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

[Unfawkable]

This looks like a very well thought out mod with a lot of work put into it, but all the requirements make it look confusing as hell for starting with it. You should aim to make it a bit simpler, but for the things I've seen in this thread, the balance and the tech tree especially, it's something Squad should have done long ago.

[Yemo]

So: two mod configs for the SETIctt:

Hey,

thank you very much!

Am I correct in assuming that those configs are for inclusion into the next SETIctt update?

This looks like a very well thought out mod with a lot of work put into it, but all the requirements make it look confusing as hell for starting with it. You should aim to make it a bit simpler, but for the things I've seen in this thread, the balance and the tech tree especially, it's something Squad should have done long ago.

There are very little requirements, please keep in mind that the BalanceMod (which included everything) is for KSP 0.90, while the divided versions (SETIctt, SETIcontracts, SETIgreenhouse) are for KSP 1.0.x.

And except for SETIgreenhouse they only have 1 dependency each.

[theonegalen]

Hey,

thank you very much!

Am I correct in assuming that those configs are for inclusion into the next SETIctt update?

You are quite welcome to do so if you like! The positions make sense to me, but I don't know if they are exactly what you would use.

[Cpt.Teacup]

It will define the first vessel which fulfills the criteria as the named vessel.

The intention is, that you really have to land the vessel at the end without destroying it.

What part of it does not work?

I tried a few times to launch and land a vessel that met the requirements but it kept waiting for another vessel to complete the contract instead. The vessel it detected was a dead cockpit orbiting Kerbin that was spawned by a rescue contract. After deleting that vessel, the contract couldn't detect a new vessel, so I had to complete it through the debug menu.

[EspenB89]

How does SETI tech tree work wit KSP interstellar extended 1.1.14 since it has its own install off CTT?

[Yemo]

You are quite welcome to do so if you like! The positions make sense to me, but I don't know if they are exactly what you would use.

Thank you, I ll take another look at them.

Didn't they want to release 1.0.3 about 10 days ago or so?

I tried a few times to launch and land a vessel that met the requirements but it kept waiting for another vessel to complete the contract instead. The vessel it detected was a dead cockpit orbiting Kerbin that was spawned by a rescue contract. After deleting that vessel, the contract couldn't detect a new vessel, so I had to complete it through the debug menu.

Hm, didn't take dead cockpits into account. Will try to change it for the next version.

Your best bet in that situation is, to cancel the contract and take it again.

How does SETI tech tree work wit KSP interstellar extended 1.1.14 since it has its own install off CTT?

I haven't checked it in a while, but it should work well. Will take another look.

[Unfawkable]

There are very little requirements, please keep in mind that the BalanceMod (which included everything) is for KSP 0.90, while the divided versions (SETIctt, SETIcontracts, SETIgreenhouse) are for KSP 1.0.x.

And except for SETIgreenhouse they only have 1 dependency each.

It's probably easier than it looks at first glance. I'll give this mod a go when you release the 1.xx version of the balance mod, it seems worth it.

[Yemo]

It's probably easier than it looks at first glance. I'll give this mod a go when you release the 1.xx version of the balance mod, it seems worth it.

The old BalanceMod is as good as dead. It might get resurrected at one point, but only in the form of a "balancing" module intended to work in conjunction with SETIctt and SETIcontracts. Please keep in mind, that the current SETIctt contains rudimentary balancing configs, until the BalanceMod is rebooted.

So SETIctt + SETIcontracts is your best bet at the moment, at together they are already much better than stock + mods alone.

[theonegalen]

Yemo, Heat Management was just updated with new parts, so here's a new patch. The mod now comes with it's own alternative config file to place the parts into the stock tree, but this moves them into the Heat Management branch of the CTT/SETI-CTT.

//---Small Radiator Panels
@PART[Radiator125]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heatManagementSystems
}

//---Large Radiator Panels
@PART[Radiator250]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heatManagementSystems
}

//---HM-1 Thermal Washer - 1.25m
@PART[thermalwasher125]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heatManagementSystems
}

//---HM-2 Thermal Washer - 2.5m
@PART[thermalwasher250]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heatManagementSystems
}

//---1.25m Heatsink
@PART[Heatsink125n]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heatManagementSystems
}

//----2.5m Heatsink
@PART[Heatsink250n]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heatManagementSystems
}

//---3.75m Heatsink
@PART[Heatsink375n]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advHeatManagement
}

//---Multi-node 2.5m Heatsink
@PART[MNHeatsink250]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advHeatManagement
}

//---Multi-node 3.75m Heatsink
@PART[MNHeatsink375]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advHeatManagement
}

//---VAD Interstage Decoupler - 2.5m
@PART[HMID250]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advHeatManagement
}

//---VAD Interstage Decoupler - 3.75m
@PART[HMID375]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advHeatManagement
}

//---HM-3 Thermal Washer - 3.75m
@PART[thermalwasher375]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advHeatManagement
}

//---Active Heat Management System (1.25m)
@PART[IAHMS125]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedRadiators
}

//---Active Heat Management System (2.5m)
@PART[IAHMS250]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedRadiators
}

//---Active Heat Management System (3.75m)
@PART[IAHMS375]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedRadiators
}

//---Multinode AHMS Unit (2.5m)
@PART[IAHMS250MN]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedRadiators
}

//---Multinode AHMS Unit (3.75m)
@PART[IAHMS375MN]:NEEDS[HeatManagement]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedRadiators
}

And here is an updated patch for the FantomWorks KAX+ Pack

//------\\
//---SETI-CTT---\\
//------\\
//---Tech Tree changes for Kerbal Aircraft Expansion---\\
//------\\


//---K-2 Kerbeye Cockpit
@PART[FWKerbeyeCockpit]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = subsonicFlight
}

//---KRJ/K400 Cockpit
@PART[FWKRJCockpitCockpit]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = subsonicFlight
}

//---1.875 Tail
@PART[FWKRJTail]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = subsonicFlight
}

//---V-22 Osprey Cockpit
@PART[FWOsprey]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = subsonicFlight
}

//----KRJ Fuselage
@PART[FWKRJFuselage]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedConstruction
}

//---Heavy Cargo Fuselage
@PART[FWmedcargoFuselage]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heavyAerodynamics
}

//---Heavy Crew Fuselage
@PART[FWmedcrewFuselage]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heavyAerodynamics
}

//---Cargo Ramp
@PART[FWmedcargoramp]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heavyAerodynamics
}

//---Kirage2000
@PART[Kirage2000]:NEEDS[FantomWorks]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = supersonicFlight
}

And here's one for the Taurus HCV pack:

//---Taurus HCV Capsule
@PART[TaurusHCV]:NEEDS[RSCapsuledyne]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = heavierCommandModules
}

//---SPB-HUGE-3 Science Processing / Cargo Bay
@PART[TaurusScienceBay]:NEEDS[RSCapsuledyne]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = shortTermHabitation
}

//---MCT-8 Omnibus Storage Container
@PART[Tauru....chhiker]:NEEDS[RSCapsuledyne]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = shortTermHabitation
}

//----R&S Z-8K Battery Reaction Wheel Unit
@PART[Size3SASBatt]:NEEDS[RSCapsuledyne]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = specializedElectrics
}

//---RS-2 "Tiny" X-tra Large Atomic Motor
@PART[taurusNuclearEngine]:NEEDS[RSCapsuledyne]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advNuclearPropulsion
}

//---Taurus HCV Heatshield
@PART[TaurusHeatshield]:NEEDS[RSCapsuledyne]:FOR[SETIctt]
{
	@TechRequired = advSurvivability
}

Edited June 5, 2015 by theonegalen

[Lord Aurelius]

A user over on my stock science tweaks thread reported that the telemetry report experiment was duplicated when both stock science tweaks and SETIctt are installed. Can you do a similar tweak as what you did for the HRB for the science experiment to ensure that the science experiment isn't added twice to probe cores, or would you rather have me do that on my end?

[Minwaabi]

When should I start seeing the manned orbit mission start coming up? I've done the Orbit+recovery, and the manned alt record of 18km. Does it just take time to show up? Am I missing a prereq? Possibly too many contracts available to see it? any ideas?

