[1.12.x] Near Future Technologies (September 6)

[Nertea]

8 minutes ago, eddiew said:

All I can say is that's not what I've been seeing with my game :S  For me they were snapping about 3 degrees off 30. Maybe some funky mod collisions?

 

Were you using the Pressurized one by any chance? it looks like the angular fix for that may not be working.

[eddiew]

1 hour ago, Nertea said:

Were you using the Pressurized one by any chance? it looks like the angular fix for that may not be working.

I tried it with both and got the same effect. I did notice that the pressurised one has a different node config than the scaffolding flavour...

[Nertea]

NF Electrical 0.8.7

• New 3.75m MX-5 'Hermes' nuclear reactor, generates 5000 kW of electricity
• New model for 3.75m FLAT nuclear reactor
• Radial capacitors are now physicsless
• Capacitors now have a cfg-configurable DischargeRateMinimumScalar field that can be used to edit the minimum discharge rate of a capacitor (previously locked at 50%)
• Reactors now have a new AutoWarpShutdown toggle which allows the user to set a reactor so that it gets shut down at warp factors greater or equal to the specified number
• Capacitor UI rewrite:
  • Significant visual improvements
  • Fixed a bug that caused capacitor rate setting in the UI to be erronous.
• Reactor UI rewrite:
  • Significant visual improvements
  • Reactors can now be given a persistent custom icon and name
  • Better data display and controls
  • Advanced control mode allowing the setting of the AutoShutdown temperature and a new AutoShutdown warp factor
•  Added more RTGs to DecayingRTGs patch courtesy of OrenWatson
•  Added new USI 1.25m reactor to USI patch, courtesy of Wyzard256

[HoveringKiller]

5 minutes ago, Nertea said:

NF Electrical 0.8.7

• New 3.75m MX-5 'Hermes' nuclear reactor, generates 5000 kW of electricity

If only I didn't just finish building my interplanetary ship about a week ago to I could now add even moar engines! Oh well, next iteration, It'll be incorporated :P. I finally was able to get around to using your large circular girders for this design as well haha.

[Supercheese]

2 hours ago, HoveringKiller said:

If only I didn't just finish building my interplanetary ship about a week ago to I could now add even moar engines! Oh well, next iteration, It'll be incorporated :P. I finally was able to get around to using your large circular girders for this design as well haha.

Huh, you and me both -- I'm in exactly the same situation!

[Nertea]

Technology marches on!

So I've just added this blurb into the OP. The balance pass I've mentioned before will happen with the first update to 1.3 of all of my packs. 

Near Future Technologies will be undergoing a major balancing and refinement pass with the KSP 1.3 update. I would appreciate any feedback about the balance of the current packs - leave a note here and we will look into it.
If you have suggestions for any of my other mods, please post in their threads.

Because I obviously can't test everything and it's easy to miss things, I'm hoping all of you users will be able to voice opinions that can point the elite balancing team (of two people) to balance issues and problems. Here's a not-exhaustive list of things we're looking at:

• Electric engine stats in a wide and far-reaching way
• Reactor cost, mass and heat outputs
• Solar panel cost, mass and energy outputs
• Structural part masses

There is a 100% chance that this will affect your ships in some way, so this is another warning. After this I will move the mods to 1.0 +, with minimal chance of any major ship-affecting changes.

Edited March 22, 2017 by Nertea

[HoveringKiller]

3 hours ago, Supercheese said:

Huh, you and me both -- I'm in exactly the same situation!

That may be my ship to go beyond Dres haha. The new 5000 EC reactor, and the flat one for 7000 EC to power two lithium engines, as well as some refining equipment and such, may be overkill, but it's whatevs haha.

2 hours ago, Nertea said:

Technology marches on!

So I've just added this blurb into the OP. The balance pass I've mentioned before will happen with the first update to 1.3 of all of my packs. 

Near Future Technologies will be undergoing a major balancing and refinement pass with the KSP 1.3 update. I would appreciate any feedback about the balance of the current packs - leave a note here and we will look into it.
If you have suggestions for any of my other mods, please post in their threads.

Because I obviously can't test everything and it's easy to miss things, I'm hoping all of you users will be able to voice opinions that can point the elite balancing team (of two people) to balance issues and problems. Here's a not-exhaustive list of things we're looking at:

• Electric engine stats in a wide and far-reaching way
• Reactor cost, mass and heat outputs
• Solar panel cost, mass and energy outputs
• Structural part masses

There is a 100% chance that this will affect your ships in some way, so this is another warning. After this I will move the mods to 1.0 +, with minimal chance of any major ship-affecting changes.

