[1.3.x] SETI, Unmanned before Manned [Patreon]

[Yemo]

 

@Technologicat, @JadeOfMaar

 

SETI-Greenhouse files uploaded to github.

I moved the non life support mm patches to a separate file in the root directory (nutrients, CTT, connected living spaces).

 

Also the next challenge:

Launch at least one satellite (essentially just a probe core) from a plane (airplane or rocket plane) into orbit and land safely back at KSC. The plane must be above 5km altitude when it launches the satelllite(s).

 

I went for the rocket plane / high launch concept. Two mini satellites launched into Orbit.

basicRocketry node

Edited July 8, 2017 by Yemo

[JadeOfMaar]

Thanks @Yemo I'll post something in a few minutes.

[JadeOfMaar]

@Yemo Finished. Check for PR.

Not enough total greenhouses imo. And indeed they will support 1 and 3 kerbals respectively.

[Yemo]

1 hour ago, JadeOfMaar said:

@Yemo Finished. Check for PR.

Not enough total greenhouses imo. And indeed they will support 1 and 3 kerbals respectively.

Looks good, thank you very much for the configs!

Though I m really not sure about the tech node. I have no idea why CTT put a node called "hydroponics" on the same science cost level as the 3 kerbal command pod it the first place. ShortTermHabitation should have been at 300 science, hydroponics at 550 science and long term habitation at 1000 science, so that it makes some historical sense. For TAC Life Support, anything below 550 science ought to be air scrubbers, sabatier reactors and so on. I know USI does not make that distinction. Will have to look about that for Unmanned Before Manned as well. Space greenhouses well before Mk3 shuttles just feels completely out of whack.

Edited July 8, 2017 by Yemo

[Ruedii]

Any chance an series of underwater missions could be added to the mission pack for Kerbin, and possibly Eve and Laythe? 

Including both probe and manned submarine missions, including dive depth and establishing underwater habitable bases.

[JadeOfMaar]

4 hours ago, Yemo said:

Looks good, thank you very much for the configs!

Though I m really not sure about the tech node. I have no idea why CTT put a node called "hydroponics" on the same science cost level as the 3 kerbal command pod it the first place. ShortTermHabitation should have been at 300 science, hydroponics at 550 science and long term habitation at 1000 science, so that it makes some historical sense. For TAC Life Support, anything below 550 science ought to be air scrubbers, sabatier reactors and so on. I know USI does not make that distinction. Will have to look about that for Unmanned Before Manned as well. Space greenhouses well before Mk3 shuttles just feels completely out of whack.

I was just as concerned about the previous tech node selection (short term habitation) and I decided tochange it on the single basis of what this part serves as. So it's a greenhouse, I put it in Hydroponics (alongside all of USI's greenhouses so players notice it right away) whereas I expect everything that specializes in keeping hab timers buffed will go under Short-Term Habitation. Feel free to make that MM node separate and USI-specific with :NEEDS[CommunityTechTree&USILifeSupport] or change it back to Short Term Habitation. Your reasoning is quite legit.  For my own greenhouse parts, shown in screenshot, I actually have them set to appear alongside the prominent spaceplane parts (in the "Aerospace Tech" node)

Edited July 9, 2017 by JadeOfMaar

[Technologicat]

7 hours ago, Yemo said:

SETI-Greenhouse files uploaded to github.

I moved the non life support mm patches to a separate file in the root directory (nutrients, CTT, connected living spaces).

Thanks! I see you already fixed the Nutrients definition to only run with TAC installed.

To prepare the PR, I made a fork on GitHub and added Snacks! Continued support to it (see here). I could either make the PR now, or tune it a bit further.

The gameplay balancing is my best guess based on the specs of the various parts. Some documentation on this is in the comments of the updated Greenhouse1.cfg. It should be ok, but I may tune it later once I get the chance to actually launch a Duna mission with greenhouses on board and get some actual data on how it feels.

