SpinkAkron

Thanks! I was looking for flotation devices since my probes end up sinking to the depths with alarming regularity.

Thanks. I'm going to wait for @theonegalen's aero parts before I do anything like that. Something I'll keep in mind though .

Very similar to how I play. I use most of those mods but I do use part failure mods I have three themes that guide my setup. First is to slow down the pace of the game. The primary way to do this is to play on hard difficulty. Science points drive the pace. Less science means more missions to reach the next tier. I deselect the part unlock cost. That's just a money sink and I reduce money in other ways. I use the all the pressure/force stuff on the advanced tab. I select action groups always available cuz that's just a quality of life thing. Kerbal Construction Time provides a sense of time passing. Second and third go hand in hand. I want to have meaningful decisions and I want consequences for bad ones. This also primarily done with difficulty setting sliders. I jack the penalty settings up which also increases upgrade costs. I like to feel like I'm always a couple screw ups from disaster. It's not uncommon for my careers to end in bankruptcy. I use SETI contracts to drive the career and disable all stock contracts, using contract packs instead. Exploration Plus is another good career driver. I like to use a custom tech tree so I can start with just probes and have to really work for the things we normally take for granted. I used Seti UBM with @theonegalen extensions for a long time. Probes Before Crew looks quite interesting but it makes changes to science that conflicts with my science tweaks. I finally ended up making my own tech tree to provide the challenge I wanted. I get a lot of enjoyment developing scripts for kOS. I do not allow any commands to unmanned craft except thru kOS so that adds another level of challenge. I really love how all these mods allow each of us to customize the game to our own version of what we think it should be.

It will be in v1.0. I really appreciate the feedback guys

They are not automatic. If you don't include them there will be no visible lines. They're not strictly required in the sense the node will still have the Parent as a prerequisite and will display the parent names on the right hand panel when selected.

I took a Stayputnik to space with FAR using only tier 1 and 2 parts. It took 4 attempts, one of which had an engine failure (gotta love OhScrap!). Two failed due to insufficiently tilted fins leading to early destabilization. It's not pretty, but it is possible. And normal difficulty gives an insane amount of science compared to what I'm used to. If you're not using Collision FX, I highly recommend it. Hearing the metal screeching as my probes tumble across the landscape really brings home what a failer I am.

Thanks! So I'm think this should go in Early aviation tier 3.

That sounds like both the easiest way to go and the only option that has so far presented itself. @PocketBrotector, I would like to include(with attribution) the .625m fairing from Extended Antenna Progression in UnKerballed Start. Is that okay with you?

that's exactly what I have after copying in the one from Extended Antenna Progression. This one is named "AE-FF0 Airstream Protective Shell (0.625m)"

PartInfo is a big help in that department.

That was the first place I looked. I'm not seeing one. In any case, the license is restricted and the the modder has not responded to hails. I use Ven's. There isn't one in that. I did a config for KW and moved all the fairings up but there's no size0 fairings, unless I overlooked them.

I found a .625m fairing in KSP-ExtendedAntennaProgression. It hasn't been updated for a couple years so may be abandoned. The license is CC BY-NC-SA so technically I would be able to include it even if I was unable contact the modder. Sounds like it's pretty crucial to have one. hmm... Any others anyone knows of?

Thanks. I've got the 1.25m fairing at Aviation. A .625m one would come earlier if there was one available. Is there one in a mod? I'm using FAR and don't recall any problems getting through the atmo after I get controllable parts at tier 3. I think I may have switched to the QBE at the same time tho. Before then, it is a kind of a crapshoot. Sometimes you get lucky. Spinning is all you have for stability. I use the AV-D13 Delta-Deluxe Winglet from aeronautics(t2) extensively but its a bit big for those early launches. My intent is that getting to a controllable rocket feels like a real milestone rather than something you take for granted. For v1.0, I've made some part moves suggested by @MaltYebisu that make the game start easier but it's still pretty dicey on hard. I was stuck at 4.8 science when I got lucky and had a probe core survive impact after another failed attempt to complete the starting 18k mission from SETI Contract Pack.

I've been using Space Age, which keeps track of all your achiements. Here's what it looks like for my current run using kOS, Kerbal Construction Time, Oh Scrap, and a bunch of others. I'm using SETI Contracts for the career and other contract packs for everything else. Stock contracts are disabled.

Gosh, it's been so long since I played without using kOS, I don't really remember how to play the normal way. Wiki says L2 Tracking Station and L2 Mission Control allows for maneuver nodes. I didn't change anything related to that. Playing on hard mode, I just got my first unmanned Mun landing on day 309 on my 40th launch. I did my first manned mission on day 224 but haven't got a kerbal in orbit yet.

The Stayputnik gets no respect. Stayputnik deserves its moment of glory as the starting probe. There is no point in it being in the game otherwise. It serves admirably for the first few launches where there's not really much need for steering anyway. When you're ready to try for orbit at tier three, the control parts come in and you can retire the Stayputnik draped in well-deserved wreaths of glory.

