[1.12.x] Community Tech Tree (August 13)

[SoundReaper]

Hi and thanks for this cool mod !

I've downloaded the CTT mod with all the compatibles mods and faced the same problems as above and made myself some fixes.

Here are the files : http://www./download/i0io855riz602je/GameData.zip

You just gave to extract the archive in the GameData/ folder and replace the old files. I've already backed up the original files.

[billkerbinsky]

Can't fix those. Going to add a note to the OP. They don't do anything, but they look ugly.

I think I'd rather see nodes with no parts instead of edges that go nowhere.

(You could turn it into a feature - briefly mention mods with parts at a node in the node description and you'd help players discover CTT-friendly mods ...)

[johnsonwax]

I think simpleCommandModules should default to hideEmpty = False because its the only part of the tree that is a prerequisite to a stock node, and therefore it should always be visible, even if empty. Also, this is a bug:

// Unhide Nanolathing

@RDNode:HAS[#id[nanolathing]]

{

@hideEmpty = True

@pos = -1118,1412,-1

}

Should be @hideEmpty = False

[MrCynical]

Can't fix those. Going to add a note to the OP. They don't do anything, but they look ugly.

It looks like Nanolathing is still missing even with the latest version of NFConstruction. I don't think its possible to research exotic alloys or the tech after it without it.

[johnsonwax]

Here's a draft of the flowchart. Rather than use descriptors it uses the node name, so if you are trying to put a part in a given node you can trace the dependencies back and see exactly which node names you need to unlock. If you have access to a printer that can print tabloid, it will be legible (tiny!) and you can scribble all over it.

SVG Version

PDF Version

I didn't incorporate the comments above (mine or others) - it's based on the currently released version. I took some liberties with the various branches and expanded them into what I felt were logical stock nodes, along with a bit of guidance as to what I thought went in each branch. Please:

Point out any structural errors.

Provide feedback on the branches and the notes.

Any other feedback.

[Nertea]

Well all of you who want the nodes unhidden are diametrically opposed to the earlier consensus. So everyone can argue about it, decide, and in a few days we'll do whatever the majority prefers . Just to be clear, the options are:

1) Hide all nodes by default

Pros: Cleaner tree

Cons: Trailing links present when nodes are hidden

2) Hide most nodes by default, except a few that are always unhidden

Pros: Clean-ish tree

Cons: There will always be trailing links in higher branches unless all those are unhidden, some empty nodes

3) Show all nodes by default

Pros: No trailing links

Cons: Many nodes with no content.

@johnsonwax: looks nice!

[Lorunification]

What happens in case (1) if the node i want to research has some hidden nodes as requirement? Will i be able to research them without that requirements?

My vote would be (3) since that eliminates every possible confusion. Question is how to handle empty nodes. Would be unfortunate if one has to spend 1000 Science to unlock a node with no parts.

[MrCynical]

Personally I'd prefer 3). Hiding nodes seems to be creating another point for things to break (e.g. by a prerequisite tech being missing), and doesn't really seem to add anything. With the whole tree visible there will be no problems like that, and no ugly arrows connected to nothing either. If a branch has no parts on it I can just not research it (or I can think hmm - which mods are using this, and go looking for them).

[ExavierMacbeth]

I also vote for #3.

As to the question of paying for empty nodes... To be honest most of them are much later in the tech tree so its not that big an issue. Didn't squad add proper biomes to all the other planets in 0.90? There should be plenty of obtainable science at that point. And thats not counting any mods that add more science generating components.

If you worried about the lore of an empty node... Well no all science projects net a usable product

[Yemo]

I vote for #3 as well. It is just the least prone to error/confusion. Imho it would also fit the target audience of the CTT (heavy mod users).

And since the content of the unresearched nodes is visible, people can decide for themselves whether they want to research empty nodes.

