[Dysko]

Well, wow.

I remember that INFR1 was the first mod I played when I discovered HLP 15 years ago. Exactly half a lifetime passed for me since then.
INFR1 really hooked me up on the HLP community, and I remember playing almost every campagin released in the following years. Then, when I started university, I almost completely dropped down FS2 (except for campaigns like BP).

Fast forward to few months ago. I was at work, and during my lunch break I though "Well, it's been a long time since I last went on HLP, let's check what's happening".
And then I saw the announcement for Nostos.
"Whoa, I can't wait to get back home, reinstall FSO and play this!"

That same day, sh*t happened when returning from work, as I skidded with my motorbike due to a truck losing some gravel on the road and fractured my right elbow. I spent two months at my parents' home with a crappy laptop on which FSO cannot run.

Finally, one month ago I could return to my apartment and play everything.

Wow, simply wow.

I will not comment on the quality of the missions, since I've been missing out on the latest major releases.

I just wanted to thank you for bringing back those fond memories of the 15-years-old me

[CT27]

I think that is the reason why EA attacked Beta Aquilae instead of Laramis, even though it might appear as an easier way for EA to go. But in that case, GTVA would have set up a node blockade there, what isn't mentioned. It'd also be logical that GTVAs counterattack would come from 2 sides or earlier that GTVA starts a distraction by invading weakly defended Ross 128 in order to buy time for the capital.

Wouldn't the GTVA want to save the capital immediately by going into BA rather than trying to save it via distracting the EA somewhere else?

[Nightmare]

Probably yes, but Laramis-Ross 128-DS is the only path to go there; so there's nothing else they could do besides that. Earlier (I don't know if it's still in the current story), the supply lines were EAs achilles heel, so attacking them could be a serious hit for them. EA would have to direct resources in that case atleast. But even though this:

As for the GTVA, Janus is the capital but we did not specify that it is the only capital.  With such a large expanse to govern, it only makes sense that there are other capital worlds in the GTVA.

BA is still a more reasonable target to end the war than to conquer another 8 systems. So even though it might not look like that, GTVA might be still in a strategically better situation than EA is.

[mr.WHO]

When can we expect the fix for double HUD after the Media vp update?

[FrikgFeek]

There was a metadata update for Knossos 4 weeks ago to change the MVPs dependency from newest to 3.7.2.

Nostos isn't meant to run on the newest MVPs without a patch. It uses its own shipnames(every retail ship is renamed to shipname#INF) in non-modular ships.tbl. This means that the modular MVPs tables can't change anything about INF ships.

So without a proper patch to adapt those tables into #INF ships all MVPs 3.8. can do for you is break things.

[JSRNerdo]

Am I might missing something? I didn't noticed a single checkpoint or persistence system in Act 1.

I can guarantee M9 and 11 have checkpoints (I almost died fixing M11's) and there are persistence features in place - try losing the Magellan in m6 and replaying m10 for example.

[Goober5000]

There was a metadata update for Knossos 4 weeks ago to change the MVPs dependency from newest to 3.7.2.

To add additional context, Knossos doesn't re-download metadata if the metadata has changed but Inferno's version number hasn't.  (At least for now; there is an upgrade in the works to handle this.)  So if you are getting this bug, exit Knossos, delete Inferno's mod.json file, and restart Knossos.

[CT27]

Another Inferno plot question:  do you think that that GTVI double agent (who at first looked like an EA spy but then later betrayed Spiros and needed rescuing by the player) had information on Icanus? 

(She said she had information on Earth to deliver)

[Nightmare]

I don't think that these questions will remain unawnsered.

[mr.WHO]

There was a metadata update for Knossos 4 weeks ago to change the MVPs dependency from newest to 3.7.2.

To add additional context, Knossos doesn't re-download metadata if the metadata has changed but Inferno's version number hasn't.  (At least for now; there is an upgrade in the works to handle this.)  So if you are getting this bug, exit Knossos, delete Inferno's mod.json file, and restart Knossos.

I'm a bit lost here - would deleting mod.json fix the HUD issue for me? If yes where I can find that file (I've checked the Knossos folder but can't find any).

[PIe]

going to <Knossos data>/FS2/Inferno-1.0.0, deleting the mod.json file there and then redownloading Inferno will fix the HUD issue.  Knossos should detect that the VP files still exist and won't redownload them.

I'm a bit lost here - would deleting mod.json fix the HUD issue for me?

Indirectly yes.  the mod.json file contains the version of the MVPs that Inferno requires, and the old one you have currently specifies the wrong version.  You need the newer fixed one.

[mr.WHO]

Thanks - above solution solved the issue with double HUD.

