[1.8.1] ETT - Engineering Tech Tree - May 4, 2020

[Artfact]

26 minutes ago, mtpatane said:

-snip-

Yeah, I was planning on spreading out the Surface Eperiments parts later on this week.:)
Get some more science juice flowing through the tree!

[mtpatane]

Guys, that would be awesome. 

USI LS doesn't have too many pets so hopefully won't take long. 

Is vens stock revamp fully integrated? 

Also will every new release break my save game?

 

thanks again for the hard work and awesome mod 

[Probus]

1 hour ago, mtpatane said:

Guys, that would be awesome. 

1. USI LS doesn't have too many pets so hopefully won't take long. 

2. Is vens stock revamp fully integrated? 

3. Also will every new release break my save game?

 

thanks again for the hard work and awesome mod 

1. Mostly dogs and cats.

2. Ven's is fully integrated.

3. Nope.  I will say so if it is a game breaker.

[mtpatane]

15 minutes ago, Probus said:

1. Mostly dogs and cats.

2. Ven's is fully integrated.

3. Nope.  I will say so if it is a game breaker.

haha!

Parts*

That's what I get for browsing on my phone at work.

 

 

[garwel]

5 hours ago, Probus said:

Talk about  Universal Storage.  Is there a good way to stop those from loading if US is not installed?

IIRC, DMagic also offers a version of his mod without Universal Storage parts, so this problem is handled already.

As for a roadmap, my personal most wanted implementations are RemoteTech (which is already almost good, but not entirely). USI-LS and EPL. I've adapted kOS by myself already. Overall, the tree got so much better with the latest update (when Yonge mod was introduced) that it is almost perfect. Sometimes you wish there were more nodes, e.g. for different SRBs, antennae and ladders introduced by the mods, but then you risk having many half-empty mods.

My personal preference is to play ETT with Hide Empty Tech Tree Nodes (a dev version compatible with ETT) and Fog of Tech: even more fun.

[Artfact]

5 minutes ago, garwel said:

.... Overall, the tree got so much better with the latest update (when Yonge mod was introduced) that it is almost perfect. Sometimes you wish there were more nodes, e.g. for different SRBs, antennae and ladders introduced by the mods, but then you risk having many half-empty mods.....

 

Oh I know that feeling... There's always new nodes and tech lines to wish for.:P

[Drew Kerman]

this is spamming the log whenever I'm in the R&D building:

[EXC 22:01:30.813] ArgumentException: An element with the same key already exists in the dictionary.
	System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary`2[System.String,RUI.Icons.Simple.Icon].Add (System.String key, RUI.Icons.Simple.Icon value)
	YongeTechKerbal.YT_RDIconLoader.LoadIcons ()
	YongeTechKerbal.YT_RDIconLoader.Update ()

Tested with just Squad and ETT/YongTech installed. Full log.

And while I'm posting might as well share this img of the tech tree I pieced together:

[Probus]

2 hours ago, Gaiiden said:

this is spamming the log whenever I'm in the R&D building:

[EXC 22:01:30.813] ArgumentException: An element with the same key already exists in the dictionary.
	System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary`2[System.String,RUI.Icons.Simple.Icon].Add (System.String key, RUI.Icons.Simple.Icon value)
	YongeTechKerbal.YT_RDIconLoader.LoadIcons ()
	YongeTechKerbal.YT_RDIconLoader.Update ()

Tested with just Squad and ETT/YongTech installed. Full log.

@Gaiiden,

  Can you try a completely fresh install of KSP and the latest rev of ETT.  I think this problem should go away.

[Probus]

I am considering setting the YongeTech config file to not allow you to select a tree by default so that module manager config files will work on the tree by default.  See below from the YongeTech thread:

"If you would like to disable the option to select a tech tree and the conflict with ModuleManager change the "allowTreeSelection" field in PluginData/YongeTech_TechTreesExpansion/config.xml from '1' to '0'. This will keep support for the TechTree ConfigNode additions and custom icon support, but remove the option to select a tech tree."

Does anyone have any objections?

[mtpatane]

Question.

If I wanted to learn to write a Config. for a parts pack for this Mod, is there a resource or example on how to do it?

Ever since 1.1 (and a nice Rig Upgrade I just finished) I've been loading up on part mods, figured I could help out If I get some free time.

Thanks!

[Probus]

22 minutes ago, mtpatane said:

Question.

If I wanted to learn to write a Config. for a parts pack for this Mod, is there a resource or example on how to do it?

