Jump to content

[1.0.2] NovaPunch 2.09. - May 6th - 1.0 Compatibility Update

Tiberion

By Tiberion
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

lkj802

lkj802

Posted
Posted

oh god, im really waiting for sunday punch to hopefully give permission, i NEED this addon to aid my space race against gerbals...

the shuttle will help me launch my nuclear sattelites to the mun, and also look amazing whilst doing it.

good luck tiberion in getting the licence

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gulinotm

gulinotm

Posted
Posted

I am not trying to argue about anything nor am i demanding it be changed, i'm just stating my opinion on this.

The difference between this and your examples of a movie making money or claiming a Beatles song is yours is that you're not selling these parts and you are not claiming they're yours, so that doesn't really hold up. Im pretty sure copyright law does actually allow for an archive to reproduce and distribute as long as its open to the public, no commercial gain, and a clear notice that the work is copyrighted.

Again, i'm really not trying to argue and im not saying that this is wrong to wait for their permission. I'm just saying i think this process is flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoobixCube

NoobixCube

Posted
Posted

I think the most important thing about abiding by licensing restrictions and what have you is to protect end users from any liability. In the Minecraft modding community, a lot of mods use "AdFly" to distribute their mods. They might make a few cents per view out of it, or something, I don't know the details of it all since I've never distributed a mod, but say, for example, some modder makes a pack, distributes it with AdFly, but thoughtlessly didn't indicate a license for it. Say he intended to be the sole distributor, either because of the money, or because he felt like his work was his work, alone, and didn't want other people modifying it. Then, we have a modpack like this one come along, and start innocently repackaging the mod with another one - suddenly, the original modder's AdFly account isn't the source of distribution. Unpleasantness in the community ensues.

It's not such a far fetched scenario, really, as it happened a couple of times with Minecraft mods. License agreements are important, and the default position of any work is "All rights reserved", or so it should be considered, to keep yourself out of the legal hot water. If a modder wants to allow free distribution, or other specific channels of distribution, there are licenses for that, numerous Creative Commons variations, like BY-NC-SA (attribute to the original author, non-commercial use only, derivative works must be distributed under the same licensing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ted

Ted

Posted
Posted
I am not trying to argue about anything nor am i demanding it be changed, i'm just stating my opinion on this.

The difference between this and your examples of a movie making money or claiming a Beatles song is yours is that you're not selling these parts and you are not claiming they're yours, so that doesn't really hold up. Im pretty sure copyright law does actually allow for an archive to reproduce and distribute as long as its open to the public, no commercial gain, and a clear notice that the work is copyrighted.

Again, i'm really not trying to argue and im not saying that this is wrong to wait for their permission. I'm just saying i think this process is flawed.

Copyright law and software/media licensing are very different things, so you really can't compare them.

If you downloaded a program that is free and the developer isn't making money off of it, you can't then go and distribute the program as you wish, if the developer hasn't given you express permission to do so. (Even if you distribute it under the same rules and regulations that the developer distributes it under and don't claim that it is yours.)

Yes things like software licenses are flawed sometimes, and an un/mislicensed piece of software can leave a project hanging in the wind after someone abandons it, but that is why things like FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) exist.

I understand your frustration, but there can be no leniency in these situations as it can be a very slippery slope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gulinotm

gulinotm

Posted
Posted

Yeah thats totally understandable. I just hate to think that alot of someones work, which is supposedly really good, cant be used anymore if he never responds back.

Are there any engine and tank packs currently downloadable that you guys could recommend, alot of links go to main page and theres alot to sift through on the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberion

Tiberion

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Switch subjects for a bit. lets talk about engines.

Since rockets aren't necessarily based around the 1m standard anymore, we need a better diveristy of engines. The thing is, we already have a lot of models in the pack, with some overlap. So i think there will be some shuffling of engine sizes in the next version, to cover things better. It may break some old designs.. but things have changed pretty radically since .16, so I think thats okay.'

Here's what I have planned

Lander-class engines

The Odin service module (4 nozzles/built structure)

The descent and ascent stages of the Thor lander

1 meter engines (from weakest to heaviest)

RMA (the small lander-style engine, useful for orbiting and heavy landers)

K2-X - Upper stage engine, highly efficient in vacuum

GG-M4 - the quad-engine, slightly enlarged and used as a 1m heavy lifter

NERVA and Aerospike remain as specialty engines

1.75M engines

SPS-10 (now 20) - the other small "1m" engine - now much larger, for use on an Apollo-style CSM (roughly a 2m analogue)

Twin Bertha Lite

M-50 (used to be 1m, slightly enlarged and aimed ay being used with a 5x plate adapter on 5m stages, or as an upper stage on 1.75/2m rockets.

Medium Bertha - The heavy lifting "single" nozzle engine in this range.

2m engines

Bearcat Tr-engine - lightweight lifting engine

Large bertha - upscaled to 2m, now the biggest and most powerful single-nozzle engine in the pack

Energia-style Quad engine - Heavy lifter/1st stage engine for 2m

3m engines

5x beatcat "SLS" engine pack - more efficient than 4x800

4x-800 - Same as always, big, loud and powerful.

5m engines

The Matriarch/Omni-Bertha - how she was always meant to be experienced. Truly frightening

New Adapter plate, 5x 2m engines (think Saturn V)

Was pondering a place for the single bearcat engine, but I am not sure there is room for another engine.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
antiquark

antiquark

Posted
Posted (edited)

Regarding the idea of "too many engines", I think that the new ISP parameter actually permits more engines without redundancy. You can choose between low-ISP, high thrust engines (think the F-1) vs high-ISP lesser-thrust engines (think the J2-X). The KW rocketry pack makes good use of this idea, by providing engines that are efficient for different purposes.

Maybe you could have a little survey to ask which engines people use. The engines I rarely use are the GG-M4, the Large Bertha and Medium Bertha. Everything else, I used a lot!

Edited by antiquark
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shortsonfire79

Shortsonfire79

Posted
Posted

3m engines

5x beatcat "SLS" engine pack - more efficient than 4x800

4x-800 - Same as always, big, loud and powerful.

5m engines

The Matriarch/Omni-Bertha - how she was always meant to be experienced. Truly frightening

New Adapter plate, 5x 2m engines (think Saturn V)

Was pondering a place for the single bearcat engine, but I am not sure there is room for another engine.

Thoughts?

I use the 4x-800 for the lower stage of my Delta IV-look a like and the Bearcat 5x for the upper stage, so I'd be quite happy with the 5x being more efficient in space. :)

I'd also be really happy with a Saturn V-like engine as well. I downloaded something called the Kerbollo project, but the largest stage is 2.25m, which is way too small to be compared to the real Saturn V.

I also agree with Antiquark, more engines means more variations for efficiencies in different atmospheres (especially with the new planets coming, that'll be a great addon.)

Keep up the great work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiberion

Tiberion

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Okay, I have put NP 1.2Beta and 1.0a (the latest version, and the demo-compat version, respectively) back on the front page. Novapunch is now officially released under the following license:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

I didn't add back the other older versions, since they don't have the license text in them. If for some odd reason you need one of those old versions, you can PM me directly and we can arrange something.

PLEASE remember that this is is only the previously released version and is only 100% functional on KSP 15.2 - it is NOT 0.16-ready so you will experience issues if you try to use it.

The new version is still a few days away.

Enjoy :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...