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

[Yemo]

1 hour ago, Chippy the Space Dog said:

Aha.  Ok, I haven't looked at where the M-700 is on the tree yet, but I can't fault your argument there otherwise.

The point I was trying to make about the OKS/MKS modules is they're all at tier 9. I'm not sure how they ended up there though if you haven't placed them, as in the community tech tree and stock they appear at tier 5 (90 points)  While I dom't think they should all necessarily be that low, there's a heap of difference in their placement from stock/Community. and the SETI tree, and it would sure be nice to be able to aim at sustainable stations before the very end of tech advancement.

At least it would for me.

 

The only config to modify those tech tree positions (as far as I know) is the CTT.cfg within the UKS folder, which is triggered when module manager detects the CommunityTechTree (SETIctt also triggers the CommunityTechTree configs). Thus the part placement should be the same for CTT and SETIctt, as long as CTT is installed correctly ("CommunityTechTree" folder directly within the GameData folder.

Imho totally independent bases make sense to be somewhere along the last technological advances in game, with FTL engines being the last one.

[Dunbaratu]

5 hours ago, Yemo said:

 (eg 12200 funds for 145 reputation)
 

About the only opinion I agree with you on is that the Strategies seem to be written under the false assumption that the ratio between science and funding is about 1:100 and the ratio between reputation and funding is also about 1:100 when it's obviously more than 10 times that.  (Each science point or rep point you gain costs you a heck of a lot more than 100 funds to earn. 100 funds barely buys the cheapest single part you can attach to a spaceship.)  I'm of the opinion that the tradeoff ratio *should be* quite poor for something like a bailout grant, so it's something you avoid if you can, but not so poor that it may as well not exist at all in the game.

[nobodyhasthis2]

On 3/25/2016 at 2:41 PM, Yemo said:

I wish the "Sane Strategies" mod from KSP 0.90 would still be around.

oh yes I fondly remember that!

Not the same mod but Strategia fills in a pretty big hole in poor stock administration building choices. Absolutely will not play with out this now. Before this the administration building was pretty useless in a SETI game. The nice thing is also offers some roleplay choices that add to game replay value. Depending on what strategies are chosen the game can feel like a different experience. Would definitely recommend this to anyone that has problems with the stock administration building.  

 

[nobodyhasthis2]

 

22 hours ago, Yemo said:

The only config to modify those tech tree positions (as far as I know) is the CTT.cfg within the UKS folder, which is triggered when module manager detects the CommunityTechTree (SETIctt also triggers the CommunityTechTree configs). Thus the part placement should be the same for CTT and SETIctt, as long as CTT is installed correctly ("CommunityTechTree" folder directly within the GameData folder.

Imho totally independent bases make sense to be somewhere along the last technological advances in game, with FTL engines being the last one.

USI mods have tech tree adjustments different from CTT.  The CTT.cfg is within the UKS folder, which is triggered when module manager detects the CommunityTechTree. Then a few SETI changes are made with AFTER[UmbraSpaceIndustries]:FOR[SETIctt] using individual files in MM-Tech tree folder. At least that is what I think happens. I have not looked at OKS/MKS + SETI game builds in a while but as I recall they work. The stock M-700 seems placed correctly too.

 

 

[Phelan]

Quick question: I may be wrong (since I've got a couple of other mods installed as well), but it looks like the Rebalance mod seriously nerfs the command pods and SAS modules (pretty much removal or division by 10 or so of the reaction wheel effect plus an entire removal of RCS fuel from the Mk I pod for example). Is my guess correct that it's that mod, and if so, why is there no mention of this in the features list?

[Yemo]

On 25.3.2016 at 4:49 PM, nobodyhasthis2 said:

oh yes I fondly remember that!

Not the same mod but Strategia fills in a pretty big hole in poor stock administration building choices. Absolutely will not play with out this now. Before this the administration building was pretty useless in a SETI game. The nice thing is also offers some roleplay choices that add to game replay value. Depending on what strategies are chosen the game can feel like a different experience. Would definitely recommend this to anyone that has problems with the stock administration building.  

 

Yes, though I will wait until the teething problems are ironed out.

