MedievalNerd
-
Posts
759 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by MedievalNerd
-
-
@NathanKell: If you want a gauge of how things are going, consider this rocket:
Can we try it out too? The wobble is killing me. Literally.
-
You're gonna need fins. At that size, you should use wing pieces to forge them on the bottom of the rocket. It'll fly like an arrow, also remember to begin your gravity turn very early, once it gets speed it'll be very hard to change trajectory and you'll most likely spin out.
How early in terms of altitude?
-
We have a problem here.
On the first 2 picture I orbited the Mun at an altitude of 82000m. On the last one I was orbiting at 32000. I don't know yet if it is only hyperedit or not.
Doh, trippy but unwanted definitely.
Did you try with a rocket with infinite fuel? Maybe if you get there 'manually' you won't have that funky stuff going on.
-
I must have missed that post sorry Medieval, I can indeed get it working with stock. I was curious on the limitations and/or capabilities of treenode in the current state.
I really like the increased nodes and placement of these custom trees, which is why I asked if it was possible
No worries. Posts pour in quickly at times, and there are so many that it's easy to miss one.
If you get your hands on the Tech Tree Edit, you can do whatever you want basically. I'm building a quite extensive one, you can see the thread in my sig.
Cheers,
-
@NeoSky: Some day, maybe. I can't simulate energy consumption in unloaded vessels and this is a very complicated system even without that.
I'm not sure if it can help, but TAC Life Support mod is the only mod I've seen that is able to track passive vessels. Maybe there is something in the source that can help, or perhaps Taranis can provide some insight?
Just a thought,
-
any news for the new version?
mfg
Did you try the hotfix version? Apart for the Sub Assembly shenanigans (IE, you must unselect all filters to see the SA tab), it works fine for me! A few rare select parts don't show up for some of my mod, but it's only a few. (maybe 3-4 total)
Cheers!
-
They dont show, at all.
Some parts show up in the VAB, even though they arent showing up in the tech tree, while some dont show up at all (VAB *or* Tech tree). This is with numerous tests of new installs and edited parts.cfg, and after-the-event tree.cfg editing (and also testing without doing either, or both for bug tracking consistancy)
In short - editing the part.cfg to be a tech of anything BUT the start node, is not allowing external mods to be placed into the new trees.
I even tried editing the persistance.sfs to no avail.
Can we get a quick and dirty example so we can add some mods/parts into these awesome trees? (eg. KAS or Kethane) because those are kinda key (for me anyway
)Are you manually adding them, or using TreeEdit?
If you are manually adding them, I believe I've said this in the thread in a previous comment. The stuff that is done with TreeLoader is post any changes done to module manager, or part.cfg edits. Meaning, each time a techtree is loaded, it reapplies the TechRequired to all the items. (When the career is created, not everytime to you go to the Tech Screen.) I don't know how the game handles loading the icons within the tech nodes.
The only way you can add stuff to the tech tree manually is by not using TreeLoader and running with the stock tree. Try it.
-
I would make nodes more conceptual than part-oriented. Mechanics, chemistry, metallurgy, thermodynamics, aerodynamics, biology, etc.
That would be nice, but at some point there are logistical limitations of the usability of it all. Look at how complex the line patterns are. At some point it would require a whole seperate tech tree plugin to be able to customize the connection lines and how they are drawn. I'm able to make the above look 'decent' in the actual KSP tech screen, but it's borderline.
Also, its' a mix of conceptual and part oriented. Not all conceptual nodes will unlock parts, in some cases improvements to existing ones. And this is a quasi comprise again to logistical issues of making the nodes fit in a semi coherent way. Originally purple would have been conceptual, and light blue part nodes.
Ideally, if you could have 'required' tech nodes which don't have a link drawn would solve the issue. You could have just a series of tech lines next to each other. Obviously you'd need to have some sort of out game diagram to makes sense of it all. But it could work.
Not a good idea... I don't know how about others, but I can hardly run my game with either of these packs installed (lagging and crashing) while with both it runs out of memory everytime. And that's even with all the optimizations that have been made.I'd rather suggest including resized versions of stock engines and tanks (would only require including .cfgs in the mod) and requiring procedural wings and fairings, and stretchy tanks (though the last one may not be that good of an idea if you include modular fuel).
Still looking for realistic (aviation>probes>manned) tree for stock game.
I have even more than the mods listed above and I pull it off. I don't use them, but there are redux versions of each of those with some considerable memory footprint savings.
Also, this is intended to be probe>manned. The tech requirements for capsules is quite massive. Also, space plane integration isn't done in that tree yet. This is probes/rockets. You'll notice science modules aren't included either. It's a WIP, as the title of the post suggest.
