Jump to content

Yemo

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,486

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Yemo

  1. Yemo
    I like them a lot, sample craft make sense, but screenshots in the OP would reach far more people. Just stumpled upon a request/example by makkz, which would fit nicely into the ChopShop array of ingenious parts: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/128699 Not about the procedural thing, but about the schematic of post #3 in that thread. A hexagonal cargo bay. Personally I would change it a bit. No compartments, but instead 3 of the outer walls fixed (compartment hexagon is roughly available with UniversalStorage). The other 3 sides are unfoldable solar panels as shown in the schematic. Not sure if it needs a core truss, of if it is better to leave the interior unobstructed, so people may even use it as a small garage for a micro rover (for which the solar panel supports would need to be on the side or non-existant, to not obstruct the opening). I propose making the graphics for 2.5m, but using rescale factor to make the part fit into 1.25m diameter. Then it could be available relatively early in the tech tree and players can use TweakScale for 0.625m to 3.75m...
  2. Yemo
    That looks like a box sat with a hexagonal shaped, compartmentalized cargo bay beneath it. And the "doors" unfold to be solar panels. Which is a really nice design. I m not sure that it would work as a procedural part. The boxsat is already possible using the BoxSat mod. Procedural Probe cores are available in SETIctt, if ProceduralParts are installed. UniversalStorage offers a hexacore + wedges which comes very close to the design, if you put a box sat on top. Unfortunately no Solar Panels without adding them manually. But I quite like the hexagonal cargo bay with the solar panels.
  3. Yemo
    Hm, will try to investigate. Yeah, the clutter is annoying, I really miss the old BalanceMod. But if I start to sort the VAB categories, the SETIctt fully turns into an early version of the BalanceMod, it already is much more than a simple tech tree with all the science changes. Do you have the awsome Trajectories mod yet? It never ends, but most of it works when added on the fly. I uploaded a new version of the ModPack, this time without any mod version definitions. That might help, though I had to do it manually, which is prone to mistakes and pretty tiresome... Download: SETI ModPack 1 Basic v0.9.2 (for KSP 1.0.4) * Removed mod version definitions
  4. Yemo
    That is a whole array of mods I do not play without (there are some more, but they either do not work at the moment or are not on ckan). Stuff like KerbalAlarmClock, CapCom (mission control functionality without entering mission control, ie on the fly), LightsOut (you can switch off the VAB lights to simulate vessel lights in darkness), QuickScroll and QuickSearch (use mouse wheel to scroll VAB entries, part search field in VAB), ShipManifest for so many things that I do not know where to start, and so on. Together with the ContractPacks, it is quite a list (40-50 entries or so), but only 2 part mods so far (VenStockRevamp and AdjustableLandingGear). I recommend just making a separate, clean KSP install for CKAN, and loading the list for the detailed overview, there are quite some hidden gems in there. It is a bit like KerbalEngineer/KerbalAlarmClock, after using them, you can not really go back to vanilla. That seems to be a ̶b̶̶u̶̶g̶ "feature" of 1.0.x tech tree modding. I just learned of that "new feature" a few pages back, as I m pretty sure 0.90 tech tree modding left the parts unlocked. Sorry for the inconvenience, unfortunately I do not know a way around it. Funnily, the parts are still shown as "researched" in their previous locations, so the tech tree is more confusing... The "hole shooting" is a side effect of adding new nodes in the middle of the tech tree. It is pretty rare that I do so, in fact I do not remember doing such an extensive rework/expansion of the tech tree before. Also note, that the hole is much smaller than it appears. If you research the basicFuelSystems node, the 2 later ones will turn green again. It is just a visual b̶̶u̶̶g̶ "feature" of 1.0.x tech tree modding. I did throw the stock parachutes out of the overcrowded utilities tab, if real chutes is installed (which adds them to their own parachute category). Other than that, I did not touch categories. Does this hold for specific parts, or all researched but locked parts?
  5. Yemo
    SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.1.2 (for KSP 1.0.4) NEW: SETI-ModPack for CKAN available from the forum thread All mod packs include the info/comfort/contract mods/packs SETI-ModPack-1-Basic: VenStockRevamp and Adj.LandingGear part mods More mod packs are planned SETI-CTT Mod Support Added HGR to the 0.9.1 changelog (forgot that one as well) Corvus Command Pod config updated NearFuture Construction NearFuture Electrics Procedural Fairings Fixes Radial MaterialBay attachment offset fixed
  6. Yemo
    Hey, I really like those parts! While there is a ckan flag on the kerbalstuff download, I can not find the actual mod on ckan?
