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

[Amedee]

While I have not figured out every change squad made, I still have not found configs for the building upgrades.

Putting a few simple values behind programming is not very modding friendly. I unfortunately doubt something like contract configurator and filter extensions is published for that speciality topic.

Seeing the new flavor of the week aero model (after release/beta, rofl), I do not think that overall I jumped to conclusions too early, about the state of 1.0.

NEW Download: SETI-Contracts for KSP 1.0.2

In other news, since I can not base a balance mod on a flavor of the week stock "balance", I decided to split it up and make those spin-offs available in the OP of this thread as well, to keep the discussion in place.

In a first move, I launched the SETI-Contracts as a separate mod. This way, they can be combined with other TechTrees or even with stock without having to dig through the zip.

At the moment, only the previously available contracts are included, but it works with 1.0.2 and the latest contract configurator and module manager version.

I noticed that the SETI-Contracts mod disables Squad's contracts, including the automated altitude, distance and speed record contracts.

If I want to re-enable those contracts, is it simply a matter of commenting out this line in SETI-Contracts-General.cfg?

disabledContractType = RecordTrackContract

EDIT: to answer my own question - yes.

Edited May 5, 2015 by Amedee

[Yemo]

NEW Download: SETI-CommunityTechTree for KSP 1.0.2

With the new CommunityTechTree, this is the tech spin-off from the SETI-BalanceMod for 1.0.2.

As in the 0.90 SETI-BalanceMod, it starts with probes, then early plane parts and manned space capsules follow after that.

So far only the stock parts have been reordered into the new CTT (which was slightly altered).

Also the stock probes had to be adjusted to fit into the progression and the small Jet Engine was added again, though its velocity curve and so on are not yet rebalanced.

[FreeThinker]

I see you made an extension of the CTT, good, for balance reasons, I made some small modifications to CTT for KSPI as well,

@TechTree:AFTER[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[nanolathing]]
    {
        @hideEmpty = False
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[advSolarTech]]
    {
        @hideEmpty = False
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[advFusionReactions]]
    {
        @anyToUnlock = False
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[antimatterPower]]
    {
        @anyToUnlock = False
        Parent
        {
            parentID = exoticFuelStorage
            lineFrom = RIGHT
            lineTo = LEFT
        }
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[exoticAlloys]]
    {
        Parent
        {
            parentID = metaMaterials
            lineFrom = RIGHT
            lineTo = LEFT
        }
    }
    @RDNode:HAS[#id[highEnergyScience]]
    {
        @anyToUnlock = False
        Parent
        {
            parentID = highTechElectricalSystems
            lineFrom = RIGHT
            lineTo = LEFT
        }
    }
}

[Yemo]

I see you made an extension of the CTT, good, for balance reasons, I made some small modifications to CTT for KSPI as well,

*snip

Looks great!

I ve set an MM overwrite as well, so that every node has "hideEmpty = False" and "anyToUnlock = False" regardless of what is decided for the original CTT.

Also, I added KSPI Extended to the supported mods list.

So if you want a truly epic KSP 1.0.2 game, I suggest using KSPI Extended in addition to the SETI-CommunityTechTree and the SETI-Contracts.

This is the overview of the SETI-CTT, of course the CTT itself is required:

Edited May 6, 2015 by Yemo

[FreeThinker]

I like this Tech tree, it looks a lot more realistic than the stock version. I think you should consider allowing the download of this Techtree in a separate download, because I can imagine that people will want to use you tech tree, but not necessarily want to use the complete SETI mod.

[RoverDude]

I ve set an MM overwrite as well, so that every node has "hideEmpty = False" and "anyToUnlock = False" regardless of what is decided for the original CTT.

Doesn't that kinda break the entire 'community' part of CTT, given you're overriding expected behavior set by modders who use this?

Not very neighborly.

[FreeThinker]

Doesn't that kinda break the entire 'community' part of CTT, given you're overriding expected behavior set by modders who use this?

Not very neighborly.

Well they already planned to do this anyway as most people want it this way.

[RoverDude]

Well they already planned to do this anyway as most people want it this way.

The hideEmpty flag, yes. But the anyToUnlock = false one is a huge change as it forces people to unlock what may be a significant number of empty nodes.

[Yemo]

I like this Tech tree, it looks a lot more realistic than the stock version. I think you should consider allowing the download of this Techtree in a separate download, because I can imagine that people will want to use you tech tree, but not necessarily want to use the complete SETI mod.

