Nertea

Hey, thanks for the feedback! Couple things: 1. Your initial instincts are correct, all the normal maps in the mod have some issues. They're not inverted but they have some strange filtering artifact going on. They will all need to be reexported and recompressed. However... it should not cause that thing in your screenshot, which I definitely can't reproduce in unity at least. 2. All of the panels will rotate and fold at the same time - nothing I can really do about that. I am not at a computer that can test this, but I assume by weird you mean that the door clips with the rotation or something. I'll work on getting the normals fixed for the next update. Umm, it was going to but I scrapped it. I could create it again, what are people's thoughts? Lol I would like Kop to update too. There is a 1.7.3 branch of NFeX on my github you can get the dll from if you must, but I'm not going to propagate updates and fixes into that branch any longer.

It is generally worth ensuring you have reflection map refresh turned on in the video settings and set to an appropriate value. In addition, the resolution of the cubemaps can also affect the look in flight. The VAB cubemap is the high quality and pre-generated one so will generally look best on any of the parts while flight will be lower quality.

After some research I have discovered that some fuel tanks in KPBS have very, very low dry mass values - approximately 1/5th of stock. This will create problems, as the universal patch assumes that fuel tanks obey the stock mass ratios. Ideally KPBS would adjust this ratio to be consistent to the rest of the game, or perhaps can provide a patch that makes it so CT will correctly understand the tanks. Yes it does. Sorry for the delay in replying - I was trying to get the most current version of my balance spreadsheet off my broken work laptop so I could speak to this a bit more clearly. However all the data on the laptop was wiped, so I don't have that anymore. Overall your conclusions seem pretty correct (previous post) - looks like the LH2O engines are winning when they should and losing when they should. I'll take a bit of a further look at the Ulysses and Pavonis, but I'd still say that overall total performance is more important than ratio performance to another engine (particularly an MH engine). There are some considerations - a Tharsis should equal or be very close to 2 Pavonis...es, for example. The Ulysses is also bit special because I wanted to pull in a little from its RL counterpart which has quite a high thrust level and takes a hit in specific impulse. I'll take a further look at those two engines though!

Working towards the Rhino-ish engine, it's the Space Transportation Booster Engine - a paper design for updated STS liquid-fuelled boosters. Uses a lot of SSME stylings and hardware, with influence from the RS-68 as well. Will come in our usual set of variants, likely 2.5m, 2.5m boattail, compact, and 3.75m. I've also got most of the way through the unwraps for this engine and the RS84, so progress!

Thanks for the analysis. One thing that jumps out for me is the way you talk about different DV results for dedicated tanks and other tanks. This shouldn't be the case - all the performance ratios should be identical, the mass difference should be abstracted into the power generation with the non dedicated tanks being more electricity intensive to cool. Can you elaborate there? We should make sure all the balance variables are on the same page before we start thinking about changes

Bugfix releases, @cineboxandrew turned that leg fix around real fast! Restock 1.0.3 Updated ModuleManager distribution to 4.1.3 Fixed Flea, Hammer, Kickback and Thumper colliders (#779) Fixed certain landing legs causing teleports after timewarp (#780) Restock+ 1.0.3 Updated ModuleManager distribution to 4.1.3 Fixed Pollux and Anvil colliders (#779)

I have managed to reproduce this, see https://github.com/PorktoberRevolution/ReStocked/issues/780. We'll see what we can do. In the meantime, retract your landing legs if timewarping on the pad with a launch clamp attached (issue seems to only occur with the combination of launch clamp plus extended legs).

Urk I left the debug switch on, so 2.1.4 is a thing.

Released 2.1.3: Added support for NF Exploration

SSPXr 1.3.2 Updated MM to 4.1.3 Fixed some stupid squad 1.8/BG thing (fixes randomly disabled autostruts on vehicle state changes)

NF Exploration 1.0.2 Fixed MLT-10 RCS fuel option containing LFO instead of monopropellant FeedScale of most feeder antennas tuned: 75% efficiency -> 90%, 60% -> 75% Pushed up the ranges for the smaller side reflectors by ~5-10% Upped the range for phased array antennae by 10x Tweaked tech locations for a number of the weaker antennae (on average, 1 tier lower) Fixed a localization issue with the VAB info display for ModuleDeployableReflector Fixed a localization error with the PLTO core description Adjusted the shader settings of some probe cores to match with each other better Fixed large CHFR bus' silver foil texture Fixed a missing texture reference in some probe normal maps

My mod does not redistribute RPM, so the dll version is whatever version you have personally installed.

I added some smaller things to NF Solar last update. I definitely won't add any solar panels to NFX, because, yknow, other mod. I thought I put them in the sameish places as comparably-ranged stock product but I'll have another look. The largest reflectors should definitely be past the stock antennae because they allow larger distances for sure.

Yeah I'll look further into it, but so far I still can't reproduce it (details in the ticket). The only thing I'm tracking that looks problematic is that both you and @Yurikus have the BG expansion and I don't at the moment. If either of you are willing to see if you still have this issue without BG installed that would be very helpful. -edit: ignore everything I just said, I figured out what is causing it. However fixing it is going to be very involved as the code that's causing the issues is the code I use to tell the game to recreate the IVA portraits.

Seems very much like an RPM issue, the content in this mod just uses the props.

