[1.12.x] MissingHistory v1.9.3: Handy parts to complement Making History.

[JH4C]

Is an official announcement really a leak?

On 8/3/2018 at 9:52 PM, RealKerbal3x said:

in KSP weekly, it has been leaked

@Snark I think your hastily considered plan has merit. Presumably there'll be a need to keep some of the MissingHistory stuff available after 1.5 if only to allow loading of .craft files so people can change parts, if they so desire.

[OhioBob]

16 minutes ago, JH4C said:

Presumably there'll be a need to keep some of the MissingHistory stuff available after 1.5 if only to allow loading of .craft files so people can change parts, if they so desire.

It's possible to hide the parts from appearing in the menu and tech tree, but still have them exist so as to not break existing craft.  That might be an option.

@PART[name]:AFTER[MissingHistory]
{
	@TechRequired = Unresearchable
	@category = none
	@subcategory = 0
}

 

Edited August 5, 2018 by OhioBob

[RealKerbal3x]

6 hours ago, JH4C said:

Is an official announcement really a leak?

Yeah, I may have worded that wrong

[Ruedii]

The reskinned 1.25m tanks interact badly with Color Coded Canisters. 

Might I suggest having the module manager script deactivate them if Color Coded Canisters is installed.

I suspect some other mods also interfere considering part replacement tends to do that. 

[Cloakedwand72]

Enjoy this parts pack bud. Any way you could look at adding multipart docking part mod into this stock-alike parts pack?

[Snark]

On 9/5/2018 at 2:10 AM, Ruedii said:

The reskinned 1.25m tanks interact badly with Color Coded Canisters. 

Might I suggest having the module manager script deactivate them if Color Coded Canisters is installed.

Yep-- thanks for pointing it out.  It's a known issue, already raised by @linuxgurugamer a month ago:

...the fix is a straightforward ModuleManager patch, as you rightly suggest, and the only reason it's been sitting around unfixed for over a month is because I'm a lazy jerk I've been fairly busy IRL and haven't gotten around to it. 

I'll try to get something out relatively soonish.  Apologies for the delay.

On 9/9/2018 at 8:39 PM, Cloakedwand72 said:

Any way you could look at adding multipart docking part mod into this stock-alike parts pack?

I'm guessing you're referring to some other existing mod?  If so, I'm sorry, but the answer's no-- this isn't a "mod pack" (I don't believe in them).  It's a reasonable suggestion, it's just not how I roll.  If there's a part in some other mod, then as far as I'm concerned the answer is to install that mod. 

This mod's just about adding some new parts and restyling some old ones.

[Aeroboi]

I've been using MH parts together with another 1.875m part mod and missed some cool looking parts to complement one another. This is just what I needed. Thanks @Snark

[linuxgurugamer]

22 hours ago, Cloakedwand72 said:

Enjoy this parts pack bud. Any way you could look at adding multipart docking part mod into this stock-alike parts pack?

No need, it works as-is.  I tested it

[jlcarneiro]

On 9/10/2018 at 12:39 AM, Cloakedwand72 said:

Enjoy this parts pack bud. Any way you could look at adding multipart docking part mod into this stock-alike parts pack?

Sorry to bother, but what is this "multipart docking part mod"?

[Ruedii]

It seems to be really messing up as of the latest revision.  Either that or I accidentally deleted a module manager patch.

As of some parts to add:
1.8m docking port, 1.8m shielded docking port, 1.8m inline docking port, 1.8m inflatable docking port, and 1.8m radial attachment node.

Optionally, you should through in Mk.2 1.8m inline docking port and Mk3 inline docking ports ( 1.25, 1.8 and 2.5)

 

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Ruedii

[JohnnyPanzer]

I love the skins, and I love the 1.8 parts, but I always end up trying to mix and match with PartOverhaulIntegration due to the omission of the overhauled Mk1 pod and the boat-tails.  

