Jump to content

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

Yemo

By Yemo
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Awesome work as always Yemo! thanks for the update. Do you have any more planned for 0.90 or are you going to stop supporting 0.90 when 1.0 hits given the time for mods to get updated? Just curious for the future of the mod concerning 1.0 and 0.90. Also your numbers are perfect with semi saturable RWs feels perfect control wise. Enough to hold an attitude without making RCS obsolete.

Thank you.

I plan to release something of a wrap up version for KSP 0.90, which will be called SETI-BalanceMod-v0.9. It may have very few changes, but just act as a milestone.

It will surely be released some time after KSP 1.0, depending on the KSP 1.0 changes and how fast other mods are ported to 1.0 (and therefore how fast I can work on SETI for 1.0)

Meant to post this last night, but your config for the PP-HRB has the case for the part being weightless. When you burn all the fuel your part ends up weightless. This bestows a lot more delta v when usig an HRB over an SRB. I don't believe this is the intention is it?

- - - Updated - - -

For reference pp-srbs use 3.737 for mass which does scale with resizing

Hm, I can not reproduce this. The PP-HRB in my installs has the same dry mass as the PP-SRB.

I recommend this little module that uses the same FS module B9 uses. Allowing better alignment of landing gear on planes. May not need the :final tag I just made this when I was just learning MM.

@PART[SmallGearBay]:FINAL
{
MODULE
    {
        name = FSwheelAlignment
    }
}

Since KSP 1.0 introduces new landing gear and is so close (Monday), I ll have to wait for that and then take a look, thank you!

Suggestion for the mod list:

Robotics Sequencer

Also, USI Kolonization Systems is doubled in there; and you might wanna add recommendation of Ship Manifest for Station Parts Expansion, because the 1.25m cupola has no hatch or IVA making kerbal trapped in there.

Interesting, IR really is evolving!

Oh, I have to update the dev section. And I will add Ship Manifest to StationPartsExpansion, thank you!

Hotfix Version 0.8.9.1

Fixes

  • maxTemp fixes for DeadlyReentry
  • Fixed some TweakScale Exponents for engines
  • Corrected thrust for QuizTech 5nozzle engine
  • Fixed OrbitalSurveys Science costs increase

Other changes

  • High ISP nukes later @improvedNuclearPropulsion
  • Nuclear Propulsion TechNode in CTT costs 450 science, instead of 300
  • KR-2L rebalanced, much higher thrust and atmo ISP

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I noticed Kerbal Foundries isn't listed in the OP. Are you still planning on supporting that mod? It has some great parts I would like to use and not all of them have been rebalanced for SETI yet.

It is planned to support it, however the mod author did not even balance it rudimentary, yet. So like with infernal robotics rework, the parts work, but they are not balanced in this state of development (eg impact tolerance).

An a related note: There is already a Taurus HCV (command pod only) config in SETI v0.8.9, but I can not put that mod on the supported list, since it has some major technical deficiencies at the moment (missing bracket in the config, TAC life support resource definitions without checking for TAC life support, wrong resource amounts and so on). And the mod maker does not plan to correct that before 1.0.

And on another related note: KSPI extended is compatible with SETI, it has the naming scheme and so on. But it is in the process of shifting resources and tanks (to community resource pack and fuel switchable tanks) and at the moment, the dev progress seems to be heavily focused on technical details instead of gameplay balancing.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

So, I just saw someone complete his first mission in a KSP 1.0 career game.

He had about 100,000 funds after launching his first vessel to a few km height, with HARD mode settings...

ROFL:confused:

Though there are some nice new IVAs and a shaky camera effect.

I think personally I will stay with 0.90 for a while, for a progression game...

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Aurelius

Lord Aurelius

Posted
Posted
So, I just saw someone complete his first mission in a KSP 1.0 career game.

He had about 100,000 funds after launching his first vessel to a few km height, with HARD mode settings...

ROFL:confused:

Though there are some nice new IVAs and a shaky camera effect.

I think personally I will stay with 0.90 for a while, for a progression game...

Sounds like you have your work cut out for you then :)

But in seriousness, that does sound pretty ridiculous, unless the Kerbal economy has experienced some pretty dramatic inflation and everything costs 10x more now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Svm420

Svm420

Posted
Posted
So, I just saw someone complete his first mission in a KSP 1.0 career game.

He had about 100,000 funds after launching his first vessel to a few km height, with HARD mode settings...

ROFL:confused:

Though there are some nice new IVAs and a shaky camera effect.

