[1.3.x] SETI, Unmanned before Manned [Patreon]

[Yemo]

GameData folder: http://imgur.com/EhdiBfB

I don't have the contracts part of this mod installed, though it looks pretty nice. I just assumed it was related to this mod because it first appeared with the booster. Maybe it is just a consequence of only having a limited number of crew modules, though that isn't a problem in stock either...

Here is the savegame if you want to check out the stranded Kerbals: http://www.filedropper.com/savegameremotetech

Hm, I ve never experienced those misplaced kerbals before.

But I do see some issue with your GameData folder:

1. Only use the latest module manager, never multiple ones. (Maybe delete everything below "WaypointManager" folder and then put the latest modulemanager in, all the other necessary files should get rebuild, and you get rid of all the unnecessary ones).

2. The CommunityTechTree mod is required for SETIctt to work (Quill18 forgot that too, thats why his tech tree looked so glitched and rather small).

3. I strongly recommend CustomBarnKit with SETIctt, you will have action groups from the start and Kerbals have a fixed hiring fee.

From the OP, that is how it should look like if every SETI mod is installed with requirements + KerbalEngineer (CustomBarnKit is missing, have to update the screenshot):

Edited July 6, 2015 by Yemo

[Svm420]

Not sure if you noticed this Yemo, but the variable scienceMultiplier can only be an integer meaning only whole numbers. I mention this as you ave it as 0.3 in your cfg. Have you tried setting it to 1 and then maybe science wont be multiplied? That maybe why you arent getting what you expect from the lab see this thread

[Yemo]

Not sure if you noticed this Yemo, but the variable scienceMultiplier can only be an integer meaning only whole numbers. I mention this as you ave it as 0.3 in your cfg. Have you tried setting it to 1 and then maybe science wont be multiplied? That maybe why you arent getting what you expect from the lab see this thread

Thank you very much!

I set it to 1 for both MPL and the StationScience Lab. To keep the latter one competitive, it researches quite a bit faster while only requiring 3 kerbals.

The new "hotfix" update also (temporarily) contains the CTT itself (with license and attribution and so on).

This should prevent some of the install issues due to missing dependencies, which results in a glitched and incomplete TechTree.

I prefer to direct people to the thread of the mod I build upon, but given the circumstances at the moment, I feel that an exception is ok in this case.

Looking forward to the next KSP videos by Quill18 (with RemoteTech,TAC LifeSupport and SETI)!

Download: SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.0.1 (for KSP 1.0.4)

Packaging Changes

• The SETIctt download now includes (redistributes) the CTT (by Nertea) itself
  
• This should avoid some of the install issues, especially considering recent events/circumstances
  
• Please make sure you only have the latest ModuleManager installed
  

Science Rebalancing

• "Someone" at Squad decided to set one of the MobileProcessingLab multipliers to be an integer
  
• Which severely restricts rebalancing of this imbalanced part/module and this is undocumented
  
• There is no other reason to do so, other than to restrict/punish config modding
  
• I hereby protest against this kind of intentional modding annoyance/restriction
  
• So I had to set that multiplier to 1 again, for the MPL...
  
• To make the StationScience lab superior, it now has a lower researchTime exponent and only a 3 kerbal requirement
  
• I can only urge Squad to get their stuff together again and rethink their priorities
  
• Or hire someone who does it for them, those are gamedev kindergarten mistakes/errors in judgement
  
• There is a reason why KSP forums and twitch channels are so deserted compared to pre 1.0 release
  
• tl,dr: Integer multiplier for modding config, *censored..., whats next, binary for mass values?
  

Edited July 6, 2015 by Yemo

[kcs123]

While progressing trough career I have found that level one buildings for SPH/runway and VAB/launchpad are quite limiting.

Craft weight limit is more/less understandable, height/width to some degree too, but part number count is overkill in stock level one building. Especialy when you need to fine tune craft if you build it for FAR.

Optimal part number/weight/hight limit could be somewhere between current stock value and somewhere between 60-80% of stock level two building values for those.

Level two building should increase those slightly too, so it does not become useless building before upgrading to level three.

Just suggestion if you plan to modify those trough MM and CustomBarnKit mod.

[Yemo]

While progressing trough career I have found that level one buildings for SPH/runway and VAB/launchpad are quite limiting.

