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

[Visari]

Yup, so it's compatible but no missions are made for it yet. Why are there nobody making missions for RSS people with MCE?

I think it's a calling for someone...

I've been dying to get some good economy-based campaign gameplay going.

I've actually wanted to do this for a while, but figured I should probably wait for newer versions of MCE and most importantly MS19.

There are a few more issues related to using MCE, though not from MCE; bugs from other mods.

For one, game crashes have lost me a lot of money, though luckily there was the revert button.

Secondarily, more mods need integration with each other. Take for instance kOS and RT2 (although I remember seeing an attempted merge of 'm in an addondev thread some time ago).

With the new alpha of MCE out now, I suppose I could try my hand on it to get the basics while MS19 finishes up, then see how far I can get, given time.

[Scripto23]

I've been dying to get some good economy-based campaign gameplay going.

I've actually wanted to do this for a while, but figured I should probably wait for newer versions of MCE and most importantly MS19.

There are a few more issues related to using MCE, though not from MCE; bugs from other mods.

For one, game crashes have lost me a lot of money, though luckily there was the revert button.

Secondarily, more mods need integration with each other. Take for instance kOS and RT2 (although I remember seeing an attempted merge of 'm in an addondev thread some time ago).

With the new alpha of MCE out now, I suppose I could try my hand on it to get the basics while MS19 finishes up, then see how far I can get, given time.

Are you saying you might be making MCE RSS specific mission packs? If so, I can help you out if needed.

[MedievalNerd]

Ugh, running into some really strange re-sizing issues. Parts are fine, do a reload or a revert to launch. and boom, it's like 10 times it's original size... ???

/bangs head on desk

EDIT: And Nathan saves the day from across the continent once again. *glorious trumpets*

Edited February 9, 2014 by MedievalNerd

[Scripto23]

Ugh, running into some really strange re-sizing issues. Parts are fine, do a reload or a revert to launch. and boom, it's like 10 times it's original size... ???

/bangs head on desk

That happens to me quite frequently with seemingly random parts. Could it have something to do with the order the mods get loaded and adding :Final to the right parts would help?

[NathanKell]

Nope, it's because the bug where rescaleFactor is applied twice to MODEL node scales only occurs on launch, not on revert, to root parts.

So multiply everything, and manually change your nodes and other cfg file positions, such that you can have scale = 1.0 and rescaleFactor = 1.0, and any and all scaling is done *inside* the MODEL node.

For example, the WAC Corporal probe core should be changed to:

MODEL
	{
		model = Squad/Parts/Aero/rocketNoseCone/model
		scale = 0.12, 0.576, 0.12
	}

	scale = 1
	rescaleFactor = 1.0

where it used to have MODEL { scale = 0.8333, 40.0, 0.8333 } and rescaleFactor = 0.12

Since its only node is at 0,0,0 it needn't be changed; but if it were at 0, -0.2, 0 then you'd change it to 0, -0.024, 0. ( -0.2 * old_rescaleFactor)

Edited February 9, 2014 by NathanKell

[MedievalNerd]

Nope, it's because the bug where rescaleFactor is applied twice to MODEL node scales only occurs on launch, not on revert, to root parts.

So multiply everything, and manually change your nodes and other cfg file positions, such that you can have scale = 1.0 and rescaleFactor = 1.0, and any and all scaling is done *inside* the MODEL node.

For example, the WAC Corporal probe core should be changed to:

MODEL
	{
		model = Squad/Parts/Aero/rocketNoseCone/model
		scale = 0.12, 0.576, 0.12
	}

	scale = 1
	rescaleFactor = 1.0

where it used to have MODEL { scale = 0.8333, 40.0, 0.8333 } and rescaleFactor = 0.12

Since its only node is at 0,0,0 it needn't be changed; but if it were at 0, -0.2, 0 then you'd change it to 0, -0.024, 0. ( -0.2 * old_rescaleFactor)

What the smart man said.

[MedievalNerd]

So,

Although Initially thought it wouldn't be much of a problem to deal with the new 'transmit once, part is disabled' system. It's apparently not tweakable anymore? (Unless I 'm literally going crazy and couldnt' find it) There used to be a 'reset' or 'repeat' field in either the science defs or the experiment module you add to a part. And now, you don't have that value anymore. So my awesome idea of having 2 experiments per probe hit a rather harsh brick wall. Ugh.