[kcs123]

I'm not sure, but I think in my playtrough it was just about time when I unlocked manned command pod. I'm not sure if that is only prereq.

[Minwaabi]

Never mind. I apparently had all the requirements, I just had to wait several in game days for the mission to pop up. All set now.

[Olsson]

Hey there, just another heads-up and suggestion from me after playing with this mod.

Science is much harder to get just to keep the pacing better, you're not supposed to unlock the entire tech tree from Kerbin, Mun and Minmus.

That's what I like about this mod, but after docking several experiments from the Mun to my space station and using the data to produce research points I've gotten up to about 2000 research points with only 200 data or so.

This seems way too much, I recommend lowering the amount of data you receieve from Mun experiments or maybe tone down the amount of research you get per data. I've got 2x kerbal scientists in the station at 2 star rank each.

[weeble]

Olsson if you want a harder game or one that requires you to visit more places, you could try doing a new game and lower the science returns to 50-60% or just click on the hard mode. Of course you can change it in the persistent save file if you don't want to start over.

[Olsson]

Olsson if you want a harder game or one that requires you to visit more places, you could try doing a new game and lower the science returns to 50-60% or just click on the hard mode. Of course you can change it in the persistent save file if you don't want to start over.

You did obviously not read my entire post. I'm playing on hard mode and the point of SETIctt is to make the tech tree longer and more rewarding to unlock.

In stock you can unlock the entire tech tree just by landing on mun and minmus, it's not supposed to be that way in SETIctt which is why you do not get as much science for the experiments there. However these experiements data value has not been changed from the stock value so they give you too much data which means too much science for what the experiment is. A mun surface sample shouldn't give you 74 data in SETIctt.

[Yemo]

Yemo, Heat Management was just updated with new parts, so here's a new patch. The mod now comes with it's own alternative config file to place the parts into the stock tree, but this moves them into the Heat Management branch of the CTT/SETI-CTT.

*snip

Thank you very much, I ll probably release a new update within the next day(s) incorporating those, since squad is just so out of touch concerning their recent (since 1.0) announcement/labeling/update policy.

A user over on my stock science tweaks thread reported that the telemetry report experiment was duplicated when both stock science tweaks and SETIctt are installed. Can you do a similar tweak as what you did for the HRB for the science experiment to ensure that the science experiment isn't added twice to probe cores, or would you rather have me do that on my end?

I probably can do it on my end, will check for it for the next update. Thank you for the notice.

When should I start seeing the manned orbit mission start coming up? I've done the Orbit+recovery, and the manned alt record of 18km. Does it just take time to show up? Am I missing a prereq? Possibly too many contracts available to see it? any ideas?

I'm not sure, but I think in my playtrough it was just about time when I unlocked manned command pod. I'm not sure if that is only prereq.

Never mind. I apparently had all the requirements, I just had to wait several in game days for the mission to pop up. All set now.

It is probably related to slot availability.

Usually it is recommended to decline some 2 and 3 star contracts after completing a progression contract, if you are expecting new ones according to the progression overview. So that the follow ups have slots available to spawn into...

Unfortunately I do not know of a way around that squad design limitation.

Hey there, just another heads-up and suggestion from me after playing with this mod.

Science is much harder to get just to keep the pacing better, you're not supposed to unlock the entire tech tree from Kerbin, Mun and Minmus.

That's what I like about this mod, but after docking several experiments from the Mun to my space station and using the data to produce research points I've gotten up to about 2000 research points with only 200 data or so.

This seems way too much, I recommend lowering the amount of data you receieve from Mun experiments or maybe tone down the amount of research you get per data. I've got 2x kerbal scientists in the station at 2 star rank each.

Olsson if you want a harder game or one that requires you to visit more places, you could try doing a new game and lower the science returns to 50-60% or just click on the hard mode. Of course you can change it in the persistent save file if you don't want to start over.

You did obviously not read my entire post. I'm playing on hard mode and the point of SETIctt is to make the tech tree longer and more rewarding to unlock.

In stock you can unlock the entire tech tree just by landing on mun and minmus, it's not supposed to be that way in SETIctt which is why you do not get as much science for the experiments there. However these experiements data value has not been changed from the stock value so they give you too much data which means too much science for what the experiment is. A mun surface sample shouldn't give you 74 data in SETIctt.

