[1.2.2] Historical Progression Tech Tree v2.0 - Updated 02-22-2017

[MysterySloth]

Can you add DSEV Support? I don't exactly think FUSION REACTORS should be under "Modern Electronics".

[pap1723]

On 3/9/2017 at 1:13 PM, nobodyhasthis2 said:

How about doing SXT bearing in mind it could perhaps be similar to BDB with early american rockets?

Another question is does procedural wings fit it here? It works but it feels odd as they replace every stock wing. So it kind of replaces a whole arm of the tech tree. Still sitting on the fence trying to make my mind up if I staying with stock to allow progression. Or switching to a single set of procedural wing parts.

EDIT: well decided to go with procedural wings from the start. Since we start off with really early jet aircraft. Plenty of military designs left over from war period of the Kerbin Kerfuffle. A possibly suggestion for you @pap1723 

@PART[B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeA|B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeB|B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeC]:NEEDS[B9_Aerospace_ProceduralWings]:AFTER[B9_Aerospace_ProceduralWings]:FOR[zzzzHPTechTree]
	{
		@TechRequired = start
	}

One of the side benefits. Is the actual wings node does not need to be unlocked now. Which reduces VAB clutter caused by having too many wing parts. Still looking at SXT but it is longer job that will take time. I suspect that a lot of the parts can be moved together. They don't all historically cover that many years I think but I am not the expert here.  Any thoughts or advice on a tech tree conversion please @linuxgurugamer ?

I have started working through the SXT mod to add it to the Tech Tree, but I can tell you, this is going to take a while! Right now, BDB has the most parts with 311 and FASA is second with 200 followed by RealScaleBoosters at 172 and SSTU at 169. SXT is going to be right up in that category.

The biggest difference with SXT and the rest of the ones I mentioned is that they are not necessarily based on Real Life rockets. I have to try and extrapolate out where they should be on the tech tree based on use. It will take some time.

57 minutes ago, MysterySloth said:

Can you add DSEV Support? I don't exactly think FUSION REACTORS should be under "Modern Electronics".

Yes, I will work on DSEV support. I love @Angel-125 mods and agree it should be added.

[SpaceBadger007]

Hey I just started a new modded career with this tech tree and am so hyped! But just a couple things id thought id bring up. When you first get parachutes, you also get the usi lifesupport greenhouses and recyclers in the same node, should that not be much later? Also with modded installs with airplanes, I love it that you can unlock wings right away makes a lot of sence to me, but u get the juno first, thought you could make that a little later and fill up the earlyer ones with props?

[MysterySloth]

7 hours ago, pap1723 said:

Yes, I will work on DSEV support. I love @Angel-125 mods and agree it should be added.

Yes the amazing @Angel-125 is one of the best, up there with roverdude! 

[pap1723]

2 hours ago, SpaceBadger007 said:

Hey I just started a new modded career with this tech tree and am so hyped! But just a couple things id thought id bring up. When you first get parachutes, you also get the usi lifesupport greenhouses and recyclers in the same node, should that not be much later? Also with modded installs with airplanes, I love it that you can unlock wings right away makes a lot of sence to me, but u get the juno first, thought you could make that a little later and fill up the earlyer ones with props?

Hi @SpaceBadger007, I hope you enjoy the tree.

I wanted to have the Juno available from the start for players that do not use mods. At least they would have an engine option. There is support for some mods with prop engines, so those should be in there. What mod in particular did you have in mind?

I thought I had fixed thed pesky Greenhouse bug. I will look into it again. Thanks!

[SpaceBadger007]

6 hours ago, pap1723 said:

Hi @SpaceBadger007, I hope you enjoy the tree.

I wanted to have the Juno available from the start for players that do not use mods. At least they would have an engine option. There is support for some mods with prop engines, so those should be in there. What mod in particular did you have in mind?

I thought I had fixed thed pesky Greenhouse bug. I will look into it again. Thanks!

Oh yes for stock fair enough, and with the props it is filled up early on (using airplane plus) but i forgot about the whole stock thing. Yea i thought it was a bit odd of the greenhouses!

[Suko]

Wow, looks like I found my Tech Tree for my new game. Nice job.

