Jump to content

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

Yemo

By Yemo
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

scy

scy

Posted
Posted

Most of the heat shields are missing in my game (only 0.625m and 5m and expandable ones available). Also no Mk1 pod or large parachute. I see lines like the following in the `UnmannedBeforeManned-TechTree.cfg` file but don't quite understand the syntax; why are these parts not in the tech tree in-game? 

@PART[mk1pod|HeatShield1|parachuteLarge|radialDrogue|parachuteDrogue]:NEEDS[!CommunityTechTree,!SETIctt,!SETItechtree,!ETT,!OpenTree,!RP-0]:FOR[UnmannedBeforeManned]
{
	@TechRequired = flightControl
}
@PART[mk1pod|HeatShield1|parachuteLarge|radialDrogue|parachuteDrogue]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree,!SETIctt,!SETItechtree,!ETT,!OpenTree,!RP-0]:FOR[UnmannedBeforeManned]
{
	@TechRequired = enhancedSurvivability
}

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TranceaddicT

TranceaddicT

Posted
Posted

If I'm reading correctly,

for PARTS 

mk1pod|HeatShield1|parachuteLarge|radialDrogue|parachuteDrogue

if these mods

!CommunityTechTree,!SETIctt,!SETItechtree,!ETT,!OpenTree,!RP-0

are NOT (!) installed

and

UnmannedBeforeManned 

is installed

make

TechRequired =

 

Those are techTree MMConfigs that create, shuffle and rename RnD nodes.  So, basically, if you have any of those installed it will NOT change the tech required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scy

scy

Posted
Posted

Thanks. After investigating all references to `HeatShield` with no success, I uninstalled YongeTech Tree and suddenly had a lot more parts (and a few more tree nodes). Apparently that has a different way of configuring how stuff gets added to the tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hey all,

I ll probably have time for ksp again soon (and thus the end of the quarter). Will have to catch up on the thread and all the accumulated issues, thank you all for your feedback and especially for the support you provided here.

I can not test it myself at the moment, but I just made a micro update to SETIremoteTechConfig which should make it self-deactivate when GPP is installed.

The rest I will have to check at the end of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MR L A

MR L A

Posted
Posted
On 30/08/2017 at 8:40 PM, Three_Pounds said:

No. The contracts are body specific, so they won't work. We talked about this literally on this page.

Please, for the sanity of everyone, check the thread before you ask a question if it has come up previously. And please read at least one or two pages back, especially on the fast moving threads.

They actually do... there's a patch for it somewhere that worked really well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Landwalker

Landwalker

Posted
Posted

A quick question for the gallery of peanuts:

I'm trying to do Contract 03.1: Orbit & Recovery.  The parameters:

  • Vessel Type: Probe
  • Orbit, then land/splashdown on Kerbin

Okay, great.

Except the game isn't recognizing my vessel, which consists of zero kerbals and is cored by a SETI ProbeSTACK 1, as a probe.

Which begs the question:  If this isn't a probe, what is a probe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aelfhe1m

Aelfhe1m

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Landwalker said:

A quick question for the gallery of peanuts:

I'm trying to do Contract 03.1: Orbit & Recovery.  The parameters:

  • Vessel Type: Probe
  • Orbit, then land/splashdown on Kerbin

Okay, great.

Except the game isn't recognizing my vessel, which consists of zero kerbals and is cored by a SETI ProbeSTACK 1, as a probe.

Which begs the question:  If this isn't a probe, what is a probe?

Some parts (for example relay antennae or rover wheels) will set the default vessel type when you launch. Right click on your probe core, "rename vessel" and make sure the probe icon is selected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Landwalker

Landwalker

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Aelfhe1m said:

Some parts (for example relay antennae or rover wheels) will set the default vessel type when you launch. Right click on your probe core, "rename vessel" and make sure the probe icon is selected.

Ah-hah.  Perfect (and sneaky).  Thank you for the help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Landwalker said:

Yemo (and others), if you don't mind me asking, do you prefer / recommend USI Life Support or TAC Life Support with the SETI MetaModPack?  Any particular reason either way?

