Nertea

It's like I want this to be stock, but I also don't, because then I'd have to redo all my things to a higher standard .

I've been really busy recently, and playing too much Civ:BE, but I'm still working on this... The C of M looks fine to me. Suggest you look at your design, I found that I need to change things around from my usual methods due to how much lift the body pieces create (that might need some work). I plan on a nice two-deck arrangement for the interior. We'll see after that. Pretty sure you can't use TextureSwitch for that last one, as both share the same textures (just moved UVs). ModelSwitch would work. Anyways, nice work. Possibly a MM patch that could be included. I always like these.

These are very nice, I like your clean texture work. Looking forward to seeing that engine, it is pretty unique and we could always use more non-nuclear orbital engines.

Glad you like it. I'll probably wordsmith some of the descriptions some more before release too. I plan to support NFT, SSPX and the Mk4 parts as soon as it's official released. I was wondering what it would cost . I had to click the "add science" button a lot of times, I'll say that.

I think it'd be fine to still have the "None" option available and selected by default, but possibly move it out of the tree selection box (greyed out trees in the box). Having it outside the box ( another radio button above the tree field?) would create the correct logical disconnect between it and the ability to select trees. Of course, just greying out the others would work too...

Those nodes are intended for MKS/OKS and life support mods.

That's what it was. Didn't know that was intended behavior, it is a bit counterintuitive. If I wasn't a "click everything" person I might have assumed that something was wrong and the trees weren't loading.

It asks me to select trees, and shows only the default one in the list of radio buttons (I can't remember the name offhand). Click the radio button/name of the tree and it loads the rest.

Minor bug - sometimes the tree list doesn't load naturally at start. You have to click on the blank tree in the list window to force the list to load.

I think I found another issue. I think TED needs another field in the node info for the techID field. It currently only has name, which is used to link tree components. It generates... odd values for techID (such as nanolathing over and over again). This breaks TreeManager. techID is also the name that's used for part assignment, I believe. Also a tree starting with a TECHNOLOGY_TREE_DEFINITION node enclosing the entire tree (as TreeManager 1.2 supports) won't load.

The stock nodes are all defined, I'm not sure what you mean. I hadn't tested with the new version of TechManager, which I had not noticed, which seems to be the problem... it was working totally fine before I updated it. I'll take the download down, because something's not right, even if I remove those two problems you mention. -edit: Restored, found the problem. Seems to work ok with TechManager 1.2 now.

This is all very informal at the moment. I will git a project (ha... ha...) when I actually have some time. License is CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0. A question - I've enabled all the nodes to be shown even if empty here. If they are set to hide when empty, the tree could cut off access to later tech and for this skeletal test, it's best that the entire tree be visible. If we decide to, I'll ensure all CTT nodes are marked as hide when empty at actual release time. Known issues: tree is not centered on the r&d field, I accidentally deleted nanolathing

There's always been a landing subtree, hasn't there? Squad puts capsules in control nodes, which makes sense to me, but I added two nodes since that last update. So there's now Heavy Control, Enhanced Survivability, Long Term Habitation and Short Term Habitation that are new candidates for pod-makers to use. Link

I haven't actually tried putting parts in new nodes yet so I can't confirm. I can confirm that the last version does fix the arrows though.

I think that's more of a question for the people running the tech loading plugins than me - I have no control over that. Anyways, I finished laying out the tech tree. I could use a couple of testers, I suppose.

Re: the icons, it might be a good idea to play to combine the icon with letters somehow. We only have a limited number of icons to work with and unless there's a good way to add more, any tree with new nodes will have to reuse. In that case, the letters are actually *less* confusing! Here's the tree I made

It ends up being somewhat similar, but because ctt's has some changes to the stock section, it's a little different from my goal.

I had a test! It works really nicely even in this form, nodes are easy to create and move around. I only found one bug so far! Bugs noted: A tree created by the tool (loaded by techmanager) shows no link arrows. Thought this might be TechManager's fault, but when I load older trees with it, arrows show fine You can't seem to expand the work area for the tree, which is a problem when you want to make the tree wider/taller. UI/Features: I like the single-letter for showing tech names, it's elegant, but there can be so many similar names that I might suggest the first two letters instead Grid snapping feature would be great. Direction of links is quite hard to determine.

Yes, of course it was TB2 . All the wide parts have live already, actually. Considering some surface attachable VTOL engines for that. Heh, well, hopefully the newer version of that piece works better This can't be the entire answer, because the SP+ bays use the same 4-node method with no FAR issues. I think I addressed this at one point - those bulges are too small for this, and I don't like it anyways.

That's exactly the nightmare though. What you are describing means that every time a mod adds a part, I need to update the tree. Thats not an infrequent thing, there's a lot of part mods out there. That modder has to communicate with me, the location needs to be defined etc. You could end up with needing several updates in a single day, even. That's not fair to me, and its not fair to modders either, waiting on an update for a third party. I'd hate it, if I was the modders waiting for a tree update and having to deal with support requests for something out of my control.