Craft weight limit is more/less understandable, height/width to some degree too, but part number count is overkill in stock level one building. Especialy when you need to fine tune craft if you build it for FAR.

Optimal part number/weight/hight limit could be somewhere between current stock value and somewhere between 60-80% of stock level two building values for those.

Level two building should increase those slightly too, so it does not become useless building before upgrading to level three.

Just suggestion if you plan to modify those trough MM and CustomBarnKit mod.

Optimally I would like to have more steps for the building progression and a more reasonable limitation setup, including separate stats for SPH and VAB.

maxMass for the launch pad upgrades

maxDimensions for the VAB/SPH upgrades (but the vertical VAB limit = horizontal SPH limit and so on...)

no part limits

But I wanted to wait until CustomBarnKit allows for more steps in the progression.

Then set really tight initial limits (but still allowing for early planes) and smaller steps. I ll have to rethink whether the "no part limits" would work.

[kcs123]

I agree that SPH/VAB should use separate values.

Still waiting for few mods to update until works bugs free in 1.04, so I didn't checked carefully what was improved since 1.0.2.

Mostly I found part number count overkill when comes to plane designs, since you need to combine a lot of parts: wing surfaces, control surfaces, engines, air intakes, wheels, struts etc.

That was making level one building useless, I have forced to grind money and upgrade SPH/VAB runway and launchpad to be able to build anything usefull for space program.

[rofltehcat]

The problems with the rescue quests seems to be resolved after I installed the rest of the required mods. Sorry for the inconvenience, I just assumed quill's list contained all the requirements. Thanks for the help!

[wandererobtm101]

I installed SETI CTT today and loving it. It gives me the unmanned start I needed but without the steep curve of better than manned.

One question though, I am using USI life support and I see that SETI CTT moves the supplies minipak to recyclables but leaves the mulch and fertilizer packs in survivability. This seems backwards but before I switch that around, I'm curious what the motivation for that change was?

Also, would you be interested in a config for Home Grown Rockets? I had that installed as well and you end up starting out with a manned pod.

Thanks for the great mods!

[Yemo]

I agree that SPH/VAB should use separate values.

Still waiting for few mods to update until works bugs free in 1.04, so I didn't checked carefully what was improved since 1.0.2.

Mostly I found part number count overkill when comes to plane designs, since you need to combine a lot of parts: wing surfaces, control surfaces, engines, air intakes, wheels, struts etc.

That was making level one building useless, I have forced to grind money and upgrade SPH/VAB runway and launchpad to be able to build anything usefull for space program.

I actually grew to like the challenge of building 30 part planes, like the example jets for the old SETI-BalanceMod. Nevertheless, such a limit does not make sense, so abolishing it would be the way to go.

Unfortunately it would make VAB upgrades useless at the moment, since I already made ActionGroups available from the start.

The problems with the rescue quests seems to be resolved after I installed the rest of the required mods. Sorry for the inconvenience, I just assumed quill's list contained all the requirements. Thanks for the help!

You are welcome. I only hope Quill18 fixes the issues with his install, it kind of gives a bad impression looking at the glitched out tech tree (also he must be missing quite some nodes, including the one for larger than 1.25m heatshields).

I installed SETI CTT today and loving it. It gives me the unmanned start I needed but without the steep curve of better than manned.

One question though, I am using USI life support and I see that SETI CTT moves the supplies minipak to recyclables but leaves the mulch and fertilizer packs in survivability. This seems backwards but before I switch that around, I'm curious what the motivation for that change was?

Also, would you be interested in a config for Home Grown Rockets? I had that installed as well and you end up starting out with a manned pod.

Thanks for the great mods!

Thank you!

If you want an epic SETI game, I recommend the hard reward settings (not the hard penalties, those just increase the grind), that really forces you to reconsider your designs/missions/progression decisions. Personally I prefer 50% science returns with DMagic installed.

Whoops, I started supporting USI LifeSupport before those parts were released, so I just did not take them into account for my configs. Will remedy that and move the new parts further back, thank you for the notice.

HGR is definately on my list (I nearly supported it for the old SETI-BalanceMod, together with Tantares, but it got shot down by KSP 1.0.x before I got there).

I can not promise to support it any time soon though, it has a lot of parts and more essential mods (especially ProceduralParts) are higher on my priority list. Though I always liked that it introduces 1.875m rocket engines, which works very well with the large to multi-small adapters, tweakscale and 3.75m fuel tanks...

