[1.0.5] Snacks! Kerbal simplified life support v0.3.5

[mattssheep4]

On 8/17/2014 at 0:28 PM, tgruetzm said:

I really like the idea of the mobile lab being the snack generator. I'm not sure exactly how it would function though. I need to think of a good premise for how snacks can be created. I wouldn't want snack generation to completely replace having to supply snacks. I think a generator would only extend the duration you can go without resupply.

I added 2 snacks to the external command seat to allow extended duration rover missions.

You could always try the reconstitution from waste products method. You wouldn't need to have a waste resource per se, but using that as a rationale. I suggest using an inverse relationship of new snacks created over mission duration.

Also, for storage balancing, could empty crew cabins be filled with more snacks than cabins with kerbals in them? I don't know enough about the code behind this to know if it could work.

Edited June 3, 2016 by mattssheep4
additional thought

[tg626]

So am I correct in gathering that this is working in a stock 1.1.2 but the author is AWOL?

[Angelo Kerman]

On 6/4/2016 at 3:51 PM, tg626 said:

So am I correct in gathering that this is working in a stock 1.1.2 but the author is AWOL?

Not AWOL as modding is a volunteer effort, but yes the original author appears to have retired. In his stead, I've updated the mod to 1.1.2. You can find the latest version here. I'm keeping the mod up to date for now, though if someone else wants to run with it, then by all means. I plan to keep to the original vision and not add parts in the core mod. I'm also looking at optional consequences of not feeding the crew, such as randomly dumping a science report, a portion of resources, crew dying, etc. Basically, stuff that won't irrevocably turn them into a tourist so that if you uninstall the mod, you can still control your ship. That is all low priority for me, hence keeping the mod light, and noting that if another modder feels called to maintain Snacks, then by all means.

[tg626]

I'm a modder too, so I know it's volunteer, I use AWOL in all matters where something is missing or otherwise in an unknown location. Myu glasses go AWOL at least 3 times a day.... LOL.  

I remembered this mod the other day, but had never tried it.  Then I came to the thread and it looked like the situation was as you describe - author gone, maintained by others - but your tourist comment concerns me.  May I assume that unfed Kerbals will "become" tourists and therefore basically dead weight unable to pilot etc.?  Because I can see where that would be a problem if you did remove the mod and were left with pilotless craft in space...

[Angelo Kerman]

1 hour ago, tg626 said:

I'm a modder too, so I know it's volunteer, I use AWOL in all matters where something is missing or otherwise in an unknown location. Myu glasses go AWOL at least 3 times a day.... LOL.  

I remembered this mod the other day, but had never tried it.  Then I came to the thread and it looked like the situation was as you describe - author gone, maintained by others - but your tourist comment concerns me.  May I assume that unfed Kerbals will "become" tourists and therefore basically dead weight unable to pilot etc.?  Because I can see where that would be a problem if you did remove the mod and were left with pilotless craft in space...

Precisely. I'm starting to gain more appreciation for USI-LS but one option I don't like (which I think you can turn off, but not sure) is that kerbals become tourists when starved. To me that becomes an issue when you uninstall the mod, and possibly in other situations as well. So rather thando that, my thought is to instead have other effects that re 100% controllable in game. I envision something like this:

You open the settings window at the space center and are presented a list of things that can happen when a kerbal is starved. Each one is an option that you can turn on or off. One item from the list is chosen at random for each kerbal that is starved. The list could include items like:

A kerbal dies (a servant of the many-faced-god does not ask why.  )

The ship loses a random science report

A random part that stores resources loses 2% of one of its resources 

A randomly selected radially attached part explodes (a servant of the many-faced-god does not ask why.  )

A randomly selected engine ignites for one second.

Etc.

More severe options could have a percentage chance of occurring. So if a severe option is selected but you roll low enough then nothing happens.

A smartly designed system will have an interface so that other modules can be added in the future to handle custom effects.

The basic idea is that starved kerbals do dumb things.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Angel-125

[Deimos Rast]

2 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Precisely. I'm starting to gain more appreciation for USI-LS but one option I don't like (which I think you can turn off, but not sure) is that kerbals become tourists when starved. To me that becomes an issue when you uninstall the mod, and possibly in other situations as well. So rather thando that, my thought is to instead have other effects that re 100% controllable in game. I envision something like this:

You open the settings window at the space center and are presented a list of things that can happen when a kerbal is starved. Each one is an option that you can turn on or off. One item from the list is chosen at random for each kerbal that is starved. The list could include items like:

A kerbal dies (a servant of the many-faced-god does not ask why.  )

The ship loses a random science report

A random part that stores resources loses 2% of one of its resources 

A randomly selected radially attached part explodes (a servant of the many-faced-god does not ask why.  )

A randomly selected engine ignites for one second.