What I'll do, unless someone has a work around, I'll duplicate the probes and have (Mk1/Mk2, etc) Might be funny for something Like Sputnik (Mk1, Mk2, and Sputnik II (Mk1, Mk2).. :/

At first I thought it was a bug in the plugin, but after a hours of trial and error I sort of got that it was the stock functionality taking over and ruining it. Grr! If I was a modeler, I'd be fine, i'll add little boxes like the MJ core and have people slap them on the probe/rocket. But it's not the case, and anyway, It'd defeat the purpose of giving more use to the probe cores...

Public consultation time!

What do you prefer?

A) Less experiment, and sacrifice them to avoid having duplicate probes? (the Mk1, Mk2, thing I was talking about)

Keep the experiments and duplicate probe parts so that you'll have to launch separate missions for each?

Let me know your thoughts on this, I'd rather lean towards the more popular choice if there is a such a thing.

Thanks, Sorry,

[andqui]

More experiments, please.

[acerola]

Did you try

rerunnable = True

[MedievalNerd]

Did you try

rerunnable = True

What has that field? Science Definitions, or the Experiment Module?

[acerola]

What has that field? Science Definitions, or the Experiment Module?

The module part.cfg. GooExperiment and MaterialBay don't have this. sensorThermometer, sensorGravimeter and sensorBarometer do. Take a look.

[MedievalNerd]

The module part.cfg. GooExperiment and MaterialBay don't have this. sensorThermometer, sensorGravimeter and sensorBarometer do. Take a look.

/facepalm...

Ok, thanks I'll check it out tonight. Godamn...

[Romby]

Nice. Looking much forward to the new Milestone. Glad to see people help solving the problems

[kasperhangard]

i'd prefer the one with the first release!

lol i'd prefer most experiments, if possible!

[MedievalNerd]

The module part.cfg. GooExperiment and MaterialBay don't have this. sensorThermometer, sensorGravimeter and sensorBarometer do. Take a look.

You sir, or madam, rock. You rock a righteous type of metal that contains face melting solos and crowds of all ages headbang in unison to it's awesomeness.

I knew there was a setting for this, but it had changed, and in my silly ways I only had checked the Goo & MaterialBay when I started having the issue...

Thank you!

[MedievalNerd]

Just a quick FYI of something I noticed while doing tests and getting MS19 ready.

It seems that long term data acquisition might be a bit of pain for some. I've noticed that for some reason the time compression doesn't apply to the data converter. Probably something that my limited knowledge of KSP and/or coding making it as such.

But yeah, just wanted to throw that out there.

[whorlwind]

It seems that long term data acquisition might be a bit of pain for some. I've noticed that for some reason the time compression doesn't apply to the data converter.

It doesn't apply to squad's science lab module's cleaning/transmitting data either, so apparently its not just you that can't figure out those settings, you're in good company.

[MedievalNerd]

It doesn't apply to squad's science lab module's cleaning/transmitting data either, so apparently its not just you that can't figure out those settings, you're in good company.

Ahhh! Well then! If it's good enough for squad.

I'm so happy that the probe core shutdown thing is resolved! lol

[Visari]

I've been experimenting with a slightly different way of using mission controller extended. Where payouts are normally added to your account upon mission completion, my intention is to create a more budget-for-program-like approach. The player is given a proof of concept mission every 'level'. With this budget, the player is to complete a series of missions that follow each other up, like the real programs did, with progressively expanding technology and goals as the project continues.

I intend to recreate major 'world firsts' for the player to progress through in stages, to gain access to the next level of missions with another proof of concept mission and be granted a major sum of money, with progressively increased difficulty as the player goes through the programs. This would be supplemented by contracts, which can offer a bit of pocket money if your program doesn't lift off the way you expected it to.

Of course, the exact layouts and feasibility of missions will be balanced around RPL, specifically the experiments of the probes. Gaps can be filled by granting science for completing missions that do not offer science opportunities with MS19 (manned missions, for instance).

Examples of programs I intend to recreate (read: set realistic, but balanced goals for) are the X-1 bell rocket plane, suborbital viking rockets, early V2 tests, the luna programs, gemini, mariner, pioneer, just to name a few.

Doing some more RSS compatibility testing regarding biomes and locations, but am otherwise awaiting MS19 to continue.

Thank you again for doing this, MN. Without this hardcore career mode, KSP would've grown old for me.

