Jump to content

[0.24.x] Stock ReBalance v1.4 | 11/09/14

stupid_chris

By stupid_chris
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

m4v

m4v

Posted
Posted
So that they end up in the center of the part. This way non-Mk2 parts don't look weird attached to them and are well centered.

ah ok, I think I'll be removing that in my install though. Is not really a balance issue, more like an aesthetic one, and simpler than editing the nodes of mods that expect stock's nodes position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BPI_Bel

BPI_Bel

Posted
Posted

With an understanding that Stupid_Chris's schedule strongly affects any possible changes, is there plans to update the mod to the current 2.x releases of modulemanager? Seems like something like this would be best applied right after stock.

In fact, if others agree with the load point, I may take a shot at updating the files for that purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stupid_chris

stupid_chris

Posted
  • Author
Posted
With an understanding that Stupid_Chris's schedule strongly affects any possible changes, is there plans to update the mod to the current 2.x releases of modulemanager? Seems like something like this would be best applied right after stock.

In fact, if others agree with the load point, I may take a shot at updating the files for that purpose.

Yes there is, after I'm done with my exams. which should be next week. Patience is key.

And to be honest, the only advantage MM2.0 brings is to pass the engine nodes before HotRockets <.<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
vardicd

vardicd

Posted
Posted

Just a note, has anyone else noticed this mod not playing nice with Mech-jeb? I've noticed that with this installed, ships will sway back and forth. I assumed it was because it lowered the reaction wheel strength of the pods and suck, but even with that part of the mod stripped out and the reaction wheels at full strength, I still see it, but if I remove this mod completely, the craft goes back to rock solid. Has anyone else seen this? Does anyone else know why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vardicd

vardicd

Posted
Posted
what do you mean by "sway back and forth"? finding the .cfg responsible of the behaviour would help, If you have time you can do a binary search?

I don't even know what that means let alone how to do it. By "sway back and forth" I mean if I set MJ to fly a craft at a heading of 90, pitch 20, the craft will fly that way but its true heading will fluctuate from heading 87 to 93. If I remove this mod completely, MJ will hold 90 dead on. I thought it was the cfg that messed with the reaction wheels, or cockpits, but even with those removed it still happened. I noticed the other day there is a config that had something to do with mass? next time I try KSP I'll boot that config out and see what happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Justin Kerbice

Justin Kerbice

Posted
Posted

@stupid_chris and contributors: what about lowering maxTemp parameters of parts ?

Cause as it is now, it's really weird, do you know so much material which are able to sustain a temperature as high as 3200 °C (or worth K) like the stock Z-1k Rechargeable Battery Bank ?

Most metal and rock melt long before that !

Even more weird: why engines can self-destruct from over-heating ?

Are they made of weaker material ? It's non-sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stupid_chris

stupid_chris

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't even know what that means let alone how to do it. By "sway back and forth" I mean if I set MJ to fly a craft at a heading of 90, pitch 20, the craft will fly that way but its true heading will fluctuate from heading 87 to 93. If I remove this mod completely, MJ will hold 90 dead on. I thought it was the cfg that messed with the reaction wheels, or cockpits, but even with those removed it still happened. I noticed the other day there is a config that had something to do with mass? next time I try KSP I'll boot that config out and see what happens.

I really can't tell much with the information you're giving me.

Are the jet engines rebalanced as well?

Do they need to be? As far as I know they are actually okay like this.

@stupid_chris and contributors: what about lowering maxTemp parameters of parts ?

Cause as it is now, it's really weird, do you know so much material which are able to sustain a temperature as high as 3200 °C (or worth K) like the stock Z-1k Rechargeable Battery Bank ?

Most metal and rock melt long before that !

Even more weird: why engines can self-destruct from over-heating ?

Are they made of weaker material ? It's non-sense.

Because engines produce heat. And yes, real engines can break down from overheating, it happened to an engine in one of the Falcon 9's launch.

As for maxTemp, since it's barely used at all in stock, I'm not really going to go and modify it. The only reason you should care about it is with DeadlyReentry, and they already modify all the values.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vardicd

vardicd

Posted
Posted
I really can't tell much with the information you're giving me.

I'm operating under the assumption I am an idiot and missed something obvious, I wasn't posting my comment as a bug report per se, just as a hey I noticed this behavior, has anyone else seen this? I'm currently running a total of 30 mods for KSP. I'm sure my issue is somewhere I have a mod that isn't playing nice with this mod. I just haven't narrowed it down yet. I've only seen one other person report this behavior, and he did so over on the MJ forum. I'm trying to talk to him, and see if we have any mods in common and narrow down what the issue is. If I can isolate where the problem is, then I'll post a bug report, if its a bug. Thanks though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stupid_chris

stupid_chris

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'm operating under the assumption I am an idiot and missed something obvious, I wasn't posting my comment as a bug report per se, just as a hey I noticed this behavior, has anyone else seen this? I'm currently running a total of 30 mods for KSP. I'm sure my issue is somewhere I have a mod that isn't playing nice with this mod. I just haven't narrowed it down yet. I've only seen one other person report this behavior, and he did so over on the MJ forum. I'm trying to talk to him, and see if we have any mods in common and narrow down what the issue is. If I can isolate where the problem is, then I'll post a bug report, if its a bug. Thanks though.

I thought you were doing the latter, which is reporting a bug. If not then carry on :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
etheoma

etheoma

Posted
Posted (edited)

I did write another comment then realized the reason why I was only getting 28.9% out of the fusion reactor was because I was using a direct conversion generator, a assume it gets better efficiency but can only deal with so much energy I assume.

My bad.

Edited by etheoma
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vardicd

vardicd

Posted
Posted
I thought you were doing the latter, which is reporting a bug. If not then carry on :P

No not yet, just fishing for more information. I don't want to waste your time with a false bug report, when it might just be something on my end. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stupid_chris

stupid_chris

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I did write another comment then realized the reason why I was only getting 28.9% out of the fusion reactor was because I was using a direct conversion generator, a assume it gets better efficiency but can only deal with so much energy I assume.

My bad.

Fusion... reactor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Duxwing

Duxwing

Posted
Posted

Solar panels produce little electricity near Jool and none beyond two-thirds of Eeloo's periapsis, respectively impeding and preventing Joolian and Eelooian ion propulsion of large payloads because the long burn times and many ion engines they necessitate require impractically-massive battery banks. The only practical alternative is the LV-N, which requires so much fuel as to prevent creating an interplanetary 'taxi'. Was this effect intentional?

-Duxwing

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Duxwing

Duxwing

Posted
Posted
Yes. Solar panels are nearly useless at Jupiter, this is why all probes sent that far have been using RTGs, except Juno, but the area of it's solar panels is quite mind boggling. That gives a much more distinct place for RTGs.

Ay-ay-ay... :( Players therefore encounter a dilemma: Near Future Technologies or huge mission bills?

-Duxwing

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...