Etc.

More severe options could have a percentage chance of occurring. So if a severe option is selected but you roll low enough then nothing happens.

A smartly designed system will have an interface so that other modules can be added in the future to handle custom effects.

The basic idea is that starved kerbals do dumb things.

You can actually already do exactly that in USI-LS, both ingame and out. Not saying you can't/shouldn't do it with Snacks, just showing you how RoverDude does it currently. Note: Defaults are "grouchy/tourist" for everything. Strongly suggest not doing at least the "engine ignition" thing. That would be maddening on long voyages.

From the config:

//  0 = No Effect (The feature is effectively turned off
//  1 = Grouchy (they become a Tourist until rescued)
//  2 = Mutinous (A tourist, but destroys a part of a nearby vessel...)
//  3 = Instantly 'wander' back to the KSC - don't ask us how!
//  4 = M.I.A. (will eventually respawn)
//  5 = K.I.A.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Deimos Rast

[Angelo Kerman]

31 minutes ago, Deimos Rast said:

You can actually already do exactly that in USI-LS, both ingame and out. Not saying you can't/shouldn't do it with Snacks, just showing you how RoverDude does it currently. Note: Defaults are "grouchy/tourist" for everything.

From the config:

//  0 = No Effect (The feature is effectively turned off
//  1 = Grouchy (they become a Tourist until rescued)
//  2 = Mutinous (A tourist, but destroys a part of a nearby vessel...)
//  3 = Instantly 'wander' back to the KSC - don't ask us how!
//  4 = M.I.A. (will eventually respawn)
//  5 = K.I.A.

Interesting! I didn't know that. Is it from the Space Center? In my game when I click on the USI-LS button from the space center, the window is blank; no controls appear. I really don't know much about the mod, so I don't know if that is normal. It does sound like a similar concept though. Too bad you can't add a reputation hit to the list of options. That would be a nice addition for Snacks users. That and the ability to specify what resource constitutes supplies.

I'd say the Snacks equivalent would be what I described, assuming of course that is a direction the mod should go in The original author hinted at starvation consequences in the OP but never got to it.

Anyway, like I said, Snacks is low priority for me right now since I have a lot on my plate. I encourage another modder with more free time to give the mod a permanent home. I do want to avoid the issues I ran into with the CactEye where an entitled forum user wanted a timetable for updates to the mod. I currently keep Snacks up to date because I don't want it to die but would like to see someone pick up the torch.

[Deimos Rast]

Yeah, from the space center. It's a relatively recent addition though (maybe past month-ish?) so you might need to update.

And I totally get where you're coming from with this mod. I don't use it actually, never have (preferring TACLS and trying USI-LS at the moment). I'm just providing reference material and such.

Alternatively, you could look at Kerbalism, which has a breakdown related mechanism. It's not hunger specific (rather it introduces a stress/well-being mechanic), but it functions the same way. Stressed Kerbals breakdown and eventually start throwing science out the airlock, venting resources, and destroying/damaging equipment. There is also Kabin Kraziness, which has a similar stress/breakdown and throw stuff out the airlock when things go bad mechanic.

I still think there is still a place for Snacks in the Life Support hierarchy (nothing really does lighthearted and simple).

Honestly, if you want my vote, I would just stay the course as you're doing and try to keep the .dll up to date (as long as you feel so inclined) and focus on your other mods. You have a lot on your plate, and I'd hate to see the quality of your other projects suffer (as they have a ton of potential last I checked). Not saying you couldn't do wonders for this mod, but...24 hours in the day only means so much can get done. My 2 cents.

[The Thyroid Man]

Finally, a life support that got it right!

kerbals, as we all know, use  photosynthesis to get the nutrients they need. That's why their skin is green. However, they like to have snacks, somewhat like we like to have chocolate, even though we don't really need it. 

When kerbals on big space missions don't get the snacks they want, they whisper back to the Kerbal media: "hey! This space agency sucks! I'm not getting the snacks I deserve!" Which is why Your reputation goes down, but your Kerbals don't die.

