[WIP][TechTree @ 0.23.5] - [MS19e] - Realistic Progression LITE

[LiquidKameleon]

If I'm not mistaken it was the first of the SRB tree (red), but that makes sense, I haven't installed pretty much anything besides the essential mods. I'll probably add some before I play again.

[Guest]

If I'm not mistaken it was the first of the SRB tree (red), but that makes sense, I haven't installed pretty much anything besides the essential mods. I'll probably add some before I play again.

I would install all the packages listed in the OP, including the recommended/utilities/extras, along with:

Bobcat Soviet engines pack/historical soviet pack (Soviet/Russian engines)

BT Engine Pack (Merlin 1D)

F-1 Engine replica

KerbX (for SpaceX engines)

RLA Stockalike alternative models (Shuttle OMS) & RLA Stockalike (but only the RCS thrusters, the rest arnt RO if i read it correctly)

Environmental Visual Enhancements (for better looking...everything, try it, you'll love it, it has volumetric clouds!)

Active Texture Management (this is a must IMHO, it will save you lots of ram and help prevent out of memory related game crashes)

Advanced Jet Engine (AJE) (for better, realistic, real fuels jet engine types)

And, if your big into planes/shuttles:

Procedural dynamics (for procedural wings)

B9 (for more useful plane parts)

KSO (for Kerbin Shuttle Orbiter System mini-shuttle) with forzenbacon's RSS/RO cfg file

that should give you lots of selection of parts, (i would delete all non-radial/non-stretchy fuel tanks, they are just clutter, also any soviet pack solar panels as they are not tweaked), and give you lots of options in the directions of command podded/probe based rockets, planes/space planes,shuttles.

This said i strongly recommend you use Real Solar System and all the listed the Realism overhaul files/fixes (1st 2 posts on its page i think). Game play isnt "that" diffrent and is a far better reflection of "realistic". Once you figured out RSS style rocket construction & manage your 1st orbit in RSS (there are videos on you tube showing this, basically start a slow/lengthy gravity turn once you hit 100m/sec) you will have few issues adjusting. But it really adds to the tech tree, as RPL is made with RSS/RO in mind.

I hope you dont have any issues with your current setup as it is, if thats what you prefer.

Edited April 10, 2014 by Guest

[SlimeCrusher]

Im i the only one getting errors while trying to download Deadly Re-entry, Real Solar System and other mods recommended to play with this mod? Like dropbox is down or something, it says: Error (509)

This account's public links are generating too much traffic and have been temporarily disabled!

But the thing is, Dropbox works nice with this mod's download, not with the other downloads though, i could just play it alone, but i don't know...

[Guest]

Im i the only one getting errors while trying to download Deadly Re-entry, Real Solar System and other mods recommended to play with this mod? Like dropbox is down or something, it says: Error (509)

This account's public links are generating too much traffic and have been temporarily disabled!

But the thing is, Dropbox works nice with this mod's download, not with the other downloads though, i could just play it alone, but i don't know...

I have not seen this but you can download this package here (everything is current to todays date @ about 9am EST and is pre-configured, just drop in and play) that i use, remove anything you dont want and beware the gemini pods (they seem bugged directly from FASA mod): here is a link, delete your Gamedata and Parts folder in your main KSP folder and replace with these folders: HERE

https://www.dropbox.com/s/13p25qwwsw85m04/April%208%20KSP%20MODS.zip

Edited April 8, 2014 by Guest

[NathanKell]

Yeah, dropbox just yelled at me for using too much bandwidth. I'm getting everything rehosted; sorry for the inconvenience.

[MedievalNerd]

Yeah, dropbox just yelled at me for using too much bandwidth. I'm getting everything rehosted; sorry for the inconvenience.

LOL,

You are too popular!

@All,

For all the parts & things that don't make sense in their current locations. Don't you worry, I got you covered. And whatever I miss in MS19, I'll be ready to do a series of quick hotfixes to get any stragglers in line.

The tree will have massively changed, I'm hoping it's to people's liking.

Here's a snapshot which is about a few weeks old:

image a telecharger gratuitement

Post release, I'll be open to suggestions to changes in location of parts and what not. Just state your case and I'll put it in the hat.