Will take another look at it.

On another note, I just watched the last Quill18 twitch recording.

He had the Minmus & Kerbol mission. It seems as if he was so much in the mindset of stock KSP, that he immediately built a large manned vessel for a part of this mission, instead of even considering just shooting a small probe. Even though he uses TAC LifeSupport.

Another one of those habits from stock is, that he immediately aimed for the fuel lines in the tech tree.

Which in turn will make manned missions for everything even easier, since asparagus drastically helps with big payloads.

Unfortunately he already reached the fuel lines at the end of the episode, but for everyone else, I m really considering putting those fuel lines much further back.

From the 160 science node advancedFuelSystems to the 550 node highPerformanceFuelSystems. Which needs the R&D building level 3.

It would be much more in line with reality and imho it would really benefit the TechTree experience. Mid-game massive payloads (eg station parts, long range manned missions) would really cost more and orbital assembly would be more incentivised. It would really make sense to build a station in LKO first, instead of just asparagus it to Duna or so...

The fuel lines would come at the same tech level as the first colonization techs, which would give a nice progression feeling to it. Like in reality, further than LKO bases would not only become feasible due to habitation advances, but also due to propulsion/engineering progress.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Yemo

[ibanix]

Bug report.... the 'Manned Orbit for 72 hours' mission timer is actually set for 12 days.

[Lord Aurelius]

Bug report.... the 'Manned Orbit for 72 hours' mission timer is actually set for 12 days.

Technically, a day on Kerbin is 6 hours, so 72 hours is 12 Kerbin days.

[Yemo]

A (non-savegame breaking) tech tree revison is underway.

I already started in 0.9.0 with the aerospace techs doing some minor rearrangements and an addition to the aerospace tech line.

Now in 0.9.0.2 I continue to rearrange some lines, especially the actuator/composites swap and some other stuff around that corner. The enhancedSurvivability subline was moved downwards. A lot of new/changed interdependencies were formed in those areas as well. Essentially, more nodes depend on the construction line.

For 0.9.1 I plan to flesh out the rocketry line with some new nodes. The current changes in that corner were a preparation for those rearrangements. I also plan to add a new TAC LifeSupport only node between EarlyCommandModules and enhancedSurvivability, intended to contain the oxygen and water storage parts (the food storage parts were moved to the LifeSupport node, which is the new title of the Recycling node). The parent of that TAC LifeSupport only node is planned to be the EarlyCommandModules node (vertical parent).

As stated above, there might be some minor inconveniences for existing savegames, but since everything you already researched stays unlocked, there is nothing savegame breaking.

The major change in 0.9.0.2 is, that the fuel lines are considerably moved backwards and the B9 Procedural Parts are available much earlier at earlyAviation.

SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.0.2 (for KSP 1.0.4)

TechTree changes

• Some initial reordering in preparation for 0.9.1 overhaul of propulsion/fuelSystems area
  
• Composites and Actuator tech line positions swapped
  
• NuclearPropulsion additionally requires precisionPropulsion
  
• AdvancedFuelSystems requires advConstruction instead of propulsionSystems
  
• HighPerformanceFuelSystems additionally requires advMetalworks
  
• SupersonicFlight additionally requires advConstruction
  
• HighAltitudeFlight additionally requires specializedConstruction
  
• HypersonicFlight additionally requires composites
  
• BasicCommandModules additionally requires enhancedSurvivability
  
• Recycling node retitled to "Life Support"
  
• FuelLines much later @highPerformanceFuelSystems
  
• Mk2-R parachute moved to enhancedSurvivability (since Squad made it larger than the Mk16...)
  
• 3.75m Heatshield later @advSurvivability (yeah, one less empty node ;-) )
  
• Docking Port Sr. later @composites
  

TAC LifeSupport

• First step of TAC LifeSupport rearrangement
  
• Food containers later @recycling/LifeSupport node (kerbals still survive 360hours without food)
  
• TACLS WaterSplitter moved to hydroponics/EarlyOrbitalStations
  

USI LifeSupport

• New USI LifeSupport parts (including UniversalStorage ones) moved to appropriate nodes
  

B9 Procedural

• All B9 Procedural Parts moved to earlyAviation, so you can now build a proper biplane (with KAX)
  

[ibanix]

Technically, a day on Kerbin is 6 hours, so 72 hours is 12 Kerbin days.

