Yemo

@Arachnidek: Nightingale responded to your null error reports in the SETI-BalanceMod thread. Basically the errors are harmless and will be fixed on the Contract Configurator side. If you replace minAltitude with Altitude, the errors disappear, because the contract parameter gets disabled. I recommend shifting back to the "InitialContracts" form for the next release. Thank you for the report!

I m not sure about the whole mechanics, but I think it is also a game mechanic issue. In the KSP 1.0 update it is announced that atmospheric pressure will influence thrust, instead of ISP. So the current balancing is temporary anyway. As far as I understand it: "Interstellar Near Future Integration" is the original aim from FreeThinker. Then FreeThinker "took over" KSPI 0.90 development from Boris (who could not continue due to rl), creating "KSPI 0.90 extended configuration". So "KSPI 0.90 extended configuration" is the current focus, but will be/is a part of "Interstellar Near Future Integration". Thus I want to support "KSPI 0.90 extended configuration" in the short run, and "Interstellar Near Future Integration" in the long run.

Ah, ok. But it is not only the solar panels. Other mods have reactors as well (MKS/OKS) and they might need/want to introduce heat mechanics as well. So for compatibility (with unknown mods), at least the minor radiators would be nice to have around the electrics nodes

I was going through the techs (CTT) and I was wondering about the radiator tech node placements. Since solar panels produce heat, it would be great if at least the small radial radiator was available since "electrics" and the normal one some time after that in the electrics/solar branch. I m not sure which other parts produce heat, so maybe a minor revisit of the radiator techs?

Will do what I can to support more RAM demanding mods ;-). While it would make sense from a progression point of view, it would be a nightmare to keep track which mods leads to what tech change. I had the same issue with solar panels. TACls and RemoteTech need them earlier, UniversalStorage has the alkaline fuel cell, but that does not count for contracts, and so on... So I try to avoid part shifting based on mod installs wherever I can. On a related note, the KAX prop engines seem too strong now, with FAR. Also I wonder why FAR did not half the thrust on the basic jet, like it does with the turbo jets. Will take a look at that balance again, probably nerfing the props for FAR back down (though I feel like 50% was too low). Added to the mod recommendations. I was also browsing through the mods which support CLS, thank you for the suggestion! Very nice, thank you! KSPI extended for 0.8.0 is not totally off the table, I m digging through it and weighing the options/workload. Since KSPI extended already uses the CTT, basic support for the current version would take limited effort in terms of techtree, while the parts are "beyond" the nodes I use, so part "rebalancing" would be minimal as well. Will keep BoxSat in mind, though I would like to balance that together with other small parts/solar panel/etc mods (eg USI Exploration). I will take a look at the other mods you suggested! Also planning to release a minor 7.7 with some fixes/FAR engine adjustments before aiming for the next big update.

Did you install the Firespitter folder from KAX? You have to first install that, and then overwrite the dll with the compatibility firespitter.dll, until KAX is updated to incorporate the right one itself. edit: changed the update notes and the OP to "overwrite" Also, the KR-8 dish is much too small, it will be made larger again in the next update. - - - Updated - - - When I saw the 2 Kerbal command pod, I was instantly thinking about the StockPartRevamp. Then I started balancing the 2 Kerbal pod and adjusted some other pods in the process. When I got to the stock Mk1-2 pod, I had to check whether I used ATM on aggressive or something... I then decided to leave the Mk1-2, and take a look at Vens mod again . Well, with 0.8.0 that uncertain in terms of content, I m not sure when, but it will come. Most likely together with RLA stockalike and KSPI.