Cheers,

[SlimeCrusher]

Not sure if its RSS, but is the space center supposed to be on a huge mountain range inside a crater and half-buried? Also, Kerbin looks... Quite candy-like really... Just look:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Is there a way to fix that? Or is it just me?

Edited April 10, 2014 by SlimeCrusher

[Guest]

Not sure if its RSS, but is the space center supposed to be on a huge mountain range inside a crater and half-buried? Also, Kerbin looks... Quite candy-like really... Just look:

http://imgur.com/a/Lmzll

Is there a way to fix that? Or is it just me?

The red earth bug is talked about @ RSS thread abit, someone sugested it had to due with 8k textures, you could 4k textures instead if you are using an 8k texture (use 4096x2048 instead of 8192x4096), are you using newest Active Texture Managemen mod (you should be)?

And also in RSS thread is info on how to move the KSC and RT2 tracking station (i use Guiana Space Centre in French Guiana personally, but there are many options)

[Guest]

I just wanted to ask other RPL users a question. Seeing as MS19 will be comming out soon, i wanted to know if other users were using all the "supported mods/part packs" listed on the realism overhaul thread OP and post 2 (I personally am using them all but "Engine Ignitor")?. I have been using the RPL techtree in RSS for a while and i have never been clear on if we should be using the RO listed packs/mods with the ones listed in the RPL OP or only the ones listed in the RPL OP. The 2 biggest "should i" packs are RLA stockalike RCS thrusters and Bobcat's Soviet engines pack (both of which offer much "better" options in terms of ISP, esp the RCS thrusters).

Sorry to bother everyone with this question, i'm just confused by the multiple instructions in the OP's of RPL techtree & Realism Overhaul. It would make a simpler mod install/build, on the user end, to follow all instructions on supported/suggested mods/fixes from both OP's... but this might be alot of work on the authors end. I do know we are to wait until after MS19 release before asking Medieval Nerd about this, so i hoped the community could offer their opinions so we could narrow down whats best for us all as a group

[SpacedInvader]

I just wanted to ask other RPL users a question. Seeing as MS19 will be comming out soon, i wanted to know if other users were using all the "supported mods/part packs" listed on the realism overhaul thread OP and post 2 (I personally am using them all but "Engine Ignitor")?. I have been using the RPL techtree in RSS for a while and i have never been clear on if we should be using the RO listed packs/mods with the ones listed in the RPL OP or only the ones listed in the RPL OP. The 2 biggest "should i" packs are RLA stockalike RCS thrusters and Bobcat's Soviet engines pack (both of which offer much "better" options in terms of ISP, esp the RCS thrusters).

Sorry to bother everyone with this question, i'm just confused by the multiple instructions in the OP's of RPL techtree & Realism Overhaul. It would make a simpler mod install/build, on the user end, to follow all instructions on supported/suggested mods/fixes from both OP's... but this might be alot of work on the authors end. I do know we are to wait until after MS19 release before asking Medieval Nerd about this, so i hoped the community could offer their opinions so we could narrow down whats best for us all as a group

I have been using everything except for RSS. My understanding is that if you're using the RftS engine definition package, it will cover the Bobcat engines, though I'm not really sure about the RCS pack as I think that is more the realm of Real Fuels and I know there are not definitions for the B9 thrusters, so there is a hit/miss element here.

That all being said, I've always believed that RPL and RSS/RO were pretty much designed to go hand in hand, so using all of the associated mods for both would be best practice. The only reason I'm not using RSS is because I am going to hold off until every planet has interesting terrain to land on when you get there. I would also point out that most of the additional supported and required mods crossover, with only a few on each side not being mentioned by the other.

[Guest]

I have been using everything except for RSS. My understanding is that if you're using the RftS engine definition package, it will cover the Bobcat engines, though I'm not really sure about the RCS pack as I think that is more the realm of Real Fuels and I know there are not definitions for the B9 thrusters, so there is a hit/miss element here.