The SETI-CommunityTechTree and SETI-Contracts are now seperate downloads. If I update the BalanceMod in the future, I will just pack those 2 in the same zip and set them as dependencies for CKAN.

So people are free to combine the former 2 as they like, with other TechTrees and other contract packs.

Doesn't that kinda break the entire 'community' part of CTT, given you're overriding expected behavior set by modders who use this?

Not very neighborly.

Well they already planned to do this anyway as most people want it this way.

Yep, since it seems to be the consensus in the CTT thread anyway, the hideEmpty override is just temporary until the CTT is updated.

The point of the SETI-CommunityTechTree is a different progression experience (eg starting with probes) compared to the normal CTT, also changing and slowing progress down a bit. No one is forced to use it in addition to the CTT. It provides a different gameplay variety without replacement or additional work for the modders.

Other Tech Trees shift nodes and parts around as well (and much more so, I might add, like the Adios Tech Tree).

Treat it as a different Tech Tree, which just happens to have the CTT nodes in it as well (to decrease workload for modders in terms of support), like the CTT includes the stock nodes.

[RoverDude]

See above. The issue was not hideEmpty, it was anyToUnlock - that aggressively *breaks* the CTT.

[kcs123]

Posted idea for workaround in CTT thread. Sorry, I read about it there first, although this is better thread for this.

[RoverDude]

The more appropriate thing in this instance, if you want to fundamentally change that tree, would be to do a fork (and rename it to avoid conflict) vs. actively breaking it. It has a permissive license.

Taking a community project that is meant to provide a drop-in solution that modders can depend on, and proceeding to aggressively break it is pretty much the opposite of community collaboration.

[Yemo]

The more appropriate thing in this instance, if you want to fundamentally change that tree, would be to do a fork (and rename it to avoid conflict) vs. actively breaking it. It has a permissive license.

Taking a community project that is meant to provide a drop-in solution that modders can depend on, and proceeding to aggressively break it is pretty much the opposite of community collaboration.

Quite the contrary.

There is no reason why the CommunityTechTree should only be a base tech tree for Part modders and not for TechTree modders as well.

This is an addon which provides a different flavor. The position of parts and they way to them is defined by the TechTree mod, as it is the case with every other TechTree, like Adios/ModFriendlyTT and so on.

There is no reason for a fork, the name says that it is not the CTT itself. KSP Interstellar is the interstellar addon for KSP (which adds and changes the game), SETI-CTT is the SETI addon for the CTT, which adds to and changes the CTT, CK2: Legacy of Rome is the Legacy of Rome addon to CK2, which adds to and changes CK2.

This is how addons work, it is the way how mods work, no need/reason to fork the original to build upon it.

Does Karbonite fork the stock resource system, since it adds to and changes the resource balance? Or does it now just build upon it?

edit:

Building upon a community project is pretty much exactly what community projects are for.

To provide a basis for the modders/players within the community. Not only the particular subset of (part) modders like yourself.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Yemo

[RoverDude]

The difference is that Karbonite does not *break* the stock resource system, or any other mods that use it.

There is a large difference between building on and extending vs. actively damaging.

[Yemo]

The difference is that Karbonite does not *break* the stock resource system, or any other mods that use it.

There is a large difference between building on and extending vs. actively damaging.

You previously complained about me breaking/changing your part stats balance.

No one forces you or anyone to use the changed stats, but it at least made sense.

The tech progression is determined by the TechTree. There is simply no reason to complain.

You are like a great architect, designing fantastic buildings, who flips out when a minor interior decorator proposes to wall up a passage and take another wall down.

Even if only a minority of the residents of your great buildings actually take the offer...

Just because it does not fit your vision.

Not every resident wants the same wall color or floor material, no matter how great it is.

That is not a personal offence to the architect it is just different preferences...

Edited May 6, 2015 by Yemo

[Svm420]

I find this whole think pointless. It is a single player game don't like the changes in your game then get rid of them. Telling other how to play there game and what changes they can make is a bit egotistical. Actively damaged? Really semantics aside that is a very poor argument to make.

[RoverDude]

You previously complained about me breaking/changing your part stats balance.

No one forces you or anyone to use the changed stats, but it at least made sense.

The tech progression is determined by the TechTree. There is simply no reason to complain.

