Yemo

Mun Flyby After the spectacular success of the Daredevil Pilot who went to space in his plane cockpit using nothing else than solid boosters, there has been increasing pressure on the KSC to be less hesitant and more daring. The work on a liquid fuel engine had numerous setbacks and the public is growing impatient. So a special group has been tasked with the design of a Mun flyby probe using current technologies. The lower to the mun we can get, the better for appeasing the public. The challenge Your challenge, should you accept it, is to reach an periabsis as low as possible above the mun, under the facility upgrade and technological limits described below. Ranking is done by periapsis. For those who reach a periapsis below 10km, a second ranking is done by vehicle mass (KER readouts in SPH/VAB). Minimum picture requirements for a ranking are 1. Design showing KER readouts in SPH/VAB, especially total vessel mass. 2. In flight, at or very close to periapsis. Periapsis displayed by KER or mechjeb (switch KER to partless instead of career in KER settings available in SPH/VAB). Note that the altimeter shows altitude over terrain when in surface mode. Of course additional pictures, videos, etc are very welcome. As is a link if you stream it. The restrictions 1. No R&D, SPH/VAB, Runway/Launchpad facility upgrades! (=> 30part / 9ton mass limit, other facility upgrades are allowed) 2. Tweakscale is only allowed for wings/control surfaces/landing gear/adapters. 3. No mods except the ones specified below. Visual and similar mods are exempt from this rule. 4. No cheating. 5. Science/parts restrictions as shown here (thus no liquid fuel engines, reaction wheels, etc.) Engineering101 node, use the "Alkaline Fuel Cell Mini" to provide EC when lower than 10% capacity Structural Parts node Stability Node, the "Place-Anywhere 1 Linear RCS Port" can be used as an engine The mods 1. Install CKAN for a separate, clean KSP install. 2. Only select the "SETI-MetaModPack". Click "ApplyChanges". 3. Leave all recommendations selected. Click "Continue". 4. From the suggestions, only SETIprobeControlEnabler is allowed, so that you dont have to worry about a RemoteTech connection. Click "Continue" and wait for the the mods to be installed. 5. RCS Build Aid is among the recommendations, but is currently not available via ckan. You may (highly recommended) install that manually from here: https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/RCSBuildAid/releases 6. Visual mods are allowed at your own discretion. The ranking By periapsis above the mun: 1. @Yemo with a periapsis of ~11,667m above the mun My entry for the challenge:

Whoops, did not see this post, sorry. I think SETIrebalance allows you to take a soil sample with a probe. There should be something looking like a communotron extendable antenna but with a yellow tip or so. Not sure where I put it in the tech tree, probably at unmannedTech. It is not implemented fully, but works for roleplay. I use DMagic Orbital Science myself, there are some great experiments and they can all be done by probes, though no soil sample experiment with them. Had some unexpected free time on the weekend, so some updates. OpenCockpit is nice for early flight, and the Landertrons are back. As well as Kerbonov parts. SCANsat parts start earlier at survivability, to give your early probes around Kerbin something to do. I also had to remove EVA fuel mod from the meta mod pack for the time being, as it was throwing exceptions left and right. Will also offer a second challenge later on. SETI Rebalance v1.3.0.1 (for KSP 1.3.x, use CKAN for a clean install) Fixes Fixed later probe cores, typos meant that they had wrong EC capacity Mk0 Liquid Fuel Tank more dry mass, less costs Rebalances Some minor changes to the later probe cores besides the fixes ModSupport Kerbonov Landertron OpenCockpit Unmanned before Manned v1.3.0.1 (for KSP 1.3.x, use CKAN for a clean install) TechTree changes NCS Adapter earlier @earlyAviation HECS2 to advUnmannedTech ModSupport Kerbonov Landertron OpenCockpit SCANsat

Removed EVA Fuel mod from the list since it was throwing exceptions left and right.

I just linked to the MetaModPack netkan file on github. Many of those recommended mods make no difference for this challenge, but with ckan also make no difference for the install and a very minimal difference for loading times. But they might or will become handy for future challenges and together make up something like "what stock ksp could/might have been". SCANsat and RCSbuildAid are the only two relevant ones which do not install via ckan at the moment. edit: CKAN is like a steam engines, it had issues at the start and destroyed stuff, but once they were ironed out and people (modders and users) learned to use it, there is no going back. The bare minimum to get comparable results for this particular challenge would probably be: CommunityTechTree (not sure whether this changes some part placement this early on) CorrectCoL CustomBarnKit KerbalEngineerRedux RCSBuildAid (to balance landing gear vs rudder, etc and thus keep CoM and CoT aligned) SETI-BalanceMod aka SETIrebalance SETI-CustomBarnKit SETI-ProbeParts TweakScale UnmannedBeforeManned UnmannedBeforeMannedChallenge VenStockRevamp Not the physics, just the parts. For a similar challenge, use a cockpit, deactivate all reaction wheels and use only boosters + the 0.625m jet engine, tweakscaled wings, control surfaces, adapters and in this case boosters. No decouplers or similar. Try to go to space with as light a plane as possible.