Edited June 18, 2016 by The Thyroid Man
Arggg,, TYPOS!!!

[Angelo Kerman]

And here I was thinking that kerbals were affected by Fel magic like the World of Warcraft orcs were...

Edited June 17, 2016 by Angel-125

[Stone Blue]

Just thought I would note, as having containers added to the mod has been discussed (I didnt see if there was a final verdict or not), but I will soon be releaseing a part pack that will have ZZZ's "boxes" included. I planned on adding support for several LS mods for the boxes, Snacks being one of them... It would be a simple matter of deleting all the folders in my pack, EXCEPT for the boxes, if thats all you want. I'm designing the parts pack that way specifically, since the parts included cover several categories, and some people may just want only some of the parts rather than the whole pack... Each "category" of parts should be pretty light-weight.
That way if you DO want Snack containers, no biggie, just grab the containers from my pack... If you DO NOT want containers with your Snacks install, then you are already set, and you wouldnt have to remove them from the Snacks mod, itself... Hopefully both sides would be happy then?...

Edited June 17, 2016 by Stone Blue

[Angelo Kerman]

Get Snacks 1.1.7 here.

Updated to KSP 1.1.3

@Stone Blue: I'd say keeping the mod light for now is still the way to go. Having add-on mods to add boxes and such sounds like a good idea. I think @tgruetzm considered adding a small snack container; maybe the thing to do is borrow a 3D model from the stock game such as one of the radial monopropellant tanks to hold a small amount of snacks. That would keep things light and at least have some kind of small container.

Anyway, once again I encourage someone with more time to pick up development of the mod. I'm happy to keep it updated to the latest KSP, but my time is pretty limited right now to further develop it (such as adding the starvation effects), so it's low priority for me.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Angel-125

[BetaguyGZT]

Hello, @Angel-125.  Let me see how Snacks works, and I'll see about taking up the mantle. Be advised, however, I'll future-proof it like BioMass -- no plugin needed.  It'll do everything it needs to do from MM Patches and Configs.

If you'd like to see how BioMass is doing things now, I can arrange for a Alpha Release (Currently on Build #7) to find its' way to ya. It's not ready for public consumption yet, but it's close enough for you to see the direction we're heading in if you like. That'll give you an idea how Snacks would function in our hands. 

[Deimos Rast]

@BetaguyGZT and a champion steps forth...tentatively. And don't let @Stone Blue whisper in your ear "more boxes bro."  That way leads to ruin, I tell you! I've never used this mod, I probably never will, but I have read through this entire thread. And this one thing is true: people are really divided on the boxes issue. One of the selling points of the mod was "low footprint" (although I never really liked it's hitchhiker solution myself, but whatever). I know you and Blue have just refurbished all the boxes and it would go great with Biomass, but just 'cuz you could doesn't mean ya should.Unless they look really really nice.... But then you might as well be a franchise of Thunder Aerospace, if you catch my drift.

my 0.02c

Edited June 23, 2016 by Deimos Rast

[Stone Blue]

1 hour ago, Deimos Rast said:

And don't let @Stone Blue whisper in your ear "more boxes bro." 

@Deimos Rast Too late!!!

Who do you think kinda-sorta let @BetaguyGZT know that @Angel-125 might be open to handing over the reins?

 

But in all seriousness, we are doing the boxes, for BioMASS, how many different ones depend on exactly how many "dry" resources we decide on...
I think we were planning on integrating Snacks! support into BioMASS... And the BioMASS boxes would be there for use with Snacks!, for people who want to run both mods and want them, OR, possibly just grabbing ONLY the boxes from BioMASS for use with Snacks! itself... That way problem solved: Those who WANT Snack boxes get them, those who do NOT want Snacks boxes do not have to do ANYTHING...

Dont worry, even tho I'm only starting to get into making mods, I always try to consider the best ways to do things, so the most people are happy... Thus, I love OPTIONS, as well as lots of features and parts...
I have spoken negatively about certain mods doing certain things before, not because a change is discussed or incorparted that I dont like... I dont mind that... What I MIND is try to find a way to make it an OPTION... so people have the choice on using it or not...

Anyway, while we had been discussing Snacks! support with BioMASS already, I would think taking over Snacks!, and being able to update them (hopefully) around the same times, and being able to make changes to either, that may affect BOTH, would be much easier and quicker, than having to work thru a 2nd mod dev...