Anyway it might not be to everones taste, so I d just like a way to deactivate those horribly imbalanced stock strategies.

 

1 hour ago, Phelan said:

Quick question: I may be wrong (since I've got a couple of other mods installed as well), but it looks like the Rebalance mod seriously nerfs the command pods and SAS modules (pretty much removal or division by 10 or so of the reaction wheel effect plus an entire removal of RCS fuel from the Mk I pod for example). Is my guess correct that it's that mod, and if so, why is there no mention of this in the features list?

Whoops, somehow forgot to update the feature list regarding reaction wheels. Thank you for the notice!

 

About KSP 1.1:

First of all let me say that I welcome the update and there are many great improvements!

Unfortunately unmotivated disimprovements, while much fewer than previously (also due to the lack of "new" features), are not absent. Especially that new scrolling "feature" in the VAB is aggravatingly tedious. There are no more "pages", instead it is a vertcally scrollable column, 3 items wide. Each "scroll" with the mouse wheel reveals about 2.5 additional parts. While that is barely acceptable witht the stock parts in the utility category, imagine it with hundreds of mod parts in that category. Or they could have just made it like QuickScroll did. A "scroll" with the mouse wheel turns the page, revealing dozens of new parts each time. "Optimization" for stock, disregard of modded games, again.

edit: And not speaking of that font, well, mess. The VAB cost display is huge, while the cost in the R&D part overview are tiny.

 

What does KSP 1.1 mean for the mods within this thread?

As far as I can see, nothing at all. Since that dreaded connection feature did not make it for 1.1, there seems to be little or no direct effect. Though there will probably be some indirect effect when the other mods update, since that is an opportunity to make changes.

 

And I want to use this opportunity for changes as well (especially for SETIctt), so I will not rush to update the mods, they seem to be working anyway for people who really want to use them now. Just so that no one can complain when the big SETIctt update is released.

 

Since SETIctt will take a while, Unmanned Before Manned is "updated" first, for people who want to derp around in a new 1.1 career.

By the way, the CommunityTechTree will probably update as well, though I found no issue at all when using the current CTT version 2.3 together with UnmannedBeforeManned in a KSP 1.1 game.

 

Unmanned before Manned v1.0.8 (for KSP 1.1)

KSP 1.1 compatibility

TechTree cost changes

• basicRocketry 12 instead of 5
• engineering101 4 instead of 5
• generalRocketry 16 instead of 18
• stability 8 instead of 12

Part placement changes

• Modular Girder Segment to structuralParts
• LV-T45 to generalRocketry
• 24-77 Twitch engine earlier @propulsionSystems
• FAT wings earlier @advAerodynamics/subsonicFlight
• 2.5m service bay earlier @spaceExploration/storageTech

Edited March 30, 2016 by Yemo

[Phelan]

2 minutes ago, Yemo said:

Whoops, somehow forgot to update the feature list regarding reaction wheels. Thank you for the notice!

Well, you're welcome, and thanks for the reply

But that may pretty much make the whole mod unattractive for me, which would be extremely sad because I absolutely love all the rest And when combined with other mods that actually add some "stock-alike" SAS (-capable command pods and cockpits), it becomes completely weird. Any chance of adding an optional mod/alternate download/whatever without that massive nerf? Or some "how-to" for undoing those changes manually?

[Yemo]

31 minutes ago, Phelan said:

Well, you're welcome, and thanks for the reply

But that may pretty much make the whole mod unattractive for me, which would be extremely sad because I absolutely love all the rest And when combined with other mods that actually add some "stock-alike" SAS (-capable command pods and cockpits), it becomes completely weird. Any chance of adding an optional mod/alternate download/whatever without that massive nerf? Or some "how-to" for undoing those changes manually?

Hm, unfortunately there is not one folder or file or so to delete, due to the structure of the mod being part centered, not feature centered.
There is also not an easy way to get the SAS back to the original levels by eg a multiplication by a factor of 10, since that would be overkill for probe cores and only work where SAS was not totally removed.

At least the weirdness when mixing with other part mods is temporary, since I plan to nerf those as well.