I had a look through your repo and I thought that this might be the issue. https://github.com/KSP-TaxiService/CommNetConstellation/blob/e77e8bdca44826612e24f47eedbb6b8644c90020/GameData/CommNetConstellation/cnc_module_MM.cfg#L11 If I replace this with something other that Moduledatatransmitter this module wouldn't get added, correct? Here's the report I got fyi.

Yes that is correct.

Yes that is generally correct. It's harder to predict exactly because antenna requirements are nonlinear. Those are the three foldable reflector bonuses without any feed. The bonus is additive but multiplied by the feed efficiency - only the special feed antennae have 100% efficiency so get perfect use of the bonus. Most other antennae get 75% of the bonus at the moment. It's easy to do with parts that I control the model of, see some of the NFX where the antenna moves and the path moves. Other ones need to have static points and directions defined. Will eventually improve this, but it's not really high on the docket. Luckily most of the stock moving antennae wouldn't make the best feeders anyways so I can defer it 1. Check the comments in the patch files, it will explain why 2. I'll think about it. 3. I'll look into it.

There's a 1-7-3 branch on my git, link in the last page or two of my release thread. You should probably post issues with the release version in the release thread. However, it's not really a regression, but 1.0.0 was fundamentally completely broken, and the changes needed to solve this have introduced this problem. I've contacted the mod author to see if we can figure out the best way to resolve this. Follow discussion here:

Hey! I've heard that this mod is not compatible with my new project NF Exploration. This is likely because I subclass ModuleDataTransmitter to do a bit of work on antenna power when a vessel is unloaded. I looked through your repo a bit to see how you handle this and see if I could do something on my end to adjust compatibility but I figured I would post here to let you know before I embarked on anything.

If memory serves correctly, if you use MKS or Ground Construction, the habitats need MaterialKits to be deployed, which represents kitting out the modules with all the bits to make them habitable (coffee machines, french presses, espresso percolators, etc). When you execute this function the MaterialKits are consumed and their mass is moved into the module itself. You may be seeing that.

There's no issue with that really - you would just make the origin point the deployed location. The no variants thing is related to Restock, which I want to always support (because I never have it not installed), having antennas that have PartVariants that actually point in different directions depending on variant selected. Eh the stock antennas are very, very strong in a lot of cases. It's worth pointing out that uh, size isn't everything in RF-land. Still, more explanation - I could keep making antennas that get stronger than stock, but that might be a bit pointless. Check out this chart: NFEx in blue, Stock in orange. Reflectors are included. Basically, stock's progression is quite hole-y at the lower end, but less so at the top. So most of the NFX antennas were designed to fit into areas that could be useful and not outclass everything. I also know this is less relevant in many gameplay modes too, but most of the NFX antennae have interesting properties in terms of data rate, power consumption, combinability, etc.

I mean, I did just release something new, but I've already started on the first 2020 project - Updates to NFLV! This pack has been aging poorly for a while so there are going to be some significant additions and improvements in the next generation: 5m Ground-up overhaul of the tanks New and expanded set of 5m engine adapters Repaint of the cargo parts (don't think they need a remodel) Tweaks and improvements to the utility parts 7.5m Ground-up overhaul of the tanks (plus an additional length of tank) Revised set of engine adapters Actual XL cargo parts These new tanks are being developed in lockstep with the Restock 5m tank set so will with some MM magic integrate perfectly with those. I'm also going to be adding some more engines. I have a patch that I play with that turns the stock engines that 'should' be cryogenic to be cryogenic - that means you lose the Vector, Mammoth, Rhino and Skipper as options for LFO engines. I plan on adding some new engines to fill those niches that are purely LFO. These are going to be based mostly on fairly robust engine concepts from recent history that never quite made it off the ground. I'll be making: The AR-1, Aerojet's repeatedly-advertised engine that nobody really wants. This AR-1 will be 1.25m (though a little chonky on one side) and will more or less fill the Vector role: Available in all the usual variants of course. The big blobbly turbo causes an interesting asymmetry to the boattail. The AR-1 clusters very nicely to build the Mammoth replacement too, which has Lots Of Pipes: To replace the Skipper, I've chosen the RS-84, an engine designed as part of the Space Launch Initiative: Cooked up some nice variants ranging from compact to 2.5m. These models are more or less done - there's 1 or 2 more engines on the way (Rhino still needs a replacement which is in the final detail stages, and I need some kind of 3.75m LFO vac thing), but I think these will all be very fun to play with and hopefully look nice too. ETA on this is probably early Q2, it's quite a lot of work. I'll post periodic progress here.

NFAero doesn't have any plugin components (it relies on @Angel-125 to provide that) so it'll be fine for quite a while. The only part-related 1.8 issue was the deprecation of a specific texture compression format, which imo anyone in their right mind shouldn't have been using in the first place. I won't remake the mod - I still have the assets, they just need to be rebuilt in Unity (haha, 'just', that's still a lot of work). The problem with making parts in the specific fuselage shapes is that they then become less useful overall (this goes double for OPT-shapes). You can put a 1.25m engine on a Mk2 part, but you can't really put a Mk2 engine on a 1.25m part, if you know what I mean... @biohazard15, @RyGuy_McFly Did 1 or 2 ingame tests and *seems* fine. https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/NearFutureExploration/tree/1-7-3

I was unable to reproduce any random disassembly/flexibility issues regarding the inflatable parts in tests