That's very odd - it looks like a reference to the Media VPs, but that's not a name that has ever been used for them as far as I can recall, so I can't imagine how a reference to it could have made it's way into the mod ini file. Is this an error message from Knossos, or from freespace? If it's a missing file, I.e. A freespace error, I could probably find it and figure out exactly what's wrong, but this wasn't a common error when the mod was first released, so it feels like it's most likely a file structure issue.
My main PC is in pieces at the moment while I'm painting the house, but I will try to find it on my laptop install and figure out where the file is. In the meantime, do you have an error log we could look at? That might narrow it down as well.
The error is from Knossos itself. My wife has the laptop at the moment, so I can't get an error log.
But Fso itself didnt open, so I suspect there isnt one.
Pros-As they said this makes it more difficult for the incoming Lindos to hit/pick a target
Cons-With the freighters apart from each other, EA bombers have a less intense anti-fighter/bomber screen to deal with (as Command noted)
2 (What GTVA Command wanted to happen) The freighters stick together and proceed on the same exit route
Pros-EA bombers/fighters have a harder time attacking and make it easier for the GTVA fighters to defend the convoy
Cons-The incoming Lindos might have a slower moving and larger target to hit
Militarily, do you think Command was right or did the individual captains make the better decision?
With Knossos, the campaign worked flawlessly the first try! Thank you thank you so much!
And it was worth the wait. Yeah, ok, the models are a bit clunky compared to modern campaigns, but I just love Blaise Russel's writing style and sense of fun. Everyone always talked about this as one of his best campaigns, and now I can finally see why. I honestly like this story of the genesis of the Earth Alliance better than the official "Inferno: Alliance" one.
Major kudos to Shadow Gorrath and whoever took the time to set this up on Knossos!
When I wrote that code I underestimated how many people would be using old and new launchers at the same time. My thought process was that someone would use an old launcher and then upgrade to a new one and never switch back. That was accurate for most (but not all) users until Knossos appeared which supported the new location but some users still wanted to use their old launcher at the same time. Since, in my mind, the situation was that everything would be done automatically, there would be no reason to have a config option to customize this behavior.Gotcha, I understand your thought process.
Also, since FSO needs to determine from where to read the configuration data before actually reading that data it was impossible to check what the user specified in the launcher.
Anyway, this should hopefully be fixed now. Please let me know if the next nightly still shows the buggy behavior.
I'll let you know.
@Spoon: Sorry, I was in a bad mood yesterday and the frustration got to me.No worries, I understand it can be frustrating when you keep hearing the same issue that you can't do anything about.You've done amazing work with knossos.Thanks!
If I added support for FSO's "-portable_mode" in Knossos, wouldn't that also solve the problem? The config files would once again be stored in FSO's root directory (which is already managed by Knossos anyway). I would just need to figure out how this would affect TCs since they use a different root directory than FS2 mods. Most likely I can just solve this by copying the config files.
When I tried the portable mode in the 5.5g launcher it didn't solve anything for me. No idea how or what it would do when added to knossos.