Suddenly, this explains why the sun rises and sets so quickly. Thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok, I have a new problem: I have the 'Manned Kerbin Landing' mission, and it requires a mKerbinLander vehicle. How is this supposed to work? I made a lander in the required parameters (no chutes, no aero, includes crewman) but it doesn't fulfill the requirements of the mission when tested...

[Yemo]

Suddenly, this explains why the sun rises and sets so quickly. Thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

Ok, I have a new problem: I have the 'Manned Kerbin Landing' mission, and it requires a mKerbinLander vehicle. How is this supposed to work? I made a lander in the required parameters (no chutes, no aero, includes crewman) but it doesn't fulfill the requirements of the mission when tested...

Yep, I got used to the time conversion, but I have to keep it in mind for contracts, since RSS players use 24h days. So I only use hours in the files.

Did you reach an altitude of 500m with your vessel?

That is the tricky part, you need to get to 500m and then safely land without parachutes or aero parts. Should work the same as the unmanned landing contract.

If that does not work, could you provide a screenshot of you vessel?

[BahamutZer00]

I would like to try this mod out, but I'm having some difficulty with getting KSP to start (crash at title screen) when the SETI-tree and SETI-contract mods are installed. I'm using CKAN and am only getting this error when I put in these mods. Would you know of any mods that conflict with this one?

[Yemo]

I would like to try this mod out, but I'm having some difficulty with getting KSP to start (crash at title screen) when the SETI-tree and SETI-contract mods are installed. I'm using CKAN and am only getting this error when I put in these mods. Would you know of any mods that conflict with this one?

SETIctt would naturally conflict with other tech tree mods (except CTT of course).

SETIcontracts could conflict with other general contract progression mods (not the specific ones like AnomalySurveyContracts and RemoteTech and so on).

Could you provide a screenshot of your GameData and ContractPack folders?

Are you using the KSP 64bit for windows "hack"?

[BahamutZer00]

Actually, I worked out how to get everything working. I think what happened was I was very close to hitting the RAM limit and SETI mods were sending it over. It's the first time I've tried putting this many mods into the game. I found the active texture handler mod which got the game launching stably.

Trying this out with a new career mode, and have to say that the higher difficulty in the early game is pretty fun so far. I'm actually using SETI only for contract and tech trees, since others had minor issues with the parts packs I've installed. The progression seems to be distributed correctly with the interstellar, modular, spacey, realchutes, near future, and stationscience mods, so this may be the tech tree I'll go with for the next while.

Thanks for the quick help though!

[ibanix]

If that does not work, could you provide a screenshot of you vessel?

I'll do you one better, here's the .craft file: http://pastebin.com/rauDgpFt

- - - Updated - - -

That one wasn't working so well, so I went with this: http://pastebin.com/zE46C2bJ

which is also not working to complete the mission.

[Yemo]

I'll do you one better, here's the .craft file: http://pastebin.com/rauDgpFt

- - - Updated - - -

That one wasn't working so well, so I went with this: http://pastebin.com/zE46C2bJ

which is also not working to complete the mission.

Hm, that is strange.

I tested both of those vessels and both completed the manned Kerbin Landing contract.

Engine of first one blew off, as it had not enough atmospheric TWR, Engine of second one blew off as it had not enough ground clearance. But the contract is pretty lenient, as long as the pod + kerbal survive, it will complete the contract...

Have you tried canceling the contract and taking it again? (You might have to decline other 2star or so contracts, so it shows up again)?

For the vessel design, you could use an HRB, and use beams or girders to widen the landing base, since an HRB is pretty high for a lander. You might also want to limit the thrust to half or so.

Consider using the sepratrons upside down and fire them when you touch down, if they hae enough TWR, they will press you into the ground, preventing you from tipping over.

You could also drastically reduce your mass, by using a command seat + TakeCommand (mod). This would probably allow the 909 to have sufficient TWR for the job. VenStockRevamp introduces a LV-900, which is much better for this task, having much more atmo thrust.

Edited July 8, 2015 by Yemo

[kcs123]

Actually, I worked out how to get everything working. I think what happened was I was very close to hitting the RAM limit and SETI mods were sending it over. It's the first time I've tried putting this many mods into the game. I found the active texture handler mod which got the game launching stably.