That's how I got into this. I just finishing making one where I moved every node many times until I got it set up the way I wanted, so it's all still fresh. As far as modding goes, I think it's one of the easier things to do. Take a look at the stock tech tree file in Kerbal Space Program\GameData\Squad\Resources\ TechTree.cfg to get an idea of how it's set up. Looking at other tech tree mods is a big help too. I'd recommend you look at mine linked in my siggy since I think it is better organized than some. The structure is: TechTree { RDNode { id = title = description = cost = hideEmpty = nodeName = anyToUnlock = icon = pos = scale = Parent { parentID = lineFrom = lineTo = } } } Changes are made with Module Manager config. You can only have one TechTree. You can either modify the exisiting one or delete it and make a new one. Most trees are modified stock so they start @TechTree{}. The '@' is a modify symbol. The Module Manager Handbook has lots of good info on syntax. To delete and start a new one, use !TechTree{} to delete it and TechTree{} to make your new one. I chose to modify the existing one but added some custom nodes. A simple edit to change the position of the start node is: @TechTree { @RDNode:HAS[#id[start]] { @pos = -3800,1407,0 } } We start with @TechTree because we're modifying the existing tree. We also use @RDNode to modify an existing node, in this case the node with id start. If you look in the stock techtree cfg, you'll find a node defined with id = start. Since it already has a data element 'pos' we again use @pos to modify that value to whatever we want. We can similarly change any other data element in the node. You only need to include the data elements you want to change. The others will be left at the whatever value they were set at when the node was defined. Links between nodes are done with the Parent{} structure. It has three elements - parentID, lineFrom, and lineTo. ParentID corresponds to the id of the node you're linking from. Here's a more complex example with changing a parent node. In this case I didn't need to change lineFrom or lineTo (oh and case matters, so watch your capital letters) @TechTree{ @RDNode:HAS[#id[advRocketry]] { @cost = 45 @anyToUnlock = False @pos = -3200,2155,0 @Parent { @parentID = generalRocketry } } } You can use -Parent{} to remove a link or just Parent{} to add one. Anyway, that's the basics. I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have. Oh, you only need to do @TechTree{} once and put all your @RDNode{} edits in it.

That's pretty much my experience. The 3rd values doesn't seem to be of any use. I set all mine to 0, but CTT has them at -1. I didn't find that it made in any difference. Maybe it did at one time. I read something in the CTT thread about flickering icons. The origin is at the lower right corner. I moved the starting node way over to the left and it's at pos = -3800,1505.5,0. The total area is around 4000x2300, probably measured in pixels. I also found the line/arrow graphic doesn't work when linking a node going down, for whatever reason. I think it still works otherwise.

Yep. Hide Empty Tech Tree Nodes Mod It'll be in v1.0 with the aero stuff.

@linuxgurugamer, KWsrbGlobeX has bulkheadProfiles = srf, size15.

Take a look at Final Frontier. I think either it or one if its addons adds ranks. In any case, it's a great accompaniment to Earn Your Stripes.

One of the things I love about this mod is the ability to start with a completely new set of kerbonauts. A small thing, but it does make each game feel unique. thanks!

@MaltYebisu, upon reflection and with a much less stuffy head, I've come around. Your suggestions would provide a much more satisfying beginning to the 'meh' that it is currently. I'll move the battery to start and the LV-T05 up to tier 2, displacing the LV-T10 to tier 3. Dropping the effectiveness of the SRB is a good idea too. So thanks!

Well, making more science available at first launch means you'll more quickly get the tech that makes getting to space easier. So the first kind of defeats the purpose of the second. Adding more science speeds up the pace. In my mind, we're starting just after the sounding rockets phase and are ready for real rockets. They're dumb, uncontrollable rockets, but we're on the verge of changing that. I really like the idea of the probes having a telemetry experiment. I think it should be in stock. If there was a standalone mod for it, I'd use it. But I'm committed to making no changes to parts other then their position on the tech tree. I don't want to limit the player's ability to mix/match mods to give them the game they want. Too many mods do too much, in my opinion. Hoovering up the KSC science is unfortunately something we're stuck with. I view it as the kind of easy tutorial level most games have at start. Thinking about this puts me a bit of a mood to ramble on for a while about my design philosophy. Oh goody, says no one. I've been trying to balance too easy vs frustrating. I prefer a very hardcore game but I know many players don't, so I try to err on the easier side. I think it's easier to find mods/settings to make an easy game harder than a hard game easier. I also think getting into space should be harder so I use mods like FAR and Deadly Reentry. But I don't want to force all players to do it my way. Everyone has their own vision of what KSP should be, which is why we make and use mods. I try not be do anything that would be a barrier to them making theirs. If that vision includes this little contribution, that give me warm fuzzies. I think a lot about pacing. Where's the right balance? What's too fast for one player may be too slow for another. I can design a tech tree to make a milestone dependent on tech at a certain tier. Like heat shields for instance. You're not recovering anything from orbit before that. That's the pacing I can control. That's the one I do have to force on everyone. The other pacing is how many missions should it take to reach those milestones. That is up to each player and it controlled by how quickly you can gather science. Change the sliders or add/remove science and contract mods and you change the pacing. Having a contract packs that are a good match for your tech tree is important. Anyhoo...I thought explaining my mindset might help understand where I'm coming from. I am open to changing stuff. I'm constantly tweaking things. I've probably made the most changes to that starting parts. Back and forth, this way or that way. I'm pretty satisfied with it.

I don't think it's something that needs fixed. If a player wants to use cockpits to get around the delayed availability of capsules, that's their business. There's no wrong way to play. If a player doesn't want to be restricted to unmanned at start, they probably wouldn't be using this mod anyway. My view is provide the playground, don't dictate the game.