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

[nobodyhasthis2]

30 minutes ago, randomone said:

Are there any good ways to get the downgraded mods needed  for the 0.90 version? I want to mess with the full-balance mod a bit

As a suggestion you could try this. If you have the KSP .90 version of  game then CKAN will give access to version SETI Balance 9.0.9

If you don't have KSP .90 but still want to download the files out of curiosity. Changing the KSP version number in the Readme.txt of the game will allow access to any passed file. Since the initial starting point of a CKAN search comes from this readme.txt. Just remember to change it back. Also a lot has changed since then so back up data first before exploring.

Hope this helps or at least gives you an idea of a solution.  

Edited January 23, 2016 by nobodyhasthis2

[kcs123]

You may trick CKAN by changing version number in readme file, but a lot of mods will not work properly due to stock game engine changes.

So, you must have KSP 0.90 version if you want to try anything. You might not find all mods for 0.90 on CKAN, so you will have to hunt them doen on various web sites to download older proper version. None of theese are simple and easy ways, some of mods are no longer supported for 0.90, so you might not find any.

[nobodyhasthis2]

Got an odd bug in the latest SETI build. It is very rare. Leaving a rover parked anywhere in KSC between missions can cause it to vanish. With error "vessel not loading missing parts unknown"

What does unknow parts mean?

 Is this a bug in take command perhaps. I suspect the way it works can cause problems.   

Edited January 24, 2016 by nobodyhasthis2

[kcs123]

2 hours ago, nobodyhasthis2 said:

Got an odd bug in the latest SETI build. It is very rare. Leaving a rover parked anywhere in KSC between missions can cause it to vanish. With error "vessel not loading missing parts unknown"

What does unknow parts mean?

 Is this a bug in take command perhaps. I suspect the way it works can cause problems.   

I think you have encontered old stock game bug. Happened to me couple of times when I left flags and/or small rovers that I intended to use as nav beacon. Launching a new craft might conflict with another craft that is too close to runway/launchpad. After few attempt to counterpart this bug, I gave up. I use custom waypoints from waypoint manager mod instead for such purposes. It is not physical craft so it can't cause any issues.

[nobodyhasthis2]

17 minutes ago, kcs123 said:

I think you have encontered old stock game bug. Happened to me couple of times when I left flags and/or small rovers that I intended to use as nav beacon. Launching a new craft might conflict with another craft that is too close to runway/launchpad. After few attempt to counterpart this bug, I gave up. I use custom waypoints from waypoint manager mod instead for such purposes. It is not physical craft so it can't cause any issues.

Kind of sounds familiar. Normally this would be rare but the GAP contracts are causing it to be common. The effect seems to very easy to reproduce. Although other users will need to confirm this and their own personal circumstances. To see if there is a common root cause. 

It seems restricted to command chairs at the moment. Have taken this over to the GAP contracts thread as it seems people using that pack will be seriously affected. That pack unlocks buggy parts early to start career mode off with a cool little driving job.

I am calling it Car-Kraken 

 

  

Edited January 24, 2016 by nobodyhasthis2

[nobodyhasthis2]

Here we go with an another playthrough observation. Again highly subjective and others may see this different. I am on the fence here.   

Running with a new more of a pure SETI build. Picking mods only from the approved list. It is all good and I am enjoying the experience. The only thing that is bugging me is the read out on available RAM vs part count. The game is stable but is running with less spare capacity that normal. So I would expect to have more parts. Trouble is I don't.

So took a look at the parts packs again. I think the problem is that about 3 mods can be removed and replaced with SXT. It could replace KAX, RLA Sockalike and possibly AB launchers. Getting more parts diversification and less RAM. What do others pick. Please share your thoughts. Am I missing something here?

[kcs123]

Unfortunately, hiding stock parts trough tech tree does not help with RAM. It only helps with better organized SPH/VAB editor by hiding parts that you not need.
Don't know if texture load on demand helps slightly with it. Load on demand does not help much if you force DX11 or openGL, so I skipped that. I found recently that reducing terrain details helps a lot with memory leak. You can find whole story in this thread.