I now only support TAC Life Support, since USI changed too much too often for me to keep track of. I liked USI Life Support when it was small and steady and intuitive. I just cant be bothered to recheck the values every time I come back to ksp and learn which part gives a supply duration bonus. In TAC there are recyclers which simply do what you would expect. In USI (at least when I last checked), the mobile processing lab gives a bonus to supply usage?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Landwalker

Landwalker

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Yemo said:

I now only support TAC Life Support, since USI changed too much too often for me to keep track of. I liked USI Life Support when it was small and steady and intuitive. I just cant be bothered to recheck the values every time I come back to ksp and learn which part gives a supply duration bonus. In TAC there are recyclers which simply do what you would expect. In USI (at least when I last checked), the mobile processing lab gives a bonus to supply usage?

 

Ah, thanks for the clarification.  I'm just trying to get a cohesive and cooperative set of mods together for my first career game (and first any KSP game) in two years, so wading through what mods work well with which is a bit of a challenge when I've been out of the loop for so long.

Are you still using/supporting USI Kolonization (MKS/OKS)?

 

 

Edited by Landwalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Landwalker said:

Ah, thanks for the clarification.  I'm just trying to get a cohesive and cooperative set of mods together for my first career game (and first any KSP game) in two years, so wading through what mods work well with which is a bit of a challenge when I've been out of the loop for so long.

Are you still using/supporting USI Kolonization (MKS/OKS)?

I consider the settings in this thread to be the default challenge for myself. It also goes into more details on what to expect and what changes compared to stock.

Especially the house rules are important to me, eg not exploiting KSC science.

Also the Anomaly Survey mod and RCS build aid were not available on ckan last I checked.

While nearly no one is interested in installing a mod pack for challenges, I did specify 3 so far for the SETI meta mod pack, the links to those are also in the OP of the SETI main thread (this one).

I have ideas for 4 more of them, but well, maybe some time...

 

For bases, I actually prefer Pathfinder from Angel-125. Learn it once and it pretty much works, with a limited number of parts. USI Kolonization is now too complex for my taste.

Unfortunately Angel-125 disliked ckan when I last checked, so I cant justify the effort to support it via SETI. If every compatibility issue with 50+ mods needs a manual download for this mod or that one, etc. I would be unable to support anything.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
nobodyhasthis2

nobodyhasthis2

Posted
Posted
On 30/09/2017 at 7:46 PM, Yemo said:

 I actually prefer Pathfinder from Angel-125. Learn it once and it pretty much works, with a limited number of parts. USI Kolonization is now too complex for my taste.

Unfortunately Angel-125 disliked ckan when I last checked, so I cant justify the effort to support it via SETI. If every compatibility issue with 50+ mods needs a manual download for this mod or that one, etc. I would be unable to support anything.

As another possible alternative. People might like to try out Kerbal Planetary Base Systems. I think it fits in well with late game SETI without modification.

Supported by CKAN and works with TAC too.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 10.10.2017 at 9:52 PM, infe5tedneptune said:

I seem to be having a few problems with the SETI mods saying that they are only compatible with 1.3 and not 1.3.1.

was wondering if there is an update in the works 

I do not know of any actual incompatibilities so far, but I have not tested. That is just a warning that compatibility has not yet been fully checked with the newer version.

From a modding perspective, 1.3 is the stable version for the general public, while 1.3.1 is the dev version for mod creators and beta testers.

Due to the nature of the SETI mods, they will stay with 1.3 until 1.3.1 is more widely supported.

On 11.10.2017 at 2:26 AM, nobodyhasthis2 said:

As another possible alternative. People might like to try out Kerbal Planetary Base Systems. I think it fits in well with late game SETI without modification.

Supported by CKAN and works with TAC too.

 

 

Oh, I forgot about that. Will have to take a closer look.

On 14.10.2017 at 1:33 AM, duckmaister3000 said:

I'm having an issue where the MK1 pod isn't showing up at all in the Unmanned Tech Tree. The flight control node has the aerobrake, nose cone, mechjeb, and rcs stuff. no pod. The command pod node has all the other stock ones. 

Cant help you without at least screenshots of your gamedata folder (or ckan install list) and the log file.

 

Also seems like ckan can not access spacedock at the moment.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nobodyhasthis2

nobodyhasthis2

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Yemo said:

I do not know of any actual incompatibilities so far, but I have not tested. That is just a warning that compatibility has not yet been fully checked with the newer version.

From a modding perspective, 1.3 is the stable version for the general public, while 1.3.1 is the dev version for mod creators and beta testers.