Ever since 1.1 (and a nice Rig Upgrade I just finished) I've been loading up on part mods, figured I could help out If I get some free time.

Thanks!

Two things @mtpatane:

1st - Goto our github page and download Yonge's techtree editor: https://github.com/ProbusThrax/ETT

2nd - Jump on the IRC channel (Espernet, #ETT) or message me and I will walk you through how to implement a change.  With the editor, it makes life pretty easy.

[ev0]

8 hours ago, Probus said:

I am considering setting the YongeTech config file to not allow you to select a tree by default so that module manager config files will work on the tree by default.  See below from the YongeTech thread:

"If you would like to disable the option to select a tech tree and the conflict with ModuleManager change the "allowTreeSelection" field in PluginData/YongeTech_TechTreesExpansion/config.xml from '1' to '0'. This will keep support for the TechTree ConfigNode additions and custom icon support, but remove the option to select a tech tree."

Does anyone have any objections?

Just to check, without Module Manager working the only way to add or edit part placements is to directly edit your EngTechTree.cfg file, correct? If that's a yes, then I agree with letting Module Manager work. That way modders can add their own tech tree patches without having to bug you with pull requests! Would allow normal users to make and use their own MM files too.

[Probus]

2 hours ago, ev0 said:

Just to check, without Module Manager working the only way to add or edit part placements is to directly edit your EngTechTree.cfg file, correct? If that's a yes, then I agree with letting Module Manager work. That way modders can add their own tech tree patches without having to bug you with pull requests! Would allow normal users to make and use their own MM files too.

Correct.

[Artfact]

For the Hooligan Airship parts MM  ETT patch I'm integrating the mod's option to enable realistic lift for the parts ( 40 times less than default), my thought being that the majority of ETT players would like it that way. Am I right in this? Any major objections?

[legoclone09]

Will Tantares and BDB be included sometime? I think Tantares is partially implemented currently but I don't know. That's the main reason I haven't been using this (and I really don't play career, shhh)

[Drew Kerman]

16 hours ago, Probus said:

  Can you try a completely fresh install of KSP and the latest rev of ETT.  I think this problem should go away.

yea, looks like I changed something in the Squad folder YongTech didn't like. I replaced it with a clean version and now it's fine

[Artfact]

Started work on the B9 pack...wish me luck. 
I haven't been able to use it in a while so any suggestions are welcome.:)

[Probus]

Added a new readme file with instructions on how to contribute to the mod by adding/checking part packs:

https://github.com/ProbusThrax/ETT/blob/master/README.md

It is really easy to contribute.  Just let me know which mod you would like to add.

[Probus]

Pushed a new release to spacedock, v20160526.

http://www.spacedock.info/mod/199/Engineering%20Tech%20Tree

CKAN will be ready shortly.

Added:

• B9
• Tundra Exploration
• Surface Experiments

Updated:

• KWRocketry
• AIES
• OPT
• Interstellar

And more tweaks.  Thanks @Artfact!

Edited May 27, 2016 by Probus

[Shiolle]

It seems there is a problem when downloading the current version through ckan. The archive fails to download. I can reproduce it when I download it through IE or Edge, but not in Chrome.

I believe it happens because of the spaces you've added to the file name in the latest versions. When I try to open the download URL in IE, it substitutes spaces with underscores, and spacedock of course treats it as a wrong URL. Since ckan is a .net application, it does the same.

[Probus]

4 hours ago, Shiolle said:

It seems there is a problem when downloading the current version through ckan. The archive fails to download. I can reproduce it when I download it through IE or Edge, but not in Chrome.

I believe it happens because of the spaces you've added to the file name in the latest versions. When I try to open the download URL in IE, it substitutes spaces with underscores, and spacedock of course treats it as a wrong URL. Since ckan is a .net application, it does the same.

Thanks for the heads up.  I will see if I can get this to work and re-release later today.

[inigma]

Just a note that USI Sounding Rockets are not given any costs in the Model Rocket node in the current version of ETT.  I'm not sure what to recommend.

[Drew Kerman]

Has anyone called dibs on Bluedog Design Bureau? If not I'll tackle that this weekend

Quote

Leave all parts that show up in the "none" category alone. That usually means there is an error somewhere.

I'll just leave this here then - these are all the parts showing up for me in Unplaced category (that's what you meant by the None category right?)