Any particular reason you didn't integrate them? The pod in particular, the old one looks like it's running on a broken graphics card compared to Porkjet's gloriously overhauled version. I'm not trying to look a gift horse in the mouth, I very much enjoy the hard work so many modders have put into trying to keep Porkjet's overhauls alive. But it is a tad frustrating that it keeps being one of those things where each attempt either ommits certain parts, adds some cool feature that the other mods don't (like the skins in this one, great job on those btw!) or has all the goodies but then simply leaves the old parts to clutter the item list.

It's my own fault for not saving my homemade solutions though. Every time I do a fresh install I end up downloading all the integration attempts and then spend a few evenings trying to copy files back and forth, edit .cfg files, write my own patches and then promplty forget to save it all as a clean, easy to extract package for next install. Rince and repeat... downside of being an idiot I suppose.  

[Snark]

On 9/18/2018 at 7:40 AM, Ruedii said:

1.8m docking port, 1.8m shielded docking port, 1.8m inline docking port, 1.8m inflatable docking port

Alas, these are not physically possible in KSP, because of the way docking ports are implemented.  It's one aspect of the game that's rigid and so inflexible it can't be modded.  It's simply not physically possible to have a "size 1.5 docking port" because the sizes are integers.

Alas.

On 9/18/2018 at 7:40 AM, Ruedii said:

Optionally, you should through in Mk.2 1.8m inline docking port and Mk3 inline docking ports ( 1.25, 1.8 and 2.5)

Aside from 1.875m docking ports being physically impossible, it's also the case that providing any such port as you describe would require creating a new part model, which is not among my skills.  You'll note that there aren't any new models in this mod-- it's all either just rescaling stock parts, or else bringing in Porkjet's free parts.

On 9/18/2018 at 7:40 AM, Ruedii said:

1.8m radial attachment node.

Perhaps this could be done by rescaling the BZ-52, but I've never particularly needed it and don't think it's really necessary.  (My general rule for adding 1.875m parts has been to add 'em only if 1.25m and 2.5m versions are available, since that demonstrates usefulness of in-between stuff.)

Nothing stopping anyone else from creating their own, if they're so inclined. 

3 hours ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

overhauled Mk1 pod

The who of the what, now?  You're saying there's a free overhauled Mk1 pod from Porkjet, available for download and public-domain use, somewhere?  News to me.

3 hours ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

Any particular reason you didn't integrate them?

The pod, because 1. I was unaware of its existence, and 2. because I don't actually dislike the existing pod all that much. 

The reason I didn't incorporate the boat-tails is answered in the FAQ in this thread's OP:

On 3/13/2018 at 10:30 PM, Snark said:

• Q: Hey! Didn't Porkjet release two versions of each engine, one "bare" and one "boat-tail"? Why don't you make these engines do the variant-switching thing between those two, like all those cool new engines in Making History?
• A: Short answer is "because I couldn't figure out how, in the hour or so I spent tinkering with it." First, the whole "variant switching" thing is brand new to KSP, and I don't have any documentation to go by, so after a certain amount of futile trial-and-error effort, I gave up. Also, it's worth noting that Porkjet modeled these "variants" as separate parts, over a year ago when variant-switching wasn't a thing yet, and I don't know if it's actually physically possible to get them to work together as a single part with variants. If anyone else manages to figure this out, please let me know-- I'm all ears, and I'd happily add it to the mod.

[JohnnyPanzer]

Doh! I should've read the FAQ, my bad. Also, I hope it didn't come off as a complaint, I was just curious.

But yes, the command pod is included in the PartOverhauls zip I've always been downloading from way back when it was released. I agree that the actual style of the original pod is very nice, which is why I enjoy the overhaul immensly. It's basically the same exact pod, only higher detail and much better textures. It's this one:

https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/files/PartOverhauls.zip

https://imgur.com/a/NvEs4#mYDWSeL

 

EDIT: But yeah, I get why you'd skip the boat tails due to iffyness in getting them to work. I mean, I know for a fact that you know a lot more than I do about MM patches (because you've actually helped me out a couple of times in the past  ), but having something of an obsession with getting the overhauls to work, I have noticed that as soon as a good integration patch comes along, it gets borked by the next update to either the game or MM.

