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

[Enceos]

I m trying to balance the USI Exploration Pack, but one of the problems are the command pods. They only weigh 150kg, yet they provide all the functionality of a full cockpit at 1000kg. And they can be used for space flight although that would require a fully pressurized cockpit and life support. Especially since the kerbals take off their helmets...

Really not sure what to do about them, maybe increase the mass to something like 800kg? But that would make them far less useful.

I would increase the mass by a factor of 2. But USI Exploration Pack cockpits have their own penalties:

- Jumpseat and packrat seat have no science experiment and no science container.

- All of them have very low or zero SAS.

- IVA props don't have many instruments. Especially if you use RasterProp this is a big penalty.

- Electric charge is very low (10 units)

- No life support containers (unless you add them massively to command parts)

Apollo rover with everything weighted only 210 kg.

I think we shouldn't nerf these lightweight parts.

[Yemo]

Maybe remove Active Struts from suggestions? Since it's now basically comes with IR rework and its dev is halted

I noticed that it provides a newer CIT util file, but does it also provide the ActiveStruts parts?

I would increase the mass by a factor of 2. But USI Exploration Pack cockpits have their own penalties:

- Jumpseat and packrat seat have no science experiment and no science container.

- All of them have very low or zero SAS.

- IVA props don't have many instruments. Especially if you use RasterProp this is a big penalty.

- Electric charge is very low (10 units)

- No life support containers (unless you add them massively to command parts)

Apollo rover with everything weighted only 210 kg.

I think we shouldn't nerf these lightweight parts.

I was only considering changing the enclosed cockpits, where kerbals sit without helmets. Have not though about the "outdoor" seats yet. Will probably only put USI Exploration into the "additional mods" category anyway, but the enclosed cockpits are really bugging me in terms of balance.

[SwGustav]

I noticed that it provides a newer CIT util file, but does it also provide the ActiveStruts parts?

Yes it does, in more cleaner way and without hooks (which I find useless). It also has some parts from KAS, don't know about those, seem to be remodeled copies

Shouldn't rework utility pack be balanced for SETI? It's not just robotic parts, there are wheels and a new science instrument..

Edited April 4, 2015 by SwGustav

[Yemo]

Yes it does, in more cleaner way and without hooks (which I find useless). It also has some parts from KAS, don't know about those, seem to be remodeled copies

Shouldn't rework utility pack be balanced for SETI? It's not just robotic parts, there are wheels and a new science instrument..

Ah, I did not look within the Utilities package.

I did not touch the stock wheels functionality so far and I did not change anything about the stock surface sample, so it should work as before?

[SwGustav]

Ah, I did not look within the Utilities package.

I did not touch the stock wheels functionality so far and I did not change anything about the stock surface sample, so it should work as before?

Well I meant tech tree placement, it seemed to me stock wheels were in slightly different nodes.

[Svm420]

I was only considering changing the enclosed cockpits, where kerbals sit without helmets. Have not though about the "outdoor" seats yet. Will probably only put USI Exploration into the "additional mods" category anyway, but the enclosed cockpits are really bugging me in terms of balance.

Is there a way to flag them like the command seat so they keep helmets on? Also what advantages does it have over the external seat?

Related to KIS I believe the units for volume changed from m^3 to L so all your volumes need to be increased 1000x.

[jimos]

This is the 5th time if wiped kerbal to get this working, it doesn't work i get no option for a seti tech tree.

[Yemo]

Well I meant tech tree placement, it seemed to me stock wheels were in slightly different nodes.

Oh, I see. Have to check that, but I generally just moved the roverwheels to an earlier node, so it should work for now, just not as well as it could.

Is there a way to flag them like the command seat so they keep helmets on? Also what advantages does it have over the external seat?

Related to KIS I believe the units for volume changed from m^3 to L so all your volumes need to be increased 1000x.

The USI Exploration enclosed command pods are actually so small, that even a kerbal without helmet barely fits in. There is certainly no space for a helmet in one of them.

As far as I understand it, they work just like normal cockpits/capsules.

Hm, the volume change is annoying, although not as annoying as the buggy command pod mass calculation.

Thank you for mentioning it.

This is the 5th time if wiped kerbal to get this working, it doesn't work i get no option for a seti tech tree.

Hey, you should choose the CommunityTechTree, if you installed the CommunityTechTree and the TechManager mods, as stated in the OP. There is no option called SETI TechTree.

For a more detailed support, please provide info on the version you are using (win/linux, 32bit/64bit KSP) and a screenshot of your GameData folder.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Yemo

[Lord Aurelius]

I had a random thought: I've noticed that a lot of mods add their own flags, but as epic as SETI is, it doesn't have one. Yemo, were you planning on creating a flag for SETI at some point?

[Yemo]

I had a random thought: I've noticed that a lot of mods add their own flags, but as epic as SETI is, it doesn't have one. Yemo, were you planning on creating a flag for SETI at some point?

I was planning to do so. That was one of the reasons why I chose SETI as an acronym.

For the SETI-BalanceMod it stands for Scope, Economy & Tech Integration.

For the SETI-Greenhouse it stands for Space Exploration & Technology Initiative.

Originally I planned to use the latter one for the contracts, but I m not good at graphics design and there was so much other stuff to do first, so I stayed with the Kerbin record whatever company for the contracts.

So it kind of is one of those "forever planned, never realized" things at the moment.

On another topic, 0.8.8 is getting bigger than expected, again...

Mostly because of mod support, but there are also some smaller rebalances/technode reshuffles.

I gave the Modular Girder Segment a mass of 50kg, since the procedural structural element has a mass of 70kg or so when it gets the stronger standard connection node.

Also impactTolerance of 8m/s for most girders, many are also moved to generalConstruction and the micro landing legs are moved to survivability.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Yemo

[Lord Aurelius]

I like the Space Exploration & Technology Initiative acronym, that would be perfect to put on a flag for this whole thing. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with for a flag (and I do understand about not being good with graphics design).

Also excited for the next update, this mod keeps getting better and better. Tweaking the girders and small landing legs sounds like a good compromise all around, it should prevent girder exploits while still providing a relatively durable part for small, early landers.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

[Svm420]

On another topic, 0.8.8 is getting bigger than expected, again...

Mostly because of mod support, but there are also some smaller rebalances/technode reshuffles.

I gave the Modular Girder Segment a mass of 50kg, since the procedural structural element has a mass of 70kg or so when it gets the stronger standard connection node.

Also impactTolerance of 8m/s for most girders, many are also moved to generalConstruction and the micro landing legs are moved to survivability.

Like those changes allowing more creativity within reason.

I want to suggest semi saturable reaction wheels. Crzyrndm the author feels it is far enough along to be integrated if you wanted of course. Really helps balance RW by making their available torque depletable. It also opens the door to new way to design/balance RWs with bleed rate, the rate at which a RW regain torque after use has ceased a recharge rate if you will, and torque capacity, which is a function of the available torque, which is the amount of force over time that can be applied before the RW is depleted, like fuel for an engine. If that is confusing it is explained better in the thread.

[Lord Aurelius]

@Svm420

That sounds like a good way to balance reaction wheels, my understand is that reaction wheels have a limited amount of torque that they can apply before they have to perform momentum dumping, so reaction wheels technically still provide unlimited torque but require time to replenish their available torque after use. That would be a good way to dramatically improve the usefulness of RCS compared to reaction wheels, especially for larger craft and also when launching/landing.

[Svm420]

@Svm420

That sounds like a good way to balance reaction wheels, my understand is that reaction wheels have a limited amount of torque that they can apply before they have to perform momentum dumping, so reaction wheels technically still provide unlimited torque but require time to replenish their available torque after use. That would be a good way to dramatically improve the usefulness of RCS compared to reaction wheels, especially for larger craft and also when launching/landing.

Yes they are still unlimited, but must regenerate over time to be useful again after being depleted. It feel like a nice balance between realism and stock. Though I dont think there is any other mod that attempt to bring RWs to reality levels. And it has made RCS much more important in my game. I hope to see the mod expanded with a variety of RWs to choose from. It would be even better to just be procedural and enter parameters you want for the RW. Then each wheel is tailored for the craft. Thast mostly wishful thinking though.

[Crzyrndm]

Thast mostly wishful thinking though.

I don't see any reason that couldn't be done (read: it's relatively simple to implement). The main issue would be coming up with an appropriate conversion between torque/momentum capacity (the tweakable parameters) and mass/cost/EC usage/bleed rate/etc (dependent parameters).