Due to the nature of the SETI mods, they will stay with 1.3 until 1.3.1 is more widely supported.

They are not considered compatible unless explicitly stated as such. Some mods complied for 1.3.0 can crash in 1.3.1. I will not post examples for the sake of brevity. Updates on 1.3.0 should be capped with MAX_KSP_Version where this happens. To stop them appearing as updates in 1.3.1. Not all mods do this and end users need to be aware of only the ones that do. Unfortately there are some poorly defined .version files out there that don't refect this. Also note that Spacedock does not even take multiple versions. Therefore CKAN can't block updates with the poor data being supplied. I would strongly advise checking the forum and release notes first befrore accepting any more updates to 1.3.0 builds.

As far as doing a SETI build in 1.3.1 goes. There still a few key mods missing from the whole SETI experince. Procedural wings and Procedural parts to name a few. However the mod pack will still work for those that want to beta test it. Share your finds here on what works and what does not.

3 hours ago, Yemo said:

Also seems like ckan can not access spacedock at the moment.

Temp problem on Spacedock side. The ssl certificate needs a update. VITAS poked at to fix but it is the weekend. So small delay expected.

Edited by nobodyhasthis2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
duckmaister3000

duckmaister3000

Posted
Posted
On 10/15/2017 at 11:19 AM, Yemo said:

I do not know of any actual incompatibilities so far, but I have not tested. That is just a warning that compatibility has not yet been fully checked with the newer version.

From a modding perspective, 1.3 is the stable version for the general public, while 1.3.1 is the dev version for mod creators and beta testers.

Due to the nature of the SETI mods, they will stay with 1.3 until 1.3.1 is more widely supported.

Oh, I forgot about that. Will have to take a closer look.

Cant help you without at least screenshots of your gamedata folder (or ckan install list) and the log file.

 

Also seems like ckan can not access spacedock at the moment.

I actually figured out what it was. I needed Ven's Stock Part Revamp's CTT patch. I ended up uninstalling Ven's anyways due to the pods not working with RPM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
karamazovnew

karamazovnew

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 9/14/2017 at 11:39 PM, TranceaddicT said:

I have a question about SETIrebalance and (Semi)Saturable Reaction Wheels.

In particular, I'm looking at the config of  SXT375mProbe

Here are the pertinent MMConfig codes:

Here RW.cfg creates a new MODULE[RWSaturatable]. 


//	RW.cfg

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel],!MODULE[RWSaturatable]]:FOR[RWSaturatable]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = RWSaturatable
		saturationScale = 10 // axis saturation limit is scale * avgTorque
		bleedRate
		{
			key = 0 0.025 0 0 // with 0% saturation, 2.5% of torque per second (0.25% total with the default scale of 10)
			key = 1 0.025 0 0 // with 100% saturation, 2.5% of torque per second (0.25% total with the default scale of 10)
		}
		torqueCurve
		{
			key = 0 1 -1 -1 // with 0% saturation, full torque
			key = 1 0 -1 -1 // with 100% saturation, no torque
		}
	}
}

Now, this is where I get confused.  Here it seems SETI should either:

1) if RWSaturatable exists, SETI duplicates and renames MODULE[RWSaturatable] as MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel] 

or

2) if RWSaturatable DOES NOT (!MODULE[RWSaturatable]) exists, it just creates it. 


//	SETI-GeneralSetting.cfg

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[RWSaturatable]]:NEEDS[RWSaturatable]:AFTER[RWSaturatable]:BEFORE[SETIrebalance]
{
    @MODULE[RWSaturatable],*
    {
        @name = ModuleReactionWheel
    }
}
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel],!MODULE[RWSaturatable]]:NEEDS[RWSaturatable]:AFTER[SETIrebalance]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel]
    {
        @name = RWSaturatable
        %saturationScale = 10
        !bleedRate,* {}
        bleedRate
        {
            key = 0 0.025 0 0
            key = 1 0.025 0 0
        }
        !torqueCurve,* {}
        torqueCurve
        {
            key = 0 1 -1 -1
            key = 1 0 -1 -1
        }
    }
}

These are creating the following entries in the respective config files. 


