[1.12.x] USI Life Support

[Benji]

Hi. I'm playing RSS, etc with this Lifesupport-mod.

How do I get these "supplies" into the procedural tank? Is it even possible?

[RoverDude]

Someone made configs for this as I recall

[Jahulath]

Hi, I haven't seen if this has been asked before (I did a search!)

Would it be a good idea to create a MM patch that takes the mono-propellant in manned command pods (which is mostly useless other than ballast) and switches it out for Supplies? I think that in RL it is more likely that this space would be used for food, oxygen, and all the other things that supplies stand for rather than carting around not enough niche fuel to be useful for anything really...

Ideally it would use a multiplier against a variable that took the amount of MonoProp and doubled it (15 supplies is not even a days worth!)

I'd do it myself but every time I try to do something with MM I just shaft it like an idiot - I couldn't even add supplies to the manned cockpits correctly :$ whilst I'm begging for functionality like an imbecile - perhaps this could be integrated with Fuel-switch to give people the choice?

Please, and thank you kind sir.

 

[Jahulath]

On 4/29/2015 at 9:51 PM, JumpsterG said:

Like this one!

Finally had a spare moment and put this together:

-Adds supplies to crewed modules (up to 16 kerbals. If you have some crazy mod capsule that carries more, you'll need to add that to the .cfg yourself) (This is dynamic now, so doesn't matter what mods you've got - Thanks futrtrubl!). (50 supplies 15 days of supplies per crew in command modules, 100 supplies 30 days of supplies per crew in non-command modules)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/100018891/UmbraSpaceIndustryAdjustments/AddSuppliesToCrewedParts.cfg

License: No restrictions

Combine with adjustments to the Settings.cfg file for USI-LS:

 

 

LIFE_SUPPORT_SETTINGS
{
  SupplyTime = 32400
  CausesDeath = false
  ECAmount = 0.01
}

 

And you can have required supplies right from the get-go.

RoverDude, could you describe how those variables work in game terms? (besides CausesDeath, I think we can figure that one out)

EDIT: Simplified Module Manager .cfg thanks to futrtrubl's suggestion below. Also adjusted values down to more reasonable levels. At 50 supplies, a kerbal could chill in a Mk1 pod for 45 kerbin days without any additional parts or supplies (plus the default time to starve would make it 2 kerbin months before they became dead/inactive). Now it's 15 days + 15 more with default time to starve set.

And now I feel like an idiot :$  - Actually even with this my initial point was valid, the Monoprop removal would give a better feel of actively having space made for supplies in the command pod rather than just "stashing some snacks under the seat"... My original beg still stands for this to be part and with fuel switch so you don't have to have supplies in planes (not that you need Monoprop either but that's not the point) again only if it pleases you fine sir.

Edited July 28, 2016 by Jahulath
Second thoughts

[RoverDude]

FYI - working on a new USI-LS version and will likely need some testers   Will post here with further info later.

[Sarxis]

On 7/11/2016 at 7:38 PM, RoverDude said:

It's an edge case I am ok with, as nobody can escape the global timer   

Side note...  I have been up to my eyeballs in the new balance guidelines (which cover MKS, USI-LS, as well as retrofit stock) and it has been.... entertaining.

Part of this is I need to rebalance everything so that as you swap between recyclers, hab multipliers, and converters, the mass/etc. all remain pretty balanced.  So yeah... good times

Do you have playtesters helping with balance?  I've found that devs that get input from testers tend to get the best balance

-edit-  Heh... just noticed your post above

Edited July 28, 2016 by Sarxis

[WuphonsReach]

8 hours ago, Jahulath said:

Hi, I haven't seen if this has been asked before (I did a search!)

Would it be a good idea to create a MM patch that takes the mono-propellant in manned command pods (which is mostly useless other than ballast) and switches it out for Supplies? I think that in RL it is more likely that this space would be used for food, oxygen, and all the other things that supplies stand for rather than carting around not enough niche fuel to be useful for anything really...

I typically copy the craft's config file in the same folder, and just hand-edit it to do that (make sure you give it an unique "name =" value which is usually the first line of the file).  I add things like RemoteTech integrated omni 300km antenna, integrated MechJeb AR202, more/less mono/battery capacity, adding supplies/mulch storage, increasing the mass and cost values.

There's probably a way to do it with a MM patch, but not something I've looked into (here or over at the MM thread).

[Domfluff]

I'd be keen to help out with testing/balancing USI-LS.