Awesome news! I'll be sure to make sure to retire my ships before this update drops then. Perhaps land them on Minmus as relics of a past time.

[Rodger]

The main thing that comes to mind re balance, is solar panels, especially the high tech ones, could do with a buff imo. ether mass or power, but they don't seem much better then earlier tier solar. Mind you I haven't exactly checked all the mass/power ratios, it's just a general feeling.

Also, it could be the ones I do end up using more from @akron's Probes Plus are just overpowered lol

[eddiew]

Just proving I'm not crazy with the 30 degree snap thing...

Spoiler

But don't worry about it, I found a fix for myself, and if nobody else has a problem then it's presumably some sort of weird mod interaction, maybe Editor Extensions or Hanger Extender. Or not ^^;

[ThreePounds]

2 hours ago, eddiew said:

Just proving I'm not crazy with the 30 degree snap thing...

  Reveal hidden contents

But don't worry about it, I found a fix for myself, and if nobody else has a problem then it's presumably some sort of weird mod interaction, maybe Editor Extensions or Hanger Extender. Or not ^^;

I have the exact same issue. Maybe it's really a glitch with Editor Extensions?

EDIT: Yes, removing Editor Extensions Redux fixes it. It's definitely a compatibility issue.

EDIT2: I couldn't reproduce the issue with just the two mods installed so this is getting weirder and weirder.

EDIT3: Back in my main install the issue is gone. I updated EEX to the newest version. Maybe you're running an outdated version of it as well, @eddiew?

Edited March 23, 2017 by Three_Pounds

[DStaal]

1 hour ago, Three_Pounds said:

I have the exact same issue. Maybe it's really a glitch with Editor Extensions?

EDIT: Yes, removing Editor Extensions Redux fixes it. It's definitely a compatibility issue.

EDIT2: I couldn't reproduce the issue with just the two mods installed so this is getting weirder and weirder.

EDIT3: Back in my main install the issue is gone. I updated EEX to the newest version. Maybe you're running an outdated version of it as well, @eddiew?

Can you try with and without Angle Snap on in EEX?  (And try with various angles it's snapping to?)

[akron]

19 hours ago, Rodger said:

The main thing that comes to mind re balance, is solar panels, especially the high tech ones, could do with a buff imo. ether mass or power, but they don't seem much better then earlier tier solar. Mind you I haven't exactly checked all the mass/power ratios, it's just a general feeling.

Also, it could be the ones I do end up using more from @akron's Probes Plus are just overpowered lol

So, the way I did my solar panels, was to roughly estimate a power charge based on the surface area in comparison to stock panels and then rounding up or down. I'll see how it compares with NFT, maybe I overdid it.

[Streetwind]

Near Future Solar bases its numbers on specific power (Ec/s/ton) first and foremost, with stock panels acting as the reference. How much a panel gets depends on its type and technology level (basic, concentrating, blanket), and then there are minor modifiers like whether it's retractable or not. The absolute magnitude is decided by panel area, and mass and cost are assigned accordingly.

Stock panels are between 65 and 94 Ec/s/ton. Near Future panels go up to 120 Ec/s/ton. So depending on what you compare, the best NF solar panels are between 27% and 85% better. IMHO that's plenty for a "close to stock" mod, and buffing them more would definitely not be healthy.

I mean, for lightweight high power requirements, Near Future offers reactors (~200 Ec/s/ton for massive funds cost) and capacitors (>400 Ec/s/ton in trickle charged buffer setups). And also keep in mind that solar panels shine (pun not intended) at inner solar system exploration, where their performance increases quite noticably. Down at Moho they beat everything else with ease.

 

Edited March 23, 2017 by Streetwind

[Nertea]

10 hours ago, Three_Pounds said:

I have the exact same issue. Maybe it's really a glitch with Editor Extensions?

 

EDIT: Yes, removing Editor Extensions Redux fixes it. It's definitely a compatibility issue.

EDIT2: I couldn't reproduce the issue with just the two mods installed so this is getting weirder and weirder.

EDIT3: Back in my main install the issue is gone. I updated EEX to the newest version. Maybe you're running an outdated version of it as well, @eddiew?

That one (the pressurized one) does have a bug going on, but the other one doesnt. 