THAT also, being said, I would strongly urge Betaguy (and I'm sure he would be agreeable), to keep the functionality as-is, AND keep Snacks! its own separate mod, even though there will be support, or possibly some measure of integration into BioMASS itself, for those who use BioMASS with or without Snacks!... That way those who only use, and want the simple functionailty of Snacks! itself are not affected at all...

But the final say is all up to Betaguy... He's the coder & config guru... I'm sure with Snacks! having very few parts of its own, my actual involvement with Snacks! would be very minimal, or possibly non-existent...

[Angelo Kerman]

7 hours ago, BetaguyGZT said:

Hello, @Angel-125.  Let me see how Snacks works, and I'll see about taking up the mantle. Be advised, however, I'll future-proof it like BioMass -- no plugin needed.  It'll do everything it needs to do from MM Patches and Configs.

If you'd like to see how BioMass is doing things now, I can arrange for a Alpha Release (Currently on Build #7) to find its' way to ya. It's not ready for public consumption yet, but it's close enough for you to see the direction we're heading in if you like. That'll give you an idea how Snacks would function in our hands. 

Thanks for considering taking over the mod. How are you going to cause reputation hits through MM patches and configs when the kerbals run out of snacks? Also, how will you show an indicator of how much snacks the kerbals have, both without a plugin?

Edited June 23, 2016 by Angel-125

[BetaguyGZT]

2 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Thanks for considering taking over the mod. How are you going to cause reputation hits through MM patches and configs when the kerbals run out of snacks? Also, how will you show an indicator of how much snacks the kerbals have, both without a plugin?

Quite welcome.  As I said previously, I needed to see how Snacks did things. I've seen it, and Snacks will need a plugin after all. No biggie.

8 hours ago, Deimos Rast said:

@BetaguyGZT and a champion steps forth...tentatively. And don't let @Stone Blue whisper in your ear "more boxes bro."  That way leads to ruin, I tell you! I've never used this mod, I probably never will, but I have read through this entire thread. And this one thing is true: people are really divided on the boxes issue. One of the selling points of the mod was "low footprint" (although I never really liked it's hitchhiker solution myself, but whatever). I know you and Blue have just refurbished all the boxes and it would go great with Biomass, but just 'cuz you could doesn't mean ya should.Unless they look really really nice.... But then you might as well be a franchise of Thunder Aerospace, if you catch my drift.

my 0.02c

Once a particular issue with stock converters has been sorted, I'm converting all code over. No disrespect to TAC-LS, of course ... trying to future-proof.  

[Deimos Rast]

Ya'll are good people and I'm sure what ever you decide will be fine. Put another way, a passionate developer + boxes is better than no developer at all, no? (Not knocking Angel-125, as I've said before, he could do wonders with it, but he's also busy busy). I'm mainly causing a ruckus to save you potential grief later on, when the inevitable Snacks crazed legion returns.

I would vote on getting biomass done first before jumping into this one, if only because I've been waiting on that mod since forever.

Edit:

Your comment about the converters seems to imply Snacks uses TACLS converters as opposed to stock or proprietary? If so, didn't know that. My TACLS comment was more in reference to that mod having a lot of parts and stuff and things and if you go the box route, so would you. People usually boil down LS mods to just "they make your ship heavier" (i.e. they force you to add LS containers). I'm not sure that's the entirety of it, but it's also not wrong. Snacks tried to break out of that as I understand it.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Deimos Rast

[Angelo Kerman]

42 minutes ago, BetaguyGZT said:

Quite welcome.  As I said previously, I needed to see how Snacks did things. I've seen it, and Snacks will need a plugin after all. No biggie.

Once a particular issue with stock converters has been sorted, I'm converting all code over. No disrespect to TAC-LS, of course ... trying to future-proof.  

Cool beans. If you've decided to take over Snacks, then by all means fork my github repro and give me a hollar so I know I won't need to keep it current anymore. And thanks for considering giving it a permanent home.

[Stone Blue]

24 minutes ago, Deimos Rast said:

Edit:

Your comment about the converters seems to imply Snacks uses TACLS converters as opposed to stock or proprietary? If so, didn't know that. My TACLS comment was more in reference to that mod having a lot of parts and stuff and things and if you go the box route, so would you. People usually boil down LS mods to just "they make your ship heavier" (i.e. they force you to add LS containers). I'm not sure that's the entirety of it, but it's also not wrong. Snacks tried to break out of that as I understand it.

