Making custom tech tree that uses part upgrades

[Starseeker]

I'm wanting to make a custom tech tree to address several of the idiosyncrasies I see in the stock tech tree (as well as the others I've tried using), and I'm currently in the process of planning out the core (stock & DLC + ReStock+, with the latter being a requirement for use) node contents (with more mod support to follow). What would be the best route to go about actually implementing it? It's reworking the nodes themselves, not just the parts unlocked by them, and it'll depend on the use of part upgrades for various progression-related things.

[hemeac]

I've been working on my own that extends the CTT in an attempt to extend the probes before crew concept that also incorporates a framework for part upgrades through B9 Part Switch.  I found I liked how B9 handles Part Switching through additional subtypes rather than the stock system which just replaces the original.  This gives me the chance to upgrade my engines which also increases the cost and mass, so I feel that balances better than stock upgrade which isn't as flexible.

To start off my tech tree. I started off with the PBC configs as a baseline.  Depending on your experience, I found that tech tree's are a good way to learn MM syntax.  I also agree that Stock/DLC and Restock+ are a good baseline for fleshing out the modules.  My thoughts for developing your own tree, do you want some minimal level of compatibility between unsupported mods (like PBC or Unkerballed) or are you happy to go the full redesign route of the Engineering Tech Tree.  I've added a lot of new nodes, but unsupported mods will generally end up in or near the correct branches on the tree. One additional idea, similar to your earlier question about adding solar panels to upgrades, I have extended the NF solar functionality (ie. basic, advanced, concentrated) to the stock solar panels (no visual changes though).  For me, the hope is to have fewer parts "do more".

For the practical work, I also use PartInfo to go through and figure out part names when I am going through the tech tree.  I haven't officially posted anything on the forums as I have been waiting to get through the NF mods and still deciding on whether I want to provide support for it, but it is on Github.

 

Edited September 2, 2020 by hemeac

[Starseeker]

Well, my main use for the part upgrade system is making it so that, instead of starting with the large, awkward Stayputnik, you start with the ReStock+ 0.625m Remote Guidance Unit, but it has the capabilities of the Stayputnik, and you unlock more capabilities (primarily SAS modes) as you go through the tech tree (which also apply to the other RGU diameters). The cost and mass would remain the same, simulating the advancements simplifying & lowering the cost of the existing hardware (such as a move from electomechanical to purely electronic) and making space for new hardware. This way, there's a reason to use the dedicated space probe cores: for their capabilities, they're much cheaper and lighter.

Thanks for the other info though! I'm probably not going to add much "generic" mod support (since that would be quite hard to do, given I'm switching around what type of parts go in which node, so saying "oh any part that would go in X node goes in Y instead" could lead to really weird results), but I'll definitely be trying to make it so that mods have a logical place in the tree without requiring new nodes for that mod specifically. Also, I'm gonna be adding mod support in phases; first I want to get it working with the base I've set out, then add in support for other mods a few at a time.

Edited September 2, 2020 by Starseeker

[hemeac]

If you are going down that route on, may be worth following 

 

[Starseeker]

That definitely seems interesting, though it follows some different paths than I am. For example, all the lengths of a given diameter are going to be available in one node, the logic being it's much easier to make a longer tank than a wider one.

[Fraktal]

10 hours ago, hemeac said:

If you are going down that route on, may be worth following 

 

Oh wow, I'm actually being referenced?!

Well. If that's the case, I'm available for a second opinion if you need an ear to toss your ideas at, @Starseeker

10 hours ago, Starseeker said:

That definitely seems interesting, though it follows some different paths than I am. For example, all the lengths of a given diameter are going to be available in one node, the logic being it's much easier to make a longer tank than a wider one.

Which indeed makes sense. My logic for arranging the tank lengths the way I did was:

• Giving the second smallest tank to the basic gimbal engine and the second largest tank to the no-gimbal power engine was so that researching the power engine also allows the player to lower their launcher's part count. Lower part count is a good thing.
• Giving the smallest tank to the high impulse engine was because the engine's high efficiency means you don't always need the bigger tank. Having the small tank means you can better control how much fuel you want your upper stage to carry.
• Putting the largest tank on a separate node was so that the player can optionally expend additional science to lower their launcher's part count even more.

The base idea is to make it so that that none of the tanks are obsolete right from the get-go due to something even better being unlocked at the same time. All of them have a purpose at the point they're unlocked in.

And now that you mention it, giving the Stayputnik SAS as a part upgrade once the OKTO is unlocked makes sense, I just don't have any experience with part upgrades.

[Starseeker]

5 hours ago, Fraktal said:

Oh wow, I'm actually being referenced?!

Well. If that's the case, I'm available for a second opinion if you need an ear to toss your ideas at, @Starseeker

Thanks!

 

5 hours ago, Fraktal said:

Which indeed makes sense. My logic for arranging the tank lengths the way I did was:

• Giving the second smallest tank to the basic gimbal engine and the second largest tank to the no-gimbal power engine was so that researching the power engine also allows the player to lower their launcher's part count. Lower part count is a good thing.
• Giving the smallest tank to the high impulse engine was because the engine's high efficiency means you don't always need the bigger tank. Having the small tank means you can better control how much fuel you want your upper stage to carry.
• Putting the largest tank on a separate node was so that the player can optionally expend additional science to lower their launcher's part count even more.

The base idea is to make it so that that none of the tanks are obsolete right from the get-go due to something even better being unlocked at the same time. All of them have a purpose at the point they're unlocked in.

Ah, yeah, I getcha! However, in my experience, the smaller tank lengths do come in handy quite often, when you need a touch more dV on your upper stage but don't want to have to wildly redesign your lower stage. Also, with smaller tanks, you can make sure your launcher isn't overspecced for a payload, and therefore excessively costly.

Also, with regards to engines & tanks: I actually have it planned out so that the first liquid-fuel tech node gives you the 0.625m fuel tanks (ReStock+ adds a bunch of lengths) and the Spark engine (which, with 0.625m tanks, is surprisingly powerful), and after that, tanks are one node branch and engines are another (though you need to unlock tanks of a diameter before you can unlock engines of that diameter).

Well, engines are actually a series of branches; you have one line for increasing the diameter of engines, and a branch off of each diameter for getting more advanced engines in that diameter.

6 hours ago, Fraktal said:

And now that you mention it, giving the Stayputnik SAS as a part upgrade once the OKTO is unlocked makes sense, I just don't have any experience with part upgrades.

Ah, I guess I wasn't really all that clear on this: only the Remote Guidance Unit parts (which are available in every diameter up to 3.75m using ReStock+) get the part upgrades. The probe cores themselves don't, and get unlocked later than their corresponding RGU capabilities; however, they're much cheaper (the Stayputnik is ~18% the cost of the 0.625m RGU from ReStock+) and generally lighter than an RGU, so they're good for cheap probes and the like.