As planned, the greenhouse acts as a recycler; no point in having a snack generator (ore converter) in space. The stock science lab (with Snacks!) already provides one for the players that really want one, and KPBS provides a snack-generating planetary greenhouse (higher rate, lower ore efficiency).

Two mysteries remain:

1. As I mentioned, the example provided with Snacks! Continued says it's calibrated for 4 kerbals at 1 meal per day, 100% recycler efficiency. However, the numbers don't match.
   
   I'm thinking the comment must be out of date - it talks about a rate of 4.63e-5 (1.00008 per Kerbin day), whereas the actual config says 3.4723e-5 (~0.75 per Kerbin day). Indeed, in the parts list in the VAB, the converter in the hitchhiker can advertises itself as converting 0.75 units per day. (Same for the SETI greenhouses, as I used the same conversion rate.)
   
   Now, this is supposed to be the base rate, before RecyclerCapacity is factored in (as I understood, by simple multiplication). But when a part is actually placed in the VAB, the number in the right-click menu on the placed part matches RecyclerCapacity times 0.9 (not times 0.75).
   
   There is this snippet in the config, copied from the example:

   		UseSpecialistBonus = true
   		SpecialistEfficiencyFactor = 0.2
   		UseSpecializationBonus = true      // almost-duplicate; typo or old API?
   		SpecialistEfficiencyFactor = 0.1   // duplicate, maybe overriding the previous value?
   		ExperienceEffect = ScienceSkill
   		EfficiencyBonus = 1.0

   which makes scientists on the vessel boost the conversion rate. So, I'd understand this if either the un-boosted or fully boosted rate matched RecyclerCapacity times 0.9. Searching the forum, I found this, but the end result doesn't seem to match. (I'm assuming SpecialistBonusBase defaults to 0, as this config doesn't specify it.)
   
   TL;DR: the balancing should be ok, since it is scaled from the working example provided with Snacks! Continued, but I don't fully understand where the exact final number comes from.
    
2. Following the example of KPBS, I also added some tags, including the cck-lifesupport tag.
   
   This last one is prepended dynamically to the list of tags when either TAC or Snacks! is installed, using MM's regex substitution. This should place the part in the correct category if also Community Category Kit is installed, and otherwise it should be harmless.
   
   But curiously, something here seems to break the search filter in the VAB: typing "green" no longer brings up the greenhouse. It seems KSP generates default search terms (presumably from the part title?) when tags are not specified, but when they are, something unintuitive happens.
   
   I do have FilterExtensions installed, so maybe I should test without it to make sure it's not messing things up.
   
   So I'm not sure what to do about this change - continue debugging, or leave tags out?

Comments?

[strudo76]

On 7/1/2017 at 8:23 AM, Yemo said:

SETI CareerChallenge v1.3.0.0 (Recommended for career mode, use CKAN for a clean install)

This small mod simply reduces science experiment rewards by 70% to balance out the contract science rewards compared to science mode.

If I start a new game with the hard preset settings as the base config, does the 70% reduction stack with the 60% reduction in the interface, or does this supersede that setting? Or does it work some other way? If it stacks, is the hard preset base config (60% reduction) how you intend the challenge mod to be used, or was it based on a standard 100% return as base?

 

EDIT: Also is Tweakscale a requirement for the PartOverhaulsSETI plugin? I removed it an got a bunch of module manage errors. CKAN didn't have any issues with me removing it though.

Edited July 9, 2017 by strudo76
Tweakscale stuff

[Yemo]

21 hours ago, Ruedii said:

Any chance an series of underwater missions could be added to the mission pack for Kerbin, and possibly Eve and Laythe? 

Including both probe and manned submarine missions, including dive depth and establishing underwater habitable bases.

