Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support the new PartModule atributes introduced on KSP 1.12 (or missed by previous tasks) and Update the Scale Exponents #270

Open
Lisias opened this issue Nov 13, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
task Not a problem, but something I must do and should not forget about
Milestone

Comments

@Lisias
Copy link

Lisias commented Nov 13, 2022

As the tittle says.

I probably had missed some atributes the last real overhaul I did on 1.7 (#35), 1.8 (#73) or perhaps on the last one in 1.11 (issue #150).

Check if I'm missing some PartModule, and for missing attributes on the known PartModules.

@Lisias Lisias added the task Not a problem, but something I must do and should not forget about label Nov 13, 2022
@Lisias Lisias added this to the 2.4.7.0 milestone Nov 13, 2022
@Lisias Lisias modified the milestones: 2.5.1.x, 2.5.0.x Jan 26, 2023
@Lisias
Copy link
Author

Lisias commented Jan 30, 2023

Note: The ModuleDockingNode will give me some headaches - how I will scale the nodeType?

        MODULE
        {
                name = ModuleDockingNode
                referenceAttachNode = top
                nodeType = size1
                stagingEnabled = False
                canRotate = True
                rotationTransformName = port
                maxMotorOutput = 200
                RESOURCE
                {
                        name = ElectricCharge
                        rate = 1
                }
                rotationAxis = Y
        }

@Lisias
Copy link
Author

Lisias commented Jan 31, 2023

Fellow Kerbonaut AccidentalDisassembly raise an important question on Forum:

One word of caution on the nodeType - mods like KSTS seem to use the nodeType defined in a part's config (maybe even as a string value or something) to determine what kinds of vessels can interact, so if a 3.75m docking port got scaled down to 2.5m and the intended behavior is to be able to dock with 2.5m ports, it would need to acquire the nodeType of the 2.5m ports and lose all others, I think... But not totally sure. Not sure what you might do with intermediate sizes other than disallow them…

My answer:

I'm planning to do what it's already being done with attachment nodes: scale it to the nearest size. Obviously, subject to further considerations.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
task Not a problem, but something I must do and should not forget about
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant