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

[Prezombie]

The CTT seems to have overlooked RemoteTech's 88-88 and HG-55. They're still in electronics and automation, and are more effective than the other antennas at that tech tier. Plus the HG-55, a 25Gm dish, comes after the 88-88, a 40GM antenna. The 88-88 is better in almost every way.

Most of the structural parts of OKS could be moved down a few tiers to flesh out the stationparts and stationscience nodes, and some of the more advanced parts in SP and SS could be pushed back up.

None of the stationparts parts really belong in hydroponics, they should be moved to the orbital stations line.

USI Life support having all the life support tanks from the mini to the size 3 in the same place seems rather slapdash. A single mini pack is plenty for a trip to the mun, the inline Life support tanks are for long term trips, the larger tanks could be moved to the storage tech line.

Also, a version of CTT with hideEmpty = True on all the nodes would be a nice feature for people who don't have every mod installed.

Edited October 18, 2015 by Prezombie

[Yemo]

Just wanted to check, does SETI CTT change which MechJeb modules are unlocked together, or is there some other reason the maneuver planner didn't unlock with the proper MechJeb item in the tech tree?

Edit: Oh, nevermind. I hadn't upgraded my tracking station yet. Makes sense that I'd have to have the ability to plan maneuvers before I can use the maneuver planner.

Yep, it is handled by the building upgrades. I do did not change anything with regards to mech jeb and the maneuver unlocks (only changed action group unlocks in this regard).

Don't quote me on this until 1.0.5 hits the shelves, but I don't imagine that contextual contracts will have too big an impact on Contract Configurator. And even if they do, I should be able to make changes to Contract Configurator so that the contract packs aren't affected. Of course, I can't guarantee this, as there were a couple changes in 1.0 that I needed to just drop support for some lesser used features of Contract Configurator that used to use stuff that had changed significantly in stock. But if something shows up that breaks a feature of Contract Configurator that is widely used, I'll just rewrite it so there's no perceived difference to the contract pack authors (and users).

So as long as I'm around, Contract Configurator should be able to insulate contract packs from a lot of the contract changes in stock. I can't really speak for all the other areas though.

I m interested to see what they come up with, but I certainly appreciate the possibility to deactivate the new contracts.

Certain basic environmental stability is imho the basis for modding.

Thank you very much for your continued effort in this regard!

The CTT seems to have overlooked RemoteTech's 88-88 and HG-55. They're still in electronics and automation, and are more effective than the other antennas at that tech tier. Plus the HG-55, a 25Gm dish, comes after the 88-88, a 40GM antenna. The 88-88 is better in almost every way.

Most of the structural parts of OKS could be moved down a few tiers to flesh out the stationparts and stationscience nodes, and some of the more advanced parts in SP and SS could be pushed back up.

None of the stationparts parts really belong in hydroponics, they should be moved to the orbital stations line.

USI Life support having all the life support tanks from the mini to the size 3 in the same place seems rather slapdash. A single mini pack is plenty for a trip to the mun, the inline Life support tanks are for long term trips, the larger tanks could be moved to the storage tech line.

Also, a version of CTT with hideEmpty = True on all the nodes would be a nice feature for people who don't have every mod installed.

The remote tech antennas are imho not very balanced, especially in terms of mass. I added the KR-14 config to alleviate some of the problems, but the rebalancing was done in the 0.90 BalanceMod and thus did not make it to ksp 1.0.x. If you are really interested in balanced devices, you might try to use elements from the old SETI-PartMod-RemoteTech.cfg from the 0.90 BalanceMod, but I can not guarantee that it works. I hope to revive it in ksp 1.1 provided squad lets me.

The HG-55 (together with the whole Asteroid Day mod) is not supported, since it lacks any hint of balance at all. Might change in the future, but very low on the priority list, since the whole mod is unbalanced as hell and does not really offer anything of common interest, only some very unbalanced speciality parts.

I plan to revisit MKS/OKS and the whole colonization/station line in 1.1, currently there are no special SETIctt configs for MKS/OKS. The last patch just introduced MKS Lite configs, unfortunately one day before RoverDude made some CTT configs for his core pack. So I ll probably remove the SETIctt configs for the reactors again.

I ll keep your suggestions in mind for that revisit, there are now a lot more base building mods available, so I ll try to find a balance between those.

Hydroponics is retitled in the SETIctt, in which it should appear to be one of the two station nodes (I do not remember which one). I just kept the underlying node for compatibility. The same was done for CTT simple command modules or so.

The life support tanks (USI and TAC) were in different nodes in previous versions. Unfortunately it was just too much effort to keep track of all the involved parts (USI, TAC, procedural) for too little gameplay difference (virtually none, since diameter is already determined by fuel tanks, engines and fairings). Especially since I would have to make the procedural versions stick to the same form factors. Same problem for stack batteries, which only have one "step" now.

The hideEmpty = True unfortunately only works for last nodes. In ksp 0.90 tech manager a feature existed to hide more than last nodes, but this changed with 1.0.x. I thus can only use it for certain side nodes (eg TAC life support node). You might try the plugin by ev0 to hide more empty nodes.

Thank you for your feedback! Especially the colonization/station nodes need some work. The CTT itself is planned to change in that regard as well and I will have to wait until then (and ksp 1.1).

[goldenpsp]

The CTT seems to have overlooked RemoteTech's 88-88 and HG-55. They're still in electronics and automation, and are more effective than the other antennas at that tech tier. Plus the HG-55, a 25Gm dish, comes after the 88-88, a 40GM antenna. The 88-88 is better in almost every way.

Most of the structural parts of OKS could be moved down a few tiers to flesh out the stationparts and stationscience nodes, and some of the more advanced parts in SP and SS could be pushed back up.

None of the stationparts parts really belong in hydroponics, they should be moved to the orbital stations line.

USI Life support having all the life support tanks from the mini to the size 3 in the same place seems rather slapdash. A single mini pack is plenty for a trip to the mun, the inline Life support tanks are for long term trips, the larger tanks could be moved to the storage tech line.

Also, a version of CTT with hideEmpty = True on all the nodes would be a nice feature for people who don't have every mod installed.

Keep in mind that none of those issues are actually CTT's CTT is just a framework. It's the modders for each individual mod that determine which node they want to put their items in.

[LuckyOne]

Hi! I just started using the SETI community tech tree, and when that mod is active none of the reaction wheels work anymore (including those integrated into command modules). The part menu also does not show any values for torque and such. Upon disabling the community tech tree, the part description is correct again and the wheels work. Is that a bug or is that a feature? This is my modlist, just in case: https://www.dropbox.com/s/rj2i0grdykzqz5i/currentmods.ckan?dl=0

[kcs123]

@LuckyOne, when you use CKAN, check out that folders from deinstalled mods are removed as well.

Some mods write their own config files and such that were not in folder when CKAN installed mod first time.

CKAN policy is that it does not touch files that were not installed trough CKAN. Because of that mod folder remains in gamedata folder, although with only config files inside.

Problem arise due to nature how module manager works. Trough scripts it checks if some mod folder exist, not what were actual files inside and apply some configs to parts like you have properly installed mod. I wrote my expirience with wierd camera bug, post is in this thread, somewhere, it was couple of months old post though.

I suggest that you make a list/backup of your installed mods trough CKAN, deinstall every mod, check out gamedata folder and delete all folders that comes with some mods, be careful to not delete main SQUAD game folder that contain vanilla game parts. Then install back your favorite mods with CKAN once again. If I'm right, everything should work fine.

[nobodyhasthis]

@LuckyOne, when you use CKAN, check out that folders from deinstalled mods are removed as well.

Some mods write their own config files and such that were not in folder when CKAN installed mod first time.

CKAN policy is that it does not touch files that were not installed trough CKAN. Because of that mod folder remains in gamedata folder, although with only config files inside.

Problem arise due to nature how module manager works. Trough scripts it checks if some mod folder exist, not what were actual files inside and apply some configs to parts like you have properly installed mod. I wrote my expirience with wierd camera bug, post is in this thread, somewhere, it was couple of months old post though.

I suggest that you make a list/backup of your installed mods trough CKAN, deinstall every mod, check out gamedata folder and delete all folders that comes with some mods, be careful to not delete main SQUAD game folder that contain vanilla game parts. Then install back your favorite mods with CKAN once again. If I'm right, everything should work fine.

This is excellent advice. DO NOT TRUST CKAN TO UNINSTALL. Sorry to type it that way but Kcs123 has got it absolutely spot on in his description of why most problems pop up whilst using CKAN.

It is not a error in CKAN but just a clash of features. The way I do it is to copy the vanilla game folder. Then add the extra copy of the game into the CKAN loading menu. Install mods via your .CKAN file and the modded game will run fine. I currently have five copies of ksp all with separate mod packs running. CKAN just asks which one I want to load and boots the right one.

If I uninstall a mod for any reason. I also make a new .CKAN file and the totally delete the whole game folder. With the only exception being the save file if I want to keep it. Then I copy the vanilla game folder again and use the .CKAN to put the mods back in. Boom back in business in around 30 seconds. A bit drastic but then there is no folders from deinstalled mods or crappy config files left to mess the game up.

[Sokar408]

I am using SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.3 and I'm confused about why material and goo experiments has been marked as not collectible. There has to be a reason, but I can't seem to deduce it, and without a reason, its hard to justify keeping it this way. So before changing my personal use, please inform me; Why was this change made?

[kcs123]

I am using SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.3 and I'm confused about why material and goo experiments has been marked as not collectible. There has to be a reason, but I can't seem to deduce it, and without a reason, its hard to justify keeping it this way. So before changing my personal use, please inform me; Why was this change made?

For gamebalance reasons, mostly. Yemo have explained this in couple of occasions, IIRC without such decisions you will get too much reward from collection. This is quote from OP

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

- Science comes mainly from conducting (rebalanced) experiments, not OP contracts or the OP MobileProcessingLab (which was nerfed by SETIctt)

- Some part rebalancing to fit the new progression (eg rebalanced RemoteTech dish masses), probe core rebalances

SETIctt provides different gameplay mechanic in terms of science and money progress in your personal space program and in my opinion it was done quite well along with parts/nodes rearangment. It provides completely new gameplay expirience compared to vanilla tech tree and gameplay mechanic.

[inigma]

Is this the place to suggest that Community Tech Tree should consider moving basic Firespitter propeller engines from tech level 4 to 0, along with Command Seat, and later propeller engines and parts at Tech level 1 Early Aviation rather than tech level 4 Aviation where they all currently sit; so that propellers are available before jet engines which come at tech level 2 Stability?

Also, if there were a set of contracts in SETI to take advantage of propeller engines... such as regular air ferries to KSC Island and back - is this the thread to introduce the idea? Commuter fares to various destinations should be a regularly stable way to make income from propeller and then later jet flight.

Edited November 8, 2015 by inigma

[kcs123]

IIRC firespitter parts are not touched trough this mod. A lot of firespitter parts were not bugs free for KSP 1.X.X, only plugin is suported as required by many other mods (animation/texture switching etc.). That and lack of free time for proper rearangment of parts are main reason why it is not properly suported trough SETIctt.

On the other hand, KAX is suported and engines and other parts are more/less aranged in a way you have described. KAX does not bring too much parts to be heavy on memory usage along with other mods and it is updated for 1.0.4. They have evan included my suggestion for those heli rotors

Once those memory leak issues were properly fixed on stock game it will be more sense to add support for larger mods like firespitter and B9.

[nobodyhasthis]

This is the most common question I see about SETI.

I am using SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.3 and I'm confused about why material and goo experiments has been marked as not collectible. There has to be a reason, but I can't seem to deduce it, and without a reason, its hard to justify keeping it this way. So before changing my personal use, please inform me; Why was this change made?

These are material science experiments. Your taking some material up to space and bringing it back to kerbin. Although looking at the samples in space might give you a clue to the results. It is best if the actual material is recovered to a full research lab on Kerbin. Trouble is where to you store it in a crew pod?

How do you avoid contamination of the samples when removed from the test chamber?

What to use to analyze the sample if you don't have a full kerbinside science lab?

As a way to answer these questions. SETI expects that the whole container will be brought back and there is no way to just "collect data" from a material science experiment. This also fits in with a number of other mods that work exactly the same way. Nehemiah Engineering Orbital Material Science and the Science Station Mod both require return of experiment containers to Kerbin.

Is this the place to suggest that Community Tech Tree should consider moving basic Firespitter propeller engines from tech level 4 to 0, along with Command Seat, and later propeller engines and parts at Tech level 1 Early Aviation rather than tech level 4 Aviation where they all currently sit; so that propellers are available before jet engines which come at tech level 2 Stability?

Also, if there were a set of contracts in SETI to take advantage of propeller engines... such as regular air ferries to KSC Island and back - is this the thread to introduce the idea? Commuter fares to various destinations should be a regularly stable way to make income from propeller and then later jet flight.

As kcs123 has pointed out the KAX mod is supported. Contracts that provide exactly what you want are also available in Contract Pack: Kerbal Aircraft Builders which fits into SETI very well.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/127220

Edited November 8, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[Yemo]

I am using SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.3 and I'm confused about why material and goo experiments has been marked as not collectible. There has to be a reason, but I can't seem to deduce it, and without a reason, its hard to justify keeping it this way. So before changing my personal use, please inform me; Why was this change made?

Yep, just as kcs123 and nobodyhasthis said, it was a balance/realism/gameplay decision.

This was the planned progression for mystery goo and materials bay:

Transmit: 30%, single use

Scientist reset + transmit: 30%, multi use

Return: 100%, single use

Cyclotron (from StationScience) + Scientist: 100%, multi use

Is this the place to suggest that Community Tech Tree should consider moving basic Firespitter propeller engines from tech level 4 to 0, along with Command Seat, and later propeller engines and parts at Tech level 1 Early Aviation rather than tech level 4 Aviation where they all currently sit; so that propellers are available before jet engines which come at tech level 2 Stability?

Also, if there were a set of contracts in SETI to take advantage of propeller engines... such as regular air ferries to KSC Island and back - is this the thread to introduce the idea? Commuter fares to various destinations should be a regularly stable way to make income from propeller and then later jet flight.

Nothing to add to kcs123 and nobodyhasthis . Thank you for the awesome support.

Something Ends, Something Begins, again

So, with 1.0.5 around the corner (and many positive reports about bug fixes and stuff), an update to the state of SETI.

I just began (although a bit late) to externalize the ckan metadata to my own github account to be able to react faster to changes/issues (true github reboot of the BalanceMod still only planned for KSP 1.1, too much other stuff to do with uncertain 1.1 changes ahead). As soon as this is finished, I will prepare them for the actual first round of mod changes, namely the split of the current SETIctt into a pure tech tree SETIctt and a SETIrebalance (which will take the spot of the old BalanceMod).

The split itself is nearly complete, I will release dev versions for manual install within the next days or so. Especially the procedural parts need checking.

I m still not sure how to distribute them. Depending on the KSP 1.0.5 release, the dev versions might contain adjustments for that as well.

Option 1:

Put both SETIctt and SETIrebalance folders within the SETI-CommunityTechTree 0.9.5 download.

Option 2:

Separate downloads, SETIctt within SETI-CommunityTechTree 0.9.5 download and SETIrebalance within SETI-BalanceMod download.

The advantage of option 1 would be, that manual downloaders notice the split, even if they dont check the forums.

The advantage of option 2 is, that it is a clear cut.

Same goes for CKAN, inclusion, dependency, recommendation of SETIrebalance? I m not sure yet. Will also depend on how fast I get the metadata externalization working.

Anyway, in preparation, this is the final version of the old BalanceMod, to clear the room for Option2:

SETI-BalanceMod 0.9.0

Something Ends, Something Begins

• Final version (0.9.0) of the KSP 0.90 SETI-BalanceMod
  
• The next version (0.9.5) will just contain some balancing parts, which survived within the current SETIctt
  
• So that the SETIctt can be a pure tech tree mod in KSP 1.0.5
  
• Thus SETIctt 0.9.5 and SETI BalanceMod 0.9.5 combined will be what SETIctt 0.9.3 was for KSP 1.0.4
  
• Full reboot of the original SETI-BalanceMod will not happen before KSP 1.1
  
• Check out the forum thread for more information, where the original SETI-BalanceMod is still represented in the second post
  

Contracts

• Some reputation rewards adjusted
  

Greenhouse

• SETI-Greenhouse 0.9.2 included
  

Edited November 8, 2015 by Yemo

[inigma]

IIRC firespitter parts are not touched through this mod. A lot of firespitter parts were not bugs free for KSP 1.X.X, only plugin is suported as required by many other mods (animation/texture switching etc.). That and lack of free time for proper rearangment of parts are main reason why it is not properly suported trough SETIctt.

On the other hand, KAX is suported and engines and other parts are more/less aranged in a way you have described. KAX does not bring too much parts to be heavy on memory usage along with other mods and it is updated for 1.0.4. They have evan included my suggestion for those heli rotors

Once those memory leak issues were properly fixed on stock game it will be more sense to add support for larger mods like firespitter and B9.