Unfortunately another squad design limitation. Tellur made a post some time ago proposing diminishing returns per biome body, or at least that you have to go to another planet or so before science spamming mun and minmus.

I m not aware of a way to implement this. I can not really nerf eg the surface sample for mun and minmus only.

Also I find the new mobile processing lab mechanic to be quite imbalanced.

To my knowledge, there are no config values for me to tweak it, another one of those unmotivated disimprovements with little/no moddability to rush "release".

The usual solution/workaround applies: House Rules/Role Playing! You just have to restrain yourself from science spamming Mun/Minmus/Kerbin.

[DMagic]

Also I find the new mobile processing lab mechanic to be quite imbalanced.

To my knowledge, there are no config values for me to tweak it, another one of those unmotivated disimprovements with little/no moddability to rush "release"

The science lab research module? ModuleScienceConverter is in the science lab config file. You can tweak the max amount of science the lab can hold, how much science is generated for each unit of data, how much EC is used, the scientist boost, and how long research takes.

I guess one thing that would be nice to be able to tweak is the situation based multiplier for science gain. It's probably based on one of the celestial body science multipliers, I'm just not sure which one.

[Olsson]

Oh well, if it isn't configurable (the stock MPL) what about integrating this into the Community Tech Tree?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/54774-1-0-2-Station-Science-%28v1-5-1-0-2-compatibility%29

[Yemo]

The science lab research module? ModuleScienceConverter is in the science lab config file. You can tweak the max amount of science the lab can hold, how much science is generated for each unit of data, how much EC is used, the scientist boost, and how long research takes.

I guess one thing that would be nice to be able to tweak is the situation based multiplier for science gain. It's probably based on one of the celestial body science multipliers, I'm just not sure which one.

Hm, the scienceMultiplier looks useful to deal at least with a part of the imbalance.

I do not quite know what "data" it refers to? I m guessing the same "data" as the transmission devices, as defined with the dataScale in the experiment definitions.

I m not familiar with that, I guess it is the science value times the dataScale?

Which makes this whole mechanic a nightmare to balance.

Anyway, why would a temperature scan yield additional science anyway, when 2 people in an orbital lab look at the results??

It seems to be one of those backward reasoning issues.

Devs needed a mechanic for a science generating orbital lab, instead of having a science progression and thinking about a lab which would fit into that.

Same goes for the "scientist" roles.

There is absolutely no reason why a scientist who visited Duna should make any more out of the temperature readings of Eeloo while orbiting the Mun, than a scientist back on Kerbin who never went to LKO...

The only explanation is, they needed a mechanic to give the kerbals a progression and are thinking up more or less BS reasons.

Like only engineers being able to repack parachutes...

Or only engineers visting planets outside Kerbin SoI able to repair certain stuff...

This is really annoying...

The most annoying thing is, that I can not even deactivate this for the science lab...

Imho for someone playing "fully modded" the game goes into the wrong direction.

Progression for its own sake is no progression, it is just annoying and insulting to the players intellect.

I remember the action groups pseudo-progression, kerbals can build rockets and planes but cant activate thermometer and barometer with the same button unless upgrading the building to allow bigger rockets.

W T F

So, rant over.

This whole development is really bugging me. I really do not like unmotivated disimprovements, just to be able to claim a new entry on a feature list.

I m thinking about just deactivating the whole kerbal experience nonsense implementation. Something I wanted to do for the BalanceMod.

But I do not want to handle another download at the moment, so I guess it goes into SETIctt.

The folder structure is simple enough that unwanted stuff can be deleted by the user.

Imho, if a "feature" makes no sense and can not be easily modded to make at least some sense, it deserves to be deactivated by default.

Oh well, if it isn't configurable (the stock MPL) what about integrating this into the Community Tech Tree?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/54774-1-0-2-Station-Science-%28v1-5-1-0-2-compatibility%29

Well, it was part of the BalanceMod, so it is planned for the SETIctt as well.

Not sure if it makes it into the next update, especially when massive gameplay issues (imho) like the ones above are still in it.