  7. Yemo
    Hey, I m still trying to integrate an antenna into command parts (crew and probe). Those are the the MM patches I tried: @PART [*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]]:NEEDS[AntennaRange] { MODULE { name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter nominalRange = 200 simpleRange = 160000 maxPowerFactor = 8 maxDataFactor = 4 } } @PART [*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]]:HAS[!MODULE[ModuleScienceContainer]]:NEEDS[AntennaRange] { MODULE { name = ModuleScienceContainer dataIsCollectable = true dataIsStorable = false storageRange = 2 } } Unfortunately the part descriptions are then glitched out in the tech tree. They look exactly as described in post #769 of this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/56440-1-0-AntennaRange-1-10-1-Enforce-and-Encourage-Antenna-Diversity?p=2053946&viewfull=1#post2053946 I also tried rewriting the MM statements, to account for possible transmission devices already on command parts and so on. The part descriptions always glitched out in the tech tree.
  8. Yemo
    Hm, that would be fun for BD armory. Imagine a cruel and greedy alien race attacking KSC for resources or whatever. If all buildings are destroyed, you lose. First you meet their explorers, then their missionaries and the US (Space) Marines say hello:
  9. Yemo
    The .ckan file is technically not a mod, so I m not sure it would fit on kerbalstuff. Sounds a bit like a (chrome?) glitch. I use firefox and do not experience this. Maybe I have different settings. Using ABP, the download site and link look totally fine&clean for me . So while the .ckan would probably not fit on kerbalstuff, I wonder if I should just use github... After all, it is a simple txt format and it would actually provide an immediate benefit for the first step towards github. But looking at the file, I wonder why it saves the version number of the mods. What happens when a mod is updated?
  10. Yemo
    Hm, I just tried without ABP and I only see the usual on-site ads and one of the usual pop-up windows.
  11. Yemo
    Hey, that is a change done by SETIctt, not by CTT. Funnily, Quill18 did not install CTT, only SETIctt (which requires CTT), which is the reason why his tech tree is so broken (I wonder how he could look at that broken tech tree and come to the conclusion that this mess was intended).
  12. Yemo
    I thought the heat shield of the Corvus is not yet up to date? Unfortunately the Corvus pack is pretty large for those few parts. Oh yes, with KCT simulations you sometimes forget, that you are still in the simulation. I really like the Corvus as well. Though I left it out of the new Basic Mod pack for now. Ah, I remember them, wanted to do configs for them for the BalanceMod, but didnt quite get around to it before 1.0.x hit. Will set them on my list. And just finished the small mod pack. Mostly info/comfort mods: Download: SETI ModPack 1 Basic v0.9.1 (for KSP 1.0.4) All the info/comfort mods, but only VenStockRevamp and Adj.LandingGear part mods.
  13. Yemo
    The error could be displayed by red inward and outward arrows for too small and too large, which are only displayed when the target docking port is not the right size. Eg <----> and >----<, maybe in form of a cross (vertical arrows as well, so it is more like a target marker).
  14. Yemo
    If you do that, please do tot forget to account for the KipEng Universal Docking Ports, which support multiple sizes.
  15. Yemo
    Hm, I did not touch those boosters as far as I remember. About the 2 kerbal pod: Yep, HGR has lots of them, but I was rather looking for a small mod offering a single 2 kerbal pod. The Mk3-9 is from NearFuture Spacecraft (or so). It is actually a bit too advanced and by default comes after the 3 kerbal pod (it has an advanced flight computer). But I moved it to this earlier node, for those who do not install other 2 kerbal pods. Also it is pretty heavy compared to other 2 kerbal pods anyway. Hm, I did not touch them. Maybe some other contract pack? Or the career is not advanced enough. I set the stock goo and materials bay mass to 80kg (increase for goo, decrease for materials bay, while also increasing the science return for the goo - and making them non-collectable). The US version masses were just adjusted to the new stock experiments. I did not change the cost of the universal storage parts, as I do not officially support universal storage at the moment, the imbalances in costs exist without SETIctt. The reason for that non-support is precisely those imbalances. Be it cost imbalances or converter/mass imbalances (TAC LifeSupport/DMagic experiments). I dealt with those imbalances for the old SETI-BalanceMod, but at the moment I want to concentrate on the tech tree, while leaving part balancing mainly to the part mod authors. - - - Updated - - - Oh, and I made a SETI-StarterPack.ckan file, which I intend to include in the next download: http://www./download/gd1sdv67bzbydkg/SETI-StarterPack.ckan As said above, the Mk3 Expansion Pack and the SXT Mk3 Cargo Ramp MiniPack are missing, because they are not on ckan. Thanks to NathanKell, I tried to adjut the Procedural Fairings again, on a fresh install. It seems to work now, so I ll probably finish that config for the next small update.
  16. Yemo
    Ah, thank you! But should it not work anyway in that case? Also the RP-0 config did not work for me. I just wrote a new config and did a fresh install in an empty GameData folder and now it seems to work. Many thanks.