The easiest workaround at the moment would be, to just have those 3 specific reaction wheel parts (eg Small Inline Reaction Wheel and so on) back at their old values. And then just add one of those to your vessels, while keeping the rebalancements for all the other parts, like command and probe cores.

That could be achieved pretty easily by deleting one file:

GameData\SETIrebalance\MM-PartModding\SETI-PartMod-SQUAD-Control.cfg

Though keep in mind that you would have to delete that file every time after updating SETIrebalance. Also expect rebalancements for the parts of other mods, eg NearFutureSpacecraft and so on.
Instead of deleting that file, you could also write a module manager statement which patches the properties of those 3 parts back to their original values. For your private use you would copy paste that SETI-PartMod-SQUAD-Control.cfg file directly in the GameData folder, then replace the values with the original values and change the 3 line endings from ":FOR[SETIrebalance]" to ":Final" and that should prevent the need for deleting the original file.

 

edit: SETIrebalance is far from finished which makes further splittings/alternate downloads as well as manually changing the SETI files themselves very impractical. Deleting one specific config each update might be tolerable, otherwise module manager "repatches" are the only time efficient way.

Edited March 30, 2016 by Yemo

[Phelan]

16 minutes ago, Yemo said:

<snip>

Ahh, thank you, that was pretty much the manual "how-to" I was hoping for

[goldenpsp]

Quote

Unfortunately unmotivated disimprovements, while much fewer than previously (also due to the lack of "new" features), are not absent. Especially that new scrolling "feature" in the VAB is aggravatingly tedious. There are no more "pages", instead it is a vertcally scrollable column, 3 items wide. Each "scroll" with the mouse wheel reveals about 2.5 additional parts. While that is barely acceptable witht the stock parts in the utility category, imagine it with hundreds of mod parts in that category. Or they could have just made it like QuickScroll did. A "scroll" with the mouse wheel turns the page, revealing dozens of new parts each time. "Optimization" for stock, disregard of modded games, again

.I guess it's a matter of preference.  I for one love the new scrolling, especially in conjunction with a search.  I actually like the scroll speed as well.  I already have my mouse programmed to be able to accelerate my scroll on demand, that works the same in most applications I use (Word, Excel and now KSP).

Edited March 30, 2016 by goldenpsp

[Yemo]

1 hour ago, goldenpsp said:

.I guess it's a matter of preference.  I for one love the new scrolling, especially in conjunction with a search.  I actually like the scroll speed as well.  I already have my mouse programmed to be able to accelerate my scroll on demand, that works the same in most applications I use (Word, Excel and now KSP).

Fair enough! Personally I hope that @Malah can bring back the old functionality with his QuickScroll mod!

I would also like to thank the Patrons of SETI and welcome new patron @Daelkyr! Thank you very much for your support!

Just wrote the patreon post for this month, providing an overview of the KSP 1.1 related dev plans.

[Draconomial]

InitialContracts Download is down, due to kerbalstuff shutting down. CKAN download doesn't work for it either. Can we get a rehost linked to the first post please?

[speedwaystar]

20 hours ago, Yemo said:

Since that dreaded connection feature did not make it for 1.1, there seems to be little or no direct effect.

out of interest, what was (is) the dreaded connection feature? o_O

[kcs123]

7 minutes ago, speedwaystar said:

out of interest, what was (is) the dreaded connection feature? o_O

Stock version of Remote control mod. It was posponed for some KSP update after 1.1. release. It could break so many things that is almost futile to do any balancing/changing in RC area (available parts, functionality ...)

After 1.1. is relesed, probably it will pass good amount of time until next verision of KSP become available, so it is more meaningful to put some effort to balance out tech tree and parts for better RC experience.

[speedwaystar]

@kcs123 do you mean the RemoteTech-alike communication range changes?

Edited March 31, 2016 by speedwaystar

[RoverDude]

34 minutes ago, speedwaystar said:

@kcs123 do you mean the RemoteTech-alike communication range changes?

Yep, the antenna diversity and telemetry/control features (it's a bit in between RT and AntennaRange, with a few unique bits installed as well).  And while I respect @Yemo 's right to his opinion, being consistently rude about a feature that is not even released yet it is probably not the most productive or community friendly way to behave.

