Jump to content

allista

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,208

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by allista

  1. allista
    To have a taste of what's coming, here's a sketch of a Ground Assembly Line that will produce DIY Kits on-site. *yeah, I'm not even close to @RoverDude in these things; and can't even say "I'm learning" because I'm currently learning asyncio and basic ML/AI stuff for work. But at least it's in line with the Ground Workshop, and it's better than nothing...
  2. allista
    Most likely you haven't updated AT_Utils that come along. output_log.txt will tell for sure (somewhere at the beginning, when all the .dlls are loaded) In current state, no; plans exist and the work is in progress right now. But, for starters, we'll have the ability to create DIY kits on other planets and in orbit. Then, I'll add space docks to build in orbit. I plan to finish the work during the summer.
  3. allista
    Nightbuilds (well, more like Morningbuilds) https://www.dropbox.com/sh/m3pkpgxpo9dbd40/AABq5MCRI-JDmQJiZyh-ZUTla?dl=0 There are versions of all my mods, because invariably the AT_Utils code is updated. So if you happen to use any of those beside GC, use the nightbuild flavor. Now, If you find a bug, report it here with all additional information you can gather. Screenshots are often more descriptive than words, and if the bug is an actual exception, the output_log.txt (Player.log for mac/linux) are indispensable. Save files and .craft files could also help, especially if they're not too modded. Anyway, thanks for the help, and enjoy new stuff and new bugs (and even some fixes of old ones) Cheers!
  4. allista
    !!! VOTE: SkyCrane decoupler fate !!! The vote is closed, as no more votes are coming for a day or so, and results are conclusive: 14 voted to remove the decoupler and leave the plain attach node 2 voted against it Majority rules. https://goo.gl/forms/sz3SURFK9WUAkVxf2
  5. allista
    Waaay too big indeed! But what mods are those parts from? Something called Lynx and some trusses by TAL, neither of which I cannot find on CKAN. Something else?
  6. allista
    @Critter79606, i see. The box being 10 times greater is certainly a bug. So a screenshot would help, as well as some account of constructed parts. As for the growing vs outlying... That's somewhat of a taste issue. You, for one, agree to take responsibility, but I can bet that the outlining would cause the outcry of "you blew my base into pieces!" from much larger audience. I can draw the resulting box, or its "shade"on the ground before unpacking. I can even draw a convex hull of the thing inside (like in Hangar). I can also decrease (actually, you also can via GroundConstruction.user config file) the speed of the deployment, so that everything went smoother. But I'm very reluctant to physically allow anything to get into construction site. Consider also a role-playing aspect: the box is not just a don't-go-there hedge, it's also a space for kerbals to work within.
  7. allista
    Yea, USI is actually in the process of switching from EL to GC. Now, you've touched an important topic. I've had an apparently false feeling that the build-in-the-box model is way better (and was actually made to solve some of EL problems) in that it pushes things away instead of blowing them up when the built ship is spawned. Because the box has exactly the size of the bounding box of the ship inside it, to the inch. As for "you never know" part, that's a simple wish request: I'll add the display of the fully deployed kit. Like that arrow that shows the forward direction, a rectangle that shows the actual boundaries. Or, if you prefer, the whole box, including sides and the top to see the height. And I haven't entirely understand the last thing about 2x launch capacity and braking things down. The kit is always lighter that the parts-to-be inside would be. The kits (if you need a bunch of them) could be stacked without the use of docking ports, because each one can be detached as is from the previous one using its part menu (they have decoupler on the top node). And with the bulkhead constraint you can make a train with the same cross-section everywhere. And, most importantly, GC can build things that are not ships -- not regular shapes, attached to the ground et cetera.
  8. allista
    Thanks! I'll make a build in a few hours when I'm home. There were no time in the morning, when I was writing the post
  9. allista
    The figures: you can always look at the part menu of a Kit, where the Kit Res. figure should now be accurate. As for the patches, now, that's the tough one. MKS already ships a cut-down version of GC without ISRU patch and most of the parts (except the DIY Kit box itself), so you probably wouldn't want to touch that. Patch for EL is somewhat awkward, considering where everything is going: GC will have DIY Kit production on site (soon), including space, and eventually even orbital construction (becoming Global Construction instead of Ground Construction), and it will completely replace EL in USI universe. Patches for other ISRUs, on the other hand, will be a great addition, only improving game experience.
  10. allista