I talked to FreeThinker and as I understand it, there will be rather significant changes for KSPI extended config. Which means the current version is soon outdated, thus making it rather uneconomical to put time into supporting it, before the changes are made. So I do not know what to do for 0.8.0... @Narval: I went back to checking the fuel capacity of the procedural parts. The stock liquid fuel parts are all over the place in terms of dry weight/density/fuel capacity. Thus I decided to just leave the mixed fuel balance and for the non-mixed tank setting, I gave the room for the not used resource to the one which is selectec. This greatly increases non-mixed fuel capacity for procedural parts, making aircraft much more economical in terms of dry weight/fuel tank space requirements. @Arachnidek, nightingale: I have no idea how/why the "Altitude = 18000" works and what to do about the null errors. I will investigate further, to deal with that issue. I use the minAltitude since the first contract implementation for the SETI-BalanceMod and other than the log entries, there were no indications of problems. New Version 0.7.6 Extended Mod Support Kerbal Aircraft Expansion - prop and heli engines, overwrite with this Firespitter.dll for compatibility, atm throws exceptions after staging while still on launch position 6S Service Compartment Tubes - 2 compartment fuselage fairings, requires this Firespitter.dll for compatibility, same one as above 2-Kerbal Command Pod - A new command pod for 2 Kerbals and working, integrated RCS Rebalances and Adjustments Procedural Fuel Tanks can now hold much more fuel in the non-mixed modes (eg aircraft fuel) Mk1 Cockpit lighter (from 1.2 tons to 1.1 tons) Command Pod Mk1 heavier (from 1 ton to 1.1 tons) Mk1 Lander Can heavier (from 1 ton to 1.1 tons), can store 40 units of monoprop, integrated 40 unit KAS container Mk2 Lander Can weaker reaction wheel (from 4 to 2.4), can store 80 units of monoprop, integrated 60 unit KAS container Mk2 Clamp-o-tron renamed to Clamp-o-tron Mk2 Shielded for sorting Landing gears renamed Mk3 Cockpit reaction wheel balanced KR-8 RemoteTech dish (introduced by SETI), now uses different, smaller model Earlier Radial Engine Body and Small Hardpoint Minor Changes and Fixes

I got a bug report from Arachnidek, that PARAMETER { name = ReachState type = ReachState minAltitude = 18000 } throws "[Error]: Input is null" into the debug log. When he changed it to Altitude = 18000, the errors went away. However in the wiki/guide, "Altitude" is not specified, it only states minAltitude and maxAltitude, while saying "use any combination". Thank you for your help! edit: Ninja'd in the SETI-BalanceMod thread .

I consider this a challenge to support more part mods . Thank you! Will be fixed in the next update. edit: Compartment Tubes looks straight forward, Pilot Assistant can just be added to the OP, thank you! Thanks! Flying planes in FAR is like swimming, once you know how, it is easy. First you should design the craft using the stability analysis (not everything has to be green, but for a start, it helps). Second, it is incredibly important to restrict the control surfaces using Tweakable Everything! Try setting the control surfaces to 50 for their job (yaw for rudder, pitch and roll for elevons) and very low for the other ones (pitch and roll for rudder, yaw for elevons). After installing Tweakscale and Tweakable Everything, try the 2 aircraft I provided (Tweakscale is not behaving nicely with procedural parts attached, you have to reattach the engines on the Basic Jet). After a bit of training, you can reliably start them on the mud runway, but I suggest landing somewhere else, or just use the parachutes for vertical landing. If you use Remote Tech, the Contract Pack for it should provide enough credits to build up a basic network. Will have to check out the progression requirements. Tweakscale is currently not developed/in limbo, it especially does not like the (stack) attachment of some engines (eg jets) to procedural parts, if TS is used on the engines. I investigated this issue, but did not find a solution, yet. About the RLA Stockalike support: Karbonite/Kolonization is still stalled mainly due to the lack of procedural parts and a little because MCM 0.4.2 is not officially released. I ll give it another week or so and then start to implement the required procedural parts (based on the configs of Atrius129, with his permission), regardless of their implementation into the main Procedural Parts mod... That stall and the progress/CTT support of KSP Interstellar Expanded by FreeThinker, coupled with the RLA Stockalike requests over here, lead to another option: Karbonite/Kolonization shifted back (again) to 0.9.0. 0.8.0 support for KSP Interstellar Expanded and RLA Stockalike, as well as KAX (the firespitter.dll is merged with the one compatible to USI, but the KAX prop engines still throw exceptions on the runway, regardless of the used firespitter). edit: KAX is already done, might as well release it now, together with some small fixes...

