RoverDude

[1.8.x] USI Life Support [0.5.0]

Recommended Posts

Just now, CajunInABox said:

Uh... I guess both? The most I've done with a config is change some numbers :/

You would probably do best to grab the configs from an old version of pathfinder.  Then you can look at the balance spreadsheet for USI-LS (I think its on the github wiki for this mod) and tweak/check them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, goldenpsp said:

You would probably do best to grab the configs from an old version of pathfinder.  Then you can look at the balance spreadsheet for USI-LS (I think its on the github wiki for this mod) and tweak/check them.

Oooh, that would be a lot easier than starting from scratch. Thanks mate! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alrighty then. So after a few hours of research, I think I understand how to use the balance worksheet, and how to set up the converters in the config. The latest Pathfinder config I could find was from 1.14 (latest version being 1.31). I put it on pastebin here. Based on the TAC-LS config as a reference (pastebin here), it seems there are a few deprecated parts and a few new parts.

Is there anything special I need to do for those new parts to give kerbals access to Supplies stored in other parts? 

What are some reasonable efficiency numbers for the converters? Like, I guess better efficiencies the further down the tech tree I go, but what's a good start?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, CajunInABox said:

Alrighty then. So after a few hours of research, I think I understand how to use the balance worksheet, and how to set up the converters in the config. The latest Pathfinder config I could find was from 1.14 (latest version being 1.31). I put it on pastebin here. Based on the TAC-LS config as a reference (pastebin here), it seems there are a few deprecated parts and a few new parts.

Is there anything special I need to do for those new parts to give kerbals access to Supplies stored in other parts? 

What are some reasonable efficiency numbers for the converters? Like, I guess better efficiencies the further down the tech tree I go, but what's a good start?

Somewhere it seems there were some configs specifically for USI-LS.  I'd find those.  There is a good chance they are even still good or close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, goldenpsp said:

Somewhere it seems there were some configs specifically for USI-LS.  I'd find those.  There is a good chance they are even still good or close.

My bad, meant to say I found the MM USI-LS config for Pathfinder. It's pretty close yeah, just need to delete some parts and then figure out how to balance the rest. The questions above were about what to do with new parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The recyclers should be stackable? The ones in USI-LS and KPBS don't seem to be (the Kerbals can benefit from only one), while the ones in SSPXr seems to be (the more I add, the less supplies the Kerbals use).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MaximumThrust said:

The recyclers should be stackable? The ones in USI-LS and KPBS don't seem to be (the Kerbals can benefit from only one), while the ones in SSPXr seems to be (the more I add, the less supplies the Kerbals use).

The recycler stacking is somewhat complicated.  It works like this: Each recycler reduces the amount of supplies used by it's own ratio for the amount of Kerbals it's rated for, up to the max ratio of the ship.  The max ratio is set by the highest ratio recycler on the ship.

So if you have one 80% recycler good for one Kerbal on a 6-Kerbal ship, the max ratio for that ship is 80% - but you're not reducing the supplies by 80% yet.  As you add more lower-ratio recyclers, the less supplies you will use - up until you get to reducing the entire ship's supply usage by 80%.  Even if you only have the one 80% recycler and everything else is 40% recyclers - but you'll need a lot of the latter.

My suspicion is that your SSPXr ship has one very efficient recycler, and you're adding less efficient recyclers and not hitting the max for that ship yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DStaal said:

The recycler stacking is somewhat complicated.  It works like this: Each recycler reduces the amount of supplies used by it's own ratio for the amount of Kerbals it's rated for, up to the max ratio of the ship.  The max ratio is set by the highest ratio recycler on the ship.

So if you have one 80% recycler good for one Kerbal on a 6-Kerbal ship, the max ratio for that ship is 80% - but you're not reducing the supplies by 80% yet.  As you add more lower-ratio recyclers, the less supplies you will use - up until you get to reducing the entire ship's supply usage by 80%.  Even if you only have the one 80% recycler and everything else is 40% recyclers - but you'll need a lot of the latter.

My suspicion is that your SSPXr ship has one very efficient recycler, and you're adding less efficient recyclers and not hitting the max for that ship yet.

Very interesting!

