• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

267 Excellent

About _Zee

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

1,869 profile views
  1. Terribly sorry for the delay everyone. That's 2 KSP updates now and no release date in sight. Because of the following reasons: 1) I don't want to see this mod die and people lose yet another Probes before Crew techtree option 2) people have offered to help in the past 3) I specifically released all versions of this mod via the MIT license for easy takeover , I am officially requesting help from this wonderful modding community to get this mod updated and patched to working standard with the current 1.10 release of KSP. For now, I'm only asking for help with getting the mod updated to the current release of KSP, no new mod support patches. This includes a) updating any of the pre-existing mod support patches to match changes made by those mod authors as needed, b) updating pre-existing vanilla part patches as needed, c) introducing new vanilla part patches for parts introduced in 1.9 and 1.10 d) updating AVC files e) (?)update science(?) not too sure, haven't been able to play with the new science modules at all yet. "As Needed" means the bare minimum change needed to solve any compatibility/thematic issues with KSP 1.10 or supported mods. Another thing people have been asking for quite some time is GitHub. Looks like it's finally time to make it happen. Bare with me while I learn the interface if you try to interact with me on it. https://github.com/Axiom-Zee/ProbesBeforeCrew Depending on how this goes and if there is interest, I might start accepting submissions for mod support patches in the future. Maybe I can still grow the mod and maintain its cohesiveness by acting as a curator and not just the sole constructor. That would be cool.
  2. Quick update - as a result of a lot of our clients laying people off or outright going under, we've gone from working overtime to a company-wide 20% hours cut to try and keep our business above water. I'm anticipating this trend will continue in a bad direction for quite some time... So the good news for you fine folks, is I will likely have a lot more time to get things updated in the coming weeks. Stay tuned. To answer the question of using the current version of PBC on KSP 1.9.1 - as far as I'm aware the mod works just fine with the small exception of a few vanilla parts not yet sorted. I've said this before already but will re-state it for people that don't like to flip through the thread. I haven't received any bug reports with the current release, and PBC users are pretty good about reporting problems quickly. If you're interested in making your own self-maintained patches in the meantime, the write-up from @4x4cheesecake 5 posts before this one is a very good place to start. He already linked it, but this is the KSP Modders Bible - https://github.com/sarbian/ModuleManager/wiki/Module-Manager-Handbook - this thing is basically open 24/7 whenever I'm writing code.
  3. There's something special about witnessing the birth of a new modder. They either take flight and make something great, or say to themselves "wait, people actually volunteer to do all this work for free? I'm out.".
  4. Quick update: Sorry to say it guys, but this patch will have to wait. I work in the IT industry and the coronavirus has us working overtime to keep things running. Thankfully, as I understand it the current version of the mod works just fine with 1.9, with just the minor issue of a handful of vanilla parts not being sorted yet. Send me screenshots of your exploits in space so I can remember what it felt like to still have time to play the game.
  5. With the release of KSP 1.9 its about that time for another PBC update. Thankfully, 1.9 didn't do much in the way of altering parts so the portion of updating that typically consumes the most time should be short and sweet. I've got a pretty loaded schedule for the next few weeks though so stay patient. For now, comment replies - Good to hear. The next release will be sure to include the newest AVC files. I wouldn't typically agree to allowing another mod to jump the poll, but MKS is massive and the patch may never see the light of day. It's the unfortunate reality of my circumstances right now, not to mention MKS has radically changed in its format and application every time I've ever checked in on it, going back several years. Snacks is a Life Support mod, and if memory serves it's pretty lightweight in part count, so I'd say it gets +2 to it's priority value that I just made up on the spot. I will try to squeeze this into the next patch. If I understand correctly, you're asking for a version of PBC that uses the vanilla tech tree instead of the CTT? I'm sorry, but this will likely never happen. Too much work, too little time. I can see the merit of the issue you bring up. Instead of re-designing the layer locks for a single mod that some may not even be using though, I think the better solution might be to provide staged rewards for that