Jump to content

Yemo

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,486

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Yemo

  1. Yemo
    SETI ModPack 1 Basic v0.9.4 (for KSP 1.0.4) No mod changes. It just uses the new "favorite" ckan structure. Which basically allows you to view and select/deselect the recommended mods from the pack, instead of installing everything at once without further user review.
  2. Yemo
    Thank you very much. The configs would be very helpful when the BalanceMod is rebooted. Yep, the size of Tantares is very challenging. I ll probably try the tech tree integration following your suggestion, starting with command pods. Balancing of 1.0.4 is out of the question, it is like fighting windmills. The devs made it absolutely clear that they are only interested in adding to the feature list and that (part-, gameplay-) balance is not even remotely considered for new patches. For example they already announced a new feature (antenna range) for 1.1. It took me literally 2 minutes to spot horrible balancing issues which are totally avoidable. They just do not care the slightest about balancing and I m tired of fighting windmills (every patch). I wanted mod pack 2 to add some complexity (antenna range, usi life support and so on) and then take it up a notch for pack 3 (eg remote tech, tac life support). With the announcement that they will basically introduce a disimproved antenna range / remote tech ....... to stock, I ll probably wait for 1.1 to reconsider the mod packs. Yep, I miss the BalanceMod as well, hopefully at some point squad is less hostile towards gameplay balance. I ll look at the KIS values, thank you for the notice. The old dev is basically suspended. The second post is now just a reminder of the old BalanceMod. That something like that existed before it got shut down by squads "mindless feature list extensions above everything" policy. At the moment I only really expand the SETI-CTT mod integration and try to keep SETI-Contracts and the greenhouse compatible.
  3. Yemo
    Thank you all for the help! I ll try to put bug fix versions together starting tomorrow. Not sure how much time I have for extensions. RLA Stockalike and so on are on the list, I m not sure I ll have the time for the tantares tech tree changes. @Nori: I hope to be able to restart the BalanceMod for that in the future and thus would be very greatful if I could use your rebalances for this, I ll bookmark the spreadsheet if you dont mind. Github is planned for that restart, at the moment I just lack the time to do it properly.
  4. Yemo
    If you are new to modding, I highly recommend starting with less complexitiy adding mods. That would also avoid errors, for example you can not use TAC Life Support and USI Life Support at the same time. Not sure if jumping from no mods to full realism and so on will work out for you. For a first look into modding I recommend using a simple ckan mod pack. I provide one in the SETI thread from my signature (though I m sure there are others around which are more suitable for modding beginners). After installing that, you can just uninstall the 2 SETI mods via CKAN again and the remainder is a fairly good basis for extension. From there you can take it step by step.
  5. Yemo
    Hey all, I probably have Time to continue dev at the end of next week. I ll try to include all the bugfixes and Feedback from the last pages.
  6. Yemo
    SETI http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/106130 i highly recommend using the ckan Mod Pack from the thread, including venstockrevamp.
  7. Yemo
    The starter craft were part of the SETI BalanceMod, which got shut down by Squad with KSP 1.0.x. It was just not worth making new ones, since every version (excep 1.0.3) changed important stats since 1.0.0 and there is no telling when that stops. The problem with your install is, that you have an ancient version of ModuleManager installed. It probably prevents CKAN from installing the right one, which it should do automatically together with SETIctt/SETIcontracts. Also the physicsless flag does not result in parts being physicsless, they are just handled differently (the name is misleading).
  8. Yemo
    I ll need a screenshot of your GameData folder and your CKAN installed mods filter. There is definately an installation issue.
  9. Yemo
    I have no idea about the mod (since I prefer KAX). InfernalRobotics seems to be missing on that list. I m certain that not all of those nodes can be filled with parts at the moment. It is a bit of work in progress. Ah, whoops, I forgot to change that. The contract was for the BalanceMod. Have to make MPL a station part again. Yep, but I m not sure how to do it differently. I already removed the landing requirement from nearly all other contracts. Ah, will have to try it sometime, but I prefer to see the full tree, eg for inspiration to install other mods. I did not change any node placement for MKS/OKS (or anything else regarding MKS/OKS so far). But with Karbonite the first resoucre extraction is available at scienceTech for 300 science, parts from KerbalPlanetaryBaseSystem and space station parts are available for 300 science as well. Thus before fuel lines and most of the nuclear techs (KSPIextended, NFpropulsion). I recommend using more mods to fill out the later nodes of the tech tree as well as a bigger solar system (OuterPlanets). In any case, in reality we sent a probe to Pluto while we did not yet manage to do more than a low orbit space station around our home planet. There was an interesting project around which starts with resource techs, called Project Rock: Rebirth of Civilization Kerbal, by Krakenfour: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/122283 Might be closer to what you are looking for. Hm, for some reason they get the ISP values which should only be for HRBs. And all the procedural SRB ISP values seem to be based on 0.90, while the 1.0.x boosters seem to have much lower ISPs. Not sure how to correct the first issue, but I can take another look at the ISPs, although I would prefer it if ProceduralParts does that...
  10. Yemo
    Yeah, the idea is great, but the execution has to be seen within the existing framework/situation. And the only word I can find for that is "horrible disimprovement". It would have been great if they just restricted science transmission to an active connection. For control restriction (and no life support) you need a flight computer to not relegate probes to roleplay only. 2 great choices benefiting gameplay, but they invented a 3rd one which makes the feature a disimprovement and just acts as a discouragement for using probes. Another topic: CKAN seems to have serious updating issues at the moment. SETIctt patch 0.9.1.4 was released more than 36 hours ago, but is not indexed by CKAN so far.