KAX? Brilliant! I just tried it. Perfect suggestion.

- - - Updated - - -

As kcs123 has pointed out the KAX mod is supported. Contracts that provide exactly what you want are also available in Contract Pack: Kerbal Aircraft Builders which fits into SETI very well.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/127220

Brilliant suggestions. Thanks kcs and nobody. They work great. I might take a look at the KAB pack to see if I can help that project grow as this game desperately needs propeller aircraft missions before jets.

Yemo awesome mod by the way. Its the only reason this hard core sandboxer has even bothered to venture into career. I recommend you publish a ckan import file to help quick start newbies or at least a quickstart section detailing possible or recommended seti download lists. I stayed away from seti for a long while simply because your presentation is a little confusing. A simple list or even ckan file might go a long way to help others. Or maybe I was just in a TLDR mindset whenever i visited the thread op.

Edited November 9, 2015 by inigma

[kcs123]

You are welcome, I'm glad that I was able to help.

Even without special contract missions, I have enjoyed in heli designs with KAX. It was quite nice craft for those surface based missions on Kerbin.

Temperature/pressure measurements, surface sampling and such. DMagic Orbital Science mod fit nicely for such craft designs, having lot of fun with those.

@Yemo, considering how CKAN handles installs and such, I think it will be better on long run to choose option 2.

It will be easier to include recommandation for other mods, once player choose one mod, he can make a choice what to install from optional suggestions.

Despite it's drawbacks (faulty uninstalls mostly), CKAN will probably be most common choice when comes to mod installs. Especialy when stock game become more stable and people want to use 50+ or more mods. Just be aware of CKAN limitations and properly warn users.

Old KSP players will be easy to adopt on either option, new users probably would not much bother themselfs with readings on forum posts if something does not work at once trough CKAN installs.

I'm fine with either of your choice, but in general, better put slightly more effort to organize installs that will be easier to maintain in future development than easier to publish now but more complicated update each time SQUAD publish new patch.

Edited November 10, 2015 by kcs123
noticed typo

[nobodyhasthis]

KAX? Brilliant! I just tried it. Perfect suggestion. Brilliant suggestions. Thanks kcs and nobody. They work great. I might take a look at the KAB pack to see if I can help that project grow as this game desperately needs propeller aircraft missions before jets.

Glad to be of service. Now here is a bit of a challenge for you. I have feeling you might enjoy this. Try to run through the Kerbal Aircraft Builder missions before accepting the SETI contract for Manned flight over 18km.

First manned mission goal becomes a flight to 2500 meters on propellers. A few later flights over nearby biomes will give you enough data for early jet technology. It is a bit little weaker that stock but enough to progress.

You will eventually be asked to fly at 20km from a plane launched from the runway. Come up a jet plane built around a procedural hybrid booster in the central fuselage. That will give x-15 style plane. With less that 30 parts it can be done very early in the game. This will get you through the first SETI manned mission. With a craft that is 100% recoverable once landed back on the runway.

It will never be good enough for spaceflight but will give enough high altitude atmospheric data to progress onto proper VAB built early Mercury / Vostok missions.

Tourist flights will keep cash coming early on. Eventually it is going to feel like to small a reward once your space program grows into a cost of millions. Which gives you an excuse to switch to the Tourism Plus contact to arrange orbital passenger flights.

Edited November 9, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[Yemo]

[...]

Yemo awesome mod by the way. Its the only reason this hard core sandboxer has even bothered to venture into career. I recommend you publish a ckan import file to help quick start newbies or at least a quickstart section detailing possible or recommended seti download lists. I stayed away from seti for a long while simply because your presentation is a little confusing. A simple list or even ckan file might go a long way to help others. Or maybe I was just in a TLDR mindset whenever i visited the thread op.

Yep, it was a bit messy, I did some changes to the OP, with 1.0.5 not far away.

Cleaned up the initial description (at least a bit),

moved the spin-off downloads to the end of the post,

and replaced the outdated mod recommendations image with the list from the old SETI-BalanceMod (updated a little for the current SETIctt support).

[...]

@Yemo, considering how CKAN handles installs and such, I think it will be better on long run to choose option 2.

It will be easier to include recommandation for other mods, once player choose one mod, he can make a choice what to install from optional suggestions.

Despite it's drawbacks (faulty uninstalls mostly), CKAN will probably be most common choice when comes to mod installs. Especialy when stock game become more stable and people want to use 50+ or more mods. Just be aware of CKAN limitations and properly warn users.

Old KSP players will be easy to adopt on either option, new users probably would not much bother themselfs with readings on forum posts if something does not first at once trough CKAN installs.

I'm fine with either of your choice, but in general, better put slightly more effort to organize installs that will be easier to maintain in future development than easier to publish now but more complicated update each time SQUAD publish new patch.

I m currently thinking about combining the options.

1. Putting SETIrebalance folder into the SETI-CommunityTechTree download (together with CommunityTechTree and SETIctt), so it is visible for manual downloaders.

2. The separate download of SETIrebalance (SETI-BalanceMod on kerbalstuff). This is the place from where CKAN collects the files.

Then after some time, I just stop putting SETIrebalance into the SETI-CommunityTechTree download. Once people have it, they will be notified by ksp avc about SETIrebalance updates anyway.

DEV version of the SETIctt split (both SETIrebalance and SETIctt within one download, for ease of distribution)

Since this is a dev version, a backup of your game folder is strongly recommended!

Please delete the current SETIctt folder in your install manually, before installing this dev version!

Download: SETIctt+SETIrebalance-v0.9.5dev0 License, as required for linked downloads, is ARR as usual with exceptions specified in OP and download

http://www./download/ie5aa2e3ddoi4ee/SETIctt_SETIrebalance-v0.9.5dev0.zip

The most crucial cases for testing are SETIctt alone (of course with CommunityTechTree and module manager), as well as SETIctt + SETIrebalance combined (which should have the same effect as the SETIctt folder from 0.9.3).