Spoiler

//Suggested settings are based on part mass for consistency.  
// 
//For dedicated hab parts (no other generators, etc.):
//  Kerbal Months should equal mass * 5
//    ReplacementParts = 100 * crew capacity + 100 * Kerbal Months. 
//
//For parts that act as hab multipliers (dedicated or bundled with other functions/converters),
//a multiplier equal to the tonnage works well.
//
//For recyclers, their percentage should be mass / crew capcity (i.e. the UKS Pioneer Module at 3.75t = 75%)
//at crew capacity 5.  Increasing crew cap should result in an increase in mass.
//i.e. a 12-crew recycler that weighs 7.5 tons should have a recycler percentage equal to 7.5 / 12 = 62.5%
//Recyclers require (per crew capacity) 0.2 EC and 0.000002 ReplacementParts with a cap of 75%.
//If water is used as an input (0.0002 per crew capacity) the cap can be extended to 90%

I've been doing quite a bit of thinking about some upcoming models for another mod (SSTU), which will need USI-LS patches. This mod is making models which ape historical spacecraft, without being replicas per se.

Making patches for Salyut-style space station parts are easy - two seats in the station with a two person Soyuz capsule (four seats, including the orbital module) docked equals about 90 days hab time, which matches the historical figures without the need for any additional Kerbalmonths. Space for 3000 supplies (about 3 tons - approximately what you can transfer on a Progress vehicle) and no recycling (this is a low tech space station) makes this line up with the real world stuff nicely, without any further manipulation. This is great stuff.

What I'm less sure about are hab multipliers. What they represent, or when they should be used instead of or in addition to just adding kerbalmonths. The cupola is clearly a dedicated "quality of life" part (which makes sense to me), but I'm not sure why large inflatables don't qualify for the same kind of bonuses. The Kerbitat-type parts are presumably supposed to be recyclers, but they already have a recycling function. The Karibou module combines both, presumably, but the multiplier seems huge by comparison. Since I'm going to be thinking about more advanced station parts as well, I think it would be useful to have a deeper understanding here.

I'm not entirely clear on what constitutes a "multiplier", or what would justify it. Clearly it's important to be cautious about employing too many of them, as they can make the hab problem too easy to solve. 


As a related question - is Wear actually implemented at the moment? What's the actual game effect? (I vaguely remember something about heat adding to Wear, which I really like.)

[DStaal]

In general a hab multiplier is things that make life a bit better - quality of life, or R&R type parts.  The Kerbitat in that context has a kitchen ('food preparation facilities') and better control over the A/C ('hookups for environmental control') - quality of life, in the form of better food and a more comfortable environment.  It also has a water purifier (which to me is really a separate thing than a general recycler - the normal recyclers allow you to re-use what resources you have, the water purifier uses water to extend your resources), and might be a bit OP with both, but the purifier probably doesn't take up much mass.  (I've worked with units that have a larger capacity than that and were countertop sized.)  They inflatables are nice, but they only affect the crew that can bunk in them, so they don't get multipliers.

There's a big discussion on balancing some of these parts a bit back in the Kerbal Planetary Base Systems thread, where we were discussing balancing some station parts.  It might be worth a look.

Also might be worth a look is this page: https://github.com/BobPalmer/MKS/wiki/Supporting-MKS-in-your-mod#habitation.  Mostly it's the same info as what's in the configs, but I put in some explanations and things to think about.

My general way of thought is that you should approach it thinking of there being three types of spaces:

• Normal work areas - they give some elbow room, but no extras in terms of habitation or multipliers.
• Standard living areas - actual living space beyond what's needed to work, they give habitation time to the crew who can bunk there - but they don't help crew that can't use that space.
• R&R/Quality of life areas - they provide benefits to the entire crew of the ship, whether they are assigned to a 'bunk' in that space or not.  Places that make living in a tin can more pleasant.

You don't add anything to the normal spaces, living areas get hab time, R&R/QoL areas get hab multipliers.  Parts can have some of each - just decide how much mass is dedicated to each function. 

I hope that helps.

[Rafael acevedo]

On July 28, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Benji said:

Hi. I'm playing RSS, etc with this Lifesupport-mod.

How do I get these "supplies" into the procedural tank? Is it even possible?

I made a patch to give proccedural parts usi- ls compatibility.  See a couple of post backs or look at the proccedural parts forum. Hit me up on email and I will email back file and instructions 

[Domfluff]

3 hours ago, DStaal said:

My general way of thought is that you should approach it thinking of there being three types of spaces:

• Normal work areas - they give some elbow room, but no extras in terms of habitation or multipliers.
• Standard living areas - actual living space beyond what's needed to work, they give habitation time to the crew who can bunk there - but they don't help crew that can't use that space.
• R&R/Quality of life areas - they provide benefits to the entire crew of the ship, whether they are assigned to a 'bunk' in that space or not.  Places that make living in a tin can more pleasant.