[MedievalNerd]

I've been experimenting with a slightly different way of using mission controller extended. Where payouts are normally added to your account upon mission completion, my intention is to create a more budget-for-program-like approach. The player is given a proof of concept mission every 'level'. With this budget, the player is to complete a series of missions that follow each other up, like the real programs did, with progressively expanding technology and goals as the project continues.

I intend to recreate major 'world firsts' for the player to progress through in stages, to gain access to the next level of missions with another proof of concept mission and be granted a major sum of money, with progressively increased difficulty as the player goes through the programs. This would be supplemented by contracts, which can offer a bit of pocket money if your program doesn't lift off the way you expected it to.

Of course, the exact layouts and feasibility of missions will be balanced around RPL, specifically the experiments of the probes. Gaps can be filled by granting science for completing missions that do not offer science opportunities with MS19 (manned missions, for instance).

Examples of programs I intend to recreate (read: set realistic, but balanced goals for) are the X-1 bell rocket plane, suborbital viking rockets, early V2 tests, the luna programs, gemini, mariner, pioneer, just to name a few.

Doing some more RSS compatibility testing regarding biomes and locations, but am otherwise awaiting MS19 to continue.

Thank you again for doing this, MN. Without this hardcore career mode, KSP would've grown old for me.

I should share you my notes for tier cost calculations once MS19 is out, and you & I could balance the science payouts if need be to even things out on both ends.

EDIT: I have an epic excel sheet with almost all the parts and their 'partname'. Might be of some use to design missions. If you look at the folder with the MCE missions in the RPL pack, you can see my mission templates. Might be of use as well. Feel free to plunder/pillage.

Back around November when I started this and was discussion the possibilities with Nathan, I had said that we could potentially create missions in MCE that have very high science payouts, like 100,000 which could be used to buy sub nodes that keep certain branches 'locked' until a certain mission is performed. Obviously people could cheat and just use the crazy amount to boost everything else, but I think it might be something worth considering. payouts could be labelled 100,001, 100,002, etc. And linked to those specific tech nodes that branch out.

Cheers,

Edited February 14, 2014 by MedievalNerd

[Visari]

So if I understand this right;

The intent of the subnodes would be to balance the availability of parts with the missions provided, through placing nodes inbetween current nodes with specific high science costs so the player can unlock those nodes and thus the next tier of science through the equally high mission science payout?

sounds interesting, but that would mean MCE becomes mandatory, right? Unless you mean a different approach with the subnodes.

Edited February 16, 2014 by Visari

[MedievalNerd]

So if I understand this right;

The intend of the subnodes would be to balance the availability of parts with the missions provided, through placing nodes inbetween current nodes with specific high science costs so the player can unlock those nodes and thus the next tier of science through the equally high mission science payout?

sounds interesting, but that would mean MCE becomes mandatory, right? Unless you mean a different approach with the subnodes.

Hi Visari,

Yeah it wold be my cheap way of having certain tech nodes requiring a specific mission to be completed. (via the high science payout)

And yeah, that would make MCE mandatory. In any case, before moving towards that we can wait that the MCE missions you are making cover a long period. And then we could simply pick the missions that make sense as milestones, increase their payouts, and then I could do some small edits to the tech tree.

It's probably best to look into this further down the road, but it's a interesting thing to consider/discuss.

Cheers,

[Visari]

This could indeed be a feasible way of progression. I agree with the interest in keeping this further down the road, lest it ruins the tree with bugs and incompatibility due to early release, or other miscellaneous problems.

[MedievalNerd]

This could indeed be a feasible way of progression. I agree with the interest in keeping this further down the road, lest it ruins the tree with bugs and incompatibility due to early release, or other miscellaneous problems.

Yup, and I want to make sure that the integration of the Real Fuels & fairings are working properly.

NOt sure how hard that would be to extend to structurals. (girders, plates, etc.) So that each tech level you research makes them lighter and/or cheaper.

Anyway, as much as I hate to say it things are really wrapping it up!

I'll buy loads of wunderbars and monster drinks.

[MarQan]

Hey!

I'm using this tech-tree along with the Realism Overhaul modpack (all essentials + most recommended + a few supported mods).

And I'm stuck

I can't get anything into high-orbit. Not with ralistic rockets at least. I know the easy answer would be MOAR BOOSTERS, but if I'd want that, then I wouldn't play with realism overhaul.

I can't keep my cryo-fed engines cool enough, that might help.

I researched the starting Rocket and Booster techs, I have 6 others researched besides the starting technology, and 300 RPs.

So... what's the next step?

Also if this is only a dev-thread, is there a discussion thread?