theJesuit

[1.9.x] TETRIX TechTree 2.5 and SIMPLEX TechTree 1.16

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, theJesuit said:

 The Mk2 on the other hand...

Do a lot of people make spaceplanes from mk2 parts then? Again, coming from a position of no experience whatsoever, I would have thought that if you have made a successful spaceplane from mk3 parts, you wouldn't want to "downgrade" it (remove the capability of taking 2.5m station parts as payload being the thing I would have thought would hurt most).  I'm sure I'm missing almost all of the finer points here though!

 

1 hour ago, theJesuit said:

I'll have a look at some point when I have time (maybe tomorrow?) I can send you an DM to create a CFG to put this in place

That would be outstanding, but don't feel you have to, I'm a long way off needing to use mk4 parts yet and it sounds as though you have an update planned for the not-too-distant future!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, theJesuit said:

I can send you an DM to create a CFG to put this in place

Unless you're including it in a future update you should probably just paste it in the thread. Others (like me) will use it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, theJesuit said:

I don't disagree about the Blackbird from the design aesthetic - that's another reason why it i had them initially around the other way on first release.  But you wouldn't necessarily take the Blackbird into orbit? The Mk2 on the other hand... the  mk1 also.

It's true we didn't take the Blackbird into space. Perhaps you could move the Mk2 parts earlier in the tree, but nerf them in some way that prevents them from being used as a spaceplane? Then use a later tech node to upgrade them back to stock performance? Then, of course, what would have stopped some kind of mad Kerbal genius from strapping a LF/O powered Blackbird variant to a shuttle stack if they wanted to? I feel like it should at least be an option.

And I feel like there really do have to be allowances for gameplay - there doesn't seem to be much of a point in achieving Mk2 spaceplanes after Mk3 spaceplanes besides style.

Quote

- I never included it!  Okay.  I'll have a look at some point when I have time (maybe tomorrow?) I can send you an DM to create a CFG to put this in place

I'd like to have that as well.

Oh, also, I was wondering why the 0.625m heat shield is way back in advanced construction while the larger 0.25m heat shield is in engineering 101.

Edited by theonegalen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, theonegalen said:

It's true we didn't take the Blackbird into space. Perhaps you could move the Mk2 parts earlier in the tree, but nerf them in some way that prevents them from being used as a spaceplane? Then use a later tech node to upgrade them back to stock performance? Then, of course, what would have stopped some kind of mad Kerbal genius from strapping a LF/O powered Blackbird variant to a shuttle stack if they wanted to? I feel like it should at least be an option.

And I feel like there really do have to be allowances for gameplay - there doesn't seem to be much of a point in achieving Mk2 spaceplanes after Mk3 spaceplanes besides style.

I'd like to have that as well.

Oh, also, I was wondering why the 0.625m heat shield is way back in advanced construction while the larger 0.25m heat shield is in engineering 101.

Okay.  When i get the chance I'll post it on here.

The 1.25m heat shield is at tier 1 with the mk1 command pod.  All 0.625m parts are tier 3? As they are a miniaturisation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't had a have to get in front of my pc.  Too much stuff in NZ going down IRL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi everyone 

Updated Tetrix. Simplex will come later.

The Update includes ksp 1.10.1, and updates to ResStockPlus, Raational Resources and OPT.

Peace.

 

Aldo to work on the mk2 and mrk3 flip.

Edited by theJesuit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, randomspacedude said:

Can You Make It compatible With Blue Dog Design Bureau

I could.  But not in the near future due to RL.  

You aren't the first person to ask though so im sure I'll get round to it.

It would help if someone could give me a list of the different rocket 'types' so that i dont have to go work that out.  Then i can assign the types to a tier.

Peace 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I consider trying the TETRIX out.

The list of supported part packs became big, but unfortunately there still is no support for Bluedog Design Bureau ...

Quote

It would help if someone could give me a list of the different rocket 'types' so that i dont have to go work that out.  Then i can assign the types to a tier.

Some work. And then there is the fact that the dev branch of BDB looks promising - and a lot of stuff is new and another lot of stuff is deprecated then.

Another round of some work then.

Perhaps­™ it would be wise to base a work like this on the dev branch of BDB.

Edited by Gordon Dry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

Perhaps­™ it would be wise to base a work like this on the dev branch of BDB.

That's a helpful suggestion.  It would make me sad if the work I put in was depreciated in a few months.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.