Thank you - I think that makes it a lot clearer for me.

The orbital module (+2 seats) in a Soyuz capsule (or the seats in a barebones station) are there as basic requirements for the job, so don't give bonuses. This would also apply to things like a Science Lab, since presumably the seats inside are dedicated space for scientists.

Therefore, ISS modules would differ - the science/working modules wouldn't provide additional KM's, but hab modules would.

Quality of life is there for Cupola modules. It might even make sense for greenhouses (especially massive ones like the ones in Silent Running), sports facilities or even a pub to provide multipliers, since the existence of somewhere serving space-beer has more effect than just on that module.

Silly examples, but I understand I think

[DStaal]

Yep, sounds like you've got it. 

The one wrinkle that's been discussed from that is greenhouses - it makes sense from a realistic standpoint for them to have hab multipliers.  They are even used for that in real life.  However, giving them a food converter and a recycler and a hab multiplier (which is the logical thing to do, and would be realistic...) makes them fairly overpowered in-game.  @RoverDude's don't have all of those, so you have to think about balance a bit.

I think if you had a massive one and dedicated some mass to the hab multiplier (meaning it has a less capable recycler and mulch converters) it could be balanced, but be careful.  It's pretty close to a 'do-everything' part. 

[Jagzeplin]

Hey guys when i click on the green cube thing and it shows all the "consequences" the one for ec effect for vets is blank and clicking grouchy wont "stick". Like ill select it and it will darken before i click save and close window but when i come back a bit later (like after looking in the vab or something) its back to blank. Saving the game doesnt affect anything

Edited July 30, 2016 by Jagzeplin

[RoverDude]

Known issue, fixed in the next release

[Jagzeplin]

oh ok cool just glad i didnt mess up install. thanks

[Sarxis]

Curious about the Mobile Processing Lab and RT-500 recycling:  I assume the recycling effects don't stack.  So if I have both on a ship, how do they affect the Kerbals on there?  Does one take precedence?

[RoverDude]

They do stack, with an upper cap based on the best recycling rate.

[DStaal]

7 minutes ago, Sarxis said:

Curious about the Mobile Processing Lab and RT-500 recycling:  I assume the recycling effects don't stack.  So if I have both on a ship, how do they affect the Kerbals on there?  Does one take precedence?

The larger percentage takes precedence, up to it's max Kerbal capacity.  Then the smaller effect will come into play on the rest of the Kerbals, up to it's max capacity.  Continue on down.

(I'd dispute calling it 'stacking' - as the term is normally used in discussing games they do not.)

[Merkov]

12 minutes ago, Sarxis said:

Curious about the Mobile Processing Lab and RT-500 recycling:  I assume the recycling effects don't stack.  So if I have both on a ship, how do they affect the Kerbals on there?  Does one take precedence?

They actually do stack... sort of. Notice that every recycler has a certain efficiency (indicated by a percentage) and only affects a certain number of kerbals. The RT-500 affects one kerbal and has an efficiency of 60%. What this means is that it will reduce one kerbal's resource consumption rate by 60%. However, if you have 2 kerbals on board and only one RT-500, it will reduce the resource consumption of each by 30%. Adding extra RT-500s will not raise the efficiency above 60% UNLESS you have another recycler with a higher efficiency rating, in which case you CAN stack them to reach that efficiency level. So, for example, the MPL affects (or has a recycler capacity of) 5 kerbals and has an efficiency of 70%. If you have 6 kerbals, you could use one MPL plus 2 RT-500s to get 70% efficiency for all 6 kerbals. The two RT-500s "stack" but are capped by the MPL's rating of 70%.

Edit; Aaaand everyone explained that far more concisely than I did.

Edited July 31, 2016 by Merkov
Beaten to the punch.

[Sarxis]

Thanks for the clarifications everyone

The other thing I'm wondering about - RoverDude did you intend for the 25000 Inline to come so early in the tech tree?  It comes at Survivability, sooner than the 5000 in Recyclables. Should the Inline come at Hydroponics?

[Merkov]

2 minutes ago, Sarxis said:

Thanks for the clarifications everyone

The other thing I'm wondering about - RoverDude did you intend for the 25000 Inline to come so early in the tech tree?  It comes at Survivability, sooner than the 5000 in Recyclables. Should the Inline come at Hydroponics?

Dang, I was hoping nobody would bring that up! I've been taking advantage of the early tech tree placement to save science.