Hard to say with no tech costs listed, but trust me. It'll be expensive to get to Capsules. Could even shift capsules down to branch off at Tier 2 only. (If you didn't notice, capsules require each of the purple nodes of that tier to be researched in order to be "researchable" itself.If you want to create those parts and post them, I can put them in the tech tree no problem btw. Not "all" of them would be required. But it may leave gaps in some places. IE, manned missions without TAC might make the mission controller missions arbitrary since you wont' need to worry about power consumption that much, and no need for life support supplies.
-
Nathan's also helping me out with a realism overhaul of the tech tree! I started a thread about it here:
http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55253-WIP-Full-Realistic-Tech-Tree-Overhaul
Different types of tech nodes, with 'upgrades' to existing parts as you research. Going to be crazy!
-
Howdy everyone,
I'm pleased to show you the early workings of the realistic tech tree which I've been working on with Nathan! To be honest, a lot of this would not be possible without him and his more extensive knowledge of rocketry and available plugin functionality. I came to him with my own tech tree concept, and we've basically reviewed the whole thing and came up with this new version.
This will most likely require multiple mods in order to make sense and also enable some of the key features of the tech tree. Which are as follows:
#1 - Completely separated lines of progress. Engines, Solid Rocket Boosters, each 'category' of parts has their own progression line. With some additional branching in some cases.
#2 - New series of Tech nodes: Engine Controls, Electronics, Light Weight Materials, Low Temp Materials, High Temp Materials and Life Support. Some of these will still unlock some parts, but will be linked to incremental bonuses to other part sub groups. (IE, researching high Light Weight Mats, will give a small mass reduction bonus to Ladders, Wheels, Chutes, etc.)
#3 - Inclusion of the Modular Fuel Tanks Fuels within the tech tree. (They each have their own tech line of progression with incremental bonuses for each tech level)
#4 - Nathan proposed an "experience" tracking system of which fuels/engines were used in past missions and would give slight bonuses each time you use them. (IE, if you want your space program to specialize with a certain engine only, sending multiple launches with them will progressively make them better.)
This is still heavy WIP, there is some branching missing and I haven't made it entirely pretty. We spent the whole night working on this, so bear with us.
Just to give a heads up here are some of the mods that will be needed for balancing purposes, and filling out the tech tree. (Stock parts provide no post 2.5M engines)
(Updated List - 2013/11/11 - Added links and 'authors')
#1 - Real Solar System (link) - By NathanKell
#2 - FAR (link) - By Ferram
#3 - Custom Experiments Plugin - link - By Myself!
#4 - Remote Tech 2 (link) - A Must !
#5 - Modular Fuel Tanks (link) - (BALANCED FOR KATO ENGINES!) Originally by ialdabaoth, currently maintained by NathanKell
#6 - KW Rocketry (link) - By Kickasskyle
#7 - Nova Punch (link) - By Tiberion
#8 - TAC Life Support (link)- By TaranisElsu
#9 - Mission Controller (Missions Packs & Economy) (link) - By Malkuth & NathanKell
#10 - KSP Interstellar (Late Tech) (link) - By Fractal_UK
This is a concept version of the Realistic Progression Tech Tree.
Feedback and ideas are always welcomed.
Thanks to all the hard from Squad & all of the above people in the mentioned mods for making all of this possible. Special thanks to Nathan for braving the late hours of the night with my ramblings.
Cheers!
UPDATE #3
Here is the monster of all tech trees. Behold:
Update #2
Since the initial concept of the Tech tree will require some more advanced plugin work; Make MFT's tech levels dependent on tech nodes, implement performance increases based on tech nodes, etc. I am currently working on a 'lite' version of the above tech tree.
Main Features:
1 - Full overhaul of experiments
1.a - "Removed" all stock experiments
1.b - Experiments are now body and situation specific
1.c - Experiments are now tied into probes, and unlocked by tier.
1.d - Implemented "Data resource" which needs to be gathered before an experience can be completed.
1.e - Probes have Data Module to generate the above resource at the cost of EC
1.f - Custom Plugin to make the above work. - By Myself (With special thanks to NathanKell, Ethernet, Majiir & Nerf Herder)
2 - Solar Panel Tweaks
2.a - Weights & Power Generation greatly reduced. (Stock weight/power ratios were good, but pieces too small/heavy)
2.b - Used solarpanel5 to 1 as tiers. Each progressively getting more efficient.
3 - Remote Tech 2 Tweaks
3.a - Much needed antenna range extensions (Real Earth Kerbin!)
3.b - NathanKell's multiple antenna boost.
4 - Custom Plugin to make the above work - By Myself (With special thanks to NathanKell,
Here is the latest screenshot I made for Realistic Progression 'Lite' Tech Tree.
-
The mission package is intended to be part of a story that is played through Career Mode. So yes the very first thing is a Launch Pad EVA to gather surface samples and muck about for two minutes outside the pod. The second mission is supposed to be the first actual launch with trying to get to an altitude of at least 10,000 km with a very dinky rocket to test a newly developed parachute. Premise being is the items are locked until first mentioned in the campaign.