Regarding memory usage from parts, only thing you can do about it is to delete all parts that you don't use from gamedata folder. And that can lead to breaking a game when you least expect.

[nobodyhasthis2]

6 minutes ago, kcs123 said:

Unfortunately, hiding stock parts trough tech tree does not help with RAM. It only helps with better organized SPH/VAB editor by hiding parts that you not need.
Don't know if texture load on demand helps slightly with it. Load on demand does not help much if you force DX11 or openGL, so I skipped that. I found recently that reducing terrain details helps a lot with memory leak. You can find whole story in this thread.

Regarding memory usage from parts, only thing you can do about it is to delete all parts that you don't use from gamedata folder. And that can lead to breaking a game when you least expect.

I am not deleting or hiding parts yet. So far game is running sweet but I think might be possible to get more parts for fewer mods. 

One mod that does 3 functions is better that 3 mods that duplicate parts. Too many SRB which can be not just be hidden but totally removed and not installed. Looks like putting SXG in again taking out the other mods that don't add value seems best. So far game is running sweet but I think might be possible to get more parts for fewer mods. 

Although I am still not sure. This memory cap gets me super picky over mod choices 

[Yemo]

23 hours ago, randomone said:

Are there any good ways to get the downgraded mods needed  for the 0.90 version? I want to mess with the full-balance mod a bit

Nope, unfortunately not.

As mentioned above, you need the ksp 0.90 game files and then you can use ckan for some and need to hunt down the others, and then there is still a very high chance of issues.

With 64bit windows ksp around the corner, it might not be worth it. While the BalanceMod was great, ksp itself was not (full of bugs and issues).

 

3 hours ago, nobodyhasthis2 said:

Here we go with an another playthrough observation. Again highly subjective and others may see this different. I am on the fence here.   

Running with a new more of a pure SETI build. Picking mods only from the approved list. It is all good and I am enjoying the experience. The only thing that is bugging me is the read out on available RAM vs part count. The game is stable but is running with less spare capacity that normal. So I would expect to have more parts. Trouble is I don't.

So took a look at the parts packs again. I think the problem is that about 3 mods can be removed and replaced with SXT. It could replace KAX, RLA Sockalike and possibly AB launchers. Getting more parts diversification and less RAM. What do others pick. Please share your thoughts. Am I missing something here?

The list in the OP is more like a menu from which to choose, not a "install everything part pack". The problem with SXT is, that it uses stock textures, which kind of visually conflicts with VenStockRevamp. It also adds a lot of parts which are more like alternatives than gap-fillers.

At the moment I m using the SETI-BalanceMod recommended mod list (ckan install) + Procedural Fairings (I ll add those to that list, stock fairings are imho just worse for most cases) + Procedural Parts + B9 Procedural + RLA Stockalike for testing purposes.

 

1 hour ago, kcs123 said:

Unfortunately, hiding stock parts trough tech tree does not help with RAM. It only helps with better organized SPH/VAB editor by hiding parts that you not need.
Don't know if texture load on demand helps slightly with it. Load on demand does not help much if you force DX11 or openGL, so I skipped that. I found recently that reducing terrain details helps a lot with memory leak. You can find whole story in this thread.

Regarding memory usage from parts, only thing you can do about it is to delete all parts that you don't use from gamedata folder. And that can lead to breaking a game when you least expect.

The SETI-BalanceMod was optimized for AutoPruner and even provided a pruning list for a radical switch to procedural parts and wings and so on. But that part was destroyed as well by squads ksp 1.0 release. I m not sure about the current state of AutoPruner.