@tseitsei89 Unfortunately it would not make much sense to try the challenge without the mod pack, since it changes the gameplay so much. But with a separate ksp install and ckan, it literally takes 5 clicks (and the loading time for the mods) to install everything and be ready. There are many challenges for building spaceplanes in stock, but while the screenshots look very similar to stock, the challenge is very different. The tech tree is different, the part selection is different, the parts are somewhat different (removed imbalances between parts, eg the swept wing being too heavy compared to the offered lifting surface), the cockpit is the old Mk1 Inline Cockpit from earlier KSP versions with different stats (no reaction wheels, no monoprop, more fragile, but lighter). There are no reaction wheels this early in the tech tree, no decouplers, no RCS, no parachutes, the first R&D level goes to 40 science instead of 100, first launch pad and runway facility levels start with 9 tons mass limit instead of 18 tons, action groups are available from the start, etc. It is a long list of changes and a very different feel to it. Much more balanced than stock, yet still much less realistic than RealismOverhaul, somewhere in between. I understand that the vast majority of players do not want to fiddle through mod installs for challenges. But for those few who are willing to invest a bit of disc space, 5 extra mod install clicks and some loading time to try out something different, I plan a mini series of challenges (indicated by the "01" in the title). At first glance, these challenges will seem familiar and perhaps simple, but this particular meta mod pack makes all the difference compared to similar challenges for the stock game. An opportunity to rethink your approach and experience something familiar, yet new and different, if you come from stock. edit: Oh, and to answer your question, the 3 screenshots from the tech tree nodes show all the parts you would have. But for some, the part values and modules are different from stock.

Another 4th integration option: - Mk1 pod as an updated version of the stock Mk1 pod - Boattail engines for 1.25m - Non-Boattail 303 and T15 for 0.625m - Non-Boattail 909, T30 and T45 as well as the fuel tanks for 1.875m - Configs to resize some stock basic adapters and a nose cone for 1.875m - Part upgrades removed until the upgrade function is better implemented and does not mess up part sharing. Also makes the pack usable with non-stock tech trees Thus it works with VenStockRevamp as well, without having too many duplicates (just the boattail versions). The download: https://github.com/Y3mo/PartOverhaulsSETI/releases Supported from this thread:

And as previously stated, this is the new challenge, which makes use of the SETI-MetaModPack. It probably wont recieve much attention, since few people want to install specific mods for a challenge (even if it only takes only 5 clicks in ckan total). But for those who are willing, I plan a mini series of challenges for the early tech tree. Your challenge, should you accept it, is to reach an altitude (apoapsis) as high as possible, with a kerbal piloting the vessel, under the facility upgrade and technological limits described below and then safely return to the KSC (must be visible when landed). With max 5 science spent when using the SETI-MetaModPack => no SPH/VAB/Runway/LaunchPad upgrades, no reaction wheels, no RCS, no decouplers, no liquid fuel engines, etc. Highest Altitude counts for the ranking. Made it to the upper atmosphere: Science restrictions with the new "Unmanned Before Manned" + "Unmanned Before Manned Challenge" mod The marked nodes, also somewhat shows how the latest updates changed the early tech tree. You can see the old Mk1 Retro Cockpit in the early Aviation node. Also the NRAP configurable test mass (4th part in start node) to try out launcher designs. The first, kind of black part in the start node is a camera. Start node Early Aviation node (when KAX is installed, a prop engine will appear here) Modular Wings node