Of special interest is, whether all the settings configs are applied correctly, due to changes in :FOR[] and :NEEDS[] names. I ll try to concentrate on testing those, any help is appreciated, there are quite a few possible sources for bugs in those nested statements.

Also I had quite some issues with procedural parts during initial testing, especially when I had only SETIctt installed without SETIrebalance. I think I got that one figured out now.

I hope I can get the netkan stuff sorted out before the update, otherwise this will get interesting.

Edited November 9, 2015 by Yemo

[nobodyhasthis]

Ok here is my two cents. I warn you that I am tired and dyslexic. However I do care deeply about where this going and only want to find the best solution. I will defer to the rest of the community on this. Just thinking an analysis of my user experience might help a little bit.

It will be easier to include recommandation for other mods, once player choose one mod, he can make a choice what to install from optional suggestions.

Despite it's drawbacks (faulty uninstalls mostly), CKAN will probably be most common choice when comes to mod installs. Especialy when stock game become more stable and people want to use 50+ or more mods. Just be aware of CKAN limitations and properly warn users.

Old KSP players will be easy to adopt on either option, new users probably would not much bother themselfs with readings on forum posts if something does not first at once trough CKAN installs.

I'm fine with either of your choice, but in general, better put slightly more effort to organize installs that will be easier to maintain in future development than easier to publish now but more complicated update each time SQUAD publish new patch.

I m currently thinking about combining the options.

1. Putting SETIrebalance folder into the SETI-CommunityTechTree download (together with CommunityTechTree and SETIctt), so it is visible for manual downloaders.

2. The separate download of SETIrebalance (SETI-BalanceMod on kerbalstuff). This is the place from where CKAN collects the files.

Then after some time, I just stop putting SETIrebalance into the SETI-CommunityTechTree download. Once people have it, they will be notified by ksp avc about SETIrebalance updates anyway.

.

I have given some thought to this. This is going to be embarrassing for me but it is a little self sacrifice for the progress of best KSP mod

Some facts

1. I am the village idiot here. If you give me a chance to do dumb downloads that is what I will ask you to debug.

2. There will be some future game breaking failure in SETI from a bug. One that is comes from me having 103 mods on top of SETI.

3. There are currently 29 mods with modified tech trees. 15 mods have SETI balance modifications that I can see in SETI

In the future how do we make it easy for you guys to fix the bugs hidden in there and eliminate the chances that my instal method is the thing that is wrong?

I am kind leaning towards option 2 here with CKAN dependency switched on. Is separate files easier to debug?

I really don't need to understand the separate files and CKAN is smart enough to link them and download both without me following the instructions?

Following the evidence and personal experience option 2 looks better.

The manual downloaders are only avoiding 2 risks in CKAN. Number one is the uninstalled configs problem.

Some mods write their own config files and such that were not in folder when CKAN installed mod first time.

CKAN policy is that it does not touch files that were not installed trough CKAN. Because of that mod folder remains in gamedata folder, although with only config files inside.

Trust this. There has been a pretty deep dive into the code discussion elsewhere and we not getting into the details here.

The second CKAN issue is conflicting dependency in certain mods caused by bad dependency folder use. The current SXT mod being a prime example of this.

Have confirmed that Firespitter folder is not installed correctly when using CKAN. That is going to cause debugging issues at some point due to bad installs. CKAN is pulling the right data from Kerbalstuff. Where version 22.2 is stored. What it is not doing is assigning Firespitter as a required download.

This is how it is supposed to work in a way. Module Manager for example does not appear in there because it is used by so many mods. It is better to keep one master copy elsewhere on CKAN and have it downloaded as a requirement. Firespitter appears to work the same way. Trouble is pulling Firespitter out of the SXT download also takes away the sounds folder. The code .dll and resource configs are available elsewhere but that does not replace the sounds folder. The .wav files look like they are bundled with the Firespitter folder in version 22.2. Perhaps they need to be in the SXT folder?

Sorry that is the best explanation of what I am seeing in my game. The solution appears to be a manual download and copying of the sounds folder into the CKAN version of the Firespitter core folder. This will ensure it works and plays well with other mods.

Sounds a lot of hassle but it is not. This is rare. I think that some older ksp players over react to passed CKAN issues. Both of these cases rare now and can be avoided by end user discipline and good file structures. New up to date modders can even mark their mods up with "fuzzy version numbers" to approve minor updates without having to go fix stuff when Squad does updates. Which is a huge improvement in CKAN. See here if you have never heard of fuzzy version. https://www.patreon.com/posts/ckan-fuzzy-and-3606785. Don't go there just yet just be confident I did my homework in an effort to judge the future choices.

At present I will not touch SETI if it is not on CKAN. Anything marked solely as .90 is out the window. So I will not look at the current separate balance mod. I have flavours of SETI available right now

1. SETI tech tree and parts balance mod

2. Optional contracts add on

3. Optional Greenhouse add on

Based on past comments and community feed back (how many times have we had the SETI is broken because you can't collet science question?). The future CKAN options should be

1. SETI tech tree (part movement to correct nodes only)

2. SETI Balance (Let’s fix all the problems we see and enhance gameplay). Dependence on number 1 forced in CKAN.

3. Optional contracts add on ( Future proof and help nightingale)

4. Optional Greenhouse add on

The forum thread needs to have 3 text lists which are community supported.

1. Mods that are modded by option 2. "They fit in to the SETI experience. We love them in our game. Warning come here first if something breaks and don't bug the original author just yet"

2. Mods that are not modded at all but "fits into SETI like magic". Atomic Rockets mod we are looking at you as an example.