 

About the next SETIctt and SETIrebalance update:

I m currently planning some more radical changes, especially in the early tech tree with regards to part placement and balance:

1. HECS goes way back behind OKTO, is changed to be an OKTO with double the torque, making it more in line with stock HECS
2. New probe core @start, simple SAS, no reaction wheel
3. Small Inline Reaction Wheel moved way back to flightControl
4. General nerf of reaction wheels, like in the old SETI-BalanceMod for ksp 0.90 (and some other command part balancing)
5. Linear RCS port (and fuel) earlier @stability
6. At least some mass and capacity balancing for stock RCS tanks (like in old SETI-BalanceMod for ksp 0.90)
7. LV-T15 Dachshund and LV-900 Beagle from VenStockRevamp resized to 0.625m for usage with probes, thus earlier 0.625m fuel tanks
8. Early Bi-Adapter 1.25m to 2x0.625m available @stability, for the engines above and the Juno Jet engine

Since that is quite a lot itself, I ll most likely only do that for the ckan recommended mods for the SETI-BalanceMod and ignore most of the other mods for now.
I also might postpone some of the other changes mentioned before, since that one will have quite a lot of ripple effects.

[kcs123]

30 minutes ago, Yemo said:

The SETI-BalanceMod was optimized for AutoPruner and even provided a pruning list for a radical switch to procedural parts and wings and so on. But that part was destroyed as well by squads ksp 1.0 release. I m not sure about the current state of AutoPruner.

Well, like you said, with win 64 bit version just around corner, it is not worth it. Hopefully all memory related issues will be history, so it will be more sense to include more mods trough SETI.

I'm slightly runing out of free time for KSP, but I collected nice set of aircraft/rockets trough first third of tech tree. I thought it might help with balancing decision. I think that is longest and most sucessfull career in KSP I was ever able to achieve (sandbox game excluded). I always either, run out of free time to play KSP before new version is published or some of my favorite mod is gamebreaking so I must start new career.

Also need to write down some thoughts about part progression/contracts/rewards trough that first part of career. I will write those in CFF thread, so other parties may benefit from it too.

[sherkaner]

5 hours ago, Yemo said:

I m currently planning some more radical changes, especially in the early tech tree with regards to part placement and balance:

1. HECS goes way back behind OKTO, is changed to be an OKTO with double the torque, making it more in line with stock HECS
2. New probe core @start, simple SAS, no reaction wheel
3. Small Inline Reaction Wheel moved way back to flightControl
4. General nerf of reaction wheels, like in the old SETI-BalanceMod for ksp 0.90 (and some other command part balancing)
5. Linear RCS port (and fuel) earlier @stability
6. At least some mass and capacity balancing for stock RCS tanks (like in old SETI-BalanceMod for ksp 0.90)
7. LV-T15 Dachshund and LV-900 Beagle from VenStockRevamp resized to 0.625m for usage with probes, thus earlier 0.625m fuel tanks
8. Early Bi-Adapter 1.25m to 2x0.625m available @stability, for the engines above and the Juno Jet engine

Great set of changes; very excited to have you back into the more aggressive rebalancing again.

[nobodyhasthis2]

6 hours ago, Yemo said:

The list in the OP is more like a menu from which to choose, not a "install everything part pack". The problem with SXT is, that it uses stock textures, which kind of visually conflicts with VenStockRevamp. It also adds a lot of parts which are more like alternatives than gap-fillers.

At the moment I m using the SETI-BalanceMod recommended mod list (ckan install) + Procedural Fairings (I ll add those to that list, stock fairings are imho just worse for most cases) + Procedural Parts + B9 Procedural + RLA Stockalike for testing purposes.

The SETI-BalanceMod was optimized for AutoPruner and even provided a pruning list for a radical switch to procedural parts and wings and so on. But that part was destroyed as well by squads ksp 1.0 release. I m not sure about the current state of AutoPruner.

About the next SETIctt and SETIrebalance update:

I m currently planning some more radical changes, especially in the early tech tree with regards to part placement and balance:

1. HECS goes way back behind OKTO, is changed to be an OKTO with double the torque, making it more in line with stock HECS
2. New probe core @start, simple SAS, no reaction wheel
3. Small Inline Reaction Wheel moved way back to flightControl
4. General nerf of reaction wheels, like in the old SETI-BalanceMod for ksp 0.90 (and some other command part balancing)
5. Linear RCS port (and fuel) earlier @stability
6. At least some mass and capacity balancing for stock RCS tanks (like in old SETI-BalanceMod for ksp 0.90)
7. LV-T15 Dachshund and LV-900 Beagle from VenStockRevamp resized to 0.625m for usage with probes, thus earlier 0.625m fuel tanks
8. Early Bi-Adapter 1.25m to 2x0.625m available @stability, for the engines above and the Juno Jet engine

Since that is quite a lot itself, I ll most likely only do that for the ckan recommended mods for the SETI-BalanceMod and ignore most of the other mods for now.
I also might postpone some of the other changes mentioned before, since that one will have quite a lot of ripple effects.