Daredevil Spaceplane The "Daredevil Squadron" is home to the boldest pilots on kerbin since shortly after the invention of powered flight. It is therefore a natural recruiting place for the new spaceprogram. Unfortunately technological progress is not as fast as some of those pilots would like it to be and there is a growing fear that manned spaceflight with all the proper precautions, safety concerns and design delays for capsules is coming too late for some of the pilots. And for those kerbals who live in a cockpit, taking familiar risks in flight is much more appealing than taking the risk of missing their chance. Thus some of the daredevil pilots pushed hard and called in favors to try to go to space with the current technology, even if it is only for a quick peak into what lies beyond the confines of the kerbin atmosphere. The challenge Your challenge, should you accept it, is to reach an altitude (apoapsis) as high as possible, with a kerbal piloting the vessel, under the facility upgrade and technological limits described below and then safely return to the KSC (must be visible when landed). Ranking is done by altitude (apoapsis). For those who reach space, a second ranking is done by vehicle mass (KER readouts in SPH/VAB). Minimum picture requirements for a ranking are 1. Design showing KER readouts in SPH/VAB, especially total vessel mass. 2. In flight, at or very close to apoapsis. Apoapsis displayed by KER or mechjeb (switch KER to partless instead of career in KER settings available in SPH/VAB). Note that the altimeter shows altitude over terrain when in surface mode. 3. Safely landed back at Kerbin with KSC visible in the background. Beware, the cockpit was not designed for space flight, it is somewhat fragile. Of course additional pictures, videos, etc are very welcome. As is a link if you stream it. The challenge was inspired by @Steven Mading https://www.twitch.tv/dunbaratu who streamed trying out the "Giving Aircraft a Purpose" mod pack by @inigma on twitch (which is a bit buggy at the moment due to ksp spawn calculation changes). The restrictions 1. No R&D, SPH/VAB, Runway/Launchpad facility upgrades! (=> 30part / 9ton mass limit, regardless whether you start from Runway or Launchpad) 2. Tweakscale is only allowed for wings/control surfaces/landing gear/adapters. 3. No mods except the ones specified below. Visual and similar mods are exempt from this rule. 4. No cheating. 5. Science/parts restrictions as shown here (thus no liquid fuel engines, reaction wheels, RCS, decouplers, etc.) Start node Early Aviation node Modular Wings node The mods 1. Install CKAN for a separate, clean KSP install. 2. Only select the "SETI-MetaModPack". Click "ApplyChanges". 3. Leave all recommendations selected. Click "Continue". 4. From the suggestions, only SETIprobeControlEnabler is allowed, though for this challenge it does not matter. Click "Continue" and wait for the the mods to be installed. 5. RCS Build Aid is among the recommendations, but is currently not available via ckan. You may (highly recommended) install that manually from here: https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/RCSBuildAid/releases 6. Visual mods are allowed at your own discretion. The ranking By altitude: 1. @Tux1 with ~78,006m above sea level. 2. @Yemo with ~18,295m above sea level. (Altimeter shows 18,232m above terrain) By mass, for those who reach space: 1. @Tux1 with 5,766kg, reaching an altitude of ~78,006m above sea level. I ll start with a simple submission (no pics no clicks!), though I have tested the challenge before and space (70km+) is possible, given the restrictions.