Unfortunately I lack the time to work on SETIcontracts. From viewing the last stream by Quill18, there are some bugs in the contracts which I intend to fix, but otherwise I try to focus on other mods. Especially SETIrebalance, for which there is no alternative except for full realism overhaul. SETIcontracts is also extremely basic. For underwater missions I would recommend a new procedural contract pack specifically for that purpose, like what GAP does for early planes.

 

@JadeOfMaar: Good idea, can just put it where USI puts its greenhouses, if that is installed. And otherwise keep it at the higher tech node.

@Technologicat : Hm, I really dislike such scientist boni, because they make the game less predictable. I like to be able to calculate once and then remember it, if at all. Otherwise it becomes to complicated for my personal taste. Which is also one of the reasons I dislike CommNet implementation, where you have to consult a spreadsheet/calculator for every connection between two vessels/situations.

I d say just put in what you think will work best, and in the worst case, it can be fixed. Not perfect, but time efficient.

 

17 hours ago, strudo76 said:

If I start a new game with the hard preset settings as the base config, does the 70% reduction stack with the 60% reduction in the interface, or does this supersede that setting? Or does it work some other way? If it stacks, is the hard preset base config (60% reduction) how you intend the challenge mod to be used, or was it based on a standard 100% return as base?

 

EDIT: Also is Tweakscale a requirement for the PartOverhaulsSETI plugin? I removed it an got a bunch of module manage errors. CKAN didn't have any issues with me removing it though.

The 70% do indeed stack with the settings (eg 60%). I tested the SETI-MetaModPack with a setting of 50% and no KSC biome rover exploits to be safe. But if playing for fun I would probably set it to 60% and do a bit of rover KSC science if I m not in the mood for planes and such.

The most important thing is, to leave the penalties at 100% since that is a pure grindiness slider. Its change for different difficulties is as strange to me as the default setting which hides the navball every time you enter map view (which can only be turned off from the main menu settings)...

Hm, PartOverhaulsSETI should work fine without TweakScale, I ll have to check if I missed a :NEEDS statement or something.

[Gordon Dry]

Could you please confirm if the PP patch inside GameData\SETIrebalance is or is not responsible for this?

+ the following two posts.

 

Edit:

All the PP patches inside that folder GameData\SETIrebalance\0ProceduralParts\ don't check for MFT or RealFuels.

So for example in SETI-PartMod-PP-TankLiquid.cfg it's

@PART[proceduralTankLiquid]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts]:AFTER[ProceduralParts]

but how about

@PART[proceduralTankLiquid]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts&!ModularFuelTanks&!RealFuels]:FOR[SETIrebalance]

 

or

@PART[proceduralTankTAC]:NEEDS[ThunderAerospace]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts]:AFTER[ProceduralParts]

becomes

@PART[proceduralTankTAC]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts&ThunderAerospace&!ModularFuelTanks&!RealFuels]:FOR[SETIrebalance]

etc. pp. ??

Edited July 9, 2017 by Gordon Dry

[Technologicat]

2 hours ago, Yemo said:

Hm, I really dislike such scientist boni, because they make the game less predictable. I like to be able to calculate once and then remember it, if at all. Otherwise it becomes to complicated for my personal taste. Which is also one of the reasons I dislike CommNet implementation, where you have to consult a spreadsheet/calculator for every connection between two vessels/situations.

@Yemo: I agree, such bonuses are difficult to play with due to the added complexity. However, this is how Snacks! does it, so it's probably more in spirit of this particular LS mod to keep the bonus also here.

Testing this further, I noticed the KPBS greenhouse doesn't show up by typing in the VAB parts search bar, either - but all greenhouses, including the SETI ones, are now listed under Life Support when Filter Extensions is installed.

Curiously, searching for "planetary" finds many KPBS parts, but not the greenhouse. Whatever the issue is, it's hitting KPBS, too. Maybe something in KSP 1.3 has broken the parts search for some mods?

