[KSP 1.8 - 1.12+] - Probes Before Crew [PBC] Version 2.93

[4x4cheesecake]

Well, I guess I'll write my own PBS patch in the meantime. Thanks to inform us and have fun in Civ @_Zee

[mattcooperkay]

Just wanted to say thanks for this mod. It's brought me back to enjoying KSP again!

[_Zee]

On 3/2/2019 at 12:48 AM, mattcooperkay said:

Just wanted to say thanks for this mod. It's brought me back to enjoying KSP again!

Makes my day hearing that.  Thank you friend, have fun.

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by _Zee

[Shizen]

I'd like to nominate probably the most glorious and and in depth texture overhaul of KSP for the PBC treatment.

Brought to you by Nertea and team

More Specifically the 40ish parts that Restock+ adds.

[_Zee]

On 3/11/2019 at 12:29 AM, Shizen said:

I'd like to nominate probably the most glorious and and in depth texture overhaul of KSP for the PBC treatment.
/snip

Wow that mod looks and sounds great! I'll need to take a closer look at it when I get more time, thanks for suggesting it!

Edited March 18, 2019 by _Zee

[eightiesboi]

Hi, @_Zee!

First, thank you for creating this mod. I was a big fan of Historical Progression and UBM, and PBC goes a long way to filling the hole created by their absence. Truth be told, I'm still using Historical Progression along with your contracts. Surprisingly, that aging and abandoned contract pack still works well, and very much so with your PBC tree. I'm actually reaching out to the original author to ask if I can bring it up to date. One thing I've noticed in the meantime is that there are historical missions that have increasing numbers of crew on board in orbit prior to starting missions to land on the Mun. This leads me to making a request to you and a recommendation. 

The request: the crewed portion of your tech tree seems to use crew capacity as a criteria for placement. This means that it becomes difficult to recreate some historically early missions, specifically ones that had three crew in orbit. The Making History mod includes a capsule based on the Voskhod (the KV-3 "Pomegranate") that can hold 3 crew, but the placement on the PBC tech tree is two tiers above the first available pods, making it difficult to launch these early missions. Would you consider evaluating pods not only by capacity but also by function, and move some orbital pods to an earlier part of the tech tree?

The recommendation: I really like the contracts you created with this mod in mind, but I was surprised to get a contract to land kerbals on the Mun before I'd successfully landed a probe. I'd like to recommend changing the parameters so that missions to send kerbals to other celestial bodies don't fire until after the corresponding probe mission has completed or the body has already been landed on. I think it would be keeping with the theme of your mod. 

Again, thank you so much for creating this. If I do update the Historical Progression contract pack, I'd like to work with you to design it to synergize with PBC. 

[Kozzy]

Hi,

Thanks for great mod. Iv spend lot of time using it already. Completed maned mun and minmus.  I see one problem tho  and that is antennas. To be able to get to planets  with probe I need better Athena but one that has 25Gm range costs 1000 research. That means I have to get money to max research building and jump 3 tiers higher in research.  Im now only getting first 300RP tier nodes unlocked. I need 1500 RP. Probably doable with one scientist on minmus but I will have to poor all RP into anthenas. 

I would suggest shifting interplanetary capable Athenas one tier.    Also rebuilding com relays every time I unlock new Athena is bit bore. 

Edited March 23, 2019 by Kozzy

[strudo76]

Very much looking forward to playing this. Been waiting for something along these lines for a while now to get back into KSP. Even tried making my own, but got stuck trying to move the plane parts to the start and still distribute the other parts into worthy targets (you mention a similar issue near the start of this thread, yes I read every page!)

 

But like they say, when in Rome.... I'll have to go play some Civ 6 for a bit while I wait for you to head back this way! 

[_Zee]

Hello everyone! Just wanted to give a brief bit of news that an update is currently in the works. Quick rundown of what's in store:

• KSP 1.7 tag update (from what I've seen so far, PBC works perfectly with 1.7 - this update will just make AVC stop bugging you about it)
• Proper placement for new variants and parts introduced by KSP 1.7
• Further Kerbalism Compatibility in preparation of their upcoming 3.0.0 release
• Planetary Base Systems Support Patch

Apologies for the extended absence. Priorities and Life and all that. No exact timeframe but I should expect PBC 2.7 will be ready before the end of this week.

Hope you've all been having fun!

[salajander]

5 hours ago, _Zee said:

Further Kerbalism Compatibility in preparation of their upcoming 3.0.0 release

ooooooooooo, yes.