You are welcome! I will post a small (no wall of text this time) challenge later, which makes use of the new SETI MetaModPack. CKAN now provides the updated versions of the SETI mods: New SETI MetaModPack (only available via CKAN) If you are looking for a more balanced, comfortable and more challenging gameplay without having to manually crawl through a hundred mods every time, this might be it. Simply install CKAN, only click on the SETI-MetaModPack, then "ApplyChanges", leave the recommendations selected and select those suggestions you like as well. Done. For more detailed information and recommendations for career settings, please go to the thread linked below called "SETI-UbM Career Challenge (setup takes 5-10min)". Mod Recommendations and Suggestions of the MetaModPack (Link to Textfile on Github) One liner updates SETIgreenhouse is not yet updated, but it works fine with ksp 1.3 anyway SETIcontracts, SETIrebalanceMaterialsGoo, SETIremoteTechConfig, SETIprobeControlEnabler have simply been recompiled for KSP 1.3 UnmannedBeforeManned Challenge now moves most basic engines further back, especially when VenStockRevamp is installed (which provides the Dachshund) SETIcustomBarnKitConfig now gives you 4 contract slots from the start (I forgot to to this for SETIcontracts as well) New mods 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. Porkjets PartOverhauls SETIconfig v0.9.1.0 (for KSP 1.3.x, use CKAN for a clean install) Configures and redistributes Porkjets PartOverhauls (CC-BY-NC-3.0), so that it fits into stock and VenStockRevamp without replacing parts. Some parts are now 1.875m sized, two engines augment the 0.625m collection, Boattail versions stay 1.25m sized. Strongly recommended: SETI Rebalance above and a tech tree which makes sense, probably every tech tree which is not stock... Major updates SETI ProbeParts v1.3.0.0 (for KSP 1.3.x, use CKAN for a clean install) Rebalances Alkaline Fuel Cell now consumes twice the resources for same EC output Thus it only has internal storage for 6 hours at full capacity Fuel Cell fill amount set to 10%, to make them more useful for backup purposes Pomeranian engine a bit heavier and more expensive Small extendable solar panels now use Ven textures if installed Fixes OscarB3 fuel tank 33 oxidizer instead of 36, thank you @strudo76 Unmanned before Manned v1.3.0.0 (for KSP 1.3.x, use CKAN for a clean install) New SETI-MetaModPack mini mod is new fulcrum of for SETI recommendations and suggestions TechTree changes EarlyAviation node from SETIctt is back (4 science), for early planes And the Mk1 Retro Cockpit from SETIctt is back as well, allowing early prop planes Some minor adjustments around those changes, to make them fit Ven InlineRCS to stability for simpler RCS rotation control Some decouplers to stability (eg radial ones) and launch stability enhancer Early LFO engines moved a bit, especially when UnmannedBeforeManned-Challenge is installed Mod support KAX Porkjets PartOverhauls - SETI config (available via CKAN) Fixes Adjustments for recent NFSpacecraft part name changes SETI Rebalance v1.3.0.0 (for KSP 1.3.x, use CKAN for a clean install) New SETI-MetaModPack (available via CKAN) mini mod is new fulcrum of SETI-meta-mod-pack Recommendations and suggestions for the meta mod pack are shifted from SETIrebalance to SETI-MetaModPack General 70% science nerf is shifted from SETIrebalance to SETIcareerChallenge This makes SETIrebalance more compatible with other settings, eg other techtrees and science mode Rebalances Stock dishes rebalanced for RemoteTech UniversalStorage Alkaline Fuel Cell now consumes twice the resources for same EC output Thus it only has internal storage for 6 hours at full capacity (same goes for SETIprobeParts AFC) Standard squad fuel cell lighter and produces 3kW instead of 1.5kW Fuel Cell fill amount set to 10%, to make them more useful for backup purposes Spaceplane cockpits have monoprop by default again Some Command pod rebalances, mostly adding monoprop Swept wing mass lowered a lot to be comparable to other wings Minor Cost rebalances Fixes VenStockRevamp Oscar A Fuel tank stats fixed to be half of Oscar B Adjustments for recent NFSpacecraft part name changes

@nickicool That should work, but I updated nearly all SETI mods just 2 hours ago, and I removed exactly that bit in the new version of SETIrebalance. There is now a mod called SETIcareerChallenge which solely consists of that general experiment science nerf. So that players can opt in to that if they play career and want it a bit harder (as it is intended to balance out the extra science from contracts compared to science mode). I will make the update announcement with changelogs for the mods once CKAN makes them available. The original post of this thread is already updated to some degree, thats what I m working on at the moment. After that I intend to make a new challenge thread, with a much more specific challenge and less wall of text. And then maybe update the overview pictures for the mods.

Since I know about this list, my thought process when not remembering a small mod goes: Is it maintained by by @linuxgurugamer? If yes, lets go to the bookmarked thread and find it there instead of trying to remember for 5 minutes. Perhaps a link to this thread next to a patreon logo in your signature, for those who do not know about this?

Would it be possible to simply remove the defunct Jool part for the moment, release for 1.3, and then add it back in when ready? That would make the rest "officially" available for 1.3 without any real negatives for the time being.

I agree with @linuxgurugamer, 1.875m is not such an uncommon size and there are often threads popping up asking for more parts in this diameter. Just a few days ago I adjusted Porkjet's PartOverhauls (CKAN: Porkjets PartOverhauls - SETIconfig) to provide a basic set of 1.875m parts, instead of duplicate LV-T45&/LV-T30/LV-909/fuel tanks for 1.25m. Which makes it useful with VenStockRevamp installed as well.

Hi, nice to see the landertrons back in action! Would it be possible to rename the GUI actions from "Arm" to "Arm Landertron" and from "Disarm" to "Disarm Landertron"? That would allow the integration of the landertron module into advanced probe cores per module manager patch, if landertron is installed! For spin stabilized probes, the probe core is also easier to click than a radially attached box, especially when under stress due to impending lithobreaking.

Nope, there should generally be no problems, except: Porkjets PartOverhauls will be completely rebalanced, the Mk1pod and the boattail engines will have different values but at least have the same size. The non-boattail engines and the fuel tanks will be resized and thus break OscarA fuel tank from Ven will have half? the resources. Alkaline Fuel Cells will consume twice as much per EC and thus only last half as long (6 hours instead of 12) The rest should be fine.