I think personally I will stay with 0.90 for a while, for a progression game...

Well I mean did you see the save creation process? Has it changed that you can reduce rewards? Maybe he cranked it for the show I mean unless you saw that custom save screen at the MM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Sounds like you have your work cut out for you then :)

But in seriousness, that does sound pretty ridiculous, unless the Kerbal economy has experienced some pretty dramatic inflation and everything costs 10x more now.

Well I mean did you see the save creation process? Has it changed that you can reduce rewards? Maybe he cranked it for the show I mean unless you saw that custom save screen at the MM.

He started a new save. I saw the settings. 10k starting funds, fund rewards set to 60%. He had 70k after completing the first launch (Mk1 pod with new half sized RT-10 booster and parachute to a few thousand meters altitude), he got another 30k advances from selecting the next contracts. Part costs were roughly the same as before.

Ridiculous.

What I found most surprising was, that he did not even care about that. He spent a lot of time showing new IVAs and stuff, but not a single remark about that horrendous balancing for the for the FIRST mission.

I mean, it is not something hidden behind a subcategory of a late game contract. It is after the FIRST contract, on HARD settings. It seems that with 100% rewards, you could call career a sandbox with achievement like "contracts" just for flavor, without gameplay significance.

I wish I could say "judging too early", but it is the freaking FIRST 10minutes and the funds balance is out the window...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Svm420

Svm420

Posted
Posted

Wow it sounds pretty bad then. Especially considering they are calling this a complete game now. It is exactly what I was fearing. My only hope is that a major change is made to the modability of the sph/vab so we can set limits ourselves I really really want that feature. 30 parts doesn't makes sense when you need more parts for realism. Fingers crossed that we have some steps forward in 1.0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Svm420

Svm420

Posted
Posted

Hey you forgot the :FOR[sETI] TAG IN the kisinvetory mm file without it it runs beofre the kas containers have been added. Relevant section below.

// Add KIS support for KAS storage containers@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[20]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[200]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 200
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 3
        slotsY = 3
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 250
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


// Add KIS support for KAS storage containers
@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[40]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[400]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 400
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 3
        slotsY = 4
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 450
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}




@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[60]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[600]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 600
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 4
        slotsY = 4
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 650
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}




@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[80]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[800]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 800
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 4
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 850
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[120]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[1200]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 1200
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 5
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 1250
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[160]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[1600]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 1600
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 5
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 1650
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[320]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[3200]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 3200
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 6
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 3250
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Papa_Joe

Papa_Joe

Posted
Posted
He started a new save. I saw the settings. 10k starting funds, fund rewards set to 60%. He had 70k after completing the first launch (Mk1 pod with new half sized RT-10 booster and parachute to a few thousand meters altitude), he got another 30k advances from selecting the next contracts. Part costs were roughly the same as before.

Ridiculous.

What I found most surprising was, that he did not even care about that. He spent a lot of time showing new IVAs and stuff, but not a single remark about that horrendous balancing for the for the FIRST mission.

I mean, it is not something hidden behind a subcategory of a late game contract. It is after the FIRST contract, on HARD settings. It seems that with 100% rewards, you could call career a sandbox with achievement like "contracts" just for flavor, without gameplay significance.

I wish I could say "judging too early", but it is the freaking FIRST 10minutes and the funds balance is out the window...

Lol... you definitely have a very large task in front of you for 1.0... Not sure what I can do to help, but I'm willing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dazpoet

Dazpoet

Posted
Posted
Any chance 0.8.9 will be availlable on CKAN soon? It's been out a couple of days now, but no update yet.

Oops we recombobulated a bunch of metadata recently and it seems to have disrupted the SETI indexing file. This has been fixed and and the newest version of SETI is on CKAN as of right now. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mathijs

Mathijs

Posted
Posted
Oops we recombobulated a bunch of metadata recently and it seems to have disrupted the SETI indexing file. This has been fixed and and the newest version of SETI is on CKAN as of right now. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FreeThinker

FreeThinker

Posted
Posted

[h=2]Version 0.9.9 for Kerbal Space Program 0.90[/h] Released on 2015-04-27

  • Fixed minor issue of the InterstellarFuelSwitch. switching in the VAB will always set default amount
  • Vista Engine scaled for NTF/ SETI KW Mode , requiring less power and producing mush less wasteheat
  • Electric Engines scaled for NTF/ SETI KW Mode
  • Atmospheric scoop addaped for NTF/ SETI KW Mode, requiring less power
  • Atmospheric scoop will not consume power when there is no storage room

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SwGustav

SwGustav

Posted
Posted

That's funny - Squad actually gave answer on recent AMA about career balance and they think it's good enough (though they also said more changes will be made in the future so don't give your hopes up yet) - link.