I tried also with Malah's QuickSearch installed, still no dice. Couldn't find anything definitive on this on the forum, either. Between the lines, the description of QuickSearch on SpaceDock seems to imply that stock KSP searches at least in tag, title, name, description, author and manufacturer (QuickSearch allows filtering this). IIRC the search used to work in KSP 1.1 when it was introduced, also for all modded parts that I tried back then.

Which gets me to:

I d say just put in what you think will work best, and in the worst case, it can be fixed. Not perfect, but time efficient.

Excellent strategy, let's do that!

The current version should be good enough for now. PR sent, check your GitHub. Nice working with you

 

[strudo76]

On 7/8/2017 at 1:04 AM, Yemo said:

Ah, yes, I should take another look at the contract restrictions. Not sure if the landing at coordinates is worth it, after doing the same thing unmanned. Thank you very much! I ll also have to check out the career evolution contract pack by @pap1723.

I had another thought on this actually. Instead of using a definite landing point for the manned powered landing, is it within Contract Configs ability to specify that the craft cannot exceed an altitude of say 2000m? That way it would rule out any chance of accidentally completing this contract when doing any manned space mission with non-detected parts.

[nickicool]

Hi! Porkjets PartOverhauls SETIconfig is standalone patch, or need install some mods? I can't find mod Porkjet, if you help me and give link - I be very thank for you!

[nickicool]

After install SETICustomBarnKit my kerbonauts cant get ground samples (I've only tried it on site KSC). If delete this patch - all ok. This bug or not? How return this game function?

Sorry, it's just my carelessness - all works well, just need 4 level ResearchCenter.

Thanks!))

Edited July 13, 2017 by nickicool

[nickicool]

I play with a set of your mods in first. Want to say this:

SETI Rebalance - Is very like, except MechJeb available from the beginning in career. Can make it as a separate patch file? I want the progressive development of technologies of auto-pilot. I deleted from the cfg line for MechJeb, but it's uncomfortable - need do this after each up.

Patch for CustomBarnKit - very like a lot of levels of improvement, but the cost for upgrade, in my opinion, high. Additionally, the number of buildings a lot. Maybe to increase the cost not in 2 times, and 1.5 each level?

I also use your Contracts mod, UBM, ProbeParts, CareerChallenge, Greenhouse and Rebalance for MysteryGoo - all this mods very usefull and great !

[Yemo]

On 9.7.2017 at 9:42 PM, Gordon Dry said:

Could you please confirm if the PP patch inside GameData\SETIrebalance is or is not responsible for this?

+ the following two posts.

 

Edit:

All the PP patches inside that folder GameData\SETIrebalance\0ProceduralParts\ don't check for MFT or RealFuels.

*snip*

Hm, no idea, I do not check with real fuels or mft.

But I can of course change my MM statements to check for real fuels and mft as you suggested and when they are detected, to not apply the patches.

 

On 9.7.2017 at 11:34 PM, Technologicat said:

@Yemo: I agree, such bonuses are difficult to play with due to the added complexity. However, this is how Snacks! does it, so it's probably more in spirit of this particular LS mod to keep the bonus also here.

Testing this further, I noticed the KPBS greenhouse doesn't show up by typing in the VAB parts search bar, either - but all greenhouses, including the SETI ones, are now listed under Life Support when Filter Extensions is installed.

Curiously, searching for "planetary" finds many KPBS parts, but not the greenhouse. Whatever the issue is, it's hitting KPBS, too. Maybe something in KSP 1.3 has broken the parts search for some mods?

I tried also with Malah's QuickSearch installed, still no dice. Couldn't find anything definitive on this on the forum, either. Between the lines, the description of QuickSearch on SpaceDock seems to imply that stock KSP searches at least in tag, title, name, description, author and manufacturer (QuickSearch allows filtering this). IIRC the search used to work in KSP 1.1 when it was introduced, also for all modded parts that I tried back then.

Which gets me to:

Excellent strategy, let's do that!

The current version should be good enough for now. PR sent, check your GitHub. Nice working with you

 

Interesting, I ll have to check how that search works.