Sorry for the long wait, I finally had some time the last 2 days to work on the mods. The good news is, that nothing broke because of the ksp update, if anyone else is wondering. Near Future Spacecraft part names were changed, so I ll have to account for that. Thank you! I do my best to update to 1.3 in the next few days, if real life permits. Ah, great, I did a pull request on github and it was accepted. Whoops, typo, the B3 should have 33 oxidizer, not 36. I ll remove the dead weight in the next update, thank you very much for the hint. When looking at the Oscar tanks I also found that the OscarA from VenStockRevamp has wrong content values, will be fixed as well. Hm, SETIrebalance should do most of that already. I remember putting the crew eva-experiment-swap in it a long time ago, though I have not tested that recently. About the updates for 1.3: Nothing really broke, but if you have not started in ksp 1.3 yet, there are some changes which might be worth the wait. No language support from my side, sorry. UbM gets the old earlyAviation (4science) node from SETIctt, as well as the fragile Mk1 Retro Cockpit, some parts are shifted around to support earlier planes. General 70% science nerf is removed from SETIrebalance, as well as all the mod recommendations and suggestions, a new mini mod will take over the role of the fulcrum for the meta mod pack, along with the 70% nerf Some tweaking around fuel cells for SETIrebalance and SETIprobeParts, minor tweaks to command pods (mostly more monoprop) I will also try to integrate Porkjets PartOverhauls, but not the way they are available at the moment. I dont like the upgrade feature in its current implementation, so that has to go. Also I consider VenStockRevamp a given, so no need for duplicate LV-T45 and so on, though I like the "shrouded" engine versions for spaceplanes. The Mk1pod is fine as an upgrade to the stock Mk1pod with SETIrebalance. So that leaves a bunch of "non-shrouded" engines and a set of fuel tanks. The 0.625m category could use the LV-303 and LV-T15 engines. And the rest, well, there sometimes pops up a demand for 1.875m form factor engines and tanks to fill the gap between 1.25m and 2.5m...

I m not a fan of having to use a spreadsheet/calculator every time I want to attach a commnet device to one of my vessels, so remote tech it is.

Not sure, it is quite a while since I last modded contracts. People in the contract configurator thread might have more knowledge about that. I have not checked it so far. I have not seen anything in the patch nodes breaking tech tree stuff, but since this is the first patch adressing localization, this is unchartered patching ground for me.

It does not step in, it simply removes/changes the remote tech part module which prevents you from controlling a probe when you do not have an active connection. It does this when the parts are loaded at game start.

Whoops, will check it out for 1.3. Thank you! Due to USI changes and my own schedule over the last months, I can not support it anymore myself. But if you are interested in writing configs for that and test them, I d be happy to include/paste them in the current greenhouse configs as was the case with older versions of SETIgreenhouse. Since it seems that nothing is broken with TAC life support and many mods still need updates, there is no rush for a 1.3 release from my side.