You are like a great architect, designing fantastic buildings, who flips out when a minor interior decorator proposes to wall up a passage and take another wall down.

Even if only a minority of the residents of your great buildings actually take the offer...

Because it does not fit your vision.

Hyperbole much?

Our modding community has, in the past, thrived because even if we all didn't get along or necessarily cooperate, we at least made it a point not to break other people's stuff. This is pretty much how we've avoided the mod wars that plagued games like Minecraft, etc. - It's pretty clear that your position is pretty much the opposite.

It's pretty low to take something offered up specifically to provide stability and consistency in tech node arrangement and rather than do your own thing, you actively and aggressively break it for other folks.

So I guess we'll all have to start anticipating this going forward.

- - - Updated - - -

I find this whole think pointless. It is a single player game don't like the changes in your game then get rid of them. Telling other how to play there game and what changes they can make is a bit egotistical. Actively damaged? Really semantics aside that is a very poor argument to make.

Yet it is in fact the truth, like it or not.

But then I don't expect to find a lot of friends in this thread anyway

[Svm420]

Hyperbole much?

It's pretty low to take something offered up specifically to provide stability and consistency in tech node arrangement and rather than do your own thing, you actively and aggressively break it.

actively damaging.

pot meet kettle.

But then I don't expect to find a lot of friends in this thread anyway

It is interesting how expectation can color a situation before ithas even began

Edited May 6, 2015 by Svm420

[Yemo]

Hyperbole much?

Our modding community has, in the past, thrived because even if we all didn't get along or necessarily cooperate, we at least made it a point not to break other people's stuff. This is pretty much how we've avoided the mod wars that plagued games like Minecraft, etc. - It's pretty clear that your position is pretty much the opposite.

It's pretty low to take something offered up specifically to provide stability and consistency in tech node arrangement and rather than do your own thing, you actively and aggressively break it for other folks.

So I guess we'll all have to start anticipating this going forward.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet it is in fact the truth, like it or not.

But then I don't expect to find a lot of friends in this thread anyway

Ok, I tried to explain, I tried to be diplomatic.

You pick and choose what people should be able to do with "community" mods fitting to your own tastes.

While I did do it once at the beginning, I m not the one continually smearing false/inaccurate/unwarrented accusations, biases and statements around mods and modders I do not like.

So I ll just tell you what you once told:

If you have constructive criticism, I m open for it.

But stop the slander and harassment and check your attitude!

No one forces you to use my mods, rock on!

PS: As you noticed, I m keeping out of your "non-community" threads as you wanted me to. Regardless whether it would help others or even yourself. I m not asking you to do the same, as it would be bad for the community to tell people to stay out of threads, but I will not stand for this attitude any more.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Yemo

[Lord Aurelius]

Looks like I missed quite the discussion.

But anyways, I support what Yemo is saying.

The CTT is completely intact. Yemo didn't go in and edit their repositories. The SETI version is just another mod that happens to require the CTT as a dependency. Modders can still use the CTT as a base, and the SETI tree has the same node names so parts will find the appropriate nodes.

This is exactly how modding the stock tech tree works, the only difference here is that now the CTT is the base.

@Roverdude

I'm not trying to get involved here, but I would like to ask that you take a step back and look at what you're saying. This is a mod, nothing more. If you don't like it how it is, as you've said yourself, don't use it (or alternatively, fork it or extend it into what you want). Attacking a mod because you don't like it is uncalled for at any time (nobody is required to use mods), and only serves to drive away those who have the most to offer this game.

I know this is a stressful time for Squad and everyone else involved with the 1.0 release given the launch bugs and backlash in the forums, but we need to try to calm things down and have a reasonable discussion, not add fuel to the fire.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

[FlowerChild]

Our modding community has, in the past, thrived because even if we all didn't get along or necessarily cooperate, we at least made it a point not to break other people's stuff. This is pretty much how we've avoided the mod wars that plagued games like Minecraft, etc. - It's pretty clear that your position is pretty much the opposite.

As someone who experienced the Minecraft "modder wars" first hand, I think the above pronouncement is entirely premature. I think all that's essentially happened is that the Minecraft community was much larger than KSP's ever has been (KSP's is growing rapidly now though) meaning there were more people with diverse viewpoints interacting, and that one side of that war has already declared victory here before any shots have been fired.