[Stardust]

SWEETNESS!

So I downloaded and installed Knossos, and was pleasantly surprised by the number of campaigns and mods it has. Didn't realize there were that many!

Anyways, I've stumbled across a small problem and can't seem to fix it. In short, whenever I try to launch Inferno Nostos from Knossos, I get an error about 40+ errors, but the game will try to ignore them. Get to the main menu, and wow! But as soon as I go to try a mission, it craps out with errors pertaining to one model's POF file or another. I've seen the Hermes and the Charybdis come up repeatedly.

Now I'm not new, and I've verified file integrity as well as uninstalled/reinstalled Nostos as well as the MediaVPs, to no effect. And while I can view the models in the tech room, I noticed that several are missing textures; more specifically, they are not there and the ship is transparent in certain areas. This is mostly on large capital ships like the Icelus. Anyone have any thoughts? Or do I just need to configure something in my client/game?

By the same token, verifying file integrity seems to ALWAYS find a problem - even if it's the same one - over and over again with the same file, and redownloads them. Unless there's a Knossos support thread I just haven't found, this can't be normal.

[niffiwan]

There's a general knossos thread here, or you can ask questions on the #knossos discord channel (under the "HLP" dropdown menu).

This issue:

verifying file integrity seems to ALWAYS find a problem

vaguely sounds like a bug in an older version; which version are you running?

[CT27]

I don't think that these questions will remain unawnsered.

My thoughts on this:

As I understand it, the first two acts of Nostos are basically a more in-depth version of the original Inferno R1 from years ago.  I don't remember R1 directly mentioning the Icanus so I don't think Nostos part 2 will either.
However, it may indirectly reference it.

I could see one of the command briefing pages saying something like:  "Pilots, you may have heard rumors that another reasons the Vasudans are finally joining our war against the EA is that our agent Kapinksy brought back plans for an EA super juggernaut.  Do not believe rumors, keep focused on the Shivans and EA that are in front of you."


I don't think we'll see a direct reference to Icanus until part 3 (though I could be wrong).

[Nightmare]

Mmmmhh I don't think so. Even if it would be that way, GTVA would be stupid as hell to name their agent. Also, saying things like "our enemy builds a ship that's larger than anything we have" is probably something Command wouldn't do, unless they want to put fighting moral to a minimum. It's called need-to-know basis.

Rampage said that not even EAs true reason for the war has been revealed yet, so I'd presume that the reasons for the Vasudan not-interference hasn't been either (but I don't know).

I also don't know how EA would try to hide what they're doing. Sure, the atomic bomb was built in secrecy, but the Icanus would be constructed at Mars, which is inhabited, plus the visibility of a 20km ship.

[Stardust]

This issue:

verifying file integrity seems to ALWAYS find a problem

vaguely sounds like a bug in an older version; which version are you running?
[/quote]

Of Knossos? 0.12.4. I've got the client set to download updates nightly, but don't ask me where I set that up!

[CT27]

Mmmmhh I don't think so. Even if it would be that way, GTVA would be stupid as hell to name their agent. Also, saying things like "our enemy builds a ship that's larger than anything we have" is probably something Command wouldn't do, unless they want to put fighting moral to a minimum. It's called need-to-know basis.

Rampage said that not even EAs true reason for the war has been revealed yet, so I'd presume that the reasons for the Vasudan not-interference hasn't been either (but I don't know).

I also don't know how EA would try to hide what they're doing. Sure, the atomic bomb was built in secrecy, but the Icanus would be constructed at Mars, which is inhabited, plus the visibility of a 20km ship.

That's a good point. 

When the GTVA does get into Sol in Act 2, how wouldn't they notice the Icanus?

[Nightmare]

I think every return-to-Sol campaign has its own node location. Canon had it near Earth, BP had it in outer Sol IIRC, I don't know where INFs is, so it would not necessary to be visible from the node. But the thing is, building a 20km warship could barely be concealed from the public. The construction of the Colossus was announced publicly, and I think from complexity, it's about as difficult for EA to build the Icanus as for GTVA to create their supercap. The details are probably secret, but not the whole thing.

[-Norbert-]

Space it rather big.
In the most extreme case, the EA could hide pretty much anything they want either so close to the sun that the radiation shields it from sensors, or far out in the Halo.

Or if you imagine the plane on which all the orbits is as a more or less flat area, they could go "up" or "down" and build (or move) it there. I doubt many people would think of looking for anything in either direction, since the only things that (to my knowledge) float around in such unusual orbits are very, very few comets.

Or on a low gravity celestial body like one of he smaller moons or a particularly big asteroid, they could make a sufficiently big caver underground to build even such massive ships in there.