specific contract much like they work for the mid-game/late-game contracts in this mod. I could provide a single relatively-large payout in science for the "Orbit" step of the contract, and then provide the rest of the rewards at contract completion after "Return" is complete, perhaps with a smaller science payout to compensate. Or... maybe insert a single side contract that is only available if Deadly ReEntry is detected. I'll have to think on this, but I'll make sure some kind of compensator is in place for the next patch. You can actually achieve this on your own in fairly quick and easy order. From the root of my mod, navigate to ProbesBeforeCrew\_Core\Zs_Science.cfg . That "Zs_Science.cfg" is the one and only file you need to replicate my science changes (not including my Planet-Reward-Multiplier changes; those are in Zs_ScienceParamMod.cfg). You could literally just copy paste that file into your Kerbal Space Program\GameData folder and delete my entire mod folder, or just leave the file where it is and delete everything else within my mod folder; either method will work. Out of curiosity, what engine mods are you using that I'm not supporting yet? Thanks for the continued support and interest in my mod everyone. If you guys stopped asking for things I would probably stop maintaining things. So in the words of Scott Manley, "Fly Safe."
  6. Depending on the objective of the mod, it may not be practical to just leave it to the user as well. Some mods (like mine) need to guarantee the contracts are not available.
  7. Only briefly skimmed the thread as @Kwebib tagged me, but yes, MM can be used to disable the vanilla contracts (or any contracts for that matter). This is straight from my mod, hope it helps. // Zee's Probes Before Crew Contract Pack // Version 2.02 /////////// Contract Group @Contracts { @Progression { @DisableTutorialContracts = True @DisableProgressionContracts = True @Funds { @BaseReward = 40000 } @Science { @BaseReward = 2 } @Reputation { @BaseReward = 5 } } } CONTRACT_CONFIGURATOR { disabledContractType = ExplorationContract }
  8. From the OP: So it comes down to how much the unsupported mod in question deviates from the PBC tech tree, and whether or not you are personally okay with it. Some are definitely going to deviate more than others.
  9. 500!? Good grief I knew I was in for a world of hurt, but my imagination didn't even come close to the reality... When BDB gets it's turn, I may come and poke you for any assistance you can provide...
  10. Probably because the amount of work it's going to take will be massive, just like this mod! Kidding aside, BDB is a member of my voting poll and currently in 3rd place. Probably a few more big patches for other mods in front of it, but BDB should get its turn in PBC pretty soon (relatively speaking).
  11. Hey @Wyzard, thank you for providing these patches. The reason I don't have a GitHub setup for PBC is because I create new mod support patches based on my voting poll. As the long wait for this update shows, I have limited time to mod and have to prioritize that limited time. People would likely contribute a lot of patches for mods that I don't have time to review, and even more important than that, we all have differing opinions on where a particular part should go. I think PBC has worked well thus far because the planning/designing of the entire picture is coming from one source, one mind. Whenever someone takes the time to provide me a part-ordering-patch, it's sadly a bit wasted as I need to go through each part (and indeed the entire mod in question) to make sure I agree with where those parts have been placed and how they've been valued. And aside from the text having already been typed out/pasted, at that point it's essentially starting the patch-creation-process from scratch. With all of that said, I DO read every post in this thread and the feedback on part placement is always considered. (case-in-point, v2.8 saw the mass movement of antenna unlocks because of feedback from multiple people). Your MSP-3000 patch is super simple and I see the mod only provides that single part (never heard of it before btw, I like it!), so this one will be integrated into the next release. You pointed out this CryoTank patch is for the CryoEngines and KerbalAtomics mods, which aren't in the line-up for patches quite yet, but I'll be sure to re-check this post if/when I get to those mods. Thanks again for taking the time, I appreciate it.
  12. Is anyone experiencing issues with PBC's AVC check? I updated the hosted file to v2.8, but when I launch the game with my old v2.7 .version file I'm not getting any notices that my mod install is out of date. Is anyone else seeing the notice?
  13. Hey @linuxgurugamer - hope you're doing well. I just updated PBC and for some reason it's not giving me any "you need to update!" notices when I test. I updated the hosted file to PBC v2.8, but when I launch using my old .version file with PBC v2.7 on it, I'm not getting any notices. The xml file is set to allow checks. I'm stumped?