  11. Yemo
    Hm, Minmus & Kerbol only requires to dip out of Kerbin SoI (85Mm from Kerbin), which only requires less than 100m/s dV more than a Mun flyby. Which is the reason for the early availability of this mission. Lol, no idea how that works. I just add a module. If anyone has a recommendation how to prevent this, please tell me. In other news, SQUAD seems to be determined to continue the disimprovements in 1.1: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/350 So connection requirement for control, but no flight computer, rofl (and tying in the horrible/non-config moddable kerbal experience/caste system). Effectively making probe mission much more time/resource demanding (relays) than manned missions (no life support) in stock... Again one of those "interesting/shiny features" but no thought whats-o-ever to the features interactions with the rest of the framework/gameplay/balance. List of features extended, incentivised gameplay balance shot up, again... I guess it is now time to come to terms with the fact that (marketable) features over gameplay was not just a string of mistakes (experience/caste system/artificial progression restrictions/heat system), but is the new maxim for "development". Continued disimprovements are here to stay and grow.
  12. Yemo
    Great! Though I actually liked the probe cores as a separate download.
  13. Yemo
    Yeah, that is the problem. Most of those contracts can be completed by very light and cheap craft (probe telemetry report is enough), for which the payouts are OP by a factor of 20 or more. They are more like roleplay guidelines.
  14. Yemo
    Going not so fast through the thicker atmosphere layers?
  15. Yemo
    I guess the OPness really comes into play for the contracts going to the targets with higher multipliers, so no need to feel inadequate. Originally I intended to revisit the contracts when the CustomBarnKit allows more than 3 upgrade levels. Unfortunately it does not seem that this will happen soon. Will revisit the contract payouts since I have to work on the contracts anyways (manned landing, records and so on). Though I cant promise really balanced contracts due to the aforementioned reasons, I ll try to make them less OP.
  16. Yemo
    Yep, the contracts are OP, there are several reasons: 1. The economy (contracts, parts, building upgrades especially with penalty slider) is totally imbalanced anyway, and contracts are mainly for roleplaying. No real reason to balance the contracts when the rest is so imbalanced anyway. 2. With all the modifiers for target bodies and prestige, I would have to calculate every base payout. Because of 1., that was not worth the effort so far. 3. The whole stock contract system is a major headache. The SETI contracts have to be competitive with totally imbalanced stock contracts. I agree that it is not balanced, but I kind of lack the motivation to solve all the underlying problems or put time into really balancing the SETI contracts if everything else is a total mess. It works for casual derping around, everything else requires roleplay anyway. Considering the recent squad updates, that is working as intended by squad. - - - Updated - - - edit: I have some more challenging gameplay in mind, might do some minor rebalances of the contracts if I feel bored enough to fight the squad windmills of unmotivated disimprovements.
  17. Yemo
    It seems that the bot problem is persistent. SETI-CommunityTechTree from 18? hours ago is not indexed, as before. Is there something I can change in my zip/version/NetKAN file to solve these problems? Thank you very much for your help!
  18. Yemo
    Wrong thread, should have gone into the CKAN one...
  19. Yemo
    You can just write MM statements to disable the unwanted parts...
  20. Yemo
    Get your PE as high as possible, EVA the kerbals and bring them on an orbit using their EVA fuel. Then send a rescue ship and pick them up.
  21. Yemo
    Bad coding on my part fixed for SETIctt 0.9.1.4, procedural parts should work with FAR again. My apologies for the inconveniences.
  22. Yemo
    Thank you for you help! Yeah, $100mio. I could do a lot with that. While I m a fan of the SETI project and the idea behind it, I m also a fan of balance and proportionalism. Honestly if I had that kind of money to spend on finding out whether we are alone, I would probably put a few millions into SETI (for continued funding when our tech improves, not only 10 years super funding on our low tech status) and would use the rest to increase the chances of the human species to live (not only exist, but live) long enough to actually make that discovery... The SETIcontracts are pretty rigid, they check whether the previous contract is completed, not where you have been. One of the reasons is, to give feedback to the player. But contracts should show up immediately when their requirements are met (previous contracts completed), if they do not, their 2 and 3 star spots are just blocked. In that case, just decline some 2 and 3 star contracts. Hm, Foundries is still horribly imbalanced (temperature, impact tolerance), so as with UniversalStorage I like the mod very much, but I ll support the mods first which at least make an effort to be balanced with other mods. Easiest way is, to just roleplay it and not use them until the later tech is researched. SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.1.4 (for KSP 1.0.4) SETI-CTT Mod Support Kerbal Planetary Base System Mark IV Spaceplane System Mk2 Expansion SELV AuraTexturePack parts Fixes Procedural Parts & FAR compatibility restored
  23. Yemo
    Unfortunately stock is horribly unbalanced, so I know it is hard to balance against an inbalanced system. But I ll take a look at some other stats.
  24. Yemo
    Hey, nice parts! I m wondering about the VL-9R dual mode. If the 9 nozzle mode produces 4000 thrust, shouldnt the 1 nozzle mode produce about 445 thrust instead of 1000? edit: And for a config near 1000 thrust, would it not make more sense to use 2 of the outer engines for 889 thrust? - - - Updated - - - Hm, unfortunately the octopus has the stats of the Mammoth stock engine at about half the mass and thus eliminates all traces of balance in that regard.
  25. Yemo
    Great parts, looking forward to full release. Report: The KE-90 Dudley attachment node seems to be too small for the diameter when compared with the other 2.5m engines.
×
×
  • Create New...