[SpaceBadger007]

@pap1723 Have been playing around with this tree some more and its awesome, but just one thing, i have a bdb contract pack, and it requires me to go out and destroy stuff, but the bdb weapon manager is so far up the tree and with the starting stuff i have bombs etc and i have to right click everything to drop them, could the weapon manager be put lower, and how could i do that? (eg type something somewhere then pow its there kinda thing)  

[pap1723]

8 hours ago, SpaceBadger007 said:

@pap1723 Have been playing around with this tree some more and its awesome, but just one thing, i have a bdb contract pack, and it requires me to go out and destroy stuff, but the bdb weapon manager is so far up the tree and with the starting stuff i have bombs etc and i have to right click everything to drop them, could the weapon manager be put lower, and how could i do that? (eg type something somewhere then pow its there kinda thing)  

Here you go, In the mod folder /ModSupport/ replace the BDArmory.cfg with this one.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/plnv0dzm7jgew88/BDArmory.cfg?dl=0

[Galahir950]

I'm playing through a campaign where I installed the Historical Tech Tree, glanced at the overall tree in R&D without clicking on any nodes to ensure it was installed correctly, then hid unresearchable nodes so I had no idea what was coming and it was like playing Kerbal for the first time. I am researched up to ~T5/90sci. Nodes, but I noticed I don't have fuel ducts. Are they later in the tree or is there a bug. When you answer, if it is later in the Tree, please only say "Later" so not to spoil the "adventure" for me. Thanks for your help.

- Galahir950

[pap1723]

4 minutes ago, Galahir950 said:

I'm playing through a campaign where I installed the Historical Tech Tree, glanced at the overall tree in R&D without clicking on any nodes to ensure it was installed correctly, then hid unresearchable nodes so I had no idea what was coming and it was like playing Kerbal for the first time. I am researched up to ~T5/90sci. Nodes, but I noticed I don't have fuel ducts. Are they later in the tree or is there a bug. When you answer, if it is later in the Tree, please only say "Later" so not to spoil the "adventure" for me. Thanks for your help.

- Galahir950

Later... 

[Galahir950]

Thanks for the quick response! 

[Reizo]

This is really great mod, and i plan to use it. I'm currently im building mod list for my career run and i found few mods that could use some work to fit them better in the tree layout

AoA Technologies

HX part pack

Asteroid Day

They work but HX kinda mess up the tree layout also its just a small part of B9 Aerospace that on the whole also could use some help being acomodated. I mean, i don't mind handrails in science department but its kinda strange. AoA  on the other hand just drop everything in to single node. Asteroid Day, which is made by Squad themself is in kinda a okeyish spot but you might have different opinion.

I will propably post some other mod packs that i find and plan to use and which are not fit well by default in the tree.

 

Edited March 21, 2017 by Reizo

[nobodyhasthis2]

For my next play through. I am starting off with Taerobee - Stockalike X-1 planes and V2 rockets. Without using USI sounding rockets to help. Which means my very early space exploration will be using historic old stuff. All parts placed in the start node (bumber project started 1948).

Restricting my progression to follow Historic Progression Contracts. Eventually they can only be started after GAP (it might be updated in May). Right now in game manned flight is going down the KSP version of the X-1 to X15 route. To get the science for first Kerbal in Space. Right now I am stuck with bumper rockets leading the way to early probes.

 

Edited April 2, 2017 by nobodyhasthis2

[pap1723]

19 hours ago, nobodyhasthis2 said:

For my next play through. I am starting off with Taerobee - Stockalike X-1 planes and V2 rockets. Without using USI sounding rockets to help. Which means my very early space exploration will be using historic old stuff. All parts placed in the start node (bumber project started 1948).

Restricting my progression to follow Historic Progression Contracts. Eventually they can only be started after GAP (it might be updated in May). Right now in game manned flight is going down the KSP version of the X-1 to X15 route. To get the science for first Kerbal in Space. Right now I am stuck with bumper rockets leading the way to early probes.

 

@nobodyhasthis2 Are you asking for some Mod support to be added to the tree?

[nobodyhasthis2]

13 hours ago, pap1723 said:

@nobodyhasthis2 Are you asking for some Mod support to be added to the tree?

@pap1723 Sorry for any confusion caused.

I am suggesting that Taerobee is worth just looking at for possible future support. To hear what others think about the concept. I like to put a mod into an install with other supported mods to see how if "feels" during play. Here I am asking if anyone else has looked at starting out with this mod. Feedback here is very useful and saves development time.

So far with Taerobee. I am finding things are good by having proper flat probe core in the starting tech node. Looks a lot more aesthetically pleasing that starting off with the stock ones. However I am still sitting on the fence over the eary rocket engines. Not sure if they change progression much. Worth asking everyone else here.

A long time ago I found that the concept of "play balance" or "career progression" to be a very subjective thing. KSP allows muliple installs where diffrent varations of parts can be mixed to create diffrent playing experinces. It is really nice to hear what others think about adding in support for a mod on any tech tree. It helps me decided what type of KSP game I am playing next.