Right now I am in a testing phase for a whole lot of stuff. So putting in stuff supported, not recommended or downright dangerous. The final choices and tweaks often come down to the choice between two evils. The whole SXT thing is like me trying to have my cake and eat it. I like the aircraft parts better that KAX but there is just too much wrong with in beyond that. Hence the reason why I have reservations about including it. After what @Yemo wrote even more so.

It terms of feeling. I tend to want to follow the real space program but without the whole RO thing. A sort of Kerbal version. SETI does that for me.  

For an actual more sensible playthrough.  I am also using the SETI-BalanceMod recommended mod list (ckan install). Stock fairings but with the necessary Stock bug fix and Stock plus fixes. They need patched badly right now. Procedural work better but didn't make the RAM cut in favour of late career mods.

+ Procedural Parts + B9 Procedural fork+ RLA Stockalike.

+ Still messing around with adding more early plane parts for sensible GAP builds.  

As for other mods included. This is kind of weird. They bring more radical changes that follows @Yemo proposals . Close enough that I see where he going. The following are not elegant solutions but work for me a bit. In several cases I had to fix things.

1. HECS not used. I start at 0.625m rockets or less. So that pretty much says yay! to all proposals so far.

2. New probe core @start, no SAS, no reaction wheel. Comes froms sounding rockets.    

3. Small Inline Reaction Wheel moved way back to flightControl. There is a nerfed 0.625m replacement but it there for flavor. Probably that should go back as well. This puts the early rockets into a sort of V2 development stage. Lack of early SAS often covered by tiny fin rotation to achieve spin stabilization. 

4. Semi saturation of reaction wheels mod added. To help nerf all wheels and promote RCS systems use. 

5. Linear RCS port moved to @stability. As a side note. I was forcing the first manned flight over 18k to be part of the earlier aircraft contracts. Needed a X-15 and early RCS development seemed to fit in better. Ironically the inline cockpit had the fuel anyway at this stage. 

Other stuff

Overall the mass and capacity balancing of tanks need done right across the board. I hate it when there are two tanks exactly the same size but with different volumes. I try to nerf the worse offenders. However it is a total grind to fix this. This is something that really should be addressed in a CFF thread to agree on a community standard. Otherwise we end up micromanaging every thing to get it all working together. 

 

 

 

[randomone]

Is the reaction wheel nerf going to coincide with a requirement/highly-recommended promotion for that saturation wheel mod? They would work well with each other I think.

Also on a more minor detail a recent update with USI colonization/life support stuff caused huge supply intake increase so the SETI greenhouse needs to be buffed to compensate.

[nobodyhasthis2]

Here the best I could do to nerf MJ progression out of the game completely for those that want it. Including part moved to starts and costing removed. I have yet to figure out building removal but that is probably not a good idea as it starts screwing around with a core game mechanic too much.

Remember total noob code supplied by me. Especially with the use of wildcards. They are dangerous in my hands. Use at own risk. Not responsible if this is flawed and does this WARGAMES CLIP  (caution to those at risk epileptic seizure warning)

Personally I like the default SETI progression with a twist of spice but that just me. If you start mixing this with the first example posted. The FINAL in the first example statement takes precedence so try not mix for sanity and debugging reasons.  

@PART[mumech_MJ2_AR202]:NEEDS[MechJeb2]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
    @TechRequired = start
    @entryCost = 0

    @MODULE[MechJebCore] {
        @MechJebLocalSettings[*] {
            @unlockTechs = start
        }
    }
}

 

[Yemo]

On 25.1.2016 at 8:39 AM, nobodyhasthis2 said:

Right now I am in a testing phase for a whole lot of stuff. So putting in stuff supported, not recommended or downright dangerous. The final choices and tweaks often come down to the choice between two evils. The whole SXT thing is like me trying to have my cake and eat it. I like the aircraft parts better that KAX but there is just too much wrong with in beyond that. Hence the reason why I have reservations about including it. After what @Yemo wrote even more so.