Currently the PartsOverhaulIntegration mod is doing a wonderful job. It adds all the porkjet parts, removes the originals (so no messy part list) and even renames the bare/boat-tail versions of the engines with A and B, and the contracts picks up on it. So you'll always know which version of the engine the contract requires. The drawback, needless to say, is that it lacks your amazing skins, as well as your other parts. So right now I'm trying to combine the best of your two mods in my personal install, and if possible "compile" it into it's own, single mod folder (something like gamedata/porkjetCombined) and save it for future (personal) use.

I guess my point is that I find it equally hard to live without either one of your mods, but they don't play well together per default, so I need to find a solution that works for me. I know for sure that I feel robbed every time I build a small rocket and I don't have access to your amazing textures.   

Edited September 20, 2018 by JohnnyPanzer

[Tyko]

The biggest benefit of the Porkjet Mk1 pod is that the top node is actually 0.625m in diameter and matches up with other parts of that size. The stock Mk1 has a narrower nose that looks wrong when you stack 0.625 parts on top.

The tradeoff is that the PJ Mk1 needs it's bottom node moved slightly. the bottom is more convex than the stock capsule, so snapping the 1.25 heat shield on results in the bottom of the pod poking through the shield. It's a simple config fix. I can probably even dig it up if you're interested.

[therealcrow999]

5 hours ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

Doh! I should've read the FAQ, my bad. Also, I hope it didn't come off as a complaint, I was just curious.

But yes, the command pod is included in the PartOverhauls zip I've always been downloading from way back when it was released. I agree that the actual style of the original pod is very nice, which is why I enjoy the overhaul immensly. It's basically the same exact pod, only higher detail and much better textures. It's this one:

https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/files/PartOverhauls.zip

https://imgur.com/a/NvEs4#mYDWSeL

 

EDIT: But yeah, I get why you'd skip the boat tails due to iffyness in getting them to work. I mean, I know for a fact that you know a lot more than I do about MM patches (because you've actually helped me out a couple of times in the past  ), but having something of an obsession with getting the overhauls to work, I have noticed that as soon as a good integration patch comes along, it gets borked by the next update to either the game or MM.

Currently the PartsOverhaulIntegration mod is doing a wonderful job. It adds all the porkjet parts, removes the originals (so no messy part list) and even renames the bare/boat-tail versions of the engines with A and B, and the contracts picks up on it. So you'll always know which version of the engine the contract requires. The drawback, needless to say, is that it lacks your amazing skins, as well as your other parts. So right now I'm trying to combine the best of your two mods in my personal install, and if possible "compile" it into it's own, single mod folder (something like gamedata/porkjetCombined) and save it for future (personal) use.

I guess my point is that I find it equally hard to live without either one of your mods, but they don't play well together per default, so I need to find a solution that works for me. I know for sure that I feel robbed every time I build a small rocket and I don't have access to your amazing textures.   

At some point soon in KSP 1.5 the MK1 will be using the new model. 

http://kerbaldevteam.tumblr.com/post/178086696569/ksp-weekly-mapping-with-magellan

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by therealcrow999

[OhioBob]

4 hours ago, JohnnyPanzer said:

But yes, the command pod is included in the PartOverhauls zip I've always been downloading from way back when it was released. I agree that the actual style of the original pod is very nice, which is why I enjoy the overhaul immensly. It's basically the same exact pod, only higher detail and much better textures. It's this one:

I don't remember if it's Porkjet's command pod or somebody else's, but I recall a problem.  Somebody's Mk1 pod uses too much curvature on the base of the capsule, such that when a heat shield is attached to it, the bottom of the pod clips through the heat shield and is exposed to heating.  If the pod is used for, say, a Mun mission, it will likely overheat and explode on reentry because the bottom is not fully protected.

If that's Porkjet's Mk1 pod that I'm thinking of, then I strongly suggest it not be included in this or any other mod.  Although it might look nice, it has a serious design flaw.