I have 2 more suggestions:

1. Could you swap out the simple command modules for the enhanced survivability node from the previous CTT? It was a good place for all those airbags, floaties and improved chutes/heatshields. Maybe move it up to the 90 science tier? I guess there is very little (no?) demand for "simple" command modules, which do not fit into the flight control right next to it. And if there are parts fitting, I wonder whether they are researched for extra 45 science when you need flightControl anyway.

2. The hydroponics node was never populated in the 0.90 CTT. It was always empty since RoverDudes aeroponics parts would come with short term habitation or so (much later). If you want to keep a node over there, you could use something like "orbitalStations" instead of hydroponics. I did this for the SETI-BalanceMod in 0.90 and transferred some early station parts into it, which would fit nicely between recycling and shortTermHabitation.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Yemo

[johnsonwax]

The problem with the hidden nodes is that if they are a dependency and nobody unlocks them (regardless of whether parts are installed) then you're just screwed - there's no remedy.

So, my vote would be to make the terminating nodes hidden, but leave all dependency nodes visible simply to address this problem. I don't see the problem with having to unlock empty nodes - it's just intermediate R&D needed before something can be viable - the capacitance multitouch screen pretty much only existed in R&D form until it was combined with a bunch of other technology to make the modern smartphone viable. Happens all the time.

Now, the right solution might be #4: changes to MM that can parse the parts list after first pass, and attach a parts list to each node and put that in the techtree cache. That way you could have (admittedly often huge and convoluted) selectors that could check for parts in a given node, as well as any subsequent nodes in the tree, and then hide or unhide as appropriate. And if it's written to cache, devs could dump that file and see where all of their parts land in the tree along with stock and others to help balance things out.

With this approach devs would only need to attach a part to the node they want it in, and the CTT MM file would do all the rest. It would also handle the case where CTT is inserting nodes ahead of stock.

[Cerebrate]

I'm very much for 3, for all the above reasons - plus that, as a heavy mod user, if I see an empty node, I can start shopping for something interesting to fill it with...

-c

[RoverDude]

#3 - I like seeing the entire tree exposed.

[kcs123]

#3 - Less confusing for both, players and modders.

While tech tree looks decent already is it possible to have several starting nodes, not just one. Also some of parts shold be reorganized slightly.

There was a lot good suggestions in other TechTree thread, you might want to look at this for ideas.

[Nertea]

I'm still going to sit on the update for a day or two.

#3 - Less confusing for both, players and modders.

While tech tree looks decent already is it possible to have several starting nodes, not just one. Also some of parts shold be reorganized slightly.

There was a lot good suggestions in other TechTree thread, you might want to look at this for ideas.

Out of scope, please read OP.

I vote for #3 as well. It is just the least prone to error/confusion. Imho it would also fit the target audience of the CTT (heavy mod users).

And since the content of the unresearched nodes is visible, people can decide for themselves whether they want to research empty nodes.

I have 2 more suggestions:

1. Could you swap out the simple command modules for the enhanced survivability node from the previous CTT? It was a good place for all those airbags, floaties and improved chutes/heatshields. Maybe move it up to the 90 science tier? I guess there is very little (no?) demand for "simple" command modules, which do not fit into the flight control right next to it. And if there are parts fitting, I wonder whether they are researched for extra 45 science when you need flightControl anyway.

2. The hydroponics node was never populated in the 0.90 CTT. It was always empty since RoverDudes aeroponics parts would come with short term habitation or so (much later). If you want to keep a node over there, you could use something like "orbitalStations" instead of hydroponics. I did this for the SETI-BalanceMod in 0.90 and transferred some early station parts into it, which would fit nicely between recycling and shortTermHabitation.

Simple Command Modules is for things that are between the Mk1-2 pod and the Mk1 pod. I can think of dozens. I have things to put in hydroponics eventually.

[RoverDude]

Also, Hydroponics (and that entire tree from science on down) is used with MKS/OKS.

[SoundReaper]

What happens in case (1) if the node i want to research has some hidden nodes as requirement? Will i be able to research them without that requirements?