 

On 11.7.2017 at 5:11 AM, strudo76 said:

I had another thought on this actually. Instead of using a definite landing point for the manned powered landing, is it within Contract Configs ability to specify that the craft cannot exceed an altitude of say 2000m? That way it would rule out any chance of accidentally completing this contract when doing any manned space mission with non-detected parts.

I ll have to do something about the SETIcontracts. It seems they are a bit buggy due to new ksp versions. Saw some problems when Quill18 used them last week or so.

 

On 13.7.2017 at 11:16 AM, nickicool said:

Hi! Porkjets PartOverhauls SETIconfig is standalone patch, or need install some mods? I can't find mod Porkjet, if you help me and give link - I be very thank for you!

It is a standalone, no other files needed.

 

On 13.7.2017 at 10:24 PM, nickicool said:

After install SETICustomBarnKit my kerbonauts cant get ground samples (I've only tried it on site KSC). If delete this patch - all ok. This bug or not? How return this game function?

Sorry, it's just my carelessness - all works well, just need 4 level ResearchCenter.

Thanks!))

Hm, I might have to lower that level.

 

On 14.7.2017 at 1:15 PM, nickicool said:

I play with a set of your mods in first. Want to say this:

SETI Rebalance - Is very like, except MechJeb available from the beginning in career. Can make it as a separate patch file? I want the progressive development of technologies of auto-pilot. I deleted from the cfg line for MechJeb, but it's uncomfortable - need do this after each up.

Patch for CustomBarnKit - very like a lot of levels of improvement, but the cost for upgrade, in my opinion, high. Additionally, the number of buildings a lot. Maybe to increase the cost not in 2 times, and 1.5 each level?

I also use your Contracts mod, UBM, ProbeParts, CareerChallenge, Greenhouse and Rebalance for MysteryGoo - all this mods very usefull and great !

Thank you!

I ll check the costs of the building upgrades again. What difficulty settings do you use? Especially the funds penalty slider should never be above 100%, as that is a pure grindiness slider which increases the cost of building upgrades.

To be honest, I m not much of a fan of having another small mini mod for the mechjeb settings. But you could just create a textfile called "whatever.cfg" directly in your GameData folder and then copy this code into it:

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]]:NEEDS[MechJeb2]:FINAL
{
	%MODULE[MechJebCore]
	{
		!MechJebLocalSettings,* {}
		MechJebLocalSettings
		{
            MechJebModuleCustomWindowEditor { unlockTechs = flightControl }
            MechJebModuleSmartASS { unlockTechs = flightControl }
            MechJebModuleManeuverPlanner { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleNodeEditor { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleTranslatron { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleWarpHelper { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleAttitudeAdjustment { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleThrustWindow { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleRCSBalancerWindow { unlockTechs = advFlightControl }
            MechJebModuleRoverWindow { unlockTechs = fieldScience }
            MechJebModuleAscentGuidance { unlockTechs = unmannedTech }
            MechJebModuleLandingGuidance { unlockTechs = unmannedTech }
            MechJebModuleSpaceplaneGuidance { unlockTechs = unmannedTech }
            MechJebModuleDockingGuidance { unlockTechs = advUnmanned }
            MechJebModuleRendezvousAutopilotWindow { unlockTechs = advUnmanned }
            MechJebModuleRendezvousGuidance { unlockTechs = advUnmanned }
		}
	}
}

 

That should revert the unlocks to the original tech positions. Not great, but should work and be independent of SETIrebalance updates.

[nickicool]

1 hour ago, Yemo said:

I ll check the costs of the building upgrades again. What difficulty settings do you use? Especially the funds penalty slider should never be above 100%, as that is a pure grindiness slider which increases the cost of building upgrades.

I used by default all difficult settings - normal, 100%.

Thanks for help!