Maybe it's already different in actual release, let's wait and then see

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Hey you forgot the :FOR[sETI] TAG IN the kisinvetory mm file without it it runs beofre the kas containers have been added. Relevant section below.

// Add KIS support for KAS storage containers@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[20]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[200]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 200
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 3
        slotsY = 3
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 250
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


// Add KIS support for KAS storage containers
@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[40]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[400]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 400
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 3
        slotsY = 4
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 450
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}




@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[60]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[600]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 600
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 4
        slotsY = 4
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 650
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}




@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[80]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[800]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 800
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 4
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 850
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[120]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[1200]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 1200
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 5
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 1250
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[160]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[1600]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 1600
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 5
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 1650
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}


@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[KASModuleContainer]:HAS[#maxSize[320]],!MODULE[ModuleKISInventory]:HAS[#maxVolume[3200]]]:NEEDS[KAS,KIS]:FOR[SETI]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISInventory
        maxVolume = 3200
        externalAccess = true
        internalAccess = true
        slotsX = 5
        slotsY = 6
        slotSize = 50
        itemIconResolution = 128
        selfIconResolution = 128
        openSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerOpen
        closeSndPath = KIS/Sounds/containerClose
        defaultMoveSndPath = KIS/Sounds/itemMove
    }




    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleKISItem
        volumeOverride = 3250
        editorItemsCategory = false
    }
}

Thank you, I ll correct it in the next small patch!

Version 0.9.9 for Kerbal Space Program 0.90

Released on 2015-04-27

  • Fixed minor issue of the InterstellarFuelSwitch. switching in the VAB will always set default amount
  • Vista Engine scaled for NTF/ SETI KW Mode , requiring less power and producing mush less wasteheat
  • Electric Engines scaled for NTF/ SETI KW Mode
  • Atmospheric scoop addaped for NTF/ SETI KW Mode, requiring less power
  • Atmospheric scoop will not consume power when there is no storage room

Very nice!

Wow it sounds pretty bad then. Especially considering they are calling this a complete game now. It is exactly what I was fearing. My only hope is that a major change is made to the modability of the sph/vab so we can set limits ourselves I really really want that feature. 30 parts doesn't makes sense when you need more parts for realism. Fingers crossed that we have some steps forward in 1.0.
Lol... you definitely have a very large task in front of you for 1.0... Not sure what I can do to help, but I'm willing...
That's funny - Squad actually gave answer on recent AMA about career balance and they think it's good enough (though they also said more changes will be made in the future so don't give your hopes up yet) - link.

Maybe it's already different in actual release, let's wait and then see

So I just started KSP 1.0. I played 5 minutes on hard mode (10k starting funds, 60% rewards for everything), launching one vessel.

Before launching my second vessel, I have 106k funds and 21 science, without even getting science from the launch pad.

For reference, the first vessel costs 2930 funds, both second tier science nodes cost 5 science, the third tier nodes are like before (20,18,15).

I m not sure what they were talking about when "balancing" the game. In 0.90 the science was totally imbalanced in mid game. 1.0 is totally imbalanced after 5 minutes...

Or I just have a different notion of "balance". I guess my second mission goes to the Mun or so, on hard mode...

I just hope moddability is increased again, after the last decrease with the hard coded facilities...

I expected issues, I did not expect to find them within 5 minutes. And I did not eve strap lots of boosters on, to get more record contracts completed.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I think they're catering to the beginners that are now buying the game since it's out of early access.

I understand/support that the default/easy settings should be very forgiving, but when I select "hard", I do not want to be swimming in funds after 5 minutes.

It is like playing a shooter, you select hard mode and are practically running around in god mode. Sorry, but an issue as apparent and influencial like that does not belong into a release version.

Difficulty settings are really balancing 101, and there is practically no effort neccessary in making sure that such imbalances do not occur after 5 minutes gametime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lord Aurelius

Lord Aurelius

Posted
Posted

I haven't played much with the new update yet (just fired it up for a few minutes, the new DDS textures make it load ridiculously fast now) but I did look at the tech tree and it's awful, the placement of parts doesn't look like it has improved at all since 0.90.

That new SRB is a joke, now we have FOUR 1.25m SRBs. It really would have been better as a 0.625m part. I'm pretty sure there's a way to rescale parts in just one dimension (I've seen other mods do it) so it should be an easy fix.