I've made some tests with the KPBS and some recyclers. The KPBS have one recycler that uses water and more EC, but reduces by 81%, rated for 1 Kerbal. The default USI-LS one reduces by 60%, also for only one Kerbal.

If a have a base for 3 Kerbals, I got the same duration with 81% x 3, or 81% x 1 + 60% x 3. I really liked that! It will make more interesting and flexible designs. Using just a bunch of water recyclers (in bases with water), matching the number of Kerbals, would be very boring.

The ones in SSPXr reduce by 25-50%, I should get some benefit using along some better ones, right? Even if the number of recyclers are higher than the Kerbals.

I was getting an infinite increase in duration because I have a patch that adds supplies to every command module (some command modules in SSPXr also have recyclers) and I forgot to see that :rolleyes:

Your answer was extremely helpful, I wasn't getting a detailed explanation for that anywhere.

Thanks!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MaximumThrust said:

The ones in SSPXr reduce by 25-50%, I should get some benefit using along some better ones, right? Even if the number of recyclers are higher than the Kerbals.

Yep, up to the point where the totals are the same reduction as if you'd just had the better ones.

Part of the idea is that be water recyclers are supposed to be big and bulky - and you only need one per base.  This lets you fill in using smaller ones.  (And as you said, allows for more interesting and flexible designs.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heads up.

There is a new version of USI-LS being released in the near future - it is currently available in the USI Constellation as a pre-release.  This one contains breaking changes and several part modules have changes.

Normally I try to avoid this, but this is the first time in a very long time we've had to do an overhaul of one of the core systems.

For USI users on an existing save, I would suggest temporarily disabling all ill effects before updating.  After that, make sure all of your modules are enabled before re-enabling life support effects (and keep a backup save just in case).

If you use a different mod that adds USILS support, you may want to ping said mod authors and see about asking them nicely to either update their patches, or submit a PR (as always, MKS ones can be used as examples).  Ratios and balance did not change, just a lot of back-end stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

If you use a different mod that adds USILS support, you may want to ping said mod authors and see about asking them nicely to either update their patches, or submit a PR (as always, MKS ones can be used as examples).  Ratios and balance did not change, just a lot of back-end stuff.

I am summoned and interested! Looking forward to see what got changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

….. After that, make sure all of your modules are enabled before re-enabling life support effects...

What modules is meaning @RoverDude? Don't get it sorry  :/ do you mean to unlock every part? also "mulch"? Sorry for asking.

Edited by releansol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, releansol said:

What modules is meaning @RoverDude? Don't get it sorry  :/ do you mean to unlock every part? also "mulch"? Sorry for asking.

It just means that some modules may be turned off (like hab modules, etc.) after upgrading, so be sure to turn them on or (in the case of MKS) reconfigure them as needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the new converter system, what's the right way to make a part that's both a greenhouse and a recycler?  USI_ConverterSwapOption and USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption are swappable alternatives so they can't both be active at the same time.  I see that USI_Converter has an IsStandaloneConverter option, but it doesn't look like there's such a thing as a standalone recycler.  Should it be a standalone converter for the greenhouse, plus a USI_SwapController with a single bay whose only option is a USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the standalone greenhouse converter and "swappable" (but no other options) recycler works, but with a slight UI bug: if the standalone converter is listed before the swappable one in the .cfg file, the swappable converter's start/stop button in-game says "Start Converter" (some sort of default?) instead of "Start Life Support" (the StartActionName on the USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption).  If the swappable converter is defined before the standalone one, then its label is correct.

Also, I've found that the USI_SwapController module needs to be listed before the (non-standalone) USI_Converter modules in the .cfg, otherwise the controller fails to find the converters, leading to an exception in ApplyLoadout because the _converters list is empty.  Easy to avoid (just write the modules in the correct order), but something that people should be aware of when updating integration patches to use the new system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nAs- said:

Will this mod be compatible with ksp 1.5?

