Brigadier Posted September 5, 2018 Share Posted September 5, 2018 2 hours ago, Terwin said: I believe that nothing in the timers acolovely persons for processeses that consume resources or recieve inputs, Huh?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terwin Posted September 5, 2018 Share Posted September 5, 2018 28 minutes ago, Brigadier said: Huh?? Intended line: I believe that nothing in the timers accounts for processes that consume resources or receive inputs, so both supplies and electricity will go down, even though the vessel itself never gets below full. I think I may have accidentally left out an o making part of 'accounts' a word that got replaced by the language filter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngrybobH Posted September 5, 2018 Share Posted September 5, 2018 3 hours ago, Terwin said: In USI-LS/MKS as in stock KSP nothing is run in the background Huh. I thought that there was something in USI-LS for background processes. So, I guess that part is working as intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyzard Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 I make sure my MKS bases are generating enough power to meet their needs, then just ignore the EC timer in the LS window. Since it doesn't account for power generation, it's always incorrect, and often drastically so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terwin Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 19 hours ago, AngrybobH said: Huh. I thought that there was something in USI-LS for background processes. So, I guess that part is working as intended. Keralism actually does scaled-down background processing, but in doing so changes the stock mechanics(which MKS relies on) and that is why Kerbalism and USI-LS/MKS are not compatible. I would suspect that it also puts a limit on how much stuff you can have outside the KSC, but I have never used Kerbalism, so I would not know. I believe that RoverDude is actually the one that implemented the catch-up processing in stock(for ISRU) which could be how he is able to leverage it so effectively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brohande Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 I have a dumb question.. I am using the construction Docking Ports to build a station.. in particular the Sr. ones. I seem to have issues from time to time with the modules wanting to repel each other instead of magnetizing like normal. The modules I am trying to dock together, have been docked successfully around kerbin.. but this second set that is around minmus is exhibiting this issue. Is there a way to fix / workaround this issue so I wouldn't have to rebuild the station from scratch? Or is this more of a game bug than a mod bug? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicky21 Posted September 6, 2018 Share Posted September 6, 2018 3 hours ago, brohande said: I have a dumb question.. I am using the construction Docking Ports to build a station.. in particular the Sr. ones. I seem to have issues from time to time with the modules wanting to repel each other instead of magnetizing like normal. The modules I am trying to dock together, have been docked successfully around kerbin.. but this second set that is around minmus is exhibiting this issue. Is there a way to fix / workaround this issue so I wouldn't have to rebuild the station from scratch? Or is this more of a game bug than a mod bug? If qickload/quicksave doesn't fix the issue then check if you have snap activated on both ports and if you did make sure the angle is the same on both ports or they will repel each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnesy Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 Does anyone know what happened to the large harvesters and dome parts that were teased quite a while ago? Since Roverdude hasn't been very active lately I suppose he's busy with other stuff right now (which he totally deserves ) but I was wondering if those parts are still in the pipeline for a soonTM release. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Tardos Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 (edited) Hello, I'm playing ksp 1.4.3 and I have encountered a strange thing while testing some MKS bases recently with only MKS installed. The MaterialKits production is becoming strange while a 3.75 assembly line or a 2.5 workshop is paired with a converter set to "Worshop". When you have only one converter set to worshop everything is fine, it boosts correctly the MK production according to the maths but when I had another converter set to "Workshop" , it starts to become odd : the MK production when the "Workshop" bays are off is divided by 2, it's still consumming resources normaly but the MK output is divided by 2. And when I am starting the "Workshops" the comsumption rate is boosted according to the maths but not the MK production, only the divided production is boosted which means two "Worshop" are way less efficient than one which seems a bit buggy since this means you can't have 2 assembly line and 2 worshops in one vessel . Here's a screenshot showing the issue and I will post the log if it's needed. https://imgur.com/gallery/8j5haPB Cheers Edited September 15, 2018 by El Tardos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johould Posted September 15, 2018 Share Posted September 15, 2018 On 9/12/2018 at 2:34 PM, El Tardos said: Hello, I'm playing ksp 1.4.3 and I have encountered a strange thing while testing some MKS bases recently with only MKS installed. The MaterialKits production is becoming strange while a 3.75 assembly line or a 2.5 workshop is paired with a converter set to "Worshop". When you have only one converter set to worshop everything is fine, it boosts correctly the MK production according to the maths but when I had another converter set to "Workshop" , it starts to become odd : It's a bug. I have some earlier posts about it. Basically, RoverDude had to rework the code for multiple converters to work with 1.4, and also added a second nicer way to define parts with multiple converters (but it doesn't work if bays can become efficiency parts or recyclers). Along the way the bit of code was lost that added a multiplier for number of running bays to parts in the old style. (In the old style the part has a full converter module definition and the bay settings change which of those are running, and are supposed to add a multipler when multiple bays are on the same setting. So, KSP always sees like 8 converters or whatever, most of which are disabled. In the new style there are only as many converter modules as there are bays, and bay switching actually changes the recipe of the converter, so KSP only sees as many converters as there are bays). