Jump to content

[1.12.x] USI Life Support


RoverDude

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, RoverDude said:

So you go from removing an accusing tone directly into accusing me of an outright falsehood.

You need to seriously check the attitude.  Someone posted some stats that I had never seen before, and I noted that they were very unbalanced.  Now through some kind of mental gymnastics, you're starting to (publicly) fling random accusations and conspiracy theories.

If your goal was cooperation and interop, you're really taking a weird approach.  You might want to take a step back, because all you're doing now is throwing all goodwill down the drain.

 

Wow...to say that the level of hostility and agressiveness of this reaction made me literally speechless would be a huge understatement.

I indeed referred to the passage ValPal mentioned:

Quote

I published pretty clear balance guidelines for this reason.  While I totally get that it's your game, etc. when stuff pops out as mods, it results in a weird and unbalanced 'race to the bottom' where people just use the most unbalanced parts, or have to restrain and intentionally hobble themselves in their game.  And since they are USI-LS compatible parts, I end up fielding the whole 'why is X so heavy, or why is Y so hard?' because someone's pushing a set of stuff that's completely unbalanced from the original intent and balance of not only this mod, but the other ones that tie into it.

This passage read like i'm either too stupid to read and comprehend these pretty clear instructions or made the greenhouse unbalanced on purpose for the sole purpose to outdo other mods. Neither one is the case, it was an oversight. The implication that using unbalanced mods with USI-LS is not really desired wasn't that far away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on guys, @RoverDude and @Nils277. For me, viewing this from the outside, it's more than clear that this is just a mere misunderstanting. I agree with @goldenpsp and @Andem, that everyone should let you two solve your business and you'd probably get over it soon. But I, in my on stupidity, 'care' for people that I don't know, even goldenpsp and Andem, but since I used your mods I follow you more, so I 'care' more, and I hate seeing people arguing.

So to settle this. RD said what I quoted, and at first I thought exactly as Nils, but I know RD better now, I know it's just his way with words and he didn't meant what I thought at first. But since the topic was KPBS Nils took it personal and stick with the first impression, which it's totally understandable, I would probabl do the same. So he said those 'accusation' that RD was 'attacking' him and his mod. Since RD didn't meant that, he got offended and surprised and 'fought' back. From this point on, it's just a snowball that will keep getting bigger and bigger. I've been on both sides of that, and I'm sure you both been there too.

This arguing doesn't do good to anyone, nether the community and nether and especially you two. You both probably won't like me intruding in your business, so I will be quiet for now on.

Peace guys, take it easy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, theonegalen said:

I'd very much like to have them...

They're not so great, I mainly made KBPS form-factor versions of the MEU-250, -500 and -700 drills, as well as containers for those resources. 

I need to make KBPS form-factor versions of the Regolith Sifter, Fabrication Module, Mobile Refinery, and Nuclear Fuel processor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The KBPS modules are all of roughly the same form-factor, which is a big selling point of the mod (everything looks really nice), so either similar mass in the same size, or reduced output at smaller mass.

Is there a general suggestion for mass to output, or just scale it linear based on mass?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ibanix said:

The KBPS modules are all of roughly the same form-factor, which is a big selling point of the mod (everything looks really nice), so either similar mass in the same size, or reduced output at smaller mass.

Is there a general suggestion for mass to output, or just scale it linear based on mass?

Maybe you could use the Garage parts as a base?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ibanix said:

The KBPS modules are all of roughly the same form-factor, which is a big selling point of the mod (everything looks really nice), so either similar mass in the same size, or reduced output at smaller mass.

Is there a general suggestion for mass to output, or just scale it linear based on mass?

I'll write something up, have to do it for my own new parts anyway.  Just bear in mind the upper tier manufacturing bits are generally 3.75's, so I'd need to noodle how that could be compressed (realistically) into a smaller form factor without unbalancing everything (i.e. the form factor for that last tier is part of the balance).

 

(a small edit after sleeping on it)

Tho this is better for the UKS thread.  The reason why balance RE form factor/volume/mass is important and why I am not sure linear scale balances is because even if efficiency is plummeted, and output is drastically curtailed, you can just timewarp your way to whatever you need (and effectively bypass a major gameplay element of UKS... at which point, you don't have UKS... you have something else).

I think the only way to sort it without a weird unbalancing would be to somehow split the functionality across multiple parts through some really creative use of efficiency and mandatory efficiency parts so that it landed in the same space.  i.e. you could (in theory) create a smaller fabricator that required X number of additional modules on the base to function, and construct the subcomponents on site.  I may have the tools to do this in the next major cut of OKS/MKS with the new tundra modules, but those are still pretty WIP.

DrH77z9.png

 

Edited by RoverDude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/7/2016 at 6:24 PM, tsaven said:

Could someone double-check my math so I'm clear on my understanding of how recyclers and greenhouses work?  I'm trying to design a ship for 12 Kerbals with a 10-year mission lifespan (Roundtrip to Sarnus and back).  I'm using KPBS hab and greenhouses, which (as I understand) have similar mechanics to USI's stock modules.


My understanding is as follows:

12 Kerbins * 16.2 Supplies per day per kerbal = 192.4 supplies consumed per day.  Using the Habitat MK2 recyclers at 89% reduces total vessel consumption to 21.384 Supplies per day. 

5 years * 426 days = 4260 days * 21.384 supplies per day = 91,095.84 supplies needed for a 10 year mission.

Am I correct so far?

For using the greenhouses, the .cfg files for KPBS greenhouses say they consume .0052 Mulch and .0008 Fertilizer, and produce .0060 Supplies.  I assume that's per second, so per day each greenhouse will consume 112.32 Mulch, 17.28 Fertilizer, and produce 129.6 Supplies.  So . . . wow, I don't need three greenhouses on this ship.  BUT GUYS THEY LOOK SO COOL.