That all being said, I've always believed that RPL and RSS/RO were pretty much designed to go hand in hand, so using all of the associated mods for both would be best practice. The only reason I'm not using RSS is because I am going to hold off until every planet has interesting terrain to land on when you get there. I would also point out that most of the additional supported and required mods crossover, with only a few on each side not being mentioned by the other.

Humm, i thought so, glad to hear someone else felt the same...on the note of RSS, earth and the moon have the correct surfaces for as they are in real life so their landings work out very well...and if your landing men on mars/venus i'm very jealous, i'm lucky to get orbit/flybys as far as saturn on a good day

[SpacedInvader]

@MedievalNerd: It really looks like it's developed a lot since MS18. I've noticed however, that you've moved the stock science parts pretty far up until the tech tree. While I'm guessing that this means you've really fleshed out your science experiments, I am concerned that this will force anyone using this mod into a single scientific path rather than allowing for departures based on personal preference. I would suggest keeping science parts lower in the tech tree so that they could be used in conjunction with your experiment mechanic.

I've also noticed that you are tightly intertwining RPL with RSS by highlighting specific planetary probes in the tech tree. While I can't be sure of your intentions, this does have me concerned that you will also carry this theme over to the experiment progression, completely removing that option for those of us who, for one reason or another, don't use the full blown RSS (even when it's up and running with terrain on all of the planets, I will be using a rescaled Kerbol rather than Sol). If this is where you want to take this mod, that is your choice, but I would request that you either provide instructions to write / modify the experiments so they work with stock planet names or provide a second version designed to work without the Sol system and it's planet names.

[SpacedInvader]

Humm, i thought so, glad to hear someone else felt the same...on the note of RSS, earth and the moon have the correct surfaces for as they are in real life so their landings work out very well...and if your landing men on mars/venus i'm very jealous, i'm lucky to get orbit/flybys as far as saturn on a good day

I was actually using the rescaled Kerbol system rather than the Sol system. I may eventually move to the proper Solar system version of the mod, but for the time being Iike the alien quality of the Kerbol system. That being said, when I left off with RSS, I was about ready for to launch a Duna / Mars lander, so I had already reached the limits of the RSS terrain. My understanding from talking with NathanKell is that we're going to need to wait until he gets Krag's general PQS loader up and running and then give each planet a height map before many of the planets will get decent terrain.

[MedievalNerd]

@MedievalNerd: It really looks like it's developed a lot since MS18. I've noticed however, that you've moved the stock science parts pretty far up until the tech tree. While I'm guessing that this means you've really fleshed out your science experiments, I am concerned that this will force anyone using this mod into a single scientific path rather than allowing for departures based on personal preference. I would suggest keeping science parts lower in the tech tree so that they could be used in conjunction with your experiment mechanic.

I've also noticed that you are tightly intertwining RPL with RSS by highlighting specific planetary probes in the tech tree. While I can't be sure of your intentions, this does have me concerned that you will also carry this theme over to the experiment progression, completely removing that option for those of us who, for one reason or another, don't use the full blown RSS (even when it's up and running with terrain on all of the planets, I will be using a rescaled Kerbol rather than Sol). If this is where you want to take this mod, that is your choice, but I would request that you either provide instructions to write / modify the experiments so they work with stock planet names or provide a second version designed to work without the Sol system and it's planet names.

Hi SpaceInvader,

Thanks for the feedback. Have you read the disclaimer on the OP? The challenges of developing separate settings for stock & RPL would be extremely complicated, more importantly so it would require me to create 2 trees. (One stock the other RPL flavored) I'm not discounting this possibility in the distant future, but until then I will continue along the same path as described in the initial mission statement. (RPL/RO focused, with a potential stock alternative)

As for the stock science tools being higher up in the tree, you are spot on. There will be (future tense) enough science points to reach them using the custom experiments. The reason I've placed them so high was to help with balancing. (IE, how much science can you acquire, and at what point.) The stock science instruments make this somewhat more complex since they aren't locked to specific bodies. So you personally have to make a call 'how far' would the average user get. Once balance is more strong, I'd be willing to consider either having them as a generic seperate science tools, or something of the sorts.