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baladain Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Johould said: It's a bug. I have some earlier posts about it. Basically, RoverDude had to rework the code for multiple converters to work with 1.4, and also added a second nicer way to define parts with multiple converters (but it doesn't work if bays can become efficiency parts or recyclers). Along the way the bit of code was lost that added a multiplier for number of running bays to parts in the old style. (In the old style the part has a full converter module definition and the bay settings change which of those are running, and are supposed to add a multipler when multiple bays are on the same setting. So, KSP always sees like 8 converters or whatever, most of which are disabled. In the new style there are only as many converter modules as there are bays, and bay switching actually changes the recipe of the converter, so KSP only sees as many converters as there are bays). I'm wondering if this is related to my issue, I have 2 industrial refineries. The first has 2 bays for metals, 1 bay chemical the second has 2 bays polymers, 1 bay chemicals. Chemicals are producing at a much higher rate than metals or polymers, and minerals are being consumed at twice the rate of metallic ore or substrate. No efficiency parts are involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Tardos Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 6 hours ago, Baladain said: I'm wondering if this is related to my issue, I have 2 industrial refineries. The first has 2 bays for metals, 1 bay chemical the second has 2 bays polymers, 1 bay chemicals. Chemicals are producing at a much higher rate than metals or polymers, and minerals are being consumed at twice the rate of metallic ore or substrate. No efficiency parts are involved. As Roverdude has stated some post ago, try to install USI_Tools from GitHub manually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I likeOxidizerrfuel Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 When is this mod going to be updated to 1.4.5? The github says that it's for KSP 1.4.1. Is RoverDude working on something for these mods cause they all say in their github repo 1.4.1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkherring Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 6 minutes ago, I likeOxidizerrfuel said: When is this mod going to be updated to 1.4.5? The github says that it's for KSP 1.4.1. Is RoverDude working on something for these mods cause they all say in their github repo 1.4.1. It works well for the 1.4.5, so I don't think there is a reason for such an update. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baladain Posted September 16, 2018 Share Posted September 16, 2018 14 hours ago, El Tardos said: As Roverdude has stated some post ago, try to install USI_Tools from GitHub manually. Did that. Version I had is the same as the one that was in the MKS repo. Is there a more up to date version in a different repo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverDude Posted September 17, 2018 Author Share Posted September 17, 2018 Yes... the USI Tools Repo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johould Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 On 9/15/2018 at 7:24 PM, Baladain said: I'm wondering if this is related to my issue, I have 2 industrial refineries. The first has 2 bays for metals, 1 bay chemical the second has 2 bays polymers, 1 bay chemicals. Chemicals are producing at a much higher rate than metals or polymers, and minerals are being consumed at twice the rate of metallic ore or substrate. No efficiency parts are involved. Yeah, that's the same thing. Drills switched to ModuleSwappableConverterNew and should work fine, but with any other configurable part it will be a waste to have multiple bays on the same setting until this bug is fixed. 16 hours ago, RoverDude said: Yes... the USI Tools Repo The 0.12.0.0 release from https://github.com/UmbraSpaceIndustries/UmbraSpaceIndustries has the bug with multiple converters. Multiple bays stopped helping on parts using ModuleSwappableConverter when commit 800d15d deleted the SetEfficiencyBonus("SwapBay",...) call along with ModuleSwapConverterUpdate.cs, and didn't move the calculation elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deredere Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 On 2/4/2017 at 8:30 AM, RoverDude said: It's the latter bit (manufacturing DIY kits in-situ) that I want to work with @allista on. Tho I need to do my part of the bargain and wrap up models On 6/16/2018 at 3:12 AM, allista said: There's already a PR with GC2 that is ready for merge into MKS repo. Just wait for the next MKS release. Did this never happen? Did I just spend 2 hours trying to figure out how to build off-world to no end except "install EPL"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baladain Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 3 hours ago, Johould said: Yeah, that's the same thing. Drills switched to ModuleSwappableConverterNew and should work fine, but with any other configurable part it will be a waste to have multiple bays on the same setting until this bug is fixed. The 0.12.0.0 release from https://github.com/UmbraSpaceIndustries/UmbraSpaceIndustries has the bug with multiple converters. Multiple bays stopped helping on parts using ModuleSwappableConverter when commit 800d15d deleted the SetEfficiencyBonus("SwapBay",...) call along with ModuleSwapConverterUpdate.cs, and didn't move the calculation elsewhere. Confirmed, downloaded USI tools from https://github.com/UmbraSpaceIndustries/UmbraSpaceIndustries/releases Installed, version was the same as previously installed. Did not resolve issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howdidigethere Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 I think I’m late on this, but is it updated/ updating to the new(ish) 1.4 and onwards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyko Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Howdidigethere said: I think I’m late on this, but is it updated/ updating to the new(ish) 1.4 and onwards? welcome to the forums...piece of advice...Modders aren't supposed to be asked about when an update will occur updates...it's against forum rules because they are players too and working for free. You can always start by reading back in the thread because it's really likely others have commented on its status before. Many 1.3.x mods work just fine without an update and someone has probably already tried it and talked about it. Edited September 17, 2018 by Tyko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlrk Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Howdidigethere said: I think I’m late on this, but is it updated/ updating to the new(ish) 1.4 and onwards? Yes. It's not against the rules to ask if something works in the latest version. It's against the rules to say "update this right now to 1.4!"" Quote sufficient time has passed and update is neither announced, nor already asked by someone - a polite inquiry about an update is OK. Pestering is NOT OK, Edited September 17, 2018 by dlrk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyko Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 1 minute ago, dlrk said: Yes. It's not against the rules to ask if something works in the latest version. It's against the rules to say "update this right now to 1.4!"" That's a really good clarification. I updated my posting above to reflect that. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlrk Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 (edited) That said, I kinda wonder why the OP hasn't been updated. Edited September 18, 2018 by dlrk grammar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenpsp Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 54 minutes ago, dlrk said: That said, I kinda wonder why the OP hasn't been update. LIkely because. 1. @RoverDude has always been busy, so updating the OP is way down on the list. 2. Anyone can click on the release notes in the OP to actually see what is going on I thought I had a third, but I can't remember now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.