I never understood why the techmanager allowed the activation of multiple trees in the same save... I could understand if that was an advanced option, which you have to activate somehow for debugging or whatever. But for I guess 95% it is just an invitation to chaos... It is something like a maze. Many ways to get lost and only one exit... Selecting more than one tree -> Disaster Installing some trees but not using them (like CTT) -> Disaster The only right exit is: Choose a tree, install ONLY what is necessary for that tree (you will still have multiple choices in the tech manager in game, even if you install only the CTT) AND then ONLY select the tree you wanted (and installed) in the first place. I learned that the hard way... Compatibility with many other mods, rather than the "proprietory/exclusive" KSPI tree. Sure he can. It is a choice between compatibility (with other mods) / effort (of balancing more than one tree) / and personal preferences. Balancing is not restricted to part balancing. It can also be the balance between compatibility and "tradition". The problem with KSPI is, that it is a part mod and a tech tree mod. I understand the reason behind this, there simply was no feasible tech tree, so one had to be created. But that is no longer the case. Sometimes it is time to move on. If KSP itself would not have broken with "traditional" settings/savegames at some point, we would still be sandbox only and we would certainly not get aerodynamics and resources in 1.0. The good thing about moving on in this case is, I m certain someone will continue the KSPI tree config. So the negative effect on die hard KSPI tree users is quasi non existent. But it would free up dev resources from compatibility issues with other mods, because that would be handled by the CTT, thus leaving more time for part modding. By the way, that is not theoretical. It is exactly what I do with the SETI-BalanceMod (link in signature). I have much more time for part balancing, since I delegate nearly all the tech compatibility to the CTT...

That post contains the last "compatibility dll for KAX and MKS/OKS. No idea if it fixes the staging.

Those are some great parts for Storage + visibility! It would be great if there was a third "walkable" part. Eg a version of the 2.5m part, but 3 times the height. That would be enough for a keral to walk inside and access the interior directly! Would be great for usability/roleplay on Based/Stations/Landers!

Installing new tech trees in an ongoing game is a recipe for disaster. Parts are almost always assigned to tech nodes based on your installation, not on what TechTree you pick in game. If you eg install CTT, it should be the only tech tree installed (besides stock obviously), the only one selected and you have to start a new game. No idea why Nertea does not put a fat red disclaimer on it, I already asked him, but got no response. That is the case with all tech trees, installing multiple ones simply does not work and certainly not for existing saves.

Hey, imho a balance for "stock" ksp dimensions should be the "standard" value. Otherwise the compatibility with all the other mods, including CTT, would be at risk. "Realism" values could be part of a separated mm compatibility config, dependent on the usage of Scaling/Realism mods. @FreeThinker: About the CTT compatibility: Am I correct to assume that KSPI 0.90 Extended Configuration will be the basis of further development of your KSPI/NearFuture Integration? So eg could I work on the integration of the SETI-BalanceMod and your KSPI 0.90 Extended Configuration (based on the latters CTT config by Olympic1), without creating issues down the line, when KSPI/NearFuture Integration shifts towards CTT? That would be much easier than trying to integrate everything at once and would also make the integration less problematic for existing CTT based games, since things like the heat mechanic would be already there. Thank you for your great work!

Thank you! No need to rush it, I will probably take a break from contract implementation anyway, to catch up with some part mod support backlog I accumulated . edit: The Killer asteroid contract was exactly what came to mind for an end-game asteroid mission .

Ah, ok. You need to use the Reflectron DP-10 antenna for launching probes through the atmosphere (position it vertically on the rocket, to have minimal air resistance). When you are past the atmosphere, you can activate other Comm devices, like the Communotron 16 or the Comms DTS-M1. At unmanned tech, only the integrated 3km antenna activates, which only really helps for very short distance communication, like docking. If this is your first use of RemoteTech, you may want to install RemoteTech XF on top of RemoteTech. And keep in mind that RT is not easy, there is a very steep learning curve. This guide will help a lot: http://remotetechnologiesgroup.github.io/RemoteTech/guide/ PS: I updated the original post with a link to the guide.

