty handy at times. However, I know Squad did add in some tweakability to certain things, and I thought that SAS torque was one of them, but apparently that's not the case.
Anyway, good luck getting things tuned in, sometimes it takes a little while to figure out all the nuances of how to get things working right in the game. Hopefully it will be a fun process in this case.
Later.
-
3 hours ago, Buster Charlie said:
PPS, I used RCS balancer to build the tug with no torque (besides the reaction wheel), when I'm carrying a payload it just FREAKS out, so i'm not talking about I can't translate very well, I mean, It just whips around like crazy? I tried reducing the RCS thrust to 25%, still freaks out. Very sad.
Yep, I was also experiencing the same thing just last night/this morning. Here's what I found: In the SPH/VAB, I tweak the torque of the CORE part, the one with the big fold-out grappling arms, as high as it will go, to double the original value, but then DISABLE the torque wheels so that they're not active on launch, and just use the default torque values that come with the command pod or drone, or whatever other command part you're using, those shouldn't be too strong for just the little tug by itself. Now, when you're flying around in space, if you're not pushing around a big payload you can tweak down the RCS thrust on the core part to 10% or less, so that it's not too powerful. But when you grab a big heavy payload, you need to activate the torque on the core grappler so as to counteract the WAY-off-center thrust, and gradually ramp up the RCS thruster power slider until you have enough power without it 'freaking out' and being way over-powered. Then you just need to take it slow and easy with your maneuvering inputs, if you're flying manually. If you're using MechJeb's Docking AP, set the docking speed to NO MORE than 0.5 meters per second, probably even slower if you've got something heavy and awkward, and just let it take its time.
Anyway, gotta go, hopefully these tips help. If not, well, they're worth what you paid for them.
Lol, later!
-
4 hours ago, gunt3rgam3r said:
Love the mod...just a little feedback on your latest changes. I have been playing with the docking port on the front of the "pusher". I think you should commit to a single size for the part, and not enable the claw for it. I have not been able to get the docking port to dock reliably with any of the sizes...in almost every case the link is a little off-center and as a result you get an un-centered center of thrust.
I have solved this myself by just adding a stock 1.25 part to the top of the pusher, but that makes the winch less useful, and looks a little dumb.
Again thanks so much for the mod it is great!
Wait... are you talking about the 'core' part, the one with the fold-out arms and the powerful RCS thrusters that has stack nodes at both ends, or the 'docking adapter' part, the one where you attach it so that the cockpit is in the middle of it and has a small service bay at the rear with the doors you can open to put stuff in? Because the first one is JUST a grappler, it doesn't have any built in 'docking' port code. But the second one, the docking adapter, has BOTH grappler functions AND 'universal' docking port code that will truly 'dock' with ports from 1.25 meter to 3.75 meters in diameter. In the case of that part, you don't want to use the 'Arm Grappler' function if you want to actually dock to a docking port, all you need to do is select 'Control from here' and then target the docking port to which you want to dock, then use the method of your choice (manual docking, NavyFish's Docking Port Alignment Indicator, or MechJeb's Docking AP) to dock.
Anyway, sorry to butt in, just trying to help clarify things.
Have fun!
-
8 hours ago, njmksr said:
For the first release, it will not be modular. For the next update though, I will split off the VTOL wings so that you can use them in other things.
Okay, cool, just curious. Still looking forward to this.
FWIW, check out Absolution's CORE mod, specifically the 'First Light' ship parts. Those really only fit with each other, aesthetically, but I really like that mod and in fact I'm using that ship a lot lately, so uber-modularity isn't the end-all be-all. So, again, I shall await further developments of the XKOM mod. Oh, just saw the updated OP, the logo looks good, it should look nice on a flag. And, if you're offering, I'd be happy to be a tester for you. With the understanding that I only play 'Sandbox' mode with infinite fuel and monoprop. But I can certainly report on balance (that's PHYSICAL balance, position of thrusters, engines, CoM vs. Col, etc.), usability, you know, general things like that.
Later!
-
On 3/16/2016 at 6:57 PM, Stone Blue said:
Oooooo.... That 2.5m -> 3.75m capsule is DIVINE...
I second this! When will we see that command pod and its matching service/propulsion module? That picture is what really got me interested in this mod in the first place, I'm disappointed to learn that they're the ONLY things in that picture that aren't available yet.
-
So, when may we see some pictures of how it will appear in-game? Any ideas as to how many parts, how modular they'll be, etc.? As always, I'm very interested in any and all 'Sci-Fi' oriented parts mods, so I'll be keeping a close eye on this mod.
-
YAY!!! Thank you for fixing the spelling! No more itchy teeth, lol!
-
12 hours ago, DMagic said:12 hours ago, DMagic said:
@Neutrinovore I think you misunderstood. It's not about visually confirming the position of the hammer.
The seismic hammer doesn't use visual cues to determine the angle about which it must rotate to face exactly down, or to determine the distance that the variable length section of the hammer must be extended.
As you can see in this picture, the hammer can be theoretically placed in any orientation, and at a variety of heights and still work.