Trying this out with a new career mode, and have to say that the higher difficulty in the early game is pretty fun so far. I'm actually using SETI only for contract and tech trees, since others had minor issues with the parts packs I've installed. The progression seems to be distributed correctly with the interstellar, modular, spacey, realchutes, near future, and stationscience mods, so this may be the tech tree I'll go with for the next while.

Thanks for the quick help though!

If you are short on available RAM, besides ATM and DDS converter you can try to force DX11 or opengl, whatever works better for your graphic card.

I'm using this for target (open properties on your shortcut):

"E:\Kerbal Space Program\KSP.exe" -force-d3d11

That gives additional 1GB of RAM that can be used for mods.

Open GL have similar but different command, can't recall from top of my head, but you can find it if you search KSP forums.

Hope this helps.

[Yemo]

I m currently making a new ToDo list for SETIctt, any recommendations/mod requests are very welcome!

I also added TakeCommand, TweakScale and VenStockRevamp to the recommended mods for SETIctt.

TakeCommand should also make the manned Kerbin Lander contract much easier, since you can use a command chair.

Does anyone know of a relatively lightweight engine mod, I m really missing RLA Stockalike for variety?

0.9.1 Current plans:

- TechTree rework (mainly Propulsion/Fuel area, TAC LifeSupport special node)

- Procedural Fairings (checking)

- ProceduralParts (major rework based on old BalanceMod, though not everything might make it for 0.9.1)

- RealChutes (checking)

Additional plans in order of general priority (but the smaller the mod, the more likely it can slip into an earlier spot)

High Priority:

- RLA Stockalike (as soon as it is updated for 1.0.x)

- Landertrons (as soon as it is updated for 1.0.x)

- CargoTransportationSolutions

- Karbonite

- KipEngineering docking ports and hubs

- Dr. Jet's Chop Shop

- OSE Workshop (checking)

Medium:

- HGR (especially for those 1.875m sizes)

- Mk2 Expansion

- NearFuture (some more checking together with KSPI Extended installed)

- UniversalStorage (works, but calls for a rebalance, which I m hesitant to do atm)

- USI Exploration

- USI Survivability

Low:

- B9 Aerospace (so great, but so big)

- Tantares (big and needed a serious balancing pass last time I checked)

- QuizTechAero (waiting for VTOL parts without attached engines)

- Kerbonov (needs update, as far as I know)

- Mk2 Essentials (needs update, as far as I know)

- - - Updated - - -

I m also wondering whether I should keep redistributing the CTT together with SETIctt.

Generally I would really prefer to link to a mods thread instead of redistributing the mod.

Is this one of those special cases where it makes sense to redistribute?

Edited July 8, 2015 by Yemo

[SkyMarshal]

I guess I'll report this here as I don't really see an issue tracker anywhere: SETI - Community Tech Tree sets the masses of the thermometer and the barometer to zero... which, in Squad's especially derpy Deadly Reentry knockoff, results in a near-zero thermal mass. They explode when hit with a lukewarm fart :/ (For some reason, the barometer seems more volatile than the thermometer)

[Wolfox]

I guess I'll report this here as I don't really see an issue tracker anywhere: SETI - Community Tech Tree sets the masses of the thermometer and the barometer to zero... which, in Squad's especially derpy Deadly Reentry knockoff, results in a near-zero thermal mass. They explode when hit with a lukewarm fart :/ (For some reason, the barometer seems more volatile than the thermometer)

Do you place them inside Service Bay? That is known to cause many physicless parts to melt spontaneously.

[BahamutZer00]

Not sure if you need to do anything for it, but do you need to do anything for supporting the necrobones mods (spaceY, modular, fuel tanks).

[Waz]

This tree is excellent, especially when coupled with RemoteTech and a Life Support mod to further reinforce the "unmanned first" principle. However, this bit:

- MaterialsBay and MysteryGoo can not be collected, but can still be reset by scientists (so you can use it multiple times, if you transmit)

doesn't really seem to fit the scope of the mod. Or at least there needs to be more advanced versions later in the tree (non-Jr versions?), as otherwise there is really no point taking them even as far as Duna, especially since all the others transmit at 100% (and so having a scientist just for these 2 poor experiments is pointless). What is even the logic behind it? If the scientist can reset it, he must be removing/replacing the active ingredients, so he must be able to Take the data as well.