B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk1\body_mk1_section_025m.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk1\body_mk1_section_050m.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk1\body_mk1_section_100m.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk1\body_mk1_section_400m.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_adapter_125m_long.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_adapter_125m_short.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_adapter_125m_shroud_full.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_adapter_125m_shroud_half.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_adapter_250m_long.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_adapter_250m_short.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_nosecone_125m_long.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_nosecone_125m_short.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_nosecone_direct_long.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_nosecone_direct_short.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_section_0m.cfg
B9_Aerospace\Parts\Body_Mk2\body_mk2_section_1m.cfg
HLAirships\Parts\Aero\HL_AirshipEnvelope_Cirrus\part.cfg
LBSI\Parts\Generators\LBSIElecGENRadial\LBSIElecGENRadial.cfg
LBSI\Parts\Generators\LBSIElecGENStack\LBSIElecGENStack.cfg
LBSI\Parts\Generators\LBSIfuelGENRadial\LBSIfuelGENRadial.cfg
LBSI\Parts\Generators\LBSIfuelGENStack\LBSIfuelGENStack.cfg
RLA_Stockalike\Parts\Engine\mp_small_rs\stack_small.cfg
RLA_Stockalike\Parts\Engine\mp_tiny_rs\radial.cfg
RLA_Stockalike\Parts\Engine\mp_tiny_rs\stack.cfg
RLA_Stockalike\Parts\FuelTank\lfo_small_tanks\1short_tank.cfg
RLA_Stockalike\Parts\FuelTank\lfo_small_tanks\4xlong_tank.cfg
Squad\Parts\Wheel\LandingGear\GearSmall.cfg
UmbraSpaceIndustries\Kolonization\Parts\LandingLeg.cfg
UmbraSpaceIndustries\Kolonization\Parts\LandingWheel_Side.cfg
UmbraSpaceIndustries\Kolonization\Parts\LightGlobe.cfg
HGR_Redux\Parts\Fairings\Stock Proc\fairingSize1.5.cfg
WildBlueIndustries\MOLE\Parts\Titan\fairingSize18.cfg

Note that the last two files are actually the exact same part - well not the exact same part but they have the exact same part name. I'll have to look into what's up with that

Also what does "integrated but untested" mean? What needs to be done to qualify a mod as "tested"?

Edited May 29, 2016 by Gaiiden

[Artfact]

The Unplaced B9 parts are variants of the standard fuselages that can be adjusted on their core part. The variant parts have no cost of their own so were best placed in that node.
The Cirrus Airship envelope is the 'cheat' version of the part with enormous lifting power and so has no real place in the tree.

I see a lot of landing gear parts in there as well. As it stands I think all (modded) wheels/gear are unstable so I've just placed them in their respective Landing nodes for the time that they do get fixed.
The landing gear thing is really hampering my enjoyment of making any kind of aircraft...

Integrated but untested is mostly for the parts that were included in older versions but have not been touched since 1.1 and so might be out of place. The tested parts might still not be totally in their right living spaces but there at least has been payed some extra attention to them.

And by all means, go ahead and do BDB, I don't think Probus has had time to work on that one yet.

We really ought to make a sort of billboard for claiming and acknowledging who's working on what I suppose.

[Drew Kerman]

15 hours ago, Artfact said:

I see a lot of landing gear parts in there as well. As it stands I think all (modded) wheels/gear are unstable so I've just placed them in their respective Landing nodes for the time that they do get fixed.

makes sense, as does all the other stuff in there - but what's up with that one stock retractable wheel? I thought it was just the fixed wheels that were still having issues currently?

I'll check out BDB today and see how that goes. If good I have a list of all the other mods I'm using that could use placement I'll want to take on over the next few weeks

Later...

Ok I don't really understand what I need to do to create a pull request - how do I create a branch? Is that what happens when I create a fork for my own account? But regardless, you can download my first pass at BDB integration here. This was made from an ETT.cfg last modified on 5/26 (the latest version when I started)

Although BDB is a set of launchers, the parts are placed individually, so several nodes may need to be unlocked to build a complete launcher as originally designed. I don't personally build rockets as designed by mod authors I just look at them as individual parts put together for the mission.

Also some work on the descriptions is needed to get a better idea of what sort of parts should be placed there (if not in the node description itself, then in the ReadMe). I especially liked the antenna nodes specifying the ranges.

Oh, and I also threw DMagic's EVA Struts and EVA Transfer parts into the tree as well

Edited May 30, 2016 by Gaiiden