From my experience, I strongly recommend a fixed dry mass to capacity ratio for the following reasons: 1. Gameplay/Design The "lego principle" of being able to substitute 1 triple tank with 3 normal tanks might not be realistic, but is a concession to the design limitations when using fixed block sizes. In reality a tank would be custom made to a specific size. In KSP there are instances when the right tank size is not available. Eg If there is a normal shuttle tank and a triple shuttle tank, but not a double tank. With fixed ratios, you have a linear increase of capacity and mass for length 1, 2, 3, 4 (multiples of normal length, as 1 = 1 normal, 2 = 2 normal tanks, 3 = 1 triple tank, 4 = 1 triple tank + 1 normal tank) etc. With non-fixed ratios it would go like 1 - 2 linear, 3 drastically better fuel to mass ratios, 4 worse fuel to mass ratio than length 3, 5 (one triple, 2 normal tanks) even worse fuel to mass ratio than length 3. This would introduce efficiency mali simply based on the available block sizes and their combinations, which would imho be detrimental to design choices. 2. Mod compatibility 1st degree Mods like TweakScale and Procedural Parts are linear. Thus if someone has eg engines for 1.875m diameter from another mod, but does not like the provided 1.875m tanks. The person has TweakScale installed to make up for such part catalogue limitations. If a 1.25m tank is upscaled to 1.875m, it would have drastically worse stats than a downscaled 2.5m tank (eg because the player likes the orange tank color from 2.5m). Same goes for round/special shape tanks when designing landers and so on. 3. Mod compatibility 2nd degree Mods from point 2 might be used or configured for other mods, eg rescales, tech trees etc., compounding the issues from 2. 4. Other reasons While real life rocket tanks are mostly designed around a unidirectional force vector, which drastically reduces the need for structural load considerations, many players in KSP use the tanks for other applications as well. For example space planes, or as structural parts on space stations, rovers, etc. There is currently no way to distinguish between those applications in terms of structural loads. As to the actual values for a fixed ratio approach, I recommend the following: For liquid fuel/oxygen tanks (as are nearly all stock tanks) mass = 1 ton, liquid fuel = 720, oxygen = 880 For monoprop (no stock ratio, all over the place) mass = 1 ton, monoprop = 2000 Based on tests with monoprop vs LOX rockets, there is a range of ratios suitable to preserve desired efficiency differences for design/gameplay considerations. The actual value within this range is arbitrary. However between all those alternatives, the 1 ton = 2000 monoprop capacity value stands out from a design perspective, as it results in the same wet mass as a LOX tank with the same dry mass. For 95% of the players, this is probably irrelevant. But when combined with fuel switching mods/procedural parts, it seriously improves the design/redesign process for the 5% of players who are into that. As a tank content/part switch does not alter the center of mass for already designed spaceplanes and landers (where a CoM change might affect the placement of lifting surfaces on spaceplanes and RCS thrusters on landers). Different fuel options and ratios can be tested in the design stage without having to recheck/redo the parts which are placed around the existing center of mass. And when the value within the desirable range is arbitrary, why not make life easier for those 5% when it does not cost anything.

Hey, last time I tried, strategia did not cause any technical issues, not sure about gameplay balance as I rarely use that facility anyway. I m not too familiar with all the contract packs at the moment. But as a general advice, SETIcontracts replaces the standard progression from first flight to planet flyby and landings. So any contract pack which does not do that would work fine. Anomaly Surveyor is great, but not updated at the moment. Field Research is good as a fall back, if you need some more money or an incentive to do some less science optimized biome hops. Tourism is also a fall back money generator with roleplay potential. Kerbin Space Station is another great mod, but I usually play with Station Science installed, so I m not sure how good it is with stock parts only. That is my standard package. But as I said, any contract pack which does not provide general progression contracts should work fine. About the bigger kerbin system, I have little experience with rescales and SETIcontracts, though I can't see any reason why they should not work. Also SETIcontracts does not work for Galileo at the moment. OuterPlanetsMod works fine, though there are no contracts for it in SETIcontracts. I would also recommend some other mods, like waypoint manager, especially for contracts. You can find a full list of mod recommendations and suggestions under the SETIrebalance download, there are a lot, but it might be worth it going through them for inspiration.

Good idea, thank you, must have slipped in one of the OP updates or the forum update. Ammended the section beneath the patreon logo/link including the reason to go for ARR in the first place (burnt by previous experience, thus my question earlier about pulling mods).

Not continuing this discussion as I said that I was out, but this is important as it was a promise I made to the people who donated via patreon. When I started patreon I stated that the mod will not die because of my desinterest in it and that I consider it to be my responsibility, when accepting donations, to hand it over before that happens.

This is ridiculous. You complain that a license forbids you to pull and change parts from that mod (without asking the modder first). Then I ask you if you did pull and change parts from other mods without asking the modder, just because their license allows you to do so. Then you get angry about me accusing you? You know, I started here with that attitude as well, and I was rightfully slapped on the wrist for it. I did not expect you in particular to act as badly as I did in my earlier days on this forum. You know, I came in here offering help and information/experience from someone who did rebalance ksp for over 2 years. Fighting incompatibilities and imbalances based on over 2 years of feedback. And I got ignored and false statements thrown at me for trying to prevent incompatibilities and imbalances between mods, which are totally avoidable. If you want to make the same mistakes I did over the last 2 years, be my guest. Which is coincidentally the reason why SETIrebalance is ARR, so that people can't just pull and change parts without consulting me, so that the countless contributions, bug reports and compatibility feedback from other forum members of over 2 years are not undone in an instant by someone simply unwilling to even talk to a person who remembers them. It is not about coming to different conclusions, it is just about not repeating the same mistakes for no reason. For anyone interested in stockish balance based on over 2 years of feedback and willing to learn from the past mistakes of others instead of repeating them, you know where to find it. Good luck and happy "avoidable imbalance/incompatibility fixing" for the ones who dont. I m out.