Behavior like is being exhibited in this thread is essentially what caused the MC wars in the first place: some people want to do their own thing, and others want to force their view of what modding should be, and thus how those other people should spend their own recreational time, down their throats.

So my advice would be: if you don't want that kind of hostility between modders, then don't start it. Let people do their thing and if they want to collaborate, they'll do so, and if they won't, they won't. Otherwise it's only a matter of time before some of us start wearing kilts and shouting "freedom!!!!"

There is no one right way to mod, and even if there were, I sincerely doubt it should be up to a single individual or a small group to say what it is.

My apologies for the further off-topic silliness Yemo. I just popped by the thread to see how the 1.0 update had gone for you and stumbled into this whole mess.

Edited May 6, 2015 by FlowerChild

[FreeThinker]

See above. The issue was not hideEmpty, it was anyToUnlock - that aggressively *breaks* the CTT.

I have to agree with RoverDude here. Unless you know both nodes are used and are logicly required, they should be false.

[Yemo]

Looks like I missed quite the discussion.

*snip

A flamewar per day keeps the necro away .

No, seriously, there was constructive criticism in the background (the long way to the USI Warp drive, if some other mods are not installed, at least thats what I think it was based on what RoverDude mentioned in the CTT thread after it started here), unfortunately that was not what was said here.

As someone who experienced the Minecraft "modder wars" first hand, I think the above pronouncement is entirely premature. I think all that's essentially happened is that the Minecraft community was much larger than KSP's ever has been (KSP's is growing rapidly now though) meaning there were more people with diverse viewpoints interacting, and that one side of that war has already declared victory here before any shots have been fired.

Behavior like is being exhibited in this thread is essentially what caused the MC wars in the first place: some people want to do their own thing, and others want to force their view of what modding should be, and thus how those other people should spend their own recreational time, down their throats.

So my advice would be: if you don't want that kind of hostility between modders, then don't start it. Let people do their thing and if they want to collaborate, they'll do so, and if they won't, they won't. Otherwise it's only a matter of time before some of us start wearing kilts and shouting "freedom!!!!"

There is no one right way to mod, and even if there were, I sincerely doubt it should be up to a single individual or a small group to say what it is.

My apologies for the further off-topic silliness Yemo. I just popped by the thread to see how the 1.0 update had gone for you and stumbled into this whole mess.

Well, 2 weeks after the fact, I saw the comments on the ScottManley video of BTSM, and I could not believe what people were saying about a mod made for fun, without financial interest.

How some people could just not let others be different without bad comments.

Then I witnessed the recent Skyrim/Bethesda/Steam wars, complete with death threats.

So I guess if there is a critical mass, there are always people who want to force others to do as they like and abstain from certain activities for its own sake.

Religion says hello.

Some counterarguments/movement is always necessary, thank you very much for that!

In other news, I somehow reverted the KSPI Extended addition to the OP, which I just corrected.

For the SETIctt, I m working on VenStockRevamp at the moment and will take a look at the changes made with CTT 2.1.

If there are any mods I should prioritize for reordering in addition to stock and Ven's, please tell me.

It seems that it will take quite some time to cover all the mods in the OP again.

Also, if there are any changes you want, please tell me. For example I just lumped many aircraft parts together and did not recheck everything (eg winglets).

[FreeThinker]

I think the problem is that you potentially broke the CTT by switching a few nodes from location. Although it makes perfect sense to put Manned Pods much latter in the tech tree, some mods might actually require that you have early access to manned space craft or make it a whole lot easier. At least SETI has the advantage that is a total conversion, meaning it can actively anticipate these problems and give implement alternative solutions.

[goldenpsp]

While it may be a bad idea to jump into this train wreck, I'm gonna anyhow.

On the one hand, I'd throw out that I understand Rover's viewpoint. He has worked very hard with many modders in an attempt to make it so mods that may have similar components (such as resources) can play nice together. That way if someone wants to use KSPIE and MKS they can for example. I don't think it is fair to classify his argument as a "my way or the highway" argument however.

That being said, on the other side of the coin, this SETI mod historically has only worked with mods that have first been cleansed to meet Yemo's vision of balance. So I would suspect whatever might be broken by this CTT issue would be moot, as Yemo's response would be "that mod isn't on my supported list for SETI.

Good luck everyone. I love all modders as they do things that I neither have the time or talent to do myself.