[Rodger]

Well like I said, I didn't actually check all the numbers lol. Though for example the YF-1 circular ones are 85 Ec/s/ton, but in the top tier tech node for solar power, somehow feels underwhelming, particularly as it mentions weight saving. Or the KRQ 1x4 is 84 Ec/s/ton, in the highest tier of solar tech too, and says it's the 'Most advanced solar panel tech available to Kerbalkind!'. Then in the previous tech tier you have T65 1x5 concentrating at 95 Ec/s/ton, KRX 1x3 concentrating at 92 Ec/s/ton, but then the KRX 1x4, at 70 Ec/s/ton

So maybe not an overall buff, but a couple of tweaks could be good?

10 hours ago, akron said:

So, the way I did my solar panels, was to roughly estimate a power charge based on the surface area in comparison to stock panels and then rounding up or down. I'll see how it compares with NFT, maybe I overdid it.

The main one which is probably too powerful is the E340 4 panel, 4ec/s for 0.032t, so 125 Ec/s/ton

[Streetwind]

4 minutes ago, Rodger said:

So maybe not an overall buff, but a couple of tweaks could be good?

Yep, internal consistency is one of the main goals of the rebalancing initiative Nertea announced. We'll definitely be looking at the panels you mentioned.

[Nertea]

10 hours ago, Rodger said:

Well like I said, I didn't actually check all the numbers lol. Though for example the YF-1 circular ones are 85 Ec/s/ton, but in the top tier tech node for solar power, somehow feels underwhelming, particularly as it mentions weight saving. Or the KRQ 1x4 is 84 Ec/s/ton, in the highest tier of solar tech too, and says it's the 'Most advanced solar panel tech available to Kerbalkind!'. Then in the previous tech tier you have T65 1x5 concentrating at 95 Ec/s/ton, KRX 1x3 concentrating at 92 Ec/s/ton, but then the KRX 1x4, at 70 Ec/s/ton

So maybe not an overall buff, but a couple of tweaks could be good?

The main one which is probably too powerful is the E340 4 panel, 4ec/s for 0.032t, so 125 Ec/s/ton

The issue you are describing is a direct result of there being a lot of variables.

• Panel Actuation
  • Fixed (lowest mass)
  • Deployable Only
  • Deployable/retractable (Highest mass)
• Cell Type
  • Regular
  • Concentrating 
  • Blanket

Each of those inconsistencies you mention is fully accountable to those things. For example, I know the KRX is 92 and the KRQ is 70, because one of them is retractable and one is not. What you probably have issue with is the descriptions more than anything else. 

[Rodger]

On 25/03/2017 at 6:14 AM, Nertea said:

What you probably have issue with is the descriptions more than anything else. 

Haha yeah maybe that's all it is after all lol

Some things which might need a look in NF spacecraft: RCS blocks, esp the 4 and 5 way ones seem to have some slight thrust misalignments, making it quite hard to balance them without just using the bi or mono RCS thrusters.

One example: the 5-way thrusters, snapped to 0°, induce a rotation during fore/aft translation http://i.imgur.com/bT48Rgi.png

And the mk4-1 command pod keeps blowing due to overheating past the core temp limit of 1000k, even when just returning from LKO. I haven't had a problem with the mk3-9, which is also 1000k core temp limit, but maybe that's because it's bottom node is the full width of the pod so it gets fully occluded, while the 4-1 expands out to 3.75 from a 2.5m bottom node? And maybe the 4-1 could get unmanned control like the 3-9 does too?

[DStaal]

43 minutes ago, Rodger said:

Haha yeah maybe that's all it is after all lol

Some things which might need a look in NF spacecraft: RCS blocks, esp the 4 and 5 way ones seem to have some slight thrust misalignments, making it quite hard to balance them without just using the bi or mono RCS thrusters.

One example: the 5-way thrusters, snapped to 0°, induce a rotation during fore/aft translation http://i.imgur.com/bT48Rgi.png

And the mk4-1 command pod keeps blowing due to overheating past the core temp limit of 1000k, even when just returning from LKO. I haven't had a problem with the mk3-9, which is also 1000k core temp limit, but maybe that's because it's bottom node is the full width of the pod so it gets fully occluded, while the 4-1 expands out to 3.75 from a 2.5m bottom node? And maybe the 4-1 could get unmanned control like the 3-9 does too?

The 4-1 isn't really designed to re-enter in the first place...  It's designed as a station or interplanetary transport command center.

[Rodger]

OK, well maybe a description update is needed for it too then I was just hoping to use it to shuttle tourists to and from a station.