It terms of feeling. I tend to want to follow the real space program but without the whole RO thing. A sort of Kerbal version. SETI does that for me.  

For an actual more sensible playthrough.  I am also using the SETI-BalanceMod recommended mod list (ckan install). Stock fairings but with the necessary Stock bug fix and Stock plus fixes. They need patched badly right now. Procedural work better but didn't make the RAM cut in favour of late career mods.

+ Procedural Parts + B9 Procedural fork+ RLA Stockalike.

+ Still messing around with adding more early plane parts for sensible GAP builds.  

As for other mods included. This is kind of weird. They bring more radical changes that follows @Yemo proposals . Close enough that I see where he going. The following are not elegant solutions but work for me a bit. In several cases I had to fix things.

1. HECS not used. I start at 0.625m rockets or less. So that pretty much says yay! to all proposals so far.

2. New probe core @start, no SAS, no reaction wheel. Comes froms sounding rockets.    

3. Small Inline Reaction Wheel moved way back to flightControl. There is a nerfed 0.625m replacement but it there for flavor. Probably that should go back as well. This puts the early rockets into a sort of V2 development stage. Lack of early SAS often covered by tiny fin rotation to achieve spin stabilization. 

4. Semi saturation of reaction wheels mod added. To help nerf all wheels and promote RCS systems use. 

5. Linear RCS port moved to @stability. As a side note. I was forcing the first manned flight over 18k to be part of the earlier aircraft contracts. Needed a X-15 and early RCS development seemed to fit in better. Ironically the inline cockpit had the fuel anyway at this stage. 

Other stuff

Overall the mass and capacity balancing of tanks need done right across the board. I hate it when there are two tanks exactly the same size but with different volumes. I try to nerf the worse offenders. However it is a total grind to fix this. This is something that really should be addressed in a CFF thread to agree on a community standard. Otherwise we end up micromanaging every thing to get it all working together. 

I included the procedural fairings in the recommended list, since I just could not stand the stock ones anymore, imho they are not too bad in terms of RAM.

The balance mod will focus heavily on the recommended mods, to allow for a somewhat balanced/playable core/modpack.
RLA Stockalike is just too big for the moment with too many balancing issues (the monoprop engines are just too powerful).

I scrapped the idea of resizing some engines for 0.625m for the moment, people can use tweakscale for that. Also no early bi-adapter.
But I moved all the relevant early airplane parts to earlyAviation node (including juno jet engine), since the Me262 was useable when the V2 was. Props are just a (stronger but slower) alternative now.

In general I did a lot of movement for the early tech tree, especially when using procedural parts and/or real chutes (when those are installed, all the early stock clutter is moved to the side, like the modular wings and the tac life support clutter).

ad1, 2: Going below 0.625m is imho not worth it just for one or two nodes. The probe core will have SAS, since it will be the only available one until flightControl, but no reaction wheel. Of course SAS will be of little use at the start without control surfaces or reaction wheels...

ad3: At the moment I have the reaction wheels even later at advFlightControl, control will really become a major factor in the early game. Possible solutions in order of tech level unlockability: ControlSurfaces (earlyAviation), RCS (stability), upper stage Gimbal (generalRocketry - LV-900 from VenStockRevamp), lower stage Gimbal (advRocketry), ReactionWheels (advFlightControl).

ad4: See below.

ad5: Apropos cockpit, all stock cockpits are moved to the command modules nodes, since they are effectively spaceplane cockpits. To compensate, a special "airplane" cockpit is introduced (like the special probe core) with SETIctt. It will use the model and texture of the ksp cockpit from 1.0 to 1.0.2 (not too pretty, but since the stock IVA is useable, it has a low RAM footprint and is easily available for redistribution). In terms of stats, it will have nearly no impact tolerance, low heat tolerance, no reaction wheel or monoprop, but the mass will only be 0.7 tons. I can't prevent it from going into space though.
The Mk1 pod thus weighs 0.1 tons more than the new cockpit, but with much better impact and heat tolerance. Also the shape is better for reentry and it fits better with a monoprop tank on top.