  17. Yemo
    Well, the visuals of PP are not outstanding and there are some textures I do not like, but they enable you to slope and customize the form. So you trade a bit of texture quality for a massive improvement in the form area. Especially for planes and landers (and nose cones and radial fillet tanks and what not). Also SETI adds some textures/texture variations from SwGustab any myself. PP does not provide LFO/Jet engines, just a procedural SRB (and then SETI adds the procedural HRB from LordAurelius). So no detriment to engine variety. B9 just replaces the functionality of all the wing clutter with 3 procedural parts, though it still has some quirks. While SXT Mk3 Ramp MiniPack is not 1.0.x compatible, SETI fixes the main issues (node attachment) for that part in particular (because I just needed a Mk3 cargo ramp).
  18. Yemo
    Previously the Mk1 pod had the integrated heat shield, which made it so much more mass efficient. One of the reasons why I moved the 1.25m heat shield to the same node as the Mk1 pod in 0.9.1. I hope to bring back the whole SETI-BalanceMod, but that will take some time. And I suspect 1.1 breaks stuff again, one step forward, one step back in terms of fully modded games... I thought about doing it like before (what is now in post #2), but then people wanted recommendations to "fill out their empty tech tree nodes", so I went with the commented screenshot in the OP. It is planned to do it properly again. At the moment I m working on updating that mod support screenshot and putting together a CKAN mod pack file. It will contain something like a "SETI-StarterPack". Though I m not sure about the final scope of it and not all mods are on CKAN (I m especially missing the Mk3 MiniExpansion and the SXT Mk3 CargoRamp). It should contain very few part packs, but all the necessary gameplay/info/contract mods (and from my point of view, there are a lot of those). I m currently missing a 1.0.4 compatible 2 man pod. Either the Corvus or the K2, but both are not yet 1.0.4 ready. Will have to check their TechTree placement again, but I really want a 2 kerbal pod in the basic setup. I hope the 1 hour was due to considerations and mod compatibility, not any SETI-issues?
  19. Yemo
    Imho tech should just unlock the max diameter of fuel tanks. Those length restrictions are imho artificial and just relevant for the part count. Anyway, thats how I set it up for SETIctt. It also makes procedural parts unlocks very simple when (nearly) all the same diameter stock tanks are at the same node. Oh, is a ProceduralParts storage for USI LifeSupport resources planned?
  20. Yemo
    I will still miss the old cockpit (which had a great IVA mod) and swept wings. But the general design should now be feasible again. Maybe I ll try to rebuild it and upload the .craft file.
  21. Yemo
    Hm, I really have to take a look at KW and Space-Y. Unfortunately the SETI-BalanceMod got totally wrecked by squads 1.0.x unmotivated disimprovements. It was the complete package. SETIctt and SETIcontracts are actually small spin-offs from the old SETI-BalanceMod for 1.0.x. Sort of small steps to rebuild after the wrecking ball. I hope that I can relaunch the missing parts of the SETI-BalanceMod once KSP is more stable again (hoping for KSP 1.1), using github. For an impression, the old SETI-BalanceMod info is still in post number 2 of this thread.
  22. Yemo
    Looking forward to your mission reports! For inspiration, that was the Advanced Jet example craft from the old SETI-BalanceMod, using procedural parts. The things beside the gear are actually procedural HRBs. Igor_perusco built a Me-163 on twitch, complete with skids. There is alot of potential with procedural parts (with 0.9.1 PP support, some of the SETI-BalanceMod additions returned, from procedural probe cores, thanks to SwGustav, to procedural HRBs, thanks to LordAurelius).
  23. Yemo
    I usually do quite some survey contracts, using jet planes with attached HRBs (they can now be tweakscaled to 0.625m). I only do the occasional testing contract in orbit, nothing below that. For remote tech, I use the remote tech contract pack to pay for the sats. But that totally depends on preference, 80% rewards is good if you do not like early kerbin survey and orbit missions. The most important part is, to leave the penalty slider at 100%. I changed the recommendation to 70%, just in case. I ll reconsider KW (though I recently read that it needs an update), no idea about Space-Y yet, have not checked it out post 1.0.x so far.
  24. Yemo
    Lol, I should really not publish mod updates late in the evening. Added HGR to the 0.9.1 mod list. Actually for testing purposes I go with 50% science and funds. Keep in mind I mainly use cheap probes for missions and I leave the penalties at 100%. So the building upgrades do not cost more. I found RealChutes to be invaluable for probes and finetuning. It just takes a few clicks to adjust to different atmospheres without guessing around.
  25. Yemo
    SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.1.1 Fixes HeavierRocketry costs now 300 science, as it should ProceduralFairings test config removed (did not work) Stack battery tech tree positions corrected (survivability, electrics) Added ProceduralParts to the 0.9.1 changelog - - - Updated - - - Maybe I should start releasing dev versions for the big updates again. @BahamutZer00: Thank you for the fast bug report. VenStockRevamp adds a small, low ISP nuclear engine which goes into nuclear propulsion.
×
×
  • Create New...