Figuring out the angle that the hammer must be rotated requires figuring out the location of the point on the surface directly below the hammer. I'm not really sure how to do that in the editor (figuring out the distance from the end of the hammer to the floor is probably simple though).
I could play the deploy animation without any changes, but then the hammer would just point straight out and would give the misleading impression that it can't be used in any orientations other than vertically mounted.
It's probably possible to get it working right in the editor, I just don't really want to spend that much time on it when testing it on the launchpad is so much easier.
I think you misunderstood. It's not about visually confirming the position of the hammer.
The seismic hammer doesn't use visual cues to determine the angle about which it must rotate to face exactly down, or to determine the distance that the variable length section of the hammer must be extended.
As you can see in this picture, the hammer can be theoretically placed in any orientation, and at a variety of heights and still work.
Figuring out the angle that the hammer must be rotated requires figuring out the location of the point on the surface directly below the hammer. I'm not really sure how to do that in the editor (figuring out the distance from the end of the hammer to the floor is probably simple though).
I could play the deploy animation without any changes, but then the hammer would just point straight out and would give the misleading impression that it can't be used in any orientations other than vertically mounted.
It's probably possible to get it working right in the editor, I just don't really want to spend that much time on it when testing it on the launchpad is so much easier.
Oh, I see now! Well, your explanation certainly... uhhh... explains that.
I had no idea that the part could actually orient itself correctly no matter how it starts out, so yeah, I see how you couldn't have that function in the editor. See, I have a secret: I haven't actually even tried to use the part. I play sandbox, and when I put science parts on my ships, I only do it to use them in a roleplaying type of way, I don't actually care whether or not they provide any 'Science' points, or whatever they're called, in the game. I just like building cool-looking ships and probes and stuff and then, if and when I actually go fly them to other planets (or to somewhere on Kerbin for that matter, like 'investigating' an Anomaly or something), I ACT like I'm running science experiments if I feel like it, but it doesn't matter if they really do what they're supposed to do or not. Point is, in the case of this particular part, I haven't actually built anything that I've wanted to use it on, so that's why I didn't know how the part actually worked. Capisce?
Anyway, thanks for the explanation, and once again, keep up the great modding work, DMagic!
-
4 hours ago, DMagic said:
I don't want to put in the 'systems check' for the seismic hammer...
Okay, it's your mod.
But, for the sake of argument, one CAN check to see if things can or will reach the ground without leaving the editors. Just have your landing gear extended, and physically lower your ship down until the legs visually touch the floor of the VAB/SPH. Since every landing gear and landing leg in the game (that I know of) is always shown at full extension... well, wait, all the Kerbal Foundries wheels are shown in their fully retracted, or compressed, state, but anyway... one can get a good sense of how long a ladder or a drill needs to be. Or, in the case of DMagic, the various lasers and core samplers and now the new seismic experiment (if it had the capability, is my point) can be checked to see if they'll reach the ground.
So, like I said, I see things a little differently, but it's cool, we can agree to disagree.
I still use this mod every time I build a ship or a rover, I really like all of the parts and how they work. Keep up the great work, DMagic, and I continue to look forward to seeing what you come up with next.
Later.
-
34 minutes ago, Ohm Machre said:
No. It's right on the front page. Do a CTRL+F for mediafire. It's just not a HYPERLINK anymore, due to the ban on MediaFire links.
Right, what Ohm Machre said.
http://www.This website cannot be used on these forums/download/479n9nm72b5reru/OPT1.8testV4.01.zip
The above isn't a 'LINK', it's just a line of text that is a URL. Use CTRL+C to copy it into your clipboard, then CTRL+V to paste it into your browser's address bar. Then just replace the part where it says "This website cannot be used on these forums" with the word "mediafire", and you'll be good to go. Again, it's LINKS to MediaFire that are not allowed from here, as a free individual you have the right to navigate on your own to the site at your own risk.
-
Quick comment: I've noticed that most of the newer science parts don't have a 'systems check' function so that one can check their deployment in the editors. The seismic hammer in particular, I feel, needs to be tested in the SPH/VAB so that one can be sure that it will contact the ground when landed, don't you agree? Plus, I just think it's really cool when I can see what the thing does in the editors without having to launch a craft (and potentially crashing the game... yeah, I have a few issues...) to check it out.
Later, all!
-
15 hours ago, sumghai said:
[MOD - Moved to Add-on Development subforums]
@njmksr, did you make the model and textures from scratch, or were they assets directly extracted from the original game? Do you have permission from Firaxis and 2K Games to redistribute their intellectual property?
Ah, good, I'm glad Sumghai said what I was just thinking.
I'm so broke right now that I couldn't get across the street if it cost a dime to go around the world!
[1.3] Kerbal Joint Reinforcement v3.3.3 7/24/17
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
Is this still necessary in v1.1? I haven't been able to get enough of my mods or plugins working enough to actually build a 'flyable' craft, be it a rover or spaceplane or rocket or whatever, so I'm genuinely asking.