Edited March 29, 2017 by Rodger

[Nertea]

4 hours ago, Rodger said:

Some things which might need a look in NF spacecraft: RCS blocks, esp the 4 and 5 way ones seem to have some slight thrust misalignments, making it quite hard to balance them without just using the bi or mono RCS thrusters.

I found a tiny, tiny asymmetry. I guess 

4 hours ago, Rodger said:

And the mk4-1 command pod keeps blowing due to overheating past the core temp limit of 1000k, even when just returning from LKO. I haven't had a problem with the mk3-9, which is also 1000k core temp limit, but maybe that's because it's bottom node is the full width of the pod so it gets fully occluded, while the 4-1 expands out to 3.75 from a 2.5m bottom node? And maybe the 4-1 could get unmanned control like the 3-9 does too?

The Mk3-9's special feature is supposed to be the remote control feature, kinda looks like the Mk4-1 has enough seats to leave someone behind.

Here's what I've done with the Mk4-1. I didn't really ship it in a totally finished state, it's been intended from the start that you can use one of the these two shrouds to adapt the pod to the stack. Adding a shroud buffs the maxTemp by 300K, still not a good choice for interplanetary reentry though. 

Really happy how these turned out (that render isn't quite of the final texture). I made the cutest future-space taxi thing...

[smotheredrun]

8 hours ago, Nertea said:

I found a tiny, tiny asymmetry. I guess 

The Mk3-9's special feature is supposed to be the remote control feature, kinda looks like the Mk4-1 has enough seats to leave someone behind.

Here's what I've done with the Mk4-1. I didn't really ship it in a totally finished state, it's been intended from the start that you can use one of the these two shrouds to adapt the pod to the stack. Adding a shroud buffs the maxTemp by 300K, still not a good choice for interplanetary reentry though. 

Really happy how these turned out (that render isn't quite of the final texture). I made the cutest future-space taxi thing...

Makes sense.  Just use smaller crew transfer vehicles to get up and down.

[Benjamin Kerman]

I got to say, the new shrouds look amazing!

Kudos to you, @Nertea!

[HoveringKiller]

Look amazing! And also probably would fit better as an interplanetary control point.

[Nertea]

Decided I'd try to post a consistent devlog every week, at least, as the next update cycle is probably still a bit away. 

The primary thrust of the current work is to polish, polish and more polish. To that end I've been working my way through the various packs, identifying problems and filling in holes on the roadmaps. The last week has been split into rebalancing work on NF Electrical and Heat Control, and art work on NF Solar and NF Spacecraft. 

The rebalancing of NF Electrical is intrinsically tied to every pack, so it kinda has to be done first. @Streetwind as always has been a great help here, fixing my silly ideas and helping to rein in weird decisions I try to make. As of yesterday though, we think we have a good set of numbers that should create a more cohesive gameplay experience than the current model that is both transparent to the player and deep in terms of player decisions. Interestingly, every decision really comes down to one critical number - the power-to-mass ratio, or how much electric charge can be generated for a given mass. We think - well, I think, Streetwind can speak for himself, that this is probably the best treatment of reactors we've done yet. We've got better synergy with Heat Control, better matching to stock, and even better USI Core support! I'm pretty excited.

Art-wise the week has been very boring, but this morning, I discovered something huge. Almost all of the recent models that I've released that use normal maps have... inverted normal maps (panel lines are raised and such). I have to reexport all of these to fix this! Annoying, but that means you get a nice boost in visual quality for almost no effort! NF Spacecraft is benefitting a lot right from these new normal maps (the monoprop tanks look light years better) - I've also taken the opportunity to go give the Mk3-9 and PPD-1 an exterior facelift to match the facelift I just gave the Mk4-1. In addition, I'm looking at the balance of all of the parts, for example, Isp has gone down a bit on the orbital monoprop engines. This is a good time to note any inconsistencies you might have noticed in this pack so I can inspect them.

Solar has had a huge revamp in the visual quality department - I went through and uniformized all the panel shaders, improving look and consistency across the board. One big improvement is that I finally took the time and fixed the VAB 'up' direction of a good bunch the panels, which doesn't affect anything but is a nice QoL improvement. In addition, two "new" panels have been implemented - shrouded versions of the two smallest solar panels, with full retractive capability. I've also re-massed, re-costed and re-named almost every part in the pack. Oh, and there are 4 completely new panels planned... of which I have finished two. Screenshots later this week, perhaps.