And just to be clear, although the science tree will be lightly linear in some sections, there will be more 'optional' science modules strapped on to the body/planet tech lines. If you look at Moon, Mars, Venus. They are somewhat dependent on the first node of each line, but the others are optional. So you don't have to do 'all mars, all moon, all venus' experiments before moving on. Although you'll probably want to get those science points at some point! So you will be deciding what's the next step int eh program without following a linear progression path.

When I started this I had no idea the magnitude of work that would be involved in creating/updating/implementing all these mods & ideas. This is literally the first mod ever I've created and shared. So it's a bit of a haphazard process as I get my bearings through all the ever revolving changes of other people's mod, core game and design decisions I do on my side.

Once the core design of RPL gets a good footing, perhaps I'd consider forking the project and finding some insane person willing to try and maintain/update/develop a vanilla version of RPL. (A hefty task if I do say so myself)

Heck, I'm struggling and I have massive support from Nathan, the community and some really kind posters. Brooklyn666 basically did all the research behind the new ranges/power con. for antennas & dishes. (Wow, out of the blue too!)

Again, I apologize for the disappointments, setbacks and frustrations. I was on an extended work leave when I started, and now I'm back working full time as a Project Manager so it's hard to balance that, sanity, happyness & RPL all at once.

We will get there, I won't abandon any of you.

[ThorBeorn]

I just wanted to ask other RPL users a question. Seeing as MS19 will be comming out soon, i wanted to know if other users were using all the "supported mods/part packs" listed on the realism overhaul thread OP and post 2 (I personally am using them all but "Engine Ignitor")?. I have been using the RPL techtree in RSS for a while and i have never been clear on if we should be using the RO listed packs/mods with the ones listed in the RPL OP or only the ones listed in the RPL OP. The 2 biggest "should i" packs are RLA stockalike RCS thrusters and Bobcat's Soviet engines pack (both of which offer much "better" options in terms of ISP, esp the RCS thrusters).

Sorry to bother everyone with this question, i'm just confused by the multiple instructions in the OP's of RPL techtree & Realism Overhaul. It would make a simpler mod install/build, on the user end, to follow all instructions on supported/suggested mods/fixes from both OP's... but this might be alot of work on the authors end. I do know we are to wait until after MS19 release before asking Medieval Nerd about this, so i hoped the community could offer their opinions so we could narrow down whats best for us all as a group

I'm not using the life support mods and I haven't yet added FASA (except for launch towers), Lazteks Space X parts, neither the advanced jet engine mod. I figure I will add Lazteks Space X for even more engines mostly, same goes for FASA.

If I haven't installed Bobcats Soviet Engine Pack wrong together with NathanKells RftS pack - it does not change the specs of the Soviet engines. This makes the Soviet engines quite a bit overpowered (they also don't come with a config for engine ignitor = infinate relights) appearing too early in the MS18 techtree IMHO.

However they look great and I would love to keep them in MS19, hopefully to be unlocked later. I would also love to see Dtobis Space Shuttle Engines (given that these are rescaled by RO/RftS) and maybe the spacestation parts in Kosmos Spacecraft Design Bureau by Normak. However this would mean even more work for the amazing modders who have already given us more than we deserve

[ThorBeorn]

MedievalNerd:I'm a total noob with RSS/RO and your techtree, MS18. But I shall give some feedback anyway. I really like what you've done with the probe specific one time experiments and the data recorder. No more tedious repetitive science harvesting. However, and this may just be me not unlocking the nodes in the tree wisely, I had to fly around Kerbin A LOT just to do gravioli, temperature, atmo scan etc in most if the biomes as a way to not get stuck in the techtree. I don't mind working for it, and I like how things takes longer now, but I don't want to have to fly for one hour at timewarp to the poles just to be able to unlock the next rocket parts for example. But then again, maybe I just spent my science at the wrong nodes in the tree. Thanks for the work you put in Medieval.

[SpacedInvader]

I do understand your original intention to follow the RO / RSS, though the reason I was surprised is because MS18C is much more generic than this first view of MS19. In its current form, RPL could easily be used for either RSS or stock, at least with a minimum of modification. That all being said, it would seem that maintaining a separate version for stock system would consist primarily of substituting the stock planet names for the real names and adding science for Minmus. If this is the case, I'd be happy to do it for myself as long as you provide the information about how to do it.