Originally had it for thirty minutes but with Ioncross Crew Support installed that drops the Kerbal's air close to 50% in the EVA Suit.
Edited:
Though that orbit and EVA at the same time is a good idea for a later mission.
Ahh! Nice, I'm doing a complete rehaul of the tech tree with a mission pack tie-in. Going to be Probe to Manned missions first. I have 2 pre-orbital EVAs, one in the desert in and one in the polar caps.
Looking forward to your mission pack!
-
At the moment I hop into the .sp save files that are in with the .mpkg mission files. Since that was the easiest bit I could find fast and I knew I would likely be able to change without screwing myself up too badly. Just requires me to completely shut down KSP between changes.
As for the .mkpg file I'm building it's here: https://github.com/Zerris/KerbalCorp/blob/master/kerbalcorpcareer.mpkg
It is currently synced to the current version where I pulled out the buggy second mission for now, though you could probably see the code for the previous version via the file history as I only did one commit on it after the first time I posted the link to it on this thread on page 57. Basically when I added in second mission the MC does not load up the file at all.
Do you want people to make a Launch Pad EVA? Because without a Goal leading up to orbit (for example) people could just load up a Pod, and go out EVA for 5s on the launch pad to win the mission.
Maybe do something like this:
# GOAL 1 (Launch/Orbit)
OrbitGoal
description = Get a rocket in Orbit!?
{
body = Kerbin
minPeA = 70000
}
# GOAL 2 (EVA)
EVAGoal
description = Now that the craft is in orbit. Go out there and party?
{
minSeconds = TIME(5s)
}
-
I don't use MCE but I'm starting to think I should - looks like it would add a lot of functionality and a structured space program career to the game. Looking forward to what you come up with.
Regarding this mod, I just spent a half hour going through all of the configs for these parts and added them to their respective tech tree nodes (as how I planned them out last page, p143). But they aren't showing up on the research window
All I did was add the "TechRequired = ##node##" lines in each config file right above the cost, though. Then I loaded my current career savegame and went into the tree and didn't see them.I'm wondering if I need a new game or if there is just more to updating the configs than just adding one line to each file.
Need to add the research cost too.
TechRequired = start
entryCost = 0
Or whatever cost you desire. (it's not being tracked now anyway)
-
I'm not sure what I've done wrong, and for now I'm assuming I've done something wrong. I started the first Sputnik I mission and completed the first goal, clicked HIDE COMPLETED GOAL, landed. Then I clicked craft recovery, the game told me I got 5k in insurance and ... nothing. The game insists I did not complete the mission, though both goals were clearly met. Am I supposed to click something before recovering the craft?
Did you use revert with that same craft? Using revert can leave previous mission goals completed by other crafts. Or is that fixed now, not sure. I'll let the pros provide more feedback.
-
Actually, I think no parts should go into a specific node like that.
Reasoning is like this: The bizarre technology progression of the stock research tree exists "to introduce new players to the game". People who install mods are not "new players", they know what they're installing, or at least, why. Therefore, it makes no sense to place mod parts of a gameplay-changing mod like that far at the end, it's not a far future barely feasible technology like Kethane or Extraplanetary Launchpads -- in the historical space exploration, things moving on servo motors have been used since the very beginning and there's no reason to think they should only be available as some kind of late tree advance. It makes much more sense for smaller parts to correspond to probe cores (which permit automation and would presumably involve the use of actuators) and bigger parts to correspond to heavier construction advances (which would permit to improve on smaller actuators and make them bigger).
There isn't enough branching in the stock tech tree. Things sort of cross over, and nodes are sometimes filled with arbitrary items. I'm working on a new tech tree, which will be from probes to manned, as opposed to the stock tree. And I'll also try to keep separate branches for 'type' of part. I've spent the last 20 some hours just cataloging parts and their relative cost with Mission Controller Extended. Then i'll break it up into tech levels based on performance/usefulness then make a tech tree from scractch.
Since they added science payouts for missions with MCE, I'm thinking of doing "mission research nodes" which would have a crazy cost like 101,000 RP, but would be associated to as specific mission to perform in order to 'unlock' that next tier, or wtvr.
Anyway, it's taking way longer than I ever thought. I'll get there.
-
I'm curious is anyone established what is the 'max' potential of science in the whole system as a whole?
From what I read in this thread, the app only tracks performed experiments? I'm working on a tech tree so i'm curious as to what's the natural max amount of science available out there.
-
Can I get a version of this that only requires energy for kerbal survival? Or some settings for it. Id love to setup "lifesupport" But i dont want the hassle of shipping oxygen and such around.
