Jump to content

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


Nertea

Recommended Posts

Make sure you have Module Manager installed. Particularly, make sure there's only one version, it's the latest version, and it sits directly in GameData (not in any subfolders).

After that, make sure you installed the mods correctly. Some mods, like Near Future, are very sensitive to folder structure. Install everything exactly as it is delivered, don't try to "tidy up" your GameData folder with manually created folders. I used to do that, it really breaks a lot of things :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent, sounds good. I'll review the colonization nodes since in chatting with rabidninjawombat there's room for a new one to cover civpop

Yup in reviewing placement, I wouldn't mind seeing a node beyond Long Term Habitation, for my largest parts, if that's suitable with you Nertea, and Roverdude (would probably be a place for the Larger mks MarkIV's, or whatever your gonna call em Rover :P)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new tech node looks very good , better than I anticipated, I only have a small request for a name change. Please Rename "super heavy nuclear propulsion" into something more generic like "exotic nuclear propusion"". This allows me to use the technode for the most exotic nuclear technologies which do not nessisary have to be ""super heavy".

For Insteallar I'm one tech short for the most advanced engines. I would like to have a second antimatter technode (10000 cost). You could call it Advanced Antimatter Power. This will also give players something to choose from. Right now there is only 1 end tech.

I also noticed a mistake in the name "Large Nuclear Power"which we already established to be called "Improved Nuclear Power".

Names in the gliffy do not necessarily represent the ingame names because we changed a few several times.

Nertea, I've installed CTT (And a bunch of compatible mods) and in the R&D none of the nodes have any parts!

Probably not my fault. I can't say much without a log, a few screenshots of your gamedata and a list of mods.

Yup in reviewing placement, I wouldn't mind seeing a node beyond Long Term Habitation, for my largest parts, if that's suitable with you Nertea, and Roverdude (would probably be a place for the Larger mks MarkIV's, or whatever your gonna call em Rover :P)

Yeah just let me know what you would like (even in a generic fashion) and I can draw it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally finished writing a plugin to hide all the empty tech nodes, and switch around the tech lines accordingly. There's still a case or two I need to work out where the nodes don't switch parents like they ought too, but those cases should be rare enough that no one will see them.

So hey, no more empty tech nodes!!!:D

The plugin should work with any tree that's a derivation of the CTT so long as the nodes aren't in crazy places (like left of the "start" node). So trees like SETI and Open Tree should work, as long as changes that were made were through Module Manager. Didn't test them though.

Here's the download and some pics. I'm not used to coding correctly, so the logic is probably messier than it should be... and without checks...

Download

The download link is broken, any chance you could re-upload it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That works for me :)

I'm assuming those two nodes would be place right after "Long-Term Habitation" ?

Yuppers. So the MKS Mk-IV's in Colonization, your stuff in Long Term hab (since my upper limit is still based on actual kerbals, possibly some gain and loss, but not the same type system as CivPop)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear lord people. There was so much whining when using the all-hidden approach, and there's so much whining now. Read the damn OP. You can't have it both ways, you either get trailing arrows or you get empty nodes.

If someone writes a nice little plugin, I'll bundle it, but until then... please stop complaining about this.

Just curious Nertea, do you plan on including ev0's plugin in a future version?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious Nertea, do you plan on including ev0's plugin in a future version?

I like the plugin as an opt-in, so everyone can choose with a simple click in ckan. Keep in mind it would also affect other tech trees/mods if distributed with CTT itself.

Since there has been some demand for starting unmanned without any messing around with part stats or the positions of mod parts in the tech tree, I just made a barebone spin-off for that purpose. It is specifically compatible with CTT (and even fills two empty nodes of CTT, which seems to be very important to some people). Self-deactivates if certain other (especially CTT based) tech trees are detected, like EngineeringTechTree, OpenTechTree, RP-0 and SETI-CommunityTechTree.

Download: Unmanned before Manned 0.9.0 (for KSP 1.0.4)

Some Probe Cores are available earlier (Stayputnik at start), as well as parts relevant for probe cores, like batteries, simple solar panels, antenna, small adapters and decouplers and so on. The Mk1 Command Pod is moved to a later node (flightControl for the stock tech tree, enhancedSurvivability for the CommunityTechTree).

Barebone starting unmanned mod, thus no part stat modding except for SAS changes on 2 stock probe cores.

Compatible with the stock tech tree as well as the CommunityTechTree.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the plugin as an opt-in, so everyone can choose with a simple click in ckan. Keep in mind it would also affect other tech trees/mods if distributed with CTT itself.

Yeah I figure opt-in is better. I was going to put it on ckan after 1.1, but it's taking longer than I thought. I'll take care of that with 1.05 instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't tested this mod yet so i have one question, i assume this doesnt replace the old tech tree but really just expands it. If that is the case, the mods that dont take advantage of this mod still work and the parts they add are available in the "stock" part of the tech tree, is this correct? Basically im just wondering if there is going to be problems if i have mods that dont support this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds fine to me. I'll adjust it a bit later today....

I would like to! We will see though.

I haven't tested this mod yet so i have one question, i assume this doesnt replace the old tech tree but really just expands it. If that is the case, the mods that dont take advantage of this mod still work and the parts they add are available in the "stock" part of the tech tree, is this correct? Basically im just wondering if there is going to be problems if i have mods that dont support this

Yes there should be no problem, that is the exact intention of the mod. There is not need for mods to explicitly support it for basic functionality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The entry of CKAN claims that CTT and Engineering Tech Tree are conflicts, but this simply isn't true.

In fact, if you have ETT, you need to install CTT if you want to use any of the mods with an "if CTT then CTT node = x" file, otherwise the parts are placed in the stock TT node.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The entry of CKAN claims that CTT and Engineering Tech Tree are conflicts, but this simply isn't true.

In fact, if you have ETT, you need to install CTT if you want to use any of the mods with an "if CTT then CTT node = x" file, otherwise the parts are placed in the stock TT node.

Maybe bring it up in the CKAN thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the author of the mod who sets the CKAN dependancies and conflicts, not CKAN's dev.

Not all mod authors bother to make their mods CKAN compatible, interested users do this as well. In fact some mod authors prefer CKAN discussion to be relegated to the CKAN thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, this is the proper place for it.

CKAN's people will just tell you not to post in their thread, and instead direct you towards opening an issue on their github. Which will likely get the issue fixed, but isn't terribly conducive to mod authors keeping track of their metadata files. It's very confusing if you, as an author who made their own CKAN definition, come back to it after a couple months to make a change, only to find out that people completely unrelated to you have changed your metadata multiple times to suit their own ideas without even mentioning it to you. That's why you should always come to the mod thread first and ask, like Prezombie did. Even if the author doesn't bother to manage their mod's CKAN listing, it's the polite thing to point out/request permission for changes made to it.

In case of CTT (and many of Nertea's mods), I'm responsible for most of the current relationship settings, such as the conflicts. Technically. Unless changes are made without my knowledge, of course. I intentionally set conflict entires for all tech trees I found at the time that weren't specifically CTT extensions (like SETI is), because the first and foremost assumption is that a tech tree mod throws out the stock tree and replaces it with a new one. That makes any two such mods incompatible by default. I can't really invest the time to track all of them all the time on the off chance that one of them adds a CTT compatibility mode. However, it's a perfectly easy thing to change once pointed out, so I'll make a pull request later today. :)

Edited by Streetwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...