 

edit: Oh and the procedural monoprop values will change. A procedural tank with SETIrebalance holding 400 monoprop now will hold 500 in the future, with the same dry mass. Thus from being generally less dry mass efficient than stock, they will be a bit more dry mass efficient. All non-procedural tanks from the recommended pack will be balanced to that standard. It will create a "mass symmetry", which is very useful for fuel switches. Essentially fuel tanks within the recommended mod pack will have the same wet mass per dry mass per volume, regardless whether they contain LFO or monoprop.

I will also forward this to CCF.

 

23 hours ago, randomone said:

Is the reaction wheel nerf going to coincide with a requirement/highly-recommended promotion for that saturation wheel mod? They would work well with each other I think.

Also on a more minor detail a recent update with USI colonization/life support stuff caused huge supply intake increase so the SETI greenhouse needs to be buffed to compensate.
 

 

While there is a config for the saturation mod, I currently do not have the time to test it. That is planned for the future, but imho not a priority at the moment. Too much other stuff around.

Thank you very much for the notice regarding the greenhouse, I ll take a look at it after the SETIctt and SETIrebalance 0.9.6.

 

 

SETI Contracts v0.9.6 (for KSP 1.0.5)

Adjustments

• Preparations for SETIctt 0.9.6
• World First Milestones buffed again to 1/4 of the original value, makes "Strategia" mod useful
• Contract rewards and advances nerfed (especially early ones) because of World First Milestones buff

Edited January 26, 2016 by Yemo

[nobodyhasthis2]

On 1/24/2016 at 10:35 PM, Yemo said:

The SETI-BalanceMod was optimized for AutoPruner and even provided a pruning list for a radical switch to procedural parts and wings and so on. But that part was destroyed as well by squads ksp 1.0 release. I m not sure about the current state of AutoPruner.

Checked things out with AutoPruner. Looks like project is alive. Last updated 19 Jan 2015 

But there is a big catch. It is not on CKAN and probably for very good reasons. @Yemo it might require a separate download add on. Also I think we will go crazy if significant time is put to restore .90 pruning list. Only to see it get killed again in 1.1. So I would advise to wait out.

In other news. SXT made the cut into my game after all. I got off the fence and made my mind up. The GAP contracts are just not covered before serious rocket development with any other parts pack. On a good note @Lack has suggested breaking it up into smaller parts lists. So we could cherry pick out stuff like avation parts I suppose. If they are ever split off into a separate mod.

Can't say anything yet about textures mismatch with Ven's Stock Revamp but I don't mind it. I have to say if GAP contracts are in there then at least the SXT aviation parts need to be. Without tweaking they fit into the existing tech tree really nice as well.  

EDIT: @Lack has quite sensibly stated that official SXT break out should wait for ksp1.1. He has none the less directed me to an aircraft part only link anyway. I thought that SETI users might like it. So here is the plane parts on their own https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/39086055/subpacks/Newer/SXTPropsandPlanes.zip if people want to explore a SETI varation. 

Also note Ven's Stock Revamp in flux too folks leading up to ksp 1.1 so don't be too disappointed if things don't work out mixing this all together right now. 

Edited January 27, 2016 by nobodyhasthis2

[Yemo]

@nobodyhasthis2: Thank you for the info, I will take a look at it for the next versions.

 

So here is the big double update.

Please BACKUP your savegames, if you want to try it with an existing savegame, especially regarding SETI-BalanceMod, the SETIctt changes are most affecting the early tech tree.

It is recommended to install the CKAN mod pack. To do so, you just need to select the SETI-BalanceMod on ckan and then apply the changes including the mods which are automatically recommended in the next step in CKAN.

Due to the size of the update there are most likely some errors/oversights, please provide feedback if you encounter them.

Thank you patrons, you made this update possible!

 

SETI CommunityTechTree v0.9.6 (for KSP 1.0.5)

Please support continued SETI maintenance & development via Patreon

• Link provided in the kerbalstuff description & donate field
• Many thanks to the 5 SETI patrons!

