Talk:Resource

Testium

I noticed that the entry for Testium on the resource table was removed. It is defined in ResourcesGeneric.cfg, though I guess it's not really needed as no parts use it? UmbralRaptor (talk) 00:20, 15 June 2013 (CDT)

I readded the resource to have a complete table but I added a note, that this resource is only specified but never used. I'm wondering if it is possible to create a part which uses this resource. — xZise [talk] 03:42, 15 June 2013 (CDT)

I think it's only a test resource named TESTium (test), name is something like (for eg.) "Plutionium" (Pluton), "Titanium" (Titan) etc. So I think it can be removed, we will never see this in game. This is probably test for upcoming Resource System. Piotrulos (talk) 14:59, 23 July 2013 (CDT)

this is a wiki, we must upload ALL the information we can about the subject. learn to wiki and MAYBE you will make DECENT edits.Shamrock Prototype (talk) 20:43, 23 July 2013 (CDT)

Please watch your language. Although I support your point, that this wiki should be as complete as possible, all editors in this discussion made many (also helpful) edits in this wiki so there is absolutely no need for this choice of words. — xZise [talk] 04:51, 24 July 2013 (CDT)

On topic: yes, it is a test resource and it will never be used in-game. You can use it in custom parts though, you can simply copy stock parts and modify their part.cfgs so they contain/generate/use testium. Also, why does everyone think that this is a test for the "new upcoming resource/mining system"? First of all, it's not coming that soon, and secondly NovaSilisko has posted on the forums at some point that it is not a preview or partial feature, but just a simple test. That was a few months ago and I'm too lazy to dig up that thread. --dgelessus ^{(talk · contribs)} 05:51, 24 July 2013 (CDT)

PS: Turns out I'm not that lazy after all. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/32497?p=413372&viewfull=1#post413372 --dgelessus ^{(talk · contribs)} 05:56, 24 July 2013 (CDT)

I've pulled testium off the chart again, as it isn't even defined in-game anymore. If there are objections, feel free to revert. --Dstruct2k (talk) 09:49, 15 April 2014 (CDT)

EVAPropellant

There is no reference to EVAPropellant on the resource chart. Many people are under the misconception that EVAProp and Monoprop are the same, as they were planned to be implemented, but they decided against mergign the two resources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregroxMun (talk • contribs) 18:45, 2 July 2014‎ (UTC)

Your wish is my command (at least here). This should be correct now. If you want to create an article for it, go ahead. An could you please sign your posts? — xZise [talk] 13:07, 3 July 2014 (CDT)

The "EVApropellant" seems to be a temporal solution... NWM (talk) 04:01, 4 July 2014 (CDT)