[Zertam]

Is it intentional that most squad stock engines like the LV-T45 entry price has increased nearly ten-fold starting in version 0.8.2 (entry price is 20,000)?

[Yemo]

I like the Space Exploration & Technology Initiative acronym, that would be perfect to put on a flag for this whole thing. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with for a flag (and I do understand about not being good with graphics design).

Also excited for the next update, this mod keeps getting better and better. Tweaking the girders and small landing legs sounds like a good compromise all around, it should prevent girder exploits while still providing a relatively durable part for small, early landers.

I m not sure what to use as a logo in general and it is very low priority at the moment (due to needing lots of time because I m not good at it while only providing very little benefit), so it may take quite some time.

About the girders, I m not sure I want ot tweak the IR rework parts yet and I also hesitate to change the landing gear stuff, so there is still plenty of opportunity for exploits. House rules are still necessary, but with the micro landing struts, there is at least a viable alternative.

Like those changes allowing more creativity within reason.

I want to suggest semi saturable reaction wheels. Crzyrndm the author feels it is far enough along to be integrated if you wanted of course. Really helps balance RW by making their available torque depletable. It also opens the door to new way to design/balance RWs with bleed rate, the rate at which a RW regain torque after use has ceased a recharge rate if you will, and torque capacity, which is a function of the available torque, which is the amount of force over time that can be applied before the RW is depleted, like fuel for an engine. If that is confusing it is explained better in the thread.

Yes they are still unlimited, but must regenerate over time to be useful again after being depleted. It feel like a nice balance between realism and stock. Though I dont think there is any other mod that attempt to bring RWs to reality levels. And it has made RCS much more important in my game. I hope to see the mod expanded with a variety of RWs to choose from. It would be even better to just be procedural and enter parameters you want for the RW. Then each wheel is tailored for the craft. Thast mostly wishful thinking though.

I don't see any reason that couldn't be done (read: it's relatively simple to implement). The main issue would be coming up with an appropriate conversion between torque/momentum capacity (the tweakable parameters) and mass/cost/EC usage/bleed rate/etc (dependent parameters).

Looks like I can just add this to the mods list, without changes on the SETI side. I ll take a quick look anyway and then add it.

Thank you for the suggestion.

Is it intentional that most squad stock engines like the LV-T45 entry price has increased nearly ten-fold starting in version 0.8.2 (entry price is 20,000)?

Rocket engine prices were normalized, which increased the LV-T45 costs and entry prices were based on the new prices. Basically for those using non-instant tech unlocks I wanted to create a real dilemma between using the stuff you have and investing into new unlocks. Maybe a bit high for the LV-T45?

About 0.8.8:

After feedback from twitch streamers igor_perusco and tommyterrific22, I decided to remove the SETI dependency on procedural parts (bot the normal procedural parts and the B9 procedural parts).

It should work like this:

1. With Procedural Parts mods installed:

MM statements hide the fuel tanks, adapters and stock wings. Those parts can be pruned.

2. Without Procedural Parts mods installed:

Fewer parts are hidden, mainly those which can be substituted by using tweakscale

Those will be the 2 defaults. So nothing will change by default. You would have to uninstall the procedural parts mods to be affected by the change.

If you want to use procedural parts together with the normal fuel tanks, you have to delete the MM statements/configs from the SETI-unusedParts folder, or just delete that whole folder.

At least this non-procedural mode does not have problems with KSPI extended tweakscaled parts.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Yemo

[Reisdal]

I know KOS isn't a supported mod but does anyone here have experience with it together with SETI? I get a crash much faster (may be memory), than before? It could be KOS or the background mod which is supported. I'm gonna try it out.

[Lord Aurelius]

@Reisdal

I have KOS installed on my game right now and everything seems to work fine.

As far as running out of memory and crashing, that was a major problem for me as well until I used the -force-opengl trick, now I have enough memory for a maxmods install with visual upgrades as well and the game is very stable.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

[SwGustav]

I had 2 crashes so far and both were when I touched procedural fairings stuff (if I tweaked them for long time multiple times). This also happened on my previous realism overhaul install. It's like they are eating the memory over time. Can anyone support this?