I very much do not intend to assign parts to nodes. That's a bloody nightmare for maintenance, imagine that every time a mod gets updated, I'd need to update the tree. Awful. I'll start laying out the tree in game tomorrow. I don't have a huge amount of time this week, but maybe it'll be available by next weekend. I have my other projects to work on too.

annonish, what's the chance that we could get some kind of support for custom node icons? I realize from my own attempts at tech stuff that it's an internal enum that's defining them, but I'm wondering if it would be possible to hack some kind of overwrite by getting the renderers or UI components being used to draw the nodes and replacing their textures. Would not be pretty but... not having new images bugs me more than it should . I'll investigate myself when I have time if you don't . Just thought I'd mention it in case you had any ideas.

Updated the tree: Added node: Fusion Rockets (what could this be...) Added node: Subsonic Flight (propellers!) Added node: Advanced Aerospace Composites (Advanced spaceplane parts) Added node: Experimental Aircraft Engines (Advanced aircraft engines) Added node: Heavy Control (larger pods and reaction wheels) Added node: Power Transmission (microwave networks) Moved the nuclear propulsion branch above rocketry Renamed a few techs Rearranged some more techs Comments on comments: 1. Ok 2. I think these fit perfectly well in Specialized Science Tech and Long Term Science Tech 3. I think that's not quite needed. I'd rather give KSPI microwave transmission a node 4. Experimental Motors not enough? 5. Fair enough 6. Covered in Nuclear Propulsion, really. Gave you a fusion engines node. Some other mods could find it useful. I think that I've solved that problem by not making co-dependencies unless mods can be confirmed to fill everything. 1. I see what you're saying there - I could see renaming Resource Detection to Advanced Surveys or something and moving it a few levels down. Merge resource scanning parts into Resource Utilization. I don't want to tie the surveying bits to the resource tree though. Seems... messy. 2. It makes things a little more interesting? But seriously, I already have like 20 panels (and more planned) to distribute in those nodes. None are really better than the others, so they're colocated.

I'm going to let you guys fiddle around and use whatever FAR stuff you come up with. I had been told that calling the part "Cargo bay" eliminated that behaviour. hm. I will make it touch the ground, but there's not much you can do about the entrance issue without compromising the tail component. Which I might be ok with, but it's pretty cool looking. Plus, I'm not too worried... I don't think 2.5m rovers would fit in the bay anyways (2.5m core plus wheels would be too large). Actually.. what do we think of something like this? Move the attach node above the fuselage to make more room. Me neither, but that'll teach me to just copy cfgs. Thanks. Always happy to... make people happy. I don't think it would be that much work, just need to add some numbers to the cfg, unless I'm misunderstanding. The first is not unreasonable, 2x cargo bays and fuselages will be coming eventually (in fact the models are trivial to make). Texturing is a long proposition and I'd rather focus efforts elsewhere at the moment. You may be in luck with airbrakes at some point. We'll see. Hmm, there should be a flat area of collider right on the bulbous bit. I suspect you mean cosmetic though. I'm considering making the drone core hollow. Thoughts?

I was going to post a bunch more thoughts, but I decided to just lay out some nodes . This is 41 new nodes. I'm gonna cap it at 45, 50 at maximum cap. I fully expect people to object to some of it, so here's some rationale on some areas. Nuclear Power Branch There are at least 3 mods playing in this playground so it has to have room for a decent progression Nuclear Support Technology is an extra node that I want, but I don't like the name (In NFT it's Advanced Cooling Systems, which is too specific) There should be enough here to support KSPI's abundance of reactors, NFT's reactors, KSPI's fusion (two levels) Larger Rocketry Branch Pretty generic extension of the stock tree Suggest this for 5m parts and the like Name of the second node isn't great Nuclear Propulsion Branch Two new nodes gives room for 2.5m and 3.75m parts, if you follow Squad's progression. There aren't enough NTR mods to justify that much more. Construction Branch Three new nodes focused around larger parts As Rover requested, later nodes are Orbitally focused in names Ion Engine Branch I need this many nodes for NFP KSPI can play here too Science Branch Room for a node's worth of new parts Two nodes with nomenclature for Station Science (and mods like it) Survey Branch One node for scansat and co One node for ISRU scanners I think this is enough, but we might go another node because there are quite a few ISRU scanners now... ISRU Branch Branch running from initial exploration to use to large scale stuff Should hopefully cover the range of solutions out there Colonization Branch I moved this branch to the bottom so it would fit better As suggested, folded life support into this Recycling -> Hydroponics -> Off world living Final tech might require stuff from ISRU and Science branches Future Technology Combines the end of the science stuff with the end of the plasma engines with the end of the fusion power stuff KSPIland. Rover, what would you want to do with your fusion drive? Solar Power Branch I want three nodes here Random other things Electrical Systems Node: KSPI generators or microwave transmitters? could add another node here for transmitters, considering that I have some ambitions of doing that sometime Another Control Node: Another node after Large Control might be good for large command pod mods? Firespitter, KAX, B9: Not familiar enough with these mods to say what they might want or need. However, be my guest and suggest a few nodes wherever (though do pay attention to the locations of the lines, it's hard to make things fit sometimes in the middle). I also solicit comments on (some) names. A few are evidently bad. I'd like to stay away from the high tech-> miniaturization though. It's the opposite of how the stock tree goes in a lot of respects. That doesn't mean you couldn't put those in with your own mod, but in most cases I've gone with "advanced", "high effic", "large scale" which neatly sidesteps the size question (yes, large scale could be many small ones ).Things also only get specific when I'm really sure that I know all the mods that play in that area, and that I can cover them all with a statement.