If you go in the TacLifeSupport/PluginData/TacLifeSupport folder, you'll see LifeSupport.cfg file. Open it up, then you'll see all the data you need to modify what Kebals need to survive. If you put the consumption to zero, perhaps it'll fix your problem. The plugin might still add those resources to your pods automatically though!
It's a step.
-
New Update Out .33
You can download the update from the front page either from DropBox (.rar) or SpacePort (.zip)
Changes in .33
1. Fixed the annoying Right Click on a MCE GUI Window that would cause the window while in Space Center View to Disappear (actually goes off screen and saves that way!)
2. Research window will now only show in Campaign Mode. In sandbox mode there is no research window (you automatically get Recycling)
3. When In campaign mode and without having Recycling you would not get the Crew Insurance Report window when you recovered your vessel.. That has been fixed.
4. In finance Tab you can no longer change the kerbal insurance rate from this window. It has been moved to the MCConfig.cfg file were it can be edited.. its now defaulted at 5000.
5. Fixed the Dam DOCKING problem where if you had more then 1 docking port on a vessel docking would not be recognized.. And finish the mission. (dam you DOCKING ID'S)
6. Finally added a bunch of new missions to Random Mission Package.. 2 Early missions included are Mun landing and Minmus landing. Also added 4 new Late Era Missions that bring you outside of Kerbins SOI to land in other places. Also added a landing goal to all the missions that should have them.. Back to kerbin.
Thanks everyone have fun.
Very nice!
Currently working on a tech tree to go along with my missions. Finally an unmanned to manned space program!
Awesome that the docking issue is fixed, you rock!
-
Very nice! This most likely will have to go in my mission pack.
-
Is there way to make the crewcount "max" 0? unlike the parts where -1 is ignored, 0 is ignored. I guess you could make manned pod parts to required 0, but i'm wondering if there is another way to force 0 kerbals.
-
How does this work if a player has mods?
I as curious about the same thing. Anyone?
-
I've got this installed via KSP Interstellar, and I'm unable to add parts from anything else. I'm trying to get MechJeb installed, but it fails to appear as a part. I've tried different settings for "TechRequired" - both Advanced Unmanned (advUnmanned - stock) and Automation (automation - KSPI tree), and I've got nothing. I've also tried adding the parts to the appropriate nodes in the tree.cfg attached to my save file, and still no-go. I'm seeing the same issue with other mods that add parts to the tree, such as B9.
Help?
From what I understand, some of the tech trees seem to nuke the tech tree prior to adding it's own elements, as well as rearranging the nodes. So even if you add lines in .cfg files. Once you do load tree, it might be overiding some of thos changes once the TreeLoader implements the tech tree.
I'm having a similar issue where I was tryng to use the Interstellar tech tree while modding the game to move the manned missions to later tech nodes. But for some reason if I'm using the tech tree, it keeps being 'forced back' into the start node.
Maybe mechjeb is already part of Interstellar tech tree but at a later node?
Also, which version are you using?
-
the post was in answer the this
Oh I see! With Engineer I simply switch the celestial bodie's gravity to use. And there we go. Although I'm working on a mission pack and perhaps using hyperedit to tag locations might be helpful... I'll give it a spin.
-
you know you can just test your landers with hyperedit right?(and how do you think NASA got started?)
How is using HyperEdit easier than Engineer or MechJeb in the vab? Also, i'd say that it detracts further from "enjoying the game from a stock perspective". But that's just me.
I don't have problems with other people using mods, but I'm trying to enjoy the game unmodded. Guesswork is part of the fun for me. The statement "it's problem that I have to guess the TWR" is about the same as "it's problem that I have to guess where others are" in FPS and using it as argument for using wallhack cheat.Now, I'm not saying people using mods are cheating. The game's not finished and it's not clear what will make it to the final release and what will not. But people playing with mods calculating TWR and dv for them are definitely playing a different game.
I'm not sure the parallel you are trying to make between cheating in an FPS, and having flight/construction data available to you? Maybe you are referring to mods that having engines hat consume no fuel, or perhaps over powered parts. But mods that give you access to data is not cheating.
To compare wanting that data with using wallhacks in an FPS is a bit of a stretch.
Also, as you said. It depends what you want out of KSP. I tend to be a bit on the nerdy/semi realistic side of things. So blindly launching stuff in my mind is insane. lol. It's a bit like when the maneuver nodes were added, some purists were saying that it was cheating to use it. To each his own.
)
[DISCUSSION] RemoteTech 2 Lite development
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
Sounds good! I can't wait to integrate all this into the realistic overhaul tech tree!
I think this mod will right in with it.
http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55253-WIP-Full-Realistic-Tech-Tree-Overhaul
Just waiting on R4m0n to see if the can do a tweak or two to the TreeEdit, if it's too complicated, then we'll do as best we can to keep the usability up.
Thanks for keeping this alive Cilph!