[JohnnyPanzer]

6 hours ago, therealcrow999 said:

At some point soon in KSP 1.5 the MK1 will be using the new model. 

http://kerbaldevteam.tumblr.com/post/178086696569/ksp-weekly-mapping-with-magellan

 

Yaaaaay!

6 hours ago, Tyko said:

The biggest benefit of the Porkjet Mk1 pod is that the top node is actually 0.625m in diameter and matches up with other parts of that size. The stock Mk1 has a narrower nose that looks wrong when you stack 0.625 parts on top.

The tradeoff is that the PJ Mk1 needs it's bottom node moved slightly. the bottom is more convex than the stock capsule, so snapping the 1.25 heat shield on results in the bottom of the pod poking through the shield. It's a simple config fix. I can probably even dig it up if you're interested.

Very true. I also use a patch to fix it, and when I forget to copy it over to new installs it's almost second nature to move the heat shield down.

[Snark]

Well, if it's going to be revamped "officially" anyway,  then obviously there's no need to add any Mk1 version to MissingHistory. 

[Ruedii]

On the size 1.5 covered docking port, why not just make it a size 1 docking port with size 1.5 shroud over it.

Likewise the bare docking port for size 1.5 bulkhead ends should be a size 1 with an extra large shroud around the side to cover the endcap.

As a note, I was having various weird issues with the parts.  The biggest was a bad offset on the attachment nodes, but also a bunch of other weird stuff.

It is also overwriting the Color Coded canisters patches on 1.25m parts.  Could you change the module manager behavior to fix that?

[Tyko]

51 minutes ago, Ruedii said:

On the size 1.5 covered docking port, why not just make it a size 1 docking port with size 1.5 shroud over it.

I'm trying to picture the use case for this part...there aren't any craft I'm aware of that have a 1.875m nose. Why do you need a part that has a cover of that size that can open and close? Why not just use a shroud or a fairing?

Your idea is interesting just because it's interesting, but is there enough of a use case to ask @Snark to spend time on this versus other projects? I'm just not sold at the moment

[OhioBob]

1 hour ago, Ruedii said:

On the size 1.5 covered docking port, why not just make it a size 1 docking port with size 1.5 shroud over it.

It sound to me like that would require modeling a new part.  Snark has said that modeling new parts is beyond what he wants or is able to do.  The only new parts that this mods provides are those that can be made by cloning and resizing existing parts.

[Ruedii]

3 hours ago, OhioBob said:

It sound to me like that would require modeling a new part.  Snark has said that modeling new parts is beyond what he wants or is able to do.  The only new parts that this mods provides are those that can be made by cloning and resizing existing parts.

The main design that would use this is a size 1.5 tanker.   My current designs on these use the shortest downscale part on the docking port to look nice.   The smaller ones use a similar aft end and a Terrier engine  while the larger ones use a cheetah.

It would also work well for a size 1.5 tug of similar design.

[RealKerbal3x]

Hey @Snark. Didn’t want to pester you here, but from an image on the KSP weekly thread (can’t post it now, I’m on mobile) it appears that Porkjet was planning to include an ‘LV-T15’ engine in the game. Since you already included the LV-303 engine and the rest of Porkjet’s engine revamps, is there any reason you didn’t include the LV-T15 in Missing History? Just curious.

Edited September 26, 2018 by RealKerbal3x

[Tonka Crash]

@RealKerbal3x It's in my game. 

[Snark]

1 hour ago, RealKerbal3x said:

Hey @Snark. Didn’t want to pester you here, but from an image on the KSP weekly thread (can’t post it now, I’m on mobile) it appears that Porkjet was planning to include an ‘LV-T15’ engine in the game. Since you already included the LV-303 engine and the rest of Porkjet’s engine revamps, is there any reason you didn’t include the LV-T15 in Missing History? Just curious.

Gosh, that does seem like it would have been a pretty obvious thing for me to do, doesn't it?  You'd almost think I would have not only included it in MissingHistory, but also had a description of the new engines right there in the OP of this thread so that anyone who's interested in the mod could find it, huh?

<waits for other shoe to drop>

...