[_Zee]

Version 2.7 released
 

//// Version 2.7 Changes

*Updated for KSP 1.7.0.
*Added Planetary Base Systems mod support.
*Added additional preemptive support for Kerbalism 3.0.0.
	Choosing to enable Kerbalism's 'Feature Science' will automatically override PBC's science reward values.
	Choosing to disable Kerbalism's 'Feature Science' will automatically reinstate PBC's science reward values.
Reduced research cost of SPER 18-man inflatable hab.
Sorted new vanilla 3.7m and 5m Nosecones.

Hello again friends! I've missed this community, it's good to be back and I hope you've all been well. (seriously, the difference in respect shown to modders here vs. just about any other modding community I've been a part of is incredible. ) It took a bit longer than I would have liked, but Version 2.7 is finally here.

A big thank you to @N70 for reaching out to me ahead of his 3.0.0 release so we could hammer out a way to make using both of our mods together even more seamless for you, the users. Since Kerbalism changes the entire Science system so drastically (and for the better!), we both agree it makes the most sense to have Kerbalism's system stand as the 'default' when both our mods are installed. If however, you decide you prefer PBC's more stock-alike system all you need to do is disable the 'Feature Science' option within Kerbalism's configuration menus and ModuleManager will automatically put PBC's values back into effect. No need to muck about with any files manually.

With the completion of the PBS support patch, this of course also means...
The Third round of voting has concluded!

This was another nail biter, and the winner was actually behind for about a solid month until finally pulling forward. USI - MKS will be the next mod support patch to come. It will be removed from the voting list and development starts now. Feline Rovers had the lowest number of votes overall and has also been removed from the list to make room for the next 2 most-nominated mods. They are ReStock+ and Tundra Exploration, and have been added to the voting list.

Don't forget to update your votes and nominations for round four, which starts now. (Ignore Google's weird way of saying you've already made a selection. Just click the follow-up link and you can change your votes as often as you want.)
New current results link.

Happy exploring and I hope you all have a great weekend!

Edited April 27, 2019 by _Zee

[SilverState]

11 hours ago, _Zee said:

*Added additional preemptive support for Kerbalism 3.0.0. Choosing to enable Kerbalism's 'Feature Science' will automatically override PBC's science reward values. Choosing to disable Kerbalism's 'Feature Science' will automatically reinstate PBC's science reward values.

 

Thanks a lot for this bit. You just made my life a whole lot easier.

[venturaguy101]

I have a couple of questions regarding the placement of some of the early game parts.  I am playing with Kerbalism 3.0 alpha, RemoteTech, and most of the recommended mods plus a few more.

1)  Why do we get the TD-12 Decoupler at engineering 101 when we are running 0.625m sized rockets and that decoupler the TD-06/TR-1V is not available unto General Rocketry where you get the which has 1m engines and tanks?  Sould we be getting the 0.625m in Engineering 101 or Basic Rocketry and the 1m version in the next tier?

2) Why do we get the best 1m starting engine LV-T45 "Swivel" engine with Gimbal at Basic Rocketry before we get the weaker LV-T15 "Valiant" and the basic no gimbal LV-T30 "Reliant" in General Rocketry?  It seems like these are switched.

I like what you have done with this mod and the updated and adding support for additional mod support.

[VenDei]

1 hour ago, venturaguy101 said:

2) Why do we get the best 1m starting engine LV-T45 "Swivel" engine with Gimbal at Basic Rocketry before we get the weaker LV-T15 "Valiant" and the basic no gimbal LV-T30 "Reliant" in General Rocketry?  It seems like these are switched.

From the top of my head, isn't the LV-T15 a whole lot better as an upper stage engine? You only need that later. Whereas the LV-T30, you can couple their no gimbal power with Mk-55 "Thud" engines with gimballing for a lot more powerful rockets, so you again only need them later?

[venturaguy101]

Paring with other engines, I did not consider.  I still think the LV-T30 should be the first 1m engine, with the LV-T45 coming in the next tier.  You can go back and use the LV-T30 with MK-55 later on to reuse this engine.  I did not consider the LV-T15 as an upper stage engine, so it probably should stay in it current tier.

[_Zee]

On 4/28/2019 at 2:07 PM, venturaguy101 said:

I have a couple of questions regarding the placement of some of the early game parts.  I am playing with Kerbalism 3.0 alpha, RemoteTech, and most of the recommended mods plus a few more.

1)  Why do we get the TD-12 Decoupler at engineering 101 when we are running 0.625m sized rockets and that decoupler the TD-06/TR-1V is not available unto General Rocketry where you get the which has 1m engines and tanks?  Sould we be getting the 0.625m in Engineering 101 or Basic Rocketry and the 1m version in the next tier?

2) Why do we get the best 1m starting engine LV-T45 "Swivel" engine with Gimbal at Basic Rocketry before we get the weaker LV-T15 "Valiant" and the basic no gimbal LV-T30 "Reliant" in General Rocketry?  It seems like these are switched.