[Sarxis]

7 hours ago, Merkov said:

Dang, I was hoping nobody would bring that up! I've been taking advantage of the early tech tree placement to save science.

Just drop this into the CTT.cfg and all your problems will go away ;P 

 

@PART[USILS_Greenhouse_IL]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = hydroponics
}

[Domfluff]

Is there a reason why the rotating UKS hab doesn't come with a multiplier? It seems to me like simulated gravity would come under the umbrella of things which should provide multipliers.

[RoverDude]

For balance reasons It's allocated as living space.  Making it also a multiplier would reduce its effectiveness in that role, and there are already other multiplier parts.

[Tokamak]

On 7/6/2016 at 6:21 PM, DStaal said:

Hi!  Tell me if there's anything you think needs to be added to that page - I wrote it based on my understanding, and I tried to cover just about everything, but I was going from my experience...

My description on that page is partly based on my observation that the hab ring doesn't have a multiplier.  As I think of it, a multiplier is 'extras' (or luxuries) that make your stay more enjoyable - better food, a nice view, a place to play, stuff like that.  It's not the essentials - those add hab time directly.  Gravity is an essential - so the ring doesn't really add an 'extra' luxury, it should just be adding a base hab time.

Personally, for a rotating ring I might 'round high' on the hab time it adds - round up to the next whole month number or so, just to give it a bit more of a boost.  Still keep it close to the recommended values to keep it from being unbalanced, but just a bit more can be justified by the design.  But that's me saying that, not RoverDude. 

As for the .cfg files: There are a couple of things you could do with them.  If the mod is still under active development, you can talk to the developer and see if they want to include them in the base pack.  Usually if you're polite about it (and do a good job with the files) they'll say thanks and include them.  Otherwise, it's not uncommon to have a 'mod' that's just a set of .cfg files to get things to work together.  Just make sure you document what you're doing, and don't claim to be officially part of either parent mod.

 

On 7/7/2016 at 10:02 AM, Merkov said:

I would tend to agree with @DStaal on this. The way I tend to think about hab time vs hab multipliers is that a part with a high hab time can more or less stand on its own, while a hab multiplier shouldn't be a part you expect someone to live in, just one that makes life a little nicer. Another way to think of it, if something provides a comfort bonus to everyone on the station, it should have a multiplier, but if it is just really comfortable for those living in that specific part, it should have a high hab time. Let me try to explain my thinking here:

With that larger, sturdier ring, I don't think there is anything wrong with giving it a hab time of 80 months; that's basically saying that the structure is comfortable enough to allow a full compliment of crew to happily stay aboard for 6.5 years (which is not too shabby) without any outside amenities. Having said that, I don't think that ring would have any amenities meant to serve those who do not live aboard it. For example, when I lived and worked in oil field camps, each bunkhouse had living accommodations (with washrooms & showers), a laundry room, and utility rooms. Some bunkhouses had nicer rooms, (bigger beds, bigger TVs, maybe private bathrooms, etc.) but no bunkhouse was meant to provide any service for anyone living outside of it. That is, if I lived in one of the cheaper bunkhouses, the fact that one of the fancier bunkhouses had private washrooms, queen size beds, and big TVs would not make my living situation any better. That SXT ring makes me think of one of the VIP bunkhouses. Fantastic to live in, but if you are living in an OKS ring beside it, you're not going to really care that much.

On the other hand, buildings like the gym, more-upscale restaurants, and media centres are things that everyone living in a camp could use, and they make a huge difference to how long someone can stand to live there. Even if my living quarter wasn't great, having access to a gym to work out, a common room with TVs/computers/games etc, and a more comfortable dining option meant that I didn't have to rely on my room for comfort. More importantly, they were able to be used by everyone. Nobody lived in the gym or common room, but everybody benefited from their existence. This is how I imagine hab multipliers working. No matter what kind of hab module you are living in, anyone can take a stroll (or, uh, float) through the kerbitat, or watch the stars through the cupola.

I do agree with your desire to increase hab multipliers without just spamming cupolas, but I think the problem is that not a lot of parts packs (that I know of, anyway) focus on R&R for your kerbals aboard space stations. To be honest, I don't know of any mods besides USI-LS (maybe Kerbalism?) that worry about how long your kerbals spend locked inside tin cans as long as they are fed and watered. If you know of any kerbal gyms, movie theatres, communication rooms, etc. then those would be PERFECT candidates for hab multipliers.

I asked the same question in the MKS thread, and these answers might be helpful

 

6 hours ago, Domfluff said:

Is there a reason why the rotating UKS hab doesn't come with a multiplier? It seems to me like simulated gravity would come under the umbrella of things which should provide multipliers.