afaik the new version whit the breaking changes is for 1.5

but the old one works as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, RD. First, this mod is brilliant. I've been using it for quite a long time mounting missions all over and its done everything I'd hoped to see out of an LS mod. Really appreciate all the thought that's gone into the balance and mechanics. One small gap I've found is I'd love to see an intermediate recycler between the RT-500 and the RT-5000. Its a huge gulf to fill in terms of mass, form and ec before it breaks even (something like 10y w/ converters?) I'd love to see a 1.25m inline converter that covers 3 kerbals and runs 75% efficient and pays for itself mass-wise after like 200 days. You wouldn't need it in KSOI, but you'd want it for a 3 kerbal Duna mission. 75% is also nice cause it just barely gets us over the sustained 1:1 ratio on converters to kerbals. To make the existing RT-5000 more attractive (and to cut down on RT-500 spam) that could cover 6 or even 12 kerbals given how big and heavy it is. Having both would help keep part count down and give a lot more design flexibility. 

Just a thought. And thanks again for all you do!

Edited by Pthigrivi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mentioned this over in the MKS thread, but I should mention it here too since it's particularly relevant to life support: I've submitted a pull request with a ModuleManager patch that updates parts to be compatible with the converter changes in the upcoming USI-LS release.  It's not perfect and isn't meant as a long-term solution; it's just a way to get stuff into a usable state until modders update their USI integration patches to use the new system directly.  I don't know if it'll be merged, but I want to let everyone know, and invite people to try it out and provide feedback.  Here's a direct link to the patch file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

In a clean install of 1.5.1 and the constellation from 21 October, I get a lot of:

[EXC 19:56:27.950] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
    LifeSupport.LifeSupportMonitor_SpaceCenter.GuiOn ()
    LifeSupport.LifeSupportMonitor_SpaceCenter.GenerateWindow ()
    LifeSupport.LifeSupportMonitor_SpaceCenter.OnWindow (Int32 windowId)
    UnityEngine.GUILayout+LayoutedWindow.DoWindow (Int32 windowID)
    UnityEngine.GUI.CallWindowDelegate (UnityEngine.WindowFunction func, Int32 id, Int32 instanceID, UnityEngine.GUISkin _skin, Int32 forceRect, Single width, Single height, UnityEngine.GUIStyle style)
 

The life support window is blank when I open it to configure and it'd really not usable.

I have not seen anyone else report this. Is everyone else getting USI suite to work under 1.5.1?

Thanks

 

edit1: Found the issue. Had to delete the WarpDrive directory under UmbraSpaceIndustries. Module Manager threw 4 warnings about the scaledsystems.cfg and caused some errors that affected USILS. Seems to be working so far.

edit2: I did the same fix in my modded USI install but still had the problem. Based on the log, I removed @Nerteamods Cryogenic Engines and Kerbal Atomics and everything started working. Not sure what the real issue was, but it looked like some sort of resource definition conflict or MM parsing issues with the newer versions.

Edited by Gilph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2018 at 11:52 AM, Pthigrivi said:

Hey, RD. First, this mod is brilliant. I've been using it for quite a long time mounting missions all over and its done everything I'd hoped to see out of an LS mod. Really appreciate all the thought that's gone into the balance and mechanics. One small gap I've found is I'd love to see an intermediate recycler between the RT-500 and the RT-5000. Its a huge gulf to fill in terms of mass, form and ec before it breaks even (something like 10y w/ converters?) I'd love to see a 1.25m inline converter that covers 3 kerbals and runs 75% efficient and pays for itself mass-wise after like 200 days. You wouldn't need it in KSOI, but you'd want it for a 3 kerbal Duna mission. 75% is also nice cause it just barely gets us over the sustained 1:1 ratio on converters to kerbals. To make the existing RT-5000 more attractive (and to cut down on RT-500 spam) that could cover 6 or even 12 kerbals given how big and heavy it is. Having both would help keep part count down and give a lot more design flexibility. 

Just a thought. And thanks again for all you do!

 

On 11/26/2018 at 12:46 PM, RoverDude said:

Yep, both the current version and the pre-release version are both 1.5.x compatible.

@Pthigrivi - not a bad idea :)  

Do you want this posted to the github? I love the idea! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gilph If you are opening the LS window for the first time in the Space center, then there was and may be still is a bug, which was resolved by going into VAB/SPH and open the LS window there. Then it probably loaded something and from that moment everything worked.

Edited by maja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.