3. Mods that are on "the edge / todo / avoid like the plague" scope of SETI . Tantares mod as an example is full of sweet goodness but breaks the feeling use with care.

Everything not listed drops into the " your on your own bin". A potential 4 list could be the "It works fine with SETI but is not being kept up to date on Kerbal stuff list". HGR stands out as a good example here. User beware.

However my solution is automatically waived if it makes it harder to debug or do future updates. The first duty is to provide Yemo with best working mod environment before considering the end user download options.

Sorry a long post but that is most fair analytical look at the options presented and hope it helps to some degree.

Edited November 10, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[nobodyhasthis]

Hopefully my last post has not fried my brain. Here is a little problem in SETI that I having trouble with. The HGR config file. Should the LOM-7 Inline Chute not be moved to a better tech node?

PART{


// --- general parameters ---
name = InLineChute
module = Part
author = Orion


// --- asset parameters ---
mesh = model.mu
scale = 1
rescaleFactor = 1


// --- node definitions ---
// definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z, size
node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.1, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 1
node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.1, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1


// --- FX definitions ---
sound_parachute_open = activate




// --- editor parameters ---
[B]TechRequired = landing[/B]
entryCost = 4600
cost = 1000
category = Utility
subcategory = 0
title = LOM-7 Inline Chute
manufacturer = Home Grown Rocket Parts
description = A parachute decoupler hybrid. This version fits most standard rocket sizes and is useful for those times when you need to put something on top of your parachute.

With a movement of

//---LOM-7 Inline Chute
@PART[InLineChute]:NEEDS[HGR]:AFTER[HGR]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
    @TechRequired = enhancedSurvivability
}
}

Could be wrong here. Don't even know if the LOM-7 Inline Chute in my game is coming out of HGR. There a connected living space config in there that absent in other HGR work. So it may have come from some other mod.

All I know is it is not appearing on the SETI tech tree in career mode in the right spot. It should come in as a requirement for the two man pods. It is needed to build the kerbal "soy juice" knock off of the Soyuz spacecraft. Thoughts on this?

Edited November 10, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[Yemo]

[...]

Based on past comments and community feed back (how many times have we had the SETI is broken because you can't collet science question?). The future CKAN options should be

1. SETI tech tree (part movement to correct nodes only)

2. SETI Balance (Let’s fix all the problems we see and enhance gameplay). Dependence on number 1 forced in CKAN.

3. Optional contracts add on ( Future proof and help nightingale)

4. Optional Greenhouse add on

The forum thread needs to have 3 text lists which are community supported.

1. Mods that are modded by option 2. "They fit in to the SETI experience. We love them in our game. Warning come here first if something breaks and don't bug the original author just yet"

2. Mods that are not modded at all but "fits into SETI like magic". Atomic Rockets mod we are looking at you as an example.

3. Mods that are on "the edge / todo / avoid like the plague" scope of SETI . Tantares mod as an example is full of sweet goodness but breaks the feeling use with care.

Everything not listed drops into the " your on your own bin". A potential 4 list could be the "It works fine with SETI but is not being kept up to date on Kerbal stuff list". HGR stands out as a good example here. User beware.

However my solution is automatically waived if it makes it harder to debug or do future updates. The first duty is to provide Yemo with best working mod environment before considering the end user download options.

Sorry a long post but that is most fair analytical look at the options presented and hope it helps to some degree.

Thank you for your input, I went over the options again and came up with this:

All mods contain/depend on module manager, main mods require/depend on KSP-AVC.

[TABLE=width: 1000]

[TR]

[TD]Main mods

[/TD]

[TD]manual download

[/TD]

[TD]CKAN

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-CommunityTechTree (SETIctt)[/TD]

[TD]contains CommunityTechTree, SETIctt[/TD]

[TD]depends on CTT, some recommendations (eg Ven's)[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-BalanceMod (SETIrebalance)[/TD]

[TD]contains SETIrebalance[/TD]

[TD]lots of recommendations (current ModPack1)

and suggestions (all supported mods listed in OP)[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Not really developed mods[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-Contracts[/TD]

[TD]-[/TD]

[TD]depends on ContractConfigurator[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-Greenhouse[/TD]

[TD]-[/TD]

[TD]-[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

For a transition period, I will include the SETIrebalance folder in the manual download of the SETI-CommunityTechTree and make the SETI-BalanceMod (which also distributes the SETIrebalance folder long term) a dependency. So that both CKAN and manual users can transition more easily to the new structure.

Unfortunately players will need to delete their previous SETIctt folders. But for that I can only put up huge warning signs. Complete clean-slate reinstall of all mods should be done anyway for new KSP version...

As far as the lists in the OP goes, I can realistically only maintain one list, which is the current one listing the "supported mods". Everything else would require too much effort. Everything outside of it is the players responsibility. Unfortunately I see streams/videos with SETI, where people have some non-supported mod science experiments in the very early game (including mystery goo and materials bay) or other clearly unbalanced stuff, but I can not help that.

By using the SETI-BalanceMod entry as a kind of ModPack, I try to at least give CKAN users some guidance (although some might just select everything and end up with TAC LifeSupport and USI LifeSupport...), but I can't really help that either.

[...]

Could be wrong here. Don't even know if the LOM-7 Inline Chute in my game is coming out of HGR. There a connected living space config in there that absent in other HGR work. So it may have come from some other mod.

All I know is it is not appearing on the SETI tech tree in career mode in the right spot. It should come in as a requirement for the two man pods. It is needed to build the kerbal "soy juice" knock off of the Soyuz spacecraft. Thoughts on this?

Thank you for the notice, I included it in the dev1 version below.

DEV1 version for KSP 1.0.5 of the SETIctt split (both SETIrebalance and SETIctt within one download, for ease of distribution)

Since this is a dev version, a backup of your game folder is strongly recommended!