Anyway, if my math works out the greenhouses need 6.5 Mulch + 1 Fertilizer = 7.5 Supplies.  So assuming that my little Kerbals keep producing mulch, to ensure that I'm able to have enough supplies for a 10 year mission I will need:

A small baseline of Supplies, and 12,146.112 Fertilizer.

Does this sound right? Does workload or vessel efficiency or kerbal XP tie into this in any way?

 

This should help: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ewlbEVwGbxUke23M84C7ZUU5vieG7yIFLovNLY5hz-o/edit#gid=1340751449

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The existing KBPS integration with USI-LS was done by @PocketBrotector, and I've submitted a pull request to him w/r/t to fixing some bugs in his modules. I've also now created MM patches to add the Mk3 industry modules in KBPS format factor. They likely will need balancing input. 

Since the original work was done by @PocketBrotector, I'm waiting to hear back from him, but he hasn't been on the forums since April. If I don't hear back soon I'll release what I have and let people comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The larger industrial modules are 2.5t dry with zero functionality, and require 2000t of machinery to operate at peak - so a wet weight of 10.06 tons, and about 80 cubic meters of space.   the gameplay reason being that large scale manufacturing / refining takes a significant amount of physical space.  

A way to get around the size requirement would be to leverage required efficiency parts and build it out via composition, or figure out a balance similar to how I handle the smaller scale 'Ranger' parts (generally I do this with other constraints/limitations, then turn the smaller part into an efficiency part for it's big brother to keep it from being too limited in use).  

And by requirement I don't mean that anyone is under any obligation to release balanced parts - but if you're asking how to balance them with regular UKS bits, there ya go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually going to make the modules less efficient because of the smaller size. That and remove some of the other included things, like crew space, and the large amount of EC storage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, before getting to far into the Mk3 modules I wanted to take a look at the current state of just USI-LS integration with KBPS. 

Based on @PocketBrotector's previous work, and some of the on-going work by @Nils277, here's some charts of what's going on at the moment: https://github.com/ibanix/UKS-KPBS_Compatibility/wiki/Life-Support

Comments/suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I apologize if this has been asked before, but I've tried googling and seem to be unable to find the right search terms.

 

Is there any sort of VAB/SPH mission planner for USI-LS/MKS? Some other life support mods have information windows that tell you useful things like how long your kerbals will live with the current supplies unless resupplied, and that sort of thing. Am I just missing that, or will I have to break out the calculator?

 

Edit: Durr, I am dumb. I was looking in Blitzy's Toolbar, where some other UKS buttons are, but the main one I was asking about here is in the default toolbar.

 

Edit the second: Actually, I am still a bit confused. I'm not sure how to take into account the effect of greenhouses producing supplies, and that sort of thing. Perhaps I'm just being thick, but adding or removing an Agricultural module doesn't seem to have any effect on the estimated survival times. I feel like I'm missing something.

Edited by Tokamak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oof. I'm just now seeing all of this. I had no idea. :( 

Am I to assume that all of the work that @Stone Blue and I are doing with the BioMass Continued project is redundant and unnecessary? From where I sit, it's replicating nearly all of the functionality you've already got here, RoverDude. Don't wanna step on your toes, bud. And we're so close to release, too ... ack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tokamak said:

I apologize if this has been asked before, but I've tried googling and seem to be unable to find the right search terms.

 

Is there any sort of VAB/SPH mission planner for USI-LS/MKS? Some other life support mods have information windows that tell you useful things like how long your kerbals will live with the current supplies unless resupplied, and that sort of thing. Am I just missing that, or will I have to break out the calculator?

 

Edit: Durr, I am dumb. I was looking in Blitzy's Toolbar, where some other UKS buttons are, but the main one I was asking about here is in the default toolbar.

 

Edit the second: Actually, I am still a bit confused. I'm not sure how to take into account the effect of greenhouses producing supplies, and that sort of thing. Perhaps I'm just being thick, but adding or removing an Agricultural module doesn't seem to have any effect on the estimated survival times. I feel like I'm missing something.

Converters are not included in that equation at the moment - a good (rough) rule of thumb is that your fertilizer->supply style converters extends supplies at roughly a 10:1 ratio.  So if 1,000 supplies is giving you 90 days, if you make that 1,000 fertilizer you have something like 900 or so.

4 hours ago, BetaguyGZT said:

Oof. I'm just now seeing all of this. I had no idea. :( 

Am I to assume that all of the work that @Stone Blue and I are doing with the BioMass Continued project is redundant and unnecessary? From where I sit, it's replicating nearly all of the functionality you've already got here, RoverDude. Don't wanna step on your toes, bud. And we're so close to release, too ... ack.

No reason to stop what you're working on... the existence of TAC-LS did not stop me making USI-LS, nor has USI-LS's existence stopped other folks making new mods in the same space.  Choice is a good thing :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Tokamak said:

Edit the second: Actually, I am still a bit confused. I'm not sure how to take into account the effect of greenhouses producing supplies, and that sort of thing. Perhaps I'm just being thick, but adding or removing an Agricultural module doesn't seem to have any effect on the estimated survival times. I feel like I'm missing something.

 

3 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Converters are not included in that equation at the moment - a good (rough) rule of thumb is that your fertilizer->supply style converters extends supplies at roughly a 10:1 ratio.  So if 1,000 supplies is giving you 90 days, if you make that 1,000 fertilizer you have something like 900 or so.

Or you could just use the real math, which is not any more complicated :)

Each unit of Fertilizer is equal to 8.5 Supplies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
×
  • Create New...