[Reisdal]

@Lord Aurelius

I use the OpenGL trick aswell as using popoutwindow. I used to be able to play for many hours straight without a crash but when I enabled KOS aswell as the background mod, everything went wrong. Gonna do some tweaking and try it out. I don't think it's a memory issue since its a mono.dll crash. The ALT-12 debug window shows many faults when using the background mod together with scansat. My mind is blown!?

[Lord Aurelius]

@Reisdal

Strange, I use all those mods as well and haven't had any issues. Have you tried installing ExceptionDetector to see what might be going on? It gives a bit more info than the debug menu and lets you know exactly when the exceptions are thrown.

[Yemo]

I know KOS isn't a supported mod but does anyone here have experience with it together with SETI? I get a crash much faster (may be memory), than before? It could be KOS or the background mod which is supported. I'm gonna try it out.

I had 2 crashes so far and both were when I touched procedural fairings stuff (if I tweaked them for long time multiple times). This also happened on my previous realism overhaul install. It's like they are eating the memory over time. Can anyone support this?

@Lord Aurelius

I use the OpenGL trick aswell as using popoutwindow. I used to be able to play for many hours straight without a crash but when I enabled KOS aswell as the background mod, everything went wrong. Gonna do some tweaking and try it out. I don't think it's a memory issue since its a mono.dll crash. The ALT-12 debug window shows many faults when using the background mod together with scansat. My mind is blown!?

@Reisdal

Strange, I use all those mods as well and haven't had any issues. Have you tried installing ExceptionDetector to see what might be going on? It gives a bit more info than the debug menu and lets you know exactly when the exceptions are thrown.

Sorry, I do not have experience with KOS, but as Lord Aurelius suggested, the Exception Detector is great and helped me a lot before.

Also since I use windows only for testing and modding but prefer Linux for playing (because there I do not have to worry about memory), I usually do not play long enough on windows to encounter memory/memory leak bugs.

In other news, 0.8.8 is making progress.

As announced, ProceduralParts and B9ProceduralParts will no longer be required, though if installed, nothing changes in terms of clutter hiding and pruning ability.

Though the affected clutter removal configs are now moved to separate folders for easy deletion, if you want to use the procedural parts packs and the clutter parts (eg fuel tanks, adapters, stock wings).

This step is also important for making SETI a viable choice for existing careers, eg KSPI extended ones.

Still no luck yet for a washer or a real solution for the TweakScale/ProceduralParts problem. I also inquired in the TweakScale thread (since ProceduralParts is hardly maintained at the moment).

So removing the ProceduralParts dependency is also a fallback for KSPI support.

And I need one version before official support anyway to make the CKAN dependency shift without breaking stuff.

Those are the planned mod support additions for 0.8.8 so far (still working on some, not sure if I can finish them for 0.8.8), I already changed the OP to bring some more structure into the Mods section.

* GingerCorp Stock-alike Station Hubs (very little changes)

* KipEng Universal Docking Ports, requires AdaptiveDockingNode by toadicus (very little changes)

* KipEng Low Profile Structural Hub Set (very little changes)

* Mk3 Mini Expansion Pack

* Mark IV Spaceplane System

* (Semi-)Saturatable Reaction Wheels

* USI Exploration Pack

Edited April 6, 2015 by Yemo

[Reisdal]

@Yemo @Lord Aurelius

Was looking for that mod yesterday but couldn't remember the name. Gonna try it out today!

[Yemo]

Since I rebalanced the fuel tanks as well due to removing the procedural parts dependency, the update is more work than expected, so I have to shift the release to tomorrow UTC.

As a side effect, this allowed me to normalize the masses/fuel capacities of aerospace parts as well, especially the monoprop tanks were all over the place.

I m also phasing out the Procedural RCS Tank. It will just be made invisible, which also protects most existing vessels from the general monoprop rebalance. The Procedural Liquid Tank and Nose Cone gets a new Monoprop option. This new option will have the same dry mass as the other liquid fuel tank options (about half as much as the previous procedural RCS) but will provide about 60% of the Monoprop.

The Habitat Pack by Porkjet will also be supported, allowing for inflatable station building even without MKS/OKS, which will be useful eg for the Tourism ContractPack.

edit: Also changed the OP again.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Yemo