[Catjaco]

Hi everyone, i'm having some problems with the "Unmanned before Manned" mod. When i run a new game, the tech tree is still the same as the vanilla one, so the starting tech doesn't give me the probes but only the original parts, like the mk1 capsule. I tried various things, like re-installing the mod and the other mods several times, trying different mods together, but even alone it doesn't work. I also tried to update the Module Manager, deleted the old ones , but still, nothing i could do, the mod still doesn't work for me. I installed the mod using CKAN, because i'm not used to manually install mods on ksp and prefer to use it for the simplicity. 
Still, i don't know what to do anymore, also tried to google the problem to see if someone had the same problem, but nothing. If this reply is also in the wrong section, forgive me please, i'm new to this forum and hadn't looked really well at all the sections.
If someone knows how to help me, i would be really grateful. 

[strudo76]

Are the Inline Mini RCS and RV-15 RCS Thruster Block from Flight Control supposed to be set to 0.075 thrust? Seems pretty low given the two SETI RCS objects available one node before both provide 0.3 thrust and the RCS block in the subsequent node offers 1.0 thrust. Maybe should have been 0.75 rather than 0.075?

Relevant files are setiMiniInlineRCS.cfg and setiMiniRCS.cfg

EDIT: Should have specified, in Probe Parts

Edited July 16, 2017 by strudo76

[Ruedii]

On 7/16/2017 at 10:35 AM, strudo76 said:

Are the Inline Mini RCS and RV-15 RCS Thruster Block from Flight Control supposed to be set to 0.075 thrust? Seems pretty low given the two SETI RCS objects available one node before both provide 0.3 thrust and the RCS block in the subsequent node offers 1.0 thrust. Maybe should have been 0.75 rather than 0.075?

Relevant files are setiMiniInlineRCS.cfg and setiMiniRCS.cfg

EDIT: Should have specified, in Probe Parts

They are for really tiny probes, so I suspect they are meant to be that low.

Look at the difference in the weight they are pushing compared to larger RCS systems.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Ruedii

[Atmoz]

Hello and sorry for my bad english

 

I play KSP 1.3.0 x64 modded.

I have a problem when i use engin parts from SETI-ProbeParts. I have no engine sound. Other parts engine mod work very well, exept from SETI ProbeParts 

Someone could help ?

 

Thanks

 

[markal]

So I am using the SETI ModPack with all of the recommended but none of the suggested mods. I am also installed the RCS Build Aid but having a major issue.

I still haven't unlocked reaction wheels because of the Challenge mod and was trying to do orbitting and controlling space crafts inspace with RCS but as soon as I exit atmosphere and enter space RCS rotation just stops working. Since none of the control surfaces work either I am stuck unable to control my crafts at all once I am outside Kerbin's atmosphere. What am I doing wrong, please help.

[strudo76]

1 hour ago, markal said:

So I am using the SETI ModPack with all of the recommended but none of the suggested mods. I am also installed the RCS Build Aid but having a major issue.

I still haven't unlocked reaction wheels because of the Challenge mod and was trying to do orbitting and controlling space crafts inspace with RCS but as soon as I exit atmosphere and enter space RCS rotation just stops working. Since none of the control surfaces work either I am stuck unable to control my crafts at all once I am outside Kerbin's atmosphere. What am I doing wrong, please help.

Hate to state the obvious, but you are pressing "r" to enable the RCS system yeah?

[markal]

1 hour ago, strudo76 said:

Hate to state the obvious, but you are pressing "r" to enable the RCS system yeah?

Yes I activate RCS using "r" key and it turns light green on the NAV bar as well.

[kcs123]

And other "obvious" question, do you have enough monopropelant on craft ? SETI remove monopropelant from cockpits by default, so it is easy to forget filling those tanks. This is in assumption that you don't have other RCS tanks on craft.

It would be much easier to discover what is going on if you provide screenshots of craft and/or log file.

This thread might help you how to find log file:

 

Edited July 19, 2017 by kcs123
link for support thread