As far as the science parts are concerned, it would seem that they don't offer nearly the same quantity of science points that the new experienents do, so their presence earlier in the tech tree seems to me at least like they wouldn't be that unbalancing, especially since you very quickly get into higher cost science nodes in the tech tree. You may not agree, but I'm thinking that if you were to place them lower in the tree, it would give players a little flexibility to get an extra node here or there if they included all those parts on their probes / ships, while not giving them enough science to really advance much more quickly through the tree.

[MedievalNerd]

MedievalNerd:I'm a total noob with RSS/RO and your techtree, MS18. But I shall give some feedback anyway. I really like what you've done with the probe specific one time experiments and the data recorder. No more tedious repetitive science harvesting. However, and this may just be me not unlocking the nodes in the tree wisely, I had to fly around Kerbin A LOT just to do gravioli, temperature, atmo scan etc in most if the biomes as a way to not get stuck in the techtree. I don't mind working for it, and I like how things takes longer now, but I don't want to have to fly for one hour at timewarp to the poles just to be able to unlock the next rocket parts for example. But then again, maybe I just spent my science at the wrong nodes in the tree. Thanks for the work you put in Medieval.

HI ThorBeorn,

MS17 & 18 had very little custom experiments. MS19 will have way more, so the grinding madness you describe won't have to be dealt with. I don't want people to have to drain Kerbin dry of all biomes to be able to make progress. That'd go against the very core purpose that I'm trying to flesh out with RPL.

It won't be complete, I still have loads more to create but it'll have a good starting point and provide more progression which I'm sure will generate more feedback! I do have a good idea of where this is going, but I do like to hear people's impressions as it moves forward.

Thanks for the feedback! Let me know what you think of MS19 when it's out.

I do understand your original intention to follow the RO / RSS, though the reason I was surprised is because MS18C is much more generic than this first view of MS19. In its current form, RPL could easily be used for either RSS or stock, at least with a minimum of modification. That all being said, it would seem that maintaining a separate version for stock system would consist primarily of substituting the stock planet names for the real names and adding science for Minmus. If this is the case, I'd be happy to do it for myself as long as you provide the information about how to do it.

As far as the science parts are concerned, it would seem that they don't offer nearly the same quantity of science points that the new experienents do, so their presence earlier in the tech tree seems to me at least like they wouldn't be that unbalancing, especially since you very quickly get into higher cost science nodes in the tech tree. You may not agree, but I'm thinking that if you were to place them lower in the tree, it would give players a little flexibility to get an extra node here or there if they included all those parts on their probes / ships, while not giving them enough science to really advance much more quickly through the tree.

Howdy SpaceInvader,

True, perhaps I could keep the stock science instruments in a seperate tech tree. (Like the offworld mining in the latest screenshot I shared) That way it could be somewhat optional. People could stick to the more historical based progression, or if they feel they are getting stuck/needing a boost, they could use the stock instruments to get things going or what not.

I understand your concerns about the layout of body specific RPL probes, and the discrepancy of the order of planets & moons. But in order to get balance done, I initially have to go with RSS/RO focus in order to build a solid base and not spread myself too thin. Once the balance is solid, it'll be much less of a hassle to consider how to reorder the experiments and rename them. Although that means it would need a separate tech tree & also stock flavored RPL files. (Experiments, tweaks & parts) That will be a beast of it's own, and why I mentioned I'd consider forking at that point and see if someone is crazy enough to pick that up.

A lot of work is left, I'll see what I can do to keep it stock friendly but MS19 will definitely be a significant step to tie in the tree with RSS. I wanted to release some development videos, one of which would be centered on how I go about to create an experiments and the logic behind the RPL plugin so that people could create their own experiments.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and concerns.

Cheers,

[ThorBeorn]

HI ThorBeorn,

True, perhaps I could keep the stock science instruments in a seperate tech tree. (Like the offworld mining in the latest screenshot I shared) That way it could be somewhat optional. People could stick to the more historical based progression, or if they feel they are getting stuck/needing a boost, they could use the stock instruments to get things going or what not.