		MODULE
		{
			name = RWSaturatable
			PitchTorque = 3
			YawTorque = 3
			RollTorque = 3
			saturationScale = 10
			RESOURCE
			{
				name = ElectricCharge
				rate = 0.25
			}
			bleedRate
			{
				key = 0 0.025 0 0
				key = 1 0.025 0 0
			}
			torqueCurve
			{
				key = 0 1 -1 -1
				key = 1 0 -1 -1
			}
		}


		MODULE
		{
			name = ModuleReactionWheel
			saturationScale = 10
			bleedRate
			{
				key = 0 0.025 0 0
				key = 1 0.025 0 0
			}
			torqueCurve
			{
				key = 0 1 -1 -1
				key = 1 0 -1 -1
			}
		}

Is this the desired outcome?  It seems that there is a duplication of MODULES. 

 

Again, I'm really confused about what is happening here.

OMG, finally! Now I understand why the RCS rebalance wasn't working at all.

The second part of the code in SETI-GeneralSetting.cfg is needed, just in case RWSaturable misses some parts that get a ModuleReactionWheel during SETI. SETI thus forces a recheck. The first part however shouldn't be there and it messes things up.

Comment it out or delete it. Your file should look like this. Be careful though, that if you had the "SETIrebalanceReactionWheels" folder, RCS rebalance will now do its work and slash your torque. In my case, that's exactly what I was looking for. 

  

//------\\
//---Semi-Saturatable Reaction Wheels---\\
//------\\

//---Thank you, Rokanov
//@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[RWSaturatable]]:NEEDS[RWSaturatable]:AFTER[RWSaturatable]:BEFORE[SETIrebalance]
//{
//   @MODULE[RWSaturatable],*
//    {
//       @name = ModuleReactionWheel
//    }
//}
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel],!MODULE[RWSaturatable]]:NEEDS[RWSaturatable]:AFTER[SETIrebalance]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleReactionWheel]
    {
        @name = RWSaturatable
        %saturationScale = 10
        !bleedRate,* {}
        bleedRate
        {
            key = 0 0.025 0 0
            key = 1 0.025 0 0
        }
        !torqueCurve,* {}
        torqueCurve
        {
            key = 0 1 -1 -1
            key = 1 0 -1 -1
        }
    }
}

Alternatively, you could delete RWSaturable's RW config file, as then SETI wouldn't see any RWSaturable modules to begin with and the first part of that code wouldn't do anything.

Edited by karamazovnew
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tahib

Tahib

Posted
Posted (edited)

Installed SETI as well as GPP: Somehow SETI (or one of the recommended addons) managed to hide the TAC LS Part Folder. Any Idea how to bring it back again?

edit: solved by adding community category kit to my mods list

+There's a bug with SETi rebalance. It should add Kerbal Engineer to every pod, but the added part name is not correct: in SETIrebalance\SETI-GeneralSettings.cfg line 46 its "%MODULE[FlightEngineer]{}". Should be  FlightEngineerModule  .... or maybe NEEDS kerbal engineer redux? not sure 

+would be nice if SETI probe parts would hide  default stock parts which are now obsolete

Edited by Tahib
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nobodyhasthis2

nobodyhasthis2

Posted
Posted
On 21/10/2017 at 12:45 AM, Tahib said:

+There's a bug with SETi rebalance. It should add Kerbal Engineer to every pod, but the added part name is not correct: in SETIrebalance\SETI-GeneralSettings.cfg line 46 its "%MODULE[FlightEngineer]{}". Should be  FlightEngineerModule  .... or maybe NEEDS kerbal engineer redux? not sure

Known bug reported a few pages back. Does not normally come into play as you can switch off KER parts in the in game interface. If you want to clear it the error altogether here is the patch. If you don't want to just delete the mistake.

As a personal rule of thumb it is better to use a custom config that tweaks SETI. 

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]]:NEEDS[KerbalEngineer]:AFTER[zzzzSETIrebalance]
{
	!MODULE[FlightEngineer]{}
	%MODULE[FlightEngineerModule]{}
}

 

On 21/10/2017 at 12:45 AM, Tahib said:

+would be nice if SETI probe parts would hide  default stock parts which are now obsolete

Have not looked into it but a similar patch can set @TechRequired = unresearchable which removes parts. Also note that "The Janitor's Closet"  mod can hide parts in game. To give you a better idea of a patch here is me doing it for SXT 

@PART[SXTFuel625m]:NEEDS[SXT]:FINAL
{
	@TechRequired = unresearchable
}

Hope that helps a bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...