Please delete the current SETIctt/SETIrebalance folders and old modulemanager versions in your install manually, before installing this dev version!

Download: SETIctt+SETIrebalance-v0.9.5dev1 License, as required for linked downloads, is ARR as usual with exceptions specified in OP and download

http://www./download/mgsmxo4o3lhdivv/SETIctt_SETIrebalance-v0.9.5dev1.zip

These are the changes compared to the dev0 version.

The CKAN meta files are also ready, thanks to Olympic1 and techman83, I just hope the CTT does not change for KSP 1.0.5, but instead waits for KSP 1.1. That could throw things off again.

**Tech Tree changes**

* SETIctt moves RemoteTech DP-10 to start, if SETIrebalance is not detected

* RemoteTech Reflectron KR-14 much earlier @electrics

* Normal 1.25m jet engine moved to an earlier node (aviation)

* Adjustable Ramp Intake earlier @supersonicFlight

* Engine Pre-cooler earlier @hypersonicFlight

* Some intakes moved around

* NearFuture Spacecraft 2kerbal Command Pod later @commandModules

* HGR LOM-7 Inline Chute moved to enhancedSurvivability (thank you nobodyhasthis)

**Part Replacements**

* The old small jet engine is replaced by the new stock one

* Old craft should still work, since the old jet config is just hidden (until 1.1)

* Reflectron KR-8 discontinued (just hidden, craft still work until KSP 1.1), due to earlier KR-14

**Fixes**

* HybridRocketBooster path adjusted to new structure

Edited November 11, 2015 by Yemo

[nobodyhasthis]

Thank you for your input, I went over the options again and came up with this:

All mods contain/depend on module manager, main mods require/depend on KSP-AVC.

[TABLE=width: 1000]

[TR]

[TD]Main mods

[/TD]

[TD]manual download

[/TD]

[TD]CKAN

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-CommunityTechTree (SETIctt)[/TD]

[TD]contains CommunityTechTree, SETIctt[/TD]

[TD]depends on CTT, some recommendations (eg Ven's)[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-BalanceMod (SETIrebalance)[/TD]

[TD]contains SETIrebalance[/TD]

[TD]lots of recommendations (current ModPack1)

and suggestions (all supported mods listed in OP)[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Not really developed mods[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-Contracts[/TD]

[TD]-[/TD]

[TD]depends on ContractConfigurator[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SETI-Greenhouse[/TD]

[TD]-[/TD]

[TD]-[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

For a transition period, I will include the SETIrebalance folder in the manual download of the SETI-CommunityTechTree and make the SETI-BalanceMod (which also distributes the SETIrebalance folder long term) a dependency. So that both CKAN and manual users can transition more easily to the new structure.

Yay !

I really hope this works with 1.0.5 stock part feature creep. We see how the community reacts in coming weeks. So far I have yet to see anything that I don't already have thanks to a wonderful modding community. Off I go to do more testing......

As a distraction to that sorry. A little experiment just for fun back in 1.0.4 This from a while ago but I wonder if Nori is still around and still has an outline for Tantares in 1.0.4?

Well I'm willing to provide the configs I've done...

For instance, if you go to this spreadsheet I've laid out all of the tantares control pods (plus a few other pods) and then the second tab has all of the changes I made.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LmxqtedVEelWKrStBAapaLnH0cSaq60dH6apLsL841w/edit?usp=sharing

My balance file is about 560 lines long for just Tantares.

. I am getting a bit less enthusiastic for HGR and want to have a bash at using Tantares in my next career. Liked the spreadsheet and it a great start. Did any of this find a way into an experimental 1.0.4 SETI config? Edited November 11, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[Yemo]

Yay !

I really hope this works with 1.0.5 stock part feature creep. We see how the community reacts in coming weeks. So far I have yet to see anything that I don't already have thanks to a wonderful modding community. Off I go to do more testing......

As a distraction to that sorry. A little experiment just for fun back in 1.0.4 This from a while ago but I wonder if Nori is still around and still has an outline for Tantares in 1.0.4?

. I am getting a bit less enthusiastic for HGR and want to have a bash at using Tantares in my next career. Liked the spreadsheet and it a great start. Did any of this find a way into an experimental 1.0.4 SETI config?

Yeah, from what I have seen so far, the vector makes every 1.25m and 2.5m rocket engine obsolete, except for its costs (which is of course not a problem in sandbox and science mode).

Also the new thrust vectoring, afterburning jet pretty much combines the advantages of the the normal jet with the the advantages from the ram jet, though not as OP as the vector (bit lower ISP than the normal jet, a bit lower top speed than the ram jet).

Since I plan to review the whole tech tree for KSP 1.1, it does not really make sense for me to work on such a complex part mod as tantares (and I have quite a lot of nodes I want to change/add to the current tech tree).

So I ll probably add some minor mod support, but wait for the bigger ones until the tech tree review/64bit support with KSP 1.1.

I ll wait another day or two with officially publishing SETIctt and SETIrebalance, to see whether bugs are found or Nertea decides to change the CTT. In the meantime I ll take a look at the other minor mods.

Question for everyone:

Did anyone test the new stock contract progression? Any thought on that? Is SETIcontracts obsolete anyway?

Unmanned before Manned 1.0.0 (for KSP 1.0.5)

Tech Tree changes

• Stability node cheaper @12 science instead of 18
  
• Aviation and flightControl nodes cheaper @30 science instead of 45
  
• Earlier Fairings
  
• Earlier 1.25m non-small fuel tanks
  
• Earlier structural fuselage
  
• Earlier launch clamps
  
• Earlier small landing gear
  
• Earlier multi-adapters
  
• Girders, Beams and Panels to generalConstruction
  

- - - Updated - - -

Just read around a bit more about KSP 1.0.5.