This update introduces radical changes to the early tech tree

• A backup of your savegame is recommended before updating
• The mod is optimized for the ModPack recommended when installing SETI-BalanceMod via CKAN

Vessel control now follows a progression system, in order of unlockability:

• Control surfaces @earlyAviation
• Simple RCS @stability, RCS generally available earlier
• Upper stage gimbal @generalRocketry (LV-900 from VenStockRevamp)
• Lower stage gimbal @advRocketry (LV-T45)
• Reaction wheels @advFlightControl

New "outsourcing" nodes for clutter parts

• Many girders outsourced to new structural node (from engineering101)
• If RealChute is installed, most stock chutes are moved to parachutes node
• If Procedural Parts is installed many early clutter parts are outsourced to 1 science nodes

Other part shuffling and new parts

• New probe core @start (without reaction wheels), HECS core moved way back
• Batteries moved around, small stack battery available @start
• "New" airplane cockpit @earlyAviation
• Juno engine and other parts @earlyAviation, allowing early plane building
• First parachute later @survivability, but all parachutes available at this node
• All spaceplane cockpits have to be unlocked in the command module line
• Various parts from VenStockRevamp available earlier

 

SETI BalanceMod v0.9.6 (for KSP 1.0.5)

Please support continued SETI maintenance & development via Patreon

• Link provided in the kerbalstuff description & donate field
• Many thanks to the 5 SETI patrons!

This update introduces radical changes

• A backup of your savegame is recommended before updating
• The mod is optimized for the ModPack recommended when installing SETI-BalanceMod via CKAN

Major rebalances (for the mods recommended with a CKAN install)

• Procedural monoprop capacity increased by 25%
• Fuel tanks standardized in terms of dry mass/capacity
• Reaction wheels drastically nerfed
• Command parts (probes, pods, cockpits) rebalanced mainly in terms of mass, reaction wheels and monoprop
• While spaceplane cockpits have monoprop capacity, the tank is empty by default, pods have full tanks by default
• Some cost rebalancing, but nowhere near complete

Edited January 27, 2016 by Yemo

[inigma]

It's alive!   gonna play this soon.

[Yemo]

14 hours ago, inigma said:

It's alive!   gonna play this soon.

Looking forward to the feedback.

 

Just noticed that I forgot to include the mech jeb config. Oh well, testing and merging on 3 installs is a pain...

Unfortunately station science and kerbal engineer are not installed via ckan at the moment, they are quite important for the mod pack. At least kerbal engineer is obvious enough that players install that manually (I hope). The mod pack should be playable with 32bit ksp.

I had to take out field science from the mod pack, because it kept generating contracts (visible in debug window) as soon as the parts were unlocked (eg thermometer, barometer and so on), which resulted in severe and frequent lags. Does anyone else experience this as well? I plan to take another look at this over the weekend to provide @nightingale with a clean savegame.

I ll wait for some more mistakes/issues to be reported and then release an update to fix those, maybe take a look at universal storage. But in general we will have to wait for 1.1.

Edited January 28, 2016 by Yemo

[Holyvision]

Excited to hop in and try out all the new fun -- fingers crossed for a station science update soon too. 

[sh1pman]

So why were the reaction wheels nerfed?

[kcs123]

Just a quick feedback. I have backed up saved game so I can revert if needed, so it is not a big deal for current career.
I have installed SETIctt and SETI balance mod over ongoing career from previous SETI versions, so it might be a case for messup from my side, but I have noticed some duplicate part placement.

- LY-10 small landing gear is in Early aviation node and in Stability node
- Mk1 inline and Mk1 basic inline cockpit are both in Early aviation node and Mk1 inline also in command module much higher in tech tree still "unlocked"
- Mk1 cockpit is also in both, Aerodynamic and command module node
 

I suspect those duplications are due to fact that I already unlocked those parts trough previous career progression, not a game breaking or anything like that.