I'm looking through the config files for the game and I'm not seeing anywhere to adjust the upgradeable buildings, hopefully it's just buried somewhere and not still hardcoded...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I haven't played much with the new update yet (just fired it up for a few minutes, the new DDS textures make it load ridiculously fast now) but I did look at the tech tree and it's awful, the placement of parts doesn't look like it has improved at all since 0.90.

That new SRB is a joke, now we have FOUR 1.25m SRBs. It really would have been better as a 0.625m part. I'm pretty sure there's a way to rescale parts in just one dimension (I've seen other mods do it) so it should be an easy fix.

I'm looking through the config files for the game and I'm not seeing anywhere to adjust the upgradeable buildings, hopefully it's just buried somewhere and not still hardcoded...

While I do like the new "everything visible" aspect of the tech tree, as far as I can tell so far, the tech tree itself is worse than before. It seems to be less open for modding and more specifically fitted to the set stock game and its parts.

Like having dead ends, eg the command modules are now a dead end in the middle of the tree. Also construction related nodes are all over the tree now, and the landing progression makes no sense.

What is worst, is the totally unmotivated shifting around of tech nodes, eg scienceTech to the back, introducing a new node "basicScience" where the other one was. There is a node called "largeProbes" costing 1000 science, offering nothing else than a higher diameter probe core without any advantages.

Honestly it mostly feels like shifting around stuff for its own sake, without concept, need or benefit to the game (except for putting some aircraft stuff earlier, which is a good move). Though why you have to pay 550 science to get the standardCanard is beyond me, or 1000 science for larger elevons, when nuclear propulsion costs 300 science...

And probe cores are still much too late. I understand that it is appealing to put manned capsules at the start. But I do not see the need to put unmanned stuff so far back.

Simple large to small adapters for making engine clusters are still at the 550 science node and thermo and baro at the 45 and 90 nodes, while you start with mystery goo...

Honestly, I now kind of regret using the CTT. I guess the new CTT will be based on stock again, which is now a worse starting point than before.

So I m seriously considering dumping stock and CTT and making my own tech tree, so that I do not have to touch everything again just because squad feels the unmotivated need to shuffle around some nodes...

And why has every damn late game probe core its own very high cost tech node?

L’art pour l’art, I guess.

tl;dr: The new tech tree is an inconsequential disimprovement.

PS: When you force players and modders to adjust to a new tech tree, at least make it a noticable improvement over the previous one, and certainly not a disimprovement.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SwGustav

SwGustav

Posted
Posted (edited)

I played through to first orbit on moderate difficulty and it seems.. alright? I have no idea how Yemo got 106k, I had ~70 after first vessel (still ridiculous but how can harder mode get you bigger amount??). While building upgrades cost more, you also earn more money, so you get essential stuff (conics, nodes, eva) in a better rate than 0.90 (BTW, most of this money is from records which are all done after first orbit). Contracts are great (tourism is nice), tech tree is much better (though not perfect). There is no reason to be upset about this update, especially when there are such progression changing mods as SETI.

Edit: Isn't it like now, easier to make tech trees?

Edited by SwGustav
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I played through to first orbit on moderate difficulty and it seems.. alright? I have no idea how Yemo got 106k, I had ~70 after first vessel (still ridiculous but how can harder mode get you bigger amount??). While building upgrades cost more, you also earn more money, so you get essential stuff (conics, nodes, eva) in a better rate than 0.90 (BTW, most of this money is from records which are all done after first orbit). Contracts are great (tourism is nice), tech tree is much better (though not perfect). There is no reason to be upset about this update, especially when there are such progression changing mods as SETI.

Edit: Isn't it like now, easier to make tech trees?

I had 106k funds before the second mission, which includes the advances from selectable contracts 3 and 4. So around 70k without those advances after finishing missions 1 and 2 (launch and scientific data).

Well, I do not see the improvement in the layout of the new tech tree, quite the contrary, only a small improvement in part positioning within the tree (some aero parts earlier).

The display (all nodes visible) is a great improvement, the moddability just does what was possible before with techmanager. Though to make full use of that, facility upgrades need to be moddable, for which I did not find the configs so far...

So, as stated before, with the new CTT likely based on the new stock tech tree, which offers no benefits for quite some workload, I can hardly justify adjusting to the new CTT only to have to make unmotivated adjustments again, when stock disimproves again. I like modding for improvements, not modding in circles.

But I also can hardly justify putting effort into a new tech tree, when I can not mod the building upgrades to make use of it.

Edited by Yemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...