Seems there is now a penalty for declining contracts (which can be switched off or edited out in existing saves, but default is on).

That is so bad in terms of balance, I really dont understand it. Is there no one responsible for the overall gameplay/playability at squad?

Now people have to timewarp to cycle through contracts without penalties, if they have an existing career and are unable to mess with the persistance file. Ridiculous.

Players cycle through contracts because the generated ones are not interesting for them? Lets punish them for doing so. Rofl...

And to be clear about it, I like the option. It is great for "Hard Mode" careers. But the default should be "off", especially for existing careers from 1.0.4.

Another of those features which could be a great improvement but made to be a disimprovement by bad implementation.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Yemo

[Svm420]

There is a variable you can change to get rid of rep penalties for declining. i think you have to manually edit the save game file to do it though.

[Rocket88]

I was wandering recommended Science and Funds % settings with SETIctt for 1.0.5 , Using Orbital Science and ScanSat.

[nobodyhasthis]

Just read around a bit more about KSP 1.0.5.

Seems there is now a penalty for declining contracts (which can be switched off or edited out in existing saves, but default is on).

That is so bad in terms of balance, I really dont understand it. Is there no one responsible for the overall gameplay/playability at squad?

Now people have to timewarp to cycle through contracts without penalties, if they have an existing career and are unable to mess with the persistance file. Ridiculous.

Players cycle through contracts because the generated ones are not interesting for them? Lets punish them for doing so. Rofl...

And to be clear about it, I like the option. It is great for "Hard Mode" careers. But the default should be "off", especially for existing careers from 1.0.4.

Another of those features which could be a great improvement but made to be a disimprovement by bad implementation.

I don't really understand you here. There seems to be an issue in 1.0.5 stock where a initial records can't be declined. Apart from that it works exactly like 1.0.4 and even better with Contract Configurer which can still clear off any offered contract types or reinstate them at will in the settings screen. Up to now I can switch off all stock contracts plus any add on Contract Configure Packs at will. This recycles the available list. This option keeps SETI straight in 1.0.4 and I can't see a difference in 1.0.5. For example although I have remote tech contracts installed. They don't appear unless I let them and I am only happy to do so when SETI advances passed orbital unmanned missions.

Have I missed the point here?

EDIT: Ok penny has dropped . Now I see it. Did not notice because I have dodged the problem in Contract Configurer by not doing stock contracts. The penalty does not seem to be there for those will look harder. Kind of puts your question about stock vs SETI as a done deal. I am leaning towards thinking their trying to fix a problem in contracts that was in 1.0.4 that I don't have because I play with SETI progression. If I wanted a penalty for declining then there is a mod for that too already available. Now it seems we need something to put in to give back to freedom of choice. Like I said before still can't see anything new that has not already available as a mod. Water landing since .90 for example.

EDIT: Nightingale here I come asking for help

Edited November 12, 2015 by nobodyhasthis

[Yemo]

There is a variable you can change to get rid of rep penalties for declining. i think you have to manually edit the save game file to do it though.

Yep, I m mostly complaining about that not being the default.

I was wandering recommended Science and Funds % settings with SETIctt for 1.0.5 , Using Orbital Science and ScanSat.

I have not played with KSP 1.0.5 too much (since KER is not fully adjusted to it), but I would guess around the same mark as the previous version - 60% or so.

[...]

EDIT: Ok penny has dropped . Now I see it. Did not notice because I have dodged the problem in Contract Configurer by not doing stock contracts. The penalty does not seem to be there for those will look harder. Kind of puts your question about stock vs SETI as a done deal. I am leaning towards thinking their trying to fix a problem in contracts that was in 1.0.4 that I don't have because I play with SETI progression. If I wanted a penalty for declining then there is a mod for that too already available. Now it seems we need something to put in to give back to freedom of choice. Like I said before still can't see anything new that has not already available as a mod. Water landing since .90 for example.

[...]

I upped the available contracts from 16 to 20 both for SETI-Contracts as well as InitialContracts.

Also they both make use of the CustomBarnKit now for action groups and max accepted contracts, even without SETIrebalance.

This SETIcontracts version does not change much, but I plan to use SETIcontracts as an experiment test bed in 1.0.5, to test some concepts for the contract pack which will most likely replace it in ksp 1.1.

For everyone not willing to participate, just do not update to SETIcontracts 0.9.5 when that is released.

SETI Contracts v0.9.4 (for KSP 1.0.5)

This is the (last?) non-experimental version

Adjustments

• If you have CustomBarnKit: max number of contracts in mission control from 2/7/unlimited to 3/9/unlimited
  
• The number of available contracts are increased from 16 to 20
  

Contract Pack InitialContracts 1.0.5 (for KSP 1.0.5)

Adjustments

• If you have CustomBarnKit: max number of contracts in mission control from 2/7/unlimited to 3/9/unlimited
  
• If you have CustomBarnKit: Action groups from the start
  
• The number of available contracts are increased from 16 to 20
  
• Some reputation nerfs
  

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and SETIctt/SETIrebalance will have to wait a bit longer, I will try to work on that during the weekend.

Especially SETIrebalance needs some more work/tests.

I also want to do one more thing with regards to RemoteTech and it would be beneficial to do it before releasing SETIctt/rebalance.

Since KER is not yet fully compatible with KSP 1.0.5 I consider the latter one career-unplayable anyway at the moment (but still good enough for derping around, UnmannedBeforeManned and IntitialContracts should be good enough for that).

- - - Updated - - -

Also forgot about the greenhouse.

This is just a maintenance update. At some point I want to take another look at the EC consumption and costs, but that is low on my priority list.

If you are looking for a realistic greenhouse,

I recommend the BioMass mod which can be found here.

SETI Greenhouse v0.9.3 (for KSP 1.0.4)

File Format

• Changed to .dds format