[kcs123]

2 hours ago, speedwaystar said:

@kcs123 do you mean the RemoteTech-alike communication range changes?

Yes. Roverdude have worked on those. There is more info about it in development thread, link for those should be in this thread too, several pages back. Search for my posts, it is here somewhere, but I don't recall exact thread name from top of my head.

[Yemo]

On 31.3.2016 at 9:00 AM, Draconomial said:

InitialContracts Download is down, due to kerbalstuff shutting down. CKAN download doesn't work for it either. Can we get a rehost linked to the first post please?

Yes, I felt that it offered too little to warrant the maintenance of another mod. But with 1.1 out I guess I can upload it to github and just leave it there. Will probably do so later today.

On 31.3.2016 at 5:43 PM, RoverDude said:

Yep, the antenna diversity and telemetry/control features (it's a bit in between RT and AntennaRange, with a few unique bits installed as well).  And while I respect @Yemo 's right to his opinion, being consistently rude about a feature that is not even released yet it is probably not the most productive or community friendly way to behave.

While I respect @RoverDude's right to his opinion, constantly twisting words as a pretext to flamebaiting is probably not the most productive or community friendly way to behave.

And fearing/dreading the workload and balancing issues an announced feature brings (based on the information provided), with regards to certain own mods, can hardly be constructed as being rude...

 

That said, given the state and handling of the 1.1 update, there is cause for optimism. Imho the UI needs some work (especially that VAB/SPH scroll function), but some issues can be expected when migrating.

PS: You can not activate batteries anymore, if you do not have electricity.

 

[Ixenzo]

3 hours ago, Yemo said:

PS: You can not activate batteries anymore, if you do not have electricity.

Yeah, that's a pretty big nerf to early probes, especially in SETI. Fortunately, there's already a hibernation mod for probes.

[Yemo]

On 31.3.2016 at 9:00 AM, Draconomial said:

InitialContracts Download is down, due to kerbalstuff shutting down. CKAN download doesn't work for it either. Can we get a rehost linked to the first post please?

I uploaded it again on github and I marked it as 1.1 compatible (and copy pasted some stuff over from the current SETIcontracts, like record "contract" nerfs):

https://github.com/Y3mo/InitialContracts/releases

Edited April 3, 2016 by Yemo

[guitarxe]

Does anyone know which of the mods in the Seti pack (when downloaded with CKAN and selecting everything recommended) changes the sounds of the rocket engines?

They sound awesome when they first start, but then after you've cleared the launchpad, the sound is very low in volume that you can barely hear it.

[Yemo]

On 9.4.2016 at 2:12 AM, guitarxe said:

Does anyone know which of the mods in the Seti pack (when downloaded with CKAN and selecting everything recommended) changes the sounds of the rocket engines?

They sound awesome when they first start, but then after you've cleared the launchpad, the sound is very low in volume that you can barely hear it.

Probably one of the ckan dependencies of RealPlume.

[lhunt5]

Loving the mod pack, just did a fresh install and everything is working beautifully (1.0.5)! Thanks for all the hard work!

Edited April 16, 2016 by lhunt5

[MalevolentNinja]

@Yemo Bug Report: in the 1.1 official release, I do not have action groups available in a new career.

Tested on a clean install with only these mods:

• CustomBarnKit v1.1.7
• Unmanned before Manned v1.08
• KSP-AVC v1.1.6.1
• ModuleManager v2.6.22

 

[kcs123]

11 hours ago, MalevolentNinja said:

@Yemo Bug Report: in the 1.1 official release, I do not have action groups available in a new career.

Tested on a clean install with only these mods:

• CustomBarnKit v1.1.7
• Unmanned before Manned v1.08
• KSP-AVC v1.1.6.1
• ModuleManager v2.6.22

 

I can't test it, because I don't have steam version of KSP, but IIRC action groups available on early SPH/VAB building is feature of CustomBarnKit mod. It might be broken or need to be configured in different way. It might me good idea to ask author of CutomBarnKit mod about it too.