Ah, the vessel definition was the missing link. Thinking about it, it makes sense, since you can dock with and redirect them. I wonder under which vesselType they fall and if it is possible to define a vesselType = Asteroid for them. Anyway, with the SpawnVessel behaviour there are quite a few options for more diverse asteroid contracts. Thank you!

Hey, I m the author of the SETI-BalanceMod (link in signature). Since my mod starts unmanned, I faced the issue that altitude contracts could only be completed by manned vessels, until making configs for the Contract Configurator mod by nightingale. I just released replacements for the buggy stock starting contracts, based on the ones I use for the SETI-BalanceMod, for use with other TechTree mods: Initial Contracts InitialContracts replaces the buggy/annoying stock starting contracts with 3 similar ones, which can be completed by manned and unmanned craft. Thus the mods contracts are especially useful for TechTrees which start unmanned and may be redistributed with them. They are based on the SETI-Contracts but more balanced for stock. InitialContracts Link The mod Contract Configurator by nightingale is required to use the configs. These Contract Configurator configs by nightingale and Yemo are based upon the general contracts of the SETI-BalanceMod. License: You may do what you want (change, expand, mix, redistribute as part of a larger package etc.), as long as you provide the source (eg. SETI-BalanceMod with link) and credit for previous authors (eg. nightingale and Yemo) within the file(s) and at the reference locations (forum thread and download site). Hence you can just redistribute this file along with eg a tech tree mod under any (even a very restrictive) license as long as you give credit in the form mentioned above. PS: Added your mod to the "Balance/Tech Tree mods with different foci" section

I was going over the wiki and especially the "target body" selection. Is there a way to make a general asteroid contract? Like land on an asteroid (no matter which one).

Well, 0.8.0 still needs a critical procedural parts update for Karbonite and storage and multipurpose colony modules 0.4.1 is only prereleased, so it is still stalled. Although I m thinking about expanding "procedural parts" for SETI based on the PP configs by Atrius129, regardless of the main procedural parts mod updates... RLA Stockalike looks like a great addition. While there are quite some parts that would need to be filtered out, it fills a lot of gaps. Not only the obvious engine additions (I like the electrical ones, since it has relatively recently been proven to work in real life), but also the medium solar panels and some radial adapters. Will take a closer look. Also the probe and antenna screens below would fit, originally I wanted a round probe core and considered using the OscarB fuel tank model myself . I m not sure I follow. As far as I understand you need the SETI-BalanceMod configs for RemoteTech2 to use them without the rest of the SETI-BalanceMod, but with the CTT. Thats not so easy. There are 2 distinct RemoteTech2 configs at the moment, located in SETI\MM-PartModding: SETI-PartMod-RemoteTech.cfg and SETI-PartMod-RemoteTech-AddParts.cfg. But the changes to probe cores are done within the SETI-PartMod-SQUAD-ComConElectrics.cfg file in the same folder. That is the relevant code added to the probe cores per mm config: %MODULE[ModuleSPU]:NEEDS[RemoteTech]:AFTER[RemoteTech] { %IsRTCommandStation = true %RTCommandMinCrew = 2 } Yep, it is imho all a matter of relative dosage. Kind of reminds me of StarTrek:TNG vs B5, independent episodes + "minor quest lines" vs a "great story arc" + "minor quest lines" + "side quests".

