leudaimon

Is this the place to discuss the balance of the tech tree? In case it isn't, I'm sorry! There are some parts that look strange/unbalanced to me. I'm in the early game, and one thing that makes me wonder is why both the vanguard-1 and sputnik probes are in the same node, but the engines that launched them are in different nodes. I understand that the RD-107/108 is pretty overpowered for the early orbital rocketry node (The place Vanguard engines are placed). But I think also does the Vanguard probe in the early avionics node. It is tiny, weights on tenth of the next smallest science core and has solar cells(!!). Given solar cells as a part are available only two nodes ahead (stability/early probes), I think it should be at least in the next node, Basic avionics. That would make some historic sense in that the early soviet rockets were stronger, to carry a heavier payload (which was simple and bulky), while early american rockets were not so strong and probes were more miniaturized.

I did. I'm not sure whether it is necessary, but given it is listed as a dependency I installed the current release.

Thanks for the fast reply! I installed all dependencies (including the ones not yet available at CKAN, such as Stock revamp and Taerobee), and then installed the master branch of RP-0 from github. To install the master you need to compile the tree.cfg file (it is not very complicated on linux, have no idea on windows) or copy it from the stable 0.40 release. In both cases, you only need to paste the Gamedata folder contents, not all files in the zip.

I've been playing a little with RP-0, and noticed some minor issues (or maybe intended aspects) that made me wonder: 1) When launching from other bases than KSC, recovery percentages are still calculated relative to the distances from KSC. It is a little frustrating when you manage to return with view of the base, and receive only 75% back. 2) The VAB and SPH have different characteristics at startup. VAB has basically no limitations, while SPH requires at most 30 parts. Is this intended? I don't use planes much (even my X-plane is launched vertically) but i don't see much reason for this difference. Btw, good job on the conversion to 1.0.5. It has worked flawlessly so far. EDIT: I just tested the world firsts on a new save, and they are still there even though I reinstalled RP-0. I may have made a mistake, but it's worth taking a look.

Wow! That was fast!! Amazing

Thank you for the suggestions @ZaPPPa. Yeah, I actually found out how to compile tree.cfg, and it is working properly now. I got 72K (exactly o.O) from the first set of world firsts on moderate, and 6 science. These values should definitely be changed (or world firsts removed altogether, given these milestones are already in automatic contracts) on final release.

Ow, that explains a lot! Thank you very much

I posted a more complete reply on similar issues I am finding on RP-0 in the proper forum(I tagged you there). Although, I'd just like to remark that the Aerobee is not part of RO, it is in the Taerobee mod, which is recomended by RP-0.

I've been experimenting to try to make RP-0 work on 1.0.5 with no success, and given @StuntFlyer raised similar issues on the RO forum, some of them could be unnoticed by developers and need fixing before release. I tried two ways to run it. In both cases I installed all dependencies (including the ones not available at CKAN, such as Stock revamp and Taerobee), and then installed RP-0. 1) when I install the current stable release (0.40), everything looks OK at first view, but after finishing the first flight (something similar to the real WAC corporal), I get a bunch of money from the new "world first achievements". It is not game breaking, but makes everything very easy. Is this planned to be balanced in the new version? 2) when I install the master branch from github, problems are much more serious. First of all, parts show up in completely wrong places in the tech tree (in the start I have the Mk1 capsule, Sputnik and explorer for example). Besides, all parts show as non-RP-0. EDIT: After the very useful comment by @Phineas Freak at the RO thread, I think I found out why it doesn't work - no tree.cfg file. Once I get the time to look at this again I'll check whether it works with an old tree.cfg file. I'm aware that those are experimental versions and not supposed to work well. I'm reporting it in case some of those issues are not general and/or were not noticed by the developers.

[quote name='obsidian_x'][URL]http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/18230-1-0-4-Kerbal-Engineer-Redux-v1-0-18-0?p=2304971&viewfull=1#post2304971[/URL][/QUOTE] Is there any estimate on when it will be available at CKAN?

Any issues on 1.0.5?

[quote name='Jimbodiah'] nothing will make it past 100km height, even 20K dV launchers with 45K (TWR 3+) thrust don't make it past 60-80km [/QUOTE] There is definitely something wrong going on. Did you install RO? I have started by following this tutorial: [URL]https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki/Tutorial:-Reaching-Orbit[/URL] and had no problem reaching orbit. As NathanKell pointed out, 9.3k dV is the optimal, and something around 10k is a good start for beginners launching from KSC (or Kourou if you prefer more flexibility in inclination).

[quote name='Phineas Freak'] For the launch sites it is 5 Mm, for ESTRAC / DSA stations it is 1.781 Tm and for the DSN stations it is 114 Tm. [/QUOTE] Good to know. That explains why contact of satellites in higher orbit is not constant, depending on location. The behavior always looked strange to me.

[QUOTE][COLOR=#333333]In general the range is always at least twice the range of the smaller antenna. Anyone knows why Min(r1,r2) term is there?[/COLOR][/QUOTE] I have no idea on how these antennas work in real life, but I would guess the RSS developers tweaked antennas range and chose this type of rule based on real values, or at least to make the experience in communication with probes similar to real life. Maybe there is some discussion regarding that on Real Solar System, but I couldn't find it.

[quote name='Pronoes'] Edit: Quite possibly I have just noticed RSS has "root" as default in RTsettings config. [/QUOTE] Exactly that. The Remote tech defines the rules under "root" range model: [QUOTE]The two antennas can communicate as long as they are within [IMG]https://remotetechnologiesgroup.github.io/RemoteTech/guide/settings/rootmodel.png[/IMG] of each other, where r1 and r2 are the ranges of the two antennas, up to a limit of 100 times the omni range or 1000 times the dish range, whichever is smallest.[/QUOTE] It means that it is taking the ground station's range also into account, summing the geometric mean of the two ranges to the smaller range. Given ground stations' range is pretty high, you get much more range than the stated in the description on your antenna.

[quote name='Pronoes'] Edit: Found it!![TABLE="class: cms_table_highlight cms_table_tab-size cms_table_js-file-line-container"] [TR] [TD="class: cms_table_blob-code cms_table_blob-code-inner cms_table_js-file-line"]// Red: Uncategorized[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="class: cms_table_blob-code cms_table_blob-code-inner cms_table_js-file-line"]// Green: ESTRACK / DSA[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="class: cms_table_blob-code cms_table_blob-code-inner cms_table_js-file-line"]// Blue: DSN[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="class: cms_table_blob-code cms_table_blob-code-inner cms_table_js-file-line"]// Yellow: Launch sites[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/QUOTE] Thank you! Any gameplay differences among those (range perhaps)?

Greetings, I am using RO/RSS and after the latest update on RSS the ground stations show on different colours (it looks like continuous hue values and not some categorical classification). Given it is a Remote tech feature within RSS/RO, I wondered I could find some information on the meaning of those colours on the remote tech documentation, but didn't find anything. Any ideas?

Just updated to the latest version and now the ground stations appear with different colours. Is there any reference for the meaning of those? Cheers!