    Yea, thanks a lot for the patch! Handy, will include it in the next release Nah, the logs won't help much, as it's a simple calculation problem (my fix for Kit.Res==Kit.Mass backfired). Does it affect the consumption of the Material Kits by the way, or is it purely a display problem? Anyway, I currently up to my neck in making the DIY Kit on-site manufacturing possible, and since the internal mechanics of the building process have completely changed, this bug won't be around much longer; much more notorious ones will come up instead That said, does anyone want to help me with testing of the work-in-progress? So far there isn't much in terms of new features (aside from loading of subassemblies into Kits), but the whole framework was rewritten from scratch and we need to make sure everything is backward-compatible (i.e. BACKUP YOUR SAVES) and that current functionality has not regressed. Also, it's a joy indeed: seeing your work in use like that *wish I could have time to actually play KSP these days...
  11. allista
    Hm... I'll try it myself now, but It seems to me that you have a faulty mouse that generates more clicks than you actually make. I myself have had several of those with the symptoms like that. @Reverant77 Here, see for yourself: https://gfycat.com/IndolentJadedGoldenmantledgroundsquirrel
  12. allista
    There are multiple reports of incompatibility with AVP, yes. As for the Scatterer and EVE, I don't know, so you can try and share your experience.
  13. allista
    How so? Never have such problems myself, actually. You just left-click to add all the waypoints you want, then right-click to stop adding them and return to normal operation. In any case, ClickThroughBlocker can't help with that problem.
  14. allista
    Yea, I have an idea Thanks for the report
  15. allista
    That is tempting But the need to compile against it and the .dll load order problem still make me hesitant about using such utility libs
  16. allista
    TCA does an even simpler thing: it checks if a mouse is over the window rect, and if it is, it locks controls to prevent other KSP stuff from reacting. The key word here is KSP, not Unity. These "control locks" work on KSP controls, like part menu and so on, but other UI windows drawn using direct Unity calls don't know anything about these "locks". And, as you can imagine, drawing a bitmap of a waypoint on screen and then checking if a mouse click was directed at it is pretty low-level stuff. EDIT: I want to emphasize, that the underlying mechanisms of TCA's clickthrough preventing and that of the ClickThroughBlocker are identical.
  17. allista
    The Clickthrough Blocker only works with the mods that explicitly use it, i.e. compiled against it. TCA has its own clickthrough prevention that works very similar; but it does not prevent actual mouse clicks, just the response from other windows. In simple terms, even if TCA had support for the Clickthrough Blocker it wouldn't help
  18. allista
    !!! VOTE !!! Considering the previous discussion, I would like to ask you to answer a single question: https://goo.gl/forms/sz3SURFK9WUAkVxf2
  19. allista
    Yea... but if you look at their .cfg files you'll see that the ModuleDecouple configs are identical, except for names. So I'm really out of ideas here...
  20. allista
    Yep. It is from AT_Utils. So it's probably an installation problem.
  21. allista
    Ok, got it, will investigate the matter more thoroughly. Meanwhile you can remove the MODULE { name=ModuleDecoupler ... } from the SpaceCrane.cfg to get rid of the button. As for the tank, I would recommend to use the Toroidal and Spherical Tanks by TAL with Configurable Containers and, say, Tweak Scale; this combination will allow you just the thing you want -- a hollow tank with configurable contents that could be placed atop of the SpaceCrane core without elevating the node much. The thing is, despite my liking for making parts, I'm much better at programming than at 3D modelling (and especially texturing ); and GC needs a loooot of programming to bring about the next killer feature -- the production of DIY Kits on site + in-orbit construction. And I don't have much time on my hands, so priorities are obvious. The other reason is that KSP is already bursting with parts and part mods. Adding yet-another-tank-for-something to satisfy mostly aesthetic needs seems a little redundant
  22. allista
    Version 3.3.4.1 for Kerbal Space Program 1.4.3 Released on 2018-05-10 Remote Tech support by aagon Recompiled for KSP-1.4.3 and latest AT_Utils Download
  23. allista
    Version 2.4.3 for Kerbal Space Program 1.4.3 Released on 2018-05-10 Added patches for Bluedog Design Bureau and Making History Expansion. Download
  24. allista
    Version 3.5.2 for Kerbal Space Program 1.4.3 Released on 2018-05-10 More efficient ToOrbit/Rendezvous from the ground with GravityTurn-like algorithm (thanks @AndyMt and @Overengineer1 for the explanation!). With a lot of tweakable options. And when launching in-plane with the target TCA now tries to find a launch window to get closer to the target. TCA takes into account torque from control surfaces. Attitude Control uses Oscillation Detector to quench persistent low-frequency oscillations. ToOrbit/Rendezvous AP can start without active engines. Numerous fixes in Rendezvous main logic. Fixed Maneuver Autopilot logic. Fixed VTOLControl yaw problem Fixed some Attitude Control bugs. Fixed Time Warp control. Improved performance of many orbital calculations and simulations. Download
  25. allista
    Version 1.3.0 for Kerbal Space Program 1.4.3 Released on 2018-05-10 Added on-demand rendering of spawn transform's forward direction Fix for EL 6.0 by LatiMacciato Added DIY kit size constraints. Code greatly improved by llinard Fixed KitRes display and Remaining Structure Mass calculation. Fixed SpaceCrane RCS effects. Download
×
×
  • Create New...