When starting, I was fed up with the useless clutter (when using procedural parts) in the assembly menues and the starting manned issue . While considering just banning clutter parts and putting probes in an earlier position, it kind of "expanded" to the "balance mod". Funny how it goes. Honestly, for my personal game and after quite some playthroughs, the anomaly hunting contracts are much more interesting than the normal career mode... After the solar panel kas issue, I put a warning before checking, to not forget it (better a warning too much than too little). After checking I only took it out from the OP text, but forgot the patchnotes, thanks! The "heavyControl" node is empty because I moved the parts a to the unmanned techs. The other 2 are beyond the stock TechTree (and thus beyond my current scope). Maybe some other mods populate them, will keep my eyes open. About the fuel tanks, I didnt change their values and the ones from procedural parts is actually closer to the stock game. Not sure I want to mess with that, so I probably will just remove the overpowered KSPI ones. Thank you for the report. The remote command not only reduces delay (if that is activated), but also lets you control probes without KSC connection (you still need KSC connection to transmit science), eg on the "dark side of the mun" if you have connection to a remote command vessel. I changed this to 2 Kerbals and nearly all probe cores a few patches ago, since the very high original RT2 requirements didnt make sense to me. So it is already "balanced". I do not know about preview/spoiler mode for pictures... No worries, it is most likely a second language for most forum users . Thank you for your feedback, much appreciated! +Pair of minor graphical mod suggestions - PlanetShine and Distant Object Enhancement Good to know about the decouplers! Not sure if I should remove them, maybe Universal Storage or someone else will fix them and then I would have to bring them in again. Will update the second post, didnt do that for a while. Thank you for the list! About the graphical mods, my pc is not quite good enough for a full graphical overhaul and it would cost time to test them, so I generally focus on mods influencing gameplay for the recommendations. It also avoids the issue of conflicting graphical improvement mods and why I would favor one over the other (which would be based on my hardware). That is also the reason for not suggesting texture mods (eg for procedural parts), although I use additional textures myself. That looks like a massive vessel! I like the variety of craft for different tasks, which are possible due to procedural parts and some earlier parts (eg adapters). Personally, I launch a single keosynch ComSat with 4 Comms DTS-M1 about 60° ahead of the KSC for the early unmanned Mun missions including landing there with a probe . The first time it was quite challenging and required good timing, but after some tries and using the flight computer, it is now a standard procedure (although I now tend to launch the same keosynch ComSat model at about 60° behind the KSC for better coverage ).

@BahamutoD: Since you are back, a suggestion: It would be great, if the SearchLight had a tweakscale config and could be "direction locked" by an action group. The tweakscale would allow for smaller versions to be fitted on landers/bases radially. Then it could be activated and pointed. The locking would be great for eg work on bases. When it is used by "contruction vehicles" eg based on kerbal foundries or the critter crawler, or infernal robotics "arms", it could function as a "work/flood light". Once locked, it would not follow the cursor to allow construction jobs without the constant light cone changes.

Thank you very much, it reminded me, that I wanted to change the OP to specifically recommend the other contracts for Contract Configurator! The anomaly surveyor ones are a really great "diversion" from the standard funds/science gathering, something like achievements/special missions! New Version 0.7.5 Disabling of part loading New standard procedure leaves all unused parts passively available without cluttering experimentalMotors, no need for compatibility files To save RAM, manually delete unused folders (beware of compatibility issues (eg Landertron/BahaSP) or use the AutoPruner config file provided, please follow the instructions in the AutoPruner thread Suggested and implemented by SwGustav WARNING: If you need passive support for parts, do not use AutoPruner on them (edit AutoPruner config or do not use AutoPruner) Rebalances and Adjustments Unshrouded solar panels can not be retracted once expanded Based upon StockRebalance by stupid_chris, CaptRobau, suggested for SETI-BalanceMod by noahavrum and SwGustav Contracts Many new progression Contracts, please take a look at the Contracts section in the SETI-BalanceMod OP Minor Changes and Fixes - - - Updated - - - edit: Oh, nearly forgot, I tested the Mk2 Cockpit Internals mod and as expcected, there was no problem at all. Just added it to the supported mods list.

There seem to be multiple "customized" versions of Firespitter.dll around. KerbalAircraftExpansion seems to use a customized version. USI Kolonization Systems (MKS/OKS) seems to use a customized version. What should I do if I want to use both mods?

Oh, sorry, missed it. I m not sure why US turned the decouplers off. Something like that might be a bug workaround, so I m hesitant to just reactivate them without knowing the full story. With so much else to do and the imho limited gameplay effect, I will probably postpone investigating this until after 0.8.