[Carl Sagan The S Stallion]

I have a major concern with the balancing mod in this modpack (I love the mods, by the way), and that is that you cannot remove data from mystery goo and science bay experiments on EVA. If you think about it, it would only be logical that they could be removed, since the goo canister should have a canister release switch, and since the science bay would contain a whole lot of small experiments for observation, which then could be taken out for examination. Then, when a science lab is involved, the crew inside could take another batch of test subjects and prepare them, so ultimately, there isn't much of a realism concern with keeping players from recovering their experiments on EVA.

Furthermore, doing this only harms gameplay, since players conducting Apollo-style landings with disposable landers cannot return their mystery goo and science bay experiments for recovery back on Kerbin, thus turning a already complicated mission either into a more complicated one (by either making the lander recoverable or making a separate third lander that can also be recovered), or turning one mission into two separate missions (like a mystery goo and science bay unmanned lander mission separate from the manned landing). It doesn't make any sense--the current system already works! The balance is that players have to bring a lab if they want to perform more science, or bring duplicate experiments, the reward being that you can transmit science back at a higher return than normal.

[Olsson]

I have a major concern with the balancing mod in this modpack (I love the mods, by the way), and that is that you cannot remove data from mystery goo and science bay experiments on EVA. If you think about it, it would only be logical that they could be removed, since the goo canister should have a canister release switch, and since the science bay would contain a whole lot of small experiments for observation, which then could be taken out for examination. Then, when a science lab is involved, the crew inside could take another batch of test subjects and prepare them, so ultimately, there isn't much of a realism concern with keeping players from recovering their experiments on EVA.

Furthermore, doing this only harms gameplay, since players conducting Apollo-style landings with disposable landers cannot return their mystery goo and science bay experiments for recovery back on Kerbin, thus turning a already complicated mission either into a more complicated one (by either making the lander recoverable or making a separate third lander that can also be recovered), or turning one mission into two separate missions (like a mystery goo and science bay unmanned lander mission separate from the manned landing). It doesn't make any sense--the current system already works! The balance is that players have to bring a lab if they want to perform more science, or bring duplicate experiments, the reward being that you can transmit science back at a higher return than normal.

1 - I kind of agree with you. I pointed this out earlier to dear Yemo and he told me that this is to buff probes and nerf manned landings. I agree with him and I understand why, but part of me disagrees because I'm not entirely convinced its a neccesary balance change as manned landings are nerfed significantly with tech delay, life support, deadly re-entry, etc.

2 - The part with apollo-style landers, I agree. It's not really a problem in the Kerbin SOI since you're probably just going to launch, land and return the same vessel. But if you're landing on duna and want to get those experiments back, well, that's a whole different story.

3 - You can change it in the configs quite easily, there should be a value in the parts that you change from False to True. Recoverable = False. Set this to true.

[ziom15pl]

Hello. I tried to play with your techtree and contracts mods and I can't see any parts in tree or VAB/SPH. Here is my JSGME list: http://imgur.com/wiOJi4P and my GameData folder: http://imgur.com/6XxDH7G . Any help?

[Yemo]

I have a major concern with the balancing mod in this modpack (I love the mods, by the way), and that is that you cannot remove data from mystery goo and science bay experiments on EVA. If you think about it, it would only be logical that they could be removed, since the goo canister should have a canister release switch, and since the science bay would contain a whole lot of small experiments for observation, which then could be taken out for examination. Then, when a science lab is involved, the crew inside could take another batch of test subjects and prepare them, so ultimately, there isn't much of a realism concern with keeping players from recovering their experiments on EVA.

Furthermore, doing this only harms gameplay, since players conducting Apollo-style landings with disposable landers cannot return their mystery goo and science bay experiments for recovery back on Kerbin, thus turning a already complicated mission either into a more complicated one (by either making the lander recoverable or making a separate third lander that can also be recovered), or turning one mission into two separate missions (like a mystery goo and science bay unmanned lander mission separate from the manned landing). It doesn't make any sense--the current system already works! The balance is that players have to bring a lab if they want to perform more science, or bring duplicate experiments, the reward being that you can transmit science back at a higher return than normal.