I have exactly the same question. Can we unlock a node that requires a hidden node ?

If yes, maybe finding a way to programmatically change the requirements of node that require hidden node ?

I mean, if A require B and B require C and B is hidden, now A require C.

If this is not possible, I think (3) is the best solution, avoiding all confusion.

[kcs123]

Oh, sorry, didn't read carefully OP.

Still, even if you don't want to rearange parts (left it to modders decision), multiple starting nodes instead just one starting node like vanilla game could allow more customization for all moders and anyone else who wants to extend this mod in future.

Wider tree at root will allow more customization and easier maintenance in future when more mods become supported with this one.

[Chyort]

gotta vote for #3 as well.

With the old stock tree and nodes not showing up until stuff was unlocked, there was some degree of guess and check.

"Ok, this node is junk, but there might be something after it!"

So with CTT you ended up with possibly blank nodes that led to dead-ends. Annoying to say the least, and the best thing to do was to hide them entirely.

But with the current tree showing everything at the start it is easy to see where you are going. And i would like to see CTT continue this as well. Seeing everything, even with empty nodes, is preferable.

Not to mention it would be easier on modders. They don't have to unlock the nodes they want to use, and consider dependancies and everything else.

[hoojiwana]

My vote is for #3, everything visible from the start, let's people plan out which way in the tree they need to go to get what they want.

[FreeThinker]

Note That KSP Extended Now supports CTT 2.0

I did made some tweaks to the TechTree which I think should be made to CTT as well:

@TechTree:AFTER[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[advFusionReactions]]
    {
        @anyToUnlock = False
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[antimatterPower]]
    {
        @anyToUnlock = False
        Parent
        {
            parentID = exoticFuelStorage
            lineFrom = RIGHT
            lineTo = LEFT
        }
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[exoticAlloys]]
    {
        Parent
        {
            parentID = metaMaterials
            lineFrom = RIGHT
            lineTo = LEFT
        }
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[highEnergyScience]]
    {
        @anyToUnlock = False
        Parent
        {
            parentID = highTechElectricalSystems
            lineFrom = RIGHT
            lineTo = LEFT
        }
    }
}

Edited May 4, 2015 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

I would vote for #2 and create some kind of dll which does for us automatically. You could call it AutoHideTechnode plugin, and hides all nodes that are pointless. PErhaps we can rip the functionality out of the old TechManager which has this as a feature.

[ZodiusInfuser]

I continue to vote for #1. Only nodes with actual mod content in should be visible imo. For example, if I don't have a warp drive mod installed, why should I have any nodes present related to it? That just means I'll never be able to completely unlock the tree, or I waste lots of time collecting science to unnecessarily unlock them. I can live with a few dangling arrows.

On an unrelated note, I missed the change in position of offworld manufacturing. The previous layout with Orbital Assembly made sense for my planned progression of Infernal Robotics with CTT, but the name and description of Offworld Manufacturing no longer matches that plan (which was essentially a place for heavy actuators). Is there the prospect of it being renamed and/or its description altered?

[johnsonwax]

I continue to vote for #1. Only nodes with actual mod content in should be visible imo. For example, if I don't have a warp drive mod installed, why should I have any nodes present related to it? That just means I'll never be able to completely unlock the tree, or I waste lots of time collecting science to unnecessarily unlock them. I can live with a few dangling arrows.

But what if you want to get to a node that does have parts you need, but you can't unlock it because a requisite node is hidden? You're completely shut down at that point - you can't get to that node at all, ever.

[ZodiusInfuser]

But what if you want to get to a node that does have parts you need, but you can't unlock it because a requisite node is hidden? You're completely shut down at that point - you can't get to that node at all, ever.

Then it's up to each mod maker to make sure that doesn't happen for their mod (as explained in the ForModders guide), or to CTT to ensure that prerequisites are ANY rather than ALL (except where its branching off stock nodes).

I've already setup the configs for my mod to follow the former.

Edited May 5, 2015 by ZodiusInfuser