I like what you have done with this mod and the updated and adding support for additional mod support.

Hi @venturaguy101 , if no one else has said it yet, welcome to the forums.

The answer to your first question is that having access to freely stage 0.6 profiles makes achieving orbit pretty easy, so its "gated" behind having to find creative ways to use the 0.6 engine until you get access to the decoupler slightly later down the tree. To answer in a single word, "Gameplay".

The answer to your second question is the LV T45 has the worst mass to isp ratio of all the 1.2 engines, and additionally control surfaces and reaction wheels don't show up until later, so you need the gimbal (and its accompanying low isp) to have any hope of control. And as @VenDei already mentioned, the other 1.2 engines are much better suited for upper stages. Again, "Gameplay".

Hope that helps.  

[_Zee]

Can I just quietly point out that all the amazing new parts and features about to be released by the Breaking Ground update are giving me small panic attacks when thinking about updating PBC... 

[Jognt]

@_Zee A small heads-up: there're a few parts in US2 and DMagic's Orbital Science that did not have their xmit value altered in your compatibility patches. (though the DM parts are hidden by default, so it's just the US2 science wedges that needed changing)

I've written a small cfg that allowed me to just blanket find any part with a xmit value <1 and a thermometer/barometer/seismic/etc experimentID and to fix the problem on my end. I'm not sure if you had a specific reason for targeting specific parts in each patch versus finding each part that had a value you wanted changed, but if it's any help, here's the cfg with the bit that allowed me to track down the parts in modulemanager.configcache commented out.

 

// Small config to set the xmitDataScalar value for parts missed by Zee for his PBC pack
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[*]&#xmitDataScalar[<1]]]:LAST[ProbesBeforeCrew]
{
    @MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[temperatureScan]]
    {
        //%xmitCheck = #$xmitDataScalar$ | $experimentID$ | $../name$
        @xmitDataScalar = 1.0
    }
    @MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[barometerScan]]
    {
        //%xmitCheck = #$xmitDataScalar$ | $experimentID$ | $../name$
        @xmitDataScalar = 1.0
    }
    @MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[seismicScan]]
    {
        //%xmitCheck = #$xmitDataScalar$ | $experimentID$ | $../name$
        @xmitDataScalar = 1.0
    }
    @MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[gravityScan]]
    {
        //%xmitCheck = #$xmitDataScalar$ | $experimentID$ | $../name$
        @xmitDataScalar = 1.0
    }
    @MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[atmosphereAnalysis]]
    {
        //%xmitCheck = #$xmitDataScalar$ | $experimentID$ | $../name$
        @xmitDataScalar = 1.0
    }
    @MODULE:HAS[#experimentID[infraredTelescope]]
    {
        //%xmitCheck = #$xmitDataScalar$ | $experimentID$ | $../name$
        @xmitDataScalar = 1.0
    }
}

 

I realize you'd have a much easier time if I listed the actual parts too, but at the moment I'm exhausted from trying to get MM to do OR conditionals in HAS blocks .

Sorry about that. Though the above cfg should make it easier to find them (and possibly other parts on your end) if you've had enough of that other game you mentioned you were playing .

Edited May 28, 2019 by Jognt
Can't.... move..... text.... out... of... SPOILER.... -_-

[MiscelanousItem]

[EDIT] Sorry, didn't read the post above the previous one

Edited June 3, 2019 by MiscelanousItem

[Jognt]

Heya @_Zee

How are the panic attacks treating you?

Once they've lessened and you feel like you can handle diving in, here's some more stuff you can check out (found some problems with your mod compatibility patches):

1. Missing History - It appears that your CFG changes the 2.5m engine plate cost before Missing History copies the part for its 1.25m engine plate and since stock engine plates all cost the same, @Snark didn't set a cost for it meaning it's kinda expensive in PBC.
2. Universal Storage II - The xmitDataScalar key for USAccelGravWedge (Gravity&Seismic scan), USFluidSpectroWedge (atmosphereAnalysis), and USThermoBaroWedge (thermometer & barometer) aren't adjusted to 1 like all the other experiments you did. Feel free to use the MM patch two posts up unless I missed a valid reason not to do something like that.

Then there's one suggestion (in bold, at the end):
The Stock contract weighting system is built in such a way that declining a contract type only a few times and accepting another type only a few times will quickly result in getting that second type almost all the time. (I guess that's Squads advertisement roots showing)
What this means is that it's very easy to turn the contract system into a monotonous heap of same-y-ness.