Which brings me to my current diffculity....

I have got a nuclear engine in the start node. I think it came from ven stock revamp. NT-5R Shiba. Not sure I made a mistake some place or it is supposed to be there. Trying decide if I should move it or pull it from the game?

Edited April 4, 2017 by nobodyhasthis2

[pap1723]

10 hours ago, nobodyhasthis2 said:

@pap1723 Sorry for any confusion caused.

I am suggesting that Taerobee is worth just looking at for possible future support. To hear what others think about the concept. I like to put a mod into an install with other supported mods to see how if "feels" during play. Here I am asking if anyone else has looked at starting out with this mod. Feedback here is very useful and saves development time.

So far with Taerobee. I am finding things are good by having proper flat probe core in the starting tech node. Looks a lot more aesthetically pleasing that starting off with the stock ones. However I am still sitting on the fence over the eary rocket engines. Not sure if they change progression much. Worth asking everyone else here.

A long time ago I found that the concept of "play balance" or "career progression" to be a very subjective thing. KSP allows muliple installs where diffrent varations of parts can be mixed to create diffrent playing experinces. It is really nice to hear what others think about adding in support for a mod on any tech tree. It helps me decided what type of KSP game I am playing next.

Which brings me to my current diffculity....

I have got a nuclear engine in the start node. I think it came from ven stock revamp. NT-5R Shiba. Not sure I made a mistake some place or it is supposed to be there. Trying decide if I should move it or pull it from the game?

I understand now. Taerobee is nice as all the parts are unlocked in the start node that lets you launch sounding rockets and even the X1.

The Nuclear Engine in the start node is an error. I am looking at my file now. I must have been confused by the name as Ven decided to name the part PoodleM. I will provide a fix for that shortly.

Edited April 4, 2017 by pap1723
Words

[NISSKEPCSIM]

I found a module manager error and I don't know whether I should post it here, on the Tantares thread, or on the modulemanager thread, but the error is this: Gamedata/HPTechTree/ModSupport/Tantares_OLD.cfg

[notJebKerman]

Do the parts, that aren't compatible with the tech tree just don't show up or are they there from the beginning?

[fallout2077]

On 4/14/2017 at 5:30 AM, NISSKEPCSIM said:

I found a module manager error and I don't know whether I should post it here, on the Tantares thread, or on the modulemanager thread, but the error is this: Gamedata/HPTechTree/ModSupport/Tantares_OLD.cfg

I also have the same error as KISSKEPCSIM. To clear the error, I deleted both Tantares_OLD and TantaresLV_OLD, since I figured that these configs are only for the legacy versions of the Tantares mod... correct me if I'm wrong, pap.

[NISSKEPCSIM]

@fallout2077 I did the same, as I don't use the old versions of Tantares or Tantares LV.

[pap1723]

On 4/14/2017 at 4:30 AM, NISSKEPCSIM said:

I found a module manager error and I don't know whether I should post it here, on the Tantares thread, or on the modulemanager thread, but the error is this: Gamedata/HPTechTree/ModSupport/Tantares_OLD.cfg

I am assuming this might happen when only the new Tantares is included? @NISSKEPCSIM can you post the error?

17 hours ago, notJebKerman said:

Do the parts, that aren't compatible with the tech tree just don't show up or are they there from the beginning?

@notJebKerman they will show up in relatively normal areas. I used the old nodes from the Stock tech tree and put them in order of how they are on the stock tree, but they will not necessarily be exactly where they would be placed otherwise.

 

14 hours ago, fallout2077 said:

I also have the same error as KISSKEPCSIM. To clear the error, I deleted both Tantares_OLD and TantaresLV_OLD, since I figured that these configs are only for the legacy versions of the Tantares mod... correct me if I'm wrong, pap.

Yep, that won't break anything. That is part of the reason I decided to break out the individual config files for the different mods.

[notJebKerman]

37 minutes ago, pap1723 said:

@notJebKerman they will show up in relatively normal areas. I used the old nodes from the Stock tech tree and put them in order of how they are on the stock tree, but they will not necessarily be exactly where they would be placed otherwise.

Thank you! I know the answer is kinda obvious, but just to be sure...

[NISSKEPCSIM]

Umm... still kind of a newbie when it comes to ksp - where would module manager errors be stored? And yeah, it happens when tantares is installed - but I haven't checked without it. Checking...

[fallout2077]

1 hour ago, pap1723 said:

Yep, that won't break anything. That is part of the reason I decided to break out the individual config files for the different mods.

Hah, sounds like that was a darn good idea!