This sounds like a great compromise! This could be a way around those situations when you just want a new set of landing legs for your probe, but your science points could be spent more clever. Just send a probe with gravioli detectors into a polar orbit. Doing it one time is reasonable/fun.

[SpacedInvader]

I appreciate that you're open to expanding the mod in the future. I also appreciate all the great work you've already done to this point. This mod for me at least is right up there with KSPI, FAR, and the other essential mods to enhance the KSP experience.

I would definitely like to see those development videos, and I would like to reiterate that I'd be perfectly happy doing the work necessary for making this work with the Kerbol system. As long as I have a decent set of instructions to work with, I can completely take that burden off of you.

Edited April 11, 2014 by SpacedInvader

[Guest]

Note how popular this techtree has become, its amazing. For your 1st mod its alot of work, but you have made KSP SO MUCH BETTER! I bet Scott Manley himself would find your techtree challenging. We are in your debt Medieval Nerd, you and Nathan have made KSP into something so much better than most people could have hoped for. (note that every modder has improved KSP, not to leave them out)

[MedievalNerd]

Note how popular this techtree has become, its amazing. For your 1st mod its alot of work, but you have made KSP SO MUCH BETTER! I bet Scott Manley himself would find your techtree challenging. We are in your debt Medieval Nerd, you and Nathan have made KSP into something so much better than most people could have hoped for. (note that every modder has improved KSP, not to leave them out)

Gnaww, Aazard always throwing me flowers.

As I said before, the thanks go to the 'actual' modders. If it wasn't for NathanKell, R4m0n (I mean Tree Edit/Loader...!!!)Ferram, FractalUK, etc. What would RPL be? Their mods inspired RPL, and almost as a byproduct the RPL plugin. (Data recorder & chem. trail (for first impact probes))

And sweet mother of kerbals, I surely hope Mr.Manley stays clear of RPL until it's much closer to completion. I'd be embarrassed most likely. All it's gaping flaws, on youtube. *shudders*

But I have to say, I'd fall off my chair if he'd spotlight it down the road. Wow. Internet celebrity crush. lol

Tomorrow morning I'm starting the grand tree sweep. Wish me luck!

I appreciate that you're open to expanding the mod in the future. I also appreciate all the great work you've already done to this point. This mod for me at least is right up there with KSPI, FAR, and the other essential mods to enhance the KSP experience.

I would definitely like to see those development videos, and I would like to reiterate that I'd be perfectly happy doing the work necessary for making this work with the Kerbol system. As long as I have a decent set of instructions to work with, I can completely take that burden off of you.

My pleasure, and thank you for the compliments!

The main reason I'm sticking to RSS is because I play it, and more importantly I want to keep the workload realistic in these early stages. Trying to pump out 2 separate versions would probably be more discouraging than anything (If I'd solo that madness). I'll maybe do the first video this weekend and upload it to my YT channel, i'll link it here if I do. But I might just work on the tree, we shall see where the wind blows.

I would obviously make sure the person taking up the stock version would understand the inner workings of RPL. To be fair it's really not all that complicated if you are comfortable modifying/tweaking config files. I'd say that someone that's pretty comfortable with that, or more specifically made their own stock experiments, they'd probably just figure it out by looking at the RPL folder and how the experiments are written up.

The RPL plugin uses the experiment class from stock KSP, so it's basic layout + a few tweaks. As I work on different types of way of doing experiments, I'm making them into separate modules to make it easier to use.

Anyway, I shall keep you all updated.

Cheers,

EDIT: If some of you are bored, here's a link to my YT page. There are a small handful of videos on old Dos games, with a unfinished mini-series using Ultima Underworld 1. lol

https://www.youtube.com/user/TheMedievalNerd

Edited April 11, 2014 by MedievalNerd

[NathanKell]

Who the heck said tree making wasn't "real" modding!? And even if that were true, you're also making your own plugin and part stats. So...take the well-deserved praise.

[SpacedInvader]

Who the heck said tree making wasn't "real" modding!? And even if that were true, you're also making your own plugin and part stats. So...take the well-deserved praise.

What he said

[MedievalNerd]

You guys & gals are all awesome!