I'm currently (or rather, was going to, before I found lots of bugs to report) testing what it's like to invert the weighting impact of contracts. So accepting a contract will make it ever so slightly less likely to get another one like that, and declining one will ever so slightly increase the chances of getting that type. I'm hoping that this will keep the contracts lively and varied by giving you what you love, but not so much that you couldn't get 'something different' even if you wanted to.
To prevent the fun stuff from being swamped by meh stuff, I changed the minimum weight to 35, the default to 50, and the max to 65. I'm not entirely sure how the weighting works (though I'm assuming the min and max have to add up to 100 and that they're thus percentage chance based) but I'm hoping that this'll make it so stuff I haven't done in a while at the most has a almost double chance of appearing vs stuff I've done a lot.

I haven't been able to play with it much due to the pile of bugs that is 1.7.1 but this has always been something that really bugged me about the stock contract system. If my train of thought is sound, would you consider applying it to PBC?

Cheers, Jognt

Edited June 4, 2019 by Jognt

[curiousepic]

Been enjoying this as part of a 1.7 career campaign in JNSQ (my first after being away from the game for a few years). However, the Moons of Kerbin contracts are showing some odd behavior. After completing the Kerbin Orbit contract, it unlocked contracts for the Mun and Minmus, but they were the full "land and return" contracts rather than flybys. Any idea what might be happening here?

EDIT: What's happening here is that I need to read the fine print - there's only one contract for each body and each has sub-objectives of the flyby, land, and land and return! I assumed one contract needed to have a single vessel perform all sub-objectives but I guess not?  I assume they are all packed into one contract for the challenge of completing each component within the expiration timeframe (Edit: Oh, there is no expiration. Well that would be kinda cool). That said, the blurb is a little misleading: "Reach Minmus, land on it, and return the Probe home safely."

Edited June 7, 2019 by curiousepic

[_Zee]

Hey everyone, I haven't had any time to work on updating the mod recently (or any of my mods for that matter), I recently found work and it's taking up almost all of my time. In fact I haven't even had a chance to load up the game since the update was released. Any info on how the mod is running with the new update would be appreciated, just so I can prioritize things that are the most broken with the limited amount of time I have. Hopefully it's not a total dumpster fire at the moment?

Now for replies:

@Jognt

• I'm not sure which parts you're referring to? I looked in both US2 and Dmagic's mods and don't see any wedges that carry the basic experiments on them(therm, baro, etc). If I remember correctly those parts were deprecated awhile back? If it's still an issue get back to me with the part/cfg directory path's if you can. 
• The EnginePlate1 cost will be corrected in the next release, thanks for pointing it out.
• Adjusting Contract Weights to do what you're talking about would certainly be neat, but it's beyond the scope of this mods purpose. The intended limiting-factor in acquiring the PBC contracts is purely the completion of previous PBC contracts, I can't think of any real reason to decline them. You are meant to always have access to them as soon as the rules allow. At any rate, I have no idea how any of that works and sadly don't have the time to investigate it. If you decide to play around with it though feel free to come back with whatever you find. 

@curiousepic
Ah yes, you have discovered the mechanism by which all PBC contracts are implemented.

I placed the entirety of a planet's "achievements" into a single contract, in an effort to do 3 things,
1) Semi-automate the unlocking and completion of contracts to reduce tedium and scene loading (it used to be fully automated but KSP didn't like that and I had to remove the feature)
2) Save players screen space on their contract screens
and 3) to save myself extra work

This should all be working as intended.

Edited June 9, 2019 by _Zee

[Jognt]

@_Zee The DMagic parts are hidden/deprecated yes, but the following parts in US2 are ingame:
GameData/UniversalStorage2/Parts/Science/AccelGravWedge.cfg
GameData/UniversalStorage2/Parts/Science/ThermoBaroWedge.cfg
GameData/UniversalStorage2/Parts/Science/FluidSpectorWedge.cfg

They utilize a different MODULE for their science ("USSimpleScience") but utilize the regular experimentID/xmitDataScalar setup.

And I'll certainly keep testing with my contract tweaks. As always it's not as simple as it seems.

================================

With regards to Breaking Ground: Only the few new parts that'd need placing, though Squad did 'something' to the way Science works that may show side effects later (hasn't yet afaik).

================================

Congratulations with regards to the job!

[_Zee]

I see what's happened, US2 was updated and I missed it. I don't have the Science folder in my US2 install at all. At any rate those are just xmit values which is super easy to change so I'll include it in the next release.

And thank you for the info on Breaking Ground, I was worried it would be catastrophically incompatible so its good to hear it can at least continue playing the mod for now.

[brispo]

Hoping to get a little guidance as I'm having trouble with the "Explore the Mun (Probe)" and "Explore Minmus (probe)" missions.

I built a probe, flew to minmus, landed, recovered a little science, and flew back and splashed down on Kerbin, but the contract didn't complete. It appears that I got the rewards, but the contract is still showing up as active. Any ideas?