Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


76 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/specimp.html Isp = F / ((dm/dt) * g0) => dt = dm * g0 * Isp / F and that you already managed to integrate
  2. I am playing a hard career with a 2.5x rescale, ctt (+Better Early Tree and Logical Progression) with science and funds both on 50% plus part entry costs enabled and if you don't use contract packs it's extremely hard (and much less fun). Those that I use is Exploration Plus (in conjunction to the normal Exploration contracts), Field Research, Tourism Plus and Bases and Stations. It is kinda grindy but fun in the early game to get tech to be able to go to orbit and beyond, but I recommend to not set funds penalties over 100% (which is the normal setting, and which determines how much building upgrades cost). While I am not very familiar with KTT, I know it is perfectly doable to get a probe into orbit and even to the mun in under 18t, even in rescaled systems, and without patched conics. From then on you should normally have enough funds to get those upgrades which open up the game and make satellite contracts much easier, the true, non cheesy, cash cow for early game. What is really missing is sounding rocket contracts, that are well implemented in RP-1, which would make unmanned starts much easier (I know the survey contracts exist, but they suck imo and are unreliable, as most require crew reports in my experience). I just realized that I might have misread your post...
  3. Does the Refund on Recovery fix the bug with negative funds, eg. when recovering high amounts of rare metals/refined exotics from USI?
  4. I'd love to see more of actual gameplay features, ie if anything/what is happenning or changing from ksp1 in terms of career or science gameplay.
  5. Quick question: does deleting the configs and other files for legacy parts, if not needed improve the game load time and in-game performance? Especially when running a lot of other mods?
  6. Why does this patch work for the MPO probe, but not for the MTM? The cost for the latter is only the xenon cost. My formula would be cost = mass * 6000 * SAS level, if it is present (so it wouldn't apply to the stayputnik) @PART[*]:HAS[#category[Pods]&#vesselType[Probe]] { @cost = #$mass$ @cost *= 6000 } @PART[*]:HAS[#category[Pods]&#vesselType[Probe]&@MODULE[ModuleSAS]:HAS[#SASServiceLevel]] { @cost *= #$/MODULE[ModuleSAS]/SASServiceLevel$ } For the MPO I get 0,395*6000*3 = 7110 which is correct, but for the MTM I get a cost of 15200, although it should be 0,415*6000*2 = 4980; it also works with every other probe core except the MTM!
  7. It worked! They just didn't have restock texture/models, but I am sure that's what you were working on.
  8. I haven't been able to play since then, and can only test again in a few days; I'll try it out then.
  9. You can whitelist some parts so that restock doesn't touch them. (don't know how to tho).
  10. Hi! I just downloaded the pre-release and noticed that the parachutes don't show up. I have restock installed, maybe it has to do with that?
  11. In case of Emergency, please put your seatbelt on and brace for impact lithobrake.
  12. The game is still there, it isn't like everybody will stop playing after 1.12...
  13. Logical Progression 0.1.0 License: CC BY-NC 4.0 Description This mod is the successor to ImprovedTreeEnginePlacement. It is an expansion to the entire community tech tree, Logical Progression therefore already contains ITEP, mainly focused for better career gameplay. It is an attempt to streamline and linearise the progression through the technology, no more random unlocks, or basic parts that are pushed far down the tree for no logical reason (hence the name!). You get parts you want and not a random mix of parts from different categories. It is primarily destined to support my own suite of mods, but I am putting it out so anyone who desires to can also try it out for themselves. It conserves the CTT to the highest extent possible while adding a minimal amount of new nodes. Almost all parts have been moved to new tech nodes, here is a brief summary of what it boils down to: parts get unlocked in growing order of size. Most parts with the same cross-section get unlocked in the same nodes, with one exception being the rocket fuel tanks. The tree now has a line for fuel tanks, trusses & station parts, couplers & docking ports & engine mounts, robotics, aerospace, aviation engines, landing, science & isru, ion & plasma propulsion, probes & antennas, drone cores, electrics, radiators, colonization & habitation, logistics. You won't find radiators or antennas in electrics, nor will you find science experiments elseswhere than in the science nodes. Some sacrifices had to been made so some patches can be debatable. Roadmap Currently planned is a cost and entry cost rebalance of almost all the parts following a clear structure, but that won't be for anytime soon, propositions are welcome. My idea for now is to base the costs on weighted combinations of mass, thrust, isp, crew capacity and type of part, allowing for easy but efficient and clear patching. i.e. for fuel tanks, cost = mass, entry cost = 5 x cost; for engines the separation between very efficient (nuclear, cryo) needs to be made, so that kerolox still is attractive. Supported mods FFT NF (all mods) USI KIS ReStockPlus Stock Making History Breaking Ground SSPXR CryoEngines HeatControl Interkosmos Kerbal Atomics ScanSat Notes: No patches are provided for making history 5m parts (as of now) since NFLV replaces them, and my patches target those parts. SSPXR v2.0.0 is currently supported, and further patches will be provided for the upcoming 5m parts. I will also look into the part placement of KSP 1.12 once it comes out. Dependencies Community Tech Tree Better Early Tree Module Manager Download https://github.com/TakashiSenpai/LogicalProgression
  14. @Nertea I've updated the patches for MKS and USI-LS to include the new 1.875m parts, however when trying to pull request on github I get 20k additions and 10k deletions, which means I am certainly doing something wrong. By looking into the 2.0.0 configs, I've noticed that some of the deployable centrifuges are also missing the module DeployedCrewCapacity, which should be already taken care of in the current release.
  • Create New...