Well, @BetaguyGZT would be the one to explain better, but he's been having a heck of a time trying to get the TAC converters working, so he tried the stock ones (USI uses stock), and not only I think has Beta been having issues with THAT, but IIRC, RD has had issues as well on USI...

THEN, I see just this AM that @Starwaster posted issues with whatever converters IonCross LS also uses... ??... So it may be an overall issue with KSP itself?...???.. IDK...

I'm also trying to give ideas and ways we can try to make BioMASS kind of "modular", so besides basic REQUIRED parts, any "extras" can be removed or not... AND with a (hopefully) well-organized and "modular" folder structure, people cou ld potentially grab the "extra" parts for use WITHOUT needing the basic BioMASS functionality... Betaguy & I would still have to discuss specifics of that, as "extra" parts are being pushed as future features and things to look at... Right now, focus is on improving existing models & parts, cutting dupliacte models & textures out of the mod, getting existing functionality working, and hopefully shrinking the mod size from 100MB, down to around maybe 60MB or less... So right now, we are in maintenance and optimiztaion mode, to get a working release out as soon as we can...

Edited June 23, 2016 by Stone Blue

[BetaguyGZT]

22 minutes ago, Deimos Rast said:

Ya'll are good people and I'm sure what ever you decide will be fine. Put another way, a passionate developer + boxes is better than no developer at all, no? (Not knocking Angel-125, as I've said before, he could do wonders with it, but he's also busy busy). I'm mainly causing a ruckus to save you potential grief later on, when the inevitable Snacks crazed legion returns.

I would vote on getting biomass done first before jumping into this one, if only because I've been waiting on that mod since forever.

Edit:

Your comment about the converters seems to imply Snacks uses TACLS converters as opposed to stock or proprietary? If so, didn't know that. My TACLS comment was more in reference to that mod having a lot of parts and stuff and things and if you go the box route, so would you. People usually boil down LS mods to just "they make your ship heavier" (i.e. they force you to add LS containers). I'm not sure that's the entirety of it, but it's also not wrong. Snacks tried to break out of that as I understand it.

No, not Snacks but BioMass. It's been using TAC-LS and we're trying to kick the habit.  Snacks adds stuff on-the-fly thru MM patches, and the plug helps keep track of things and the Players' rep with the Kerbalnauts (if I'm reading the code correctly).

25 minutes ago, Angel-125 said:

Cool beans. If you've decided to take over Snacks, then by all means fork my github repro and give me a hollar so I know I won't need to keep it current anymore. And thanks for considering giving it a permanent home.

No worries.  I'm a full-time Student, so I have patches where I'm super-busy then other times where I'm working on mods a lot.

[Starwaster]

3 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

THEN, I see just this AM that @Starwaster posted issues with whatever converters IonCross LS also uses... ??... So it may be an overall issue with KSP itself?...???.. IDK...

The problem I'm having with Ioncross deals with how it initializes from its config nodes and probably stems from changes to the KSP API introduced back in KSP 1.0. I should have recognized it before but I'd forgot about those changes to which my own code was immune. (Ioncross isn't my project originally, I'm just keeping it alive)

I don't know what issues TAC might be having or whether or not they're related.

[BetaguyGZT]

3 hours ago, Starwaster said:

The problem I'm having with Ioncross deals with how it initializes from its config nodes and probably stems from changes to the KSP API introduced back in KSP 1.0. I should have recognized it before but I'd forgot about those changes to which my own code was immune. (Ioncross isn't my project originally, I'm just keeping it alive)

I don't know what issues TAC might be having or whether or not they're related.

Long as you aren't calling other Converter API's (like Stock) on the part then you can have as many as ya want and TAC-LS works fine. 

[OldLost]

Since this mod seems to be abandoned for the most part (at least by the OP, with only maintenance work by Angel) I would like to attempt to remove it from my game. I do use Pathfinder which can integrate with Snacks such as storing snacks in PF containers, which I've also done on some of my ships and stations. For these PF containers I assume all I'll need to do is reconfigure the storage to something other than Snacks, but it seems most if not all command pods also have snacks as part of their config. Any advice on what to do for those? Would I just edit the sfs file and remove all snack resources found? Anything else that would be needed? Any and all suggestions appreciated. TIA.

 

Edited August 16, 2016 by OldLost
stoopid speeling

[OldLost]

Since no one was kind enough to help I went ahead and did as said above and it appears to have all worked out fine. Thanks for nothing.