Just now, when I looked trough tree/parts, I noticed that some stock wings (fat wings and control surfaces) are placed in Subsonic flight node.
Is it possible to place those too in 1 science node tree too, like Modular wings node ? I think that there is small area near subsonic flight node where is just enough room for another 1 science node, for people that use PW to reduce part cluttering.

Stock control surfaces, like fins, canrads, winglets are just fine to have, even with PW wings. I use PW mostly for planes, while stock winglets and fins are just fine for simple rockets when there is no need to bother to create proper PW wing surfaces.

To balance out PW and procedural part usage trough tree progression, it will be good to tie part mass/max temperature with R&D building level rather than any specific node in tech tree. Unfortunately mass/temp changes could cause balancing issues in other areas, parts might go boom for no apareant reasons, wing mass/strength is already tweaked for people that use FAR and so on.

So, instead of messing with mass/temperature it might be better idea to have increased cost of those parts earlier in career, based on building level. 1.75 x base price for building level 1, 1.5 for level 2 and 1 x for level 3 building. Simulating better and cheaper tenology for part production at higher tech level building. That will make some RPG style choice for player, shoulod he spend so much money on expencive stuff or he will save money to buy better building, so he can have benefit from high money invest in R&D.

Well, just a though, that is more a topic for a CFF than SETI. Other than mentioned, I didn't find any game breaking stuff in old save, although things might slightly unbalanced, but I rather refrain to start new career until KSP 1.1. comes out.

EDIT:
Due to movement of core probes higher in tech tree most of early created crafts were no longer usable, but that is more/less easy to fix with usage of different, but available probe. Anyway, I packed all crafts I was able to create trough career, some of those used multiple times. I hoped that it might help with overall balancing in future. Still more/less early career, launched couple of probes in desired orbits around Kerbin/Mun/Minimus, landed on Mun and Minimus, still waiting for Bob to return from Minimus to bring some science points.

Some probes were sent to Moho and while waiting for those to arrive I plan to unlock some more nodes and start to build orbital station around Kerbin. This is area where SETIctt is slightly unbalanced when used with USI MKS/OKS/Life support mod. To make some orbital station fesible, slightly more orbital parts should be available in 160-300 science points nods. Not way advanced stuff like greenhouses/recyclers/power generators, but some habitation parts/workshop/science lab should be available.

Just to make some sense to send Kerbals in orbit, train them there to gain some experience, make some Mun/Minimus exploration and similar small stuff while waiting for good enough transfer windows for interplanetary travels.

Edited January 28, 2016 by kcs123

[Yemo]

41 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

So why were the reaction wheels nerfed?

Without the nerf, control was hardly a problem you had to think about, even at the early stages. Also in reality reaction wheels do not work as they do in ksp, thus they are not used.

The latter is improved by the semi saturatable reaction wheels mod which was supported in ksp 0.90, but I lacked the time to test it now (feel free to try and report back).

Now control is at least a progression and has to be taken into consideration, especially in the early game. And reaction wheels are not the fix everything solution anymore, since they are now much less mass and EC efficient and RCS efficiency and availability is improved (though engines and RCS thrusters would really benefit from a mass and cost rebalance, but that is a very time consuming task).

[gerishnakov]

I'd like to suggest something to be incorporated into SETI that I've been doing myself to the mod for quite some time now. I feel that the Stayputnik ought to be moved to Engineering 101, and balanced accordingly. The Stayputnik should really be used only for your first satellites; the real life Sputnik 1 probe, on which it is obviously based, was after all designed as a technology test; it's only real purpose was to be a trackable hunk of metal in orbit. To be honest, this also is the Stayputnik's only real use. Having it unlock where it currently does renders it useless, as at that point you have the capability anyway to send actual science probes into orbit. In a standard SETI game I end up never using the Stayputnik, which is a shame given it being a tribute to the world's first artificial satellite. In order to make it more competitive with the new starting probe core, I'd suggest making that one a little bit heavier.

[Sovek]

YAY!!! I love that you nerfed the pods like they day. They were WAY overpowered and if you wanted to play without the OP pods, you had to manually click "Turn Off Reaction Wheels" BAH! Now I can use that space for "monoprop" for things like TACLS or extra hydrazine on long missions.