1 - I kind of agree with you. I pointed this out earlier to dear Yemo and he told me that this is to buff probes and nerf manned landings. I agree with him and I understand why, but part of me disagrees because I'm not entirely convinced its a neccesary balance change as manned landings are nerfed significantly with tech delay, life support, deadly re-entry, etc.

2 - The part with apollo-style landers, I agree. It's not really a problem in the Kerbin SOI since you're probably just going to launch, land and return the same vessel. But if you're landing on duna and want to get those experiments back, well, that's a whole different story.

3 - You can change it in the configs quite easily, there should be a value in the parts that you change from False to True. Recoverable = False. Set this to true.

I understand that it is strange at first, when coming from stock KSP, but that is my reasoning behind it:

I intended it to provide gradual incentives.

Eg for material bay at 80kg/24base science.

Probe only: transmission - 30%, only useable once

Scientist: transmission - 30%, but resettable/reusable

Mobile Lab (2 kerbals): boosted transmission - 75% (or so, dont remember), resettable/reusable

Return - 100%

Big, heavy Lab (planned, like BalanceMod, 3 kerbals, 10 tons) from Station Science: boosted transmission - 100%, resettable/reuseable

Also you have to take all the factors into account when comparing to other experiments. Like the "doable everywhere" biome mask.

I do not consider it to be a nerf for manned missions, rather a "balancing the incentives".

A mobile processing lab really does what it says, it boosts experiments beyond the presence of a scientist. Not only the "activate and warp for science" stuff.

The real problem is the game engine/design limitation, that collecting experiments makes them massless, even if they contain more than numbers.

For example the surface sample is massless, which should not be the case.

Mystery Goo and Materials Bay provide an easy solution for that limitation, making them non-collectible. It is essentially a workaround.

Since apollo style missions in KSP have no value at all based on game mechanics (attaching a heat shield to a lander can or a capsule gives the exact same gameplay results), I can hardly take them into account for gameplay balancing.

They are roleplay exclusively (not my idea/intention, just a result of squads design), just like the different antennas in stock ksp. Unfortunately unlike the antennas, there are no mods making apollo style missions a viable non-roleplay gameplay choice.

However with a slight design adjustment/extension, you could make it work:

The problem is, that connected living space would not allow you to pass through the Universal Storage node.

If there is any interest, I could just make a radially attachable Materials Bay, using the Mystery Goo model. That would allow for greater flexibility. However it would be slightly confusing, since it would look exactly the same as the Mystery Goo...

Though the effort to do this would be minimal.

Oh and if you really want to roleplay, just leave out the mystery goo and materials bay. The experiments they might represent only make sense in LKO and on atmospheric bodies anyway...

Hello. I tried to play with your techtree and contracts mods and I can't see any parts in tree or VAB/SPH. Here is my JSGME list: http://imgur.com/wiOJi4P and my GameData folder: http://imgur.com/6XxDH7G . Any help?

Thank you for providing the gamedata folder, makes it much easier.

The most likely problem is, that you have multiple module managers installed, please delete every one of them except the latest (2.6.5).

Also SETI contracts should be installed into the gamedata folder directly, so that SETIcontracts is right above SETIctt.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Yemo

[_Zee]

Hello again Yemo. I recently ran into a seriously strange problem and I don't know if anyone else has already brought it up.

We all know that Unity's Garbage Collector is, itself, garbage. It's usually just a minor annoyance but I narrowed it down to the main culprit that is causing my frames to rapidly dip up and down from 60 to as low as 12. For some reason accepting the contracts provided by your SETIcontracts overhaul causes the GC to absolutely lose its mind. I did a lot of troubleshooting to be sure of the cause; removing all mods, slowly re-adding mods, monitoring memory GPU and CPU usage, using the same control for my test, and I have no idea why but certain contracts are definitely the cause. If I use the debugger menu and manually complete the contract in question, my FPS immediately jumps back up to a steady 60 again.

I really don't want to uninstall that part of your mod because it really helps with immersion and driving the game with a logical progression of goals. Is there any way to fix this? And if there's anyway that I can help, please let me know. I can provide you with a zip of my game data folder, save file, and explanation on how to recreate the problem if it helps at all. Thanks for your great work!