Nils277

[1.4.X—1.6.X] Kerbal Planetary Base Systems v1.6.7 [24. January 2019]

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, mafs said:

Congratulations to the latest update Nils, i can't rep you enough for your this mod!

i took it as opportunity to install extra planetary launchpads mod, and it seems i have a problem when trying to build ships not on the launchpad but using a survey stick on the ground - the stick does not appear in the menu of the launch pad, i can only select the pad itself.

this works like a dream and as intended, but i plan to use it for building small rovers in situ and of course building rovers on top of my base would not be the best idea.

my base consists of a smelter, recycler, workshop, launchpad, the necessary tanks for metal, scrap, rocket parts and energy production - am i missing something?

in some tutorials i read that a survey station is necessary in order to work with survey sticks, does not the workshop have this function?

any help/hint would be appreciated!

Nope, the workshop doesn't contain a survey station - and you need one to build from stakes.  EL reconfigs the standard MPL to work as one, or there are some others around, depending on what other mods you might be using.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why i can't find any part in game such as lifesupport,launchpad.etc after i copy the gamedata folder into my Kerbal Space Program folder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@junhuaqi

Did you install Extraplanetary Launchpads? I had the same problem yesterday and did like half a dozen restarts until i realised that for some reason that mod was missing >.<
 

@nils277:

Congrats to the update!! It's sheer amazing. 
My current build is a colony-ship destined for Eeloo. These new EL-Parts do fit just perfectly into the plans

As for the wiki: consulted it just yesterday. So: user_count ++ :wink: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mafs Oh, I did somehow totally forget about the survey station. Will add its functionality to the Lab in the next update. 

@junhuaqi Do you see the normal parts like the Habitat mk2? If not, you need to check if you installed this mod to tje right location. 

If you see the normal parts you need to install the original mods too. E.g. for Life Support you need to install TAC-LS, USI-LS or others. Same goes for Extraplanetary Launchpads. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Nope, the workshop doesn't contain a survey station - and you need one to build from stakes.  EL reconfigs the standard MPL to work as one, or there are some others around, depending on what other mods you might be using.

thank you, that explains it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nils277 said:

@mafsOh, I did somehow totally forget about the survey station. Will add its functionality to the Lab in the next update.

I still think it fits better on your cupola.  :wink:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Nils277 said:

@mafs Oh, I did somehow totally forget about the survey station. Will add its functionality to the Lab in the next update. 

brilliant, thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DStaal said:

I still think it fits better on your cupola.  :wink:

That's a good idea!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nils277 said:

That's a good idea!

i second that!

it would fit perfectly to the way i plan to deploy the launchpad-package - tricoupler with 3 modules (smelter/recycler/drills/power, storage , workshop/launchpad) and the central hub (=cupola, isn't it?) on top of it.

this is going to be cool :sticktongue:

(this also means that all the kerbals currently on laythe will never travel back home but i won't tell them until they have set up the new base modules)

Edited by mafs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mafs Nope, the Central Hub and the Cupola are two different parts :wink: 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tsaven I'm really sorry to bug you again because of the habitation values but i'm quite confused...While working on USI-LS support for FUR i just saw that the Hitchhiker has a habitation time of 21 Kerbal Months while 'only' weighting 2.5 tons. This does not really seem to fit to the other values...especially the Orca you mentioned. Is it possible that there is an implicid distinction between normal parts and parts that are meant specifically for habitation? Does @dboi88 maybe have an idea? Is the Hitchhiker nerved massively when MKS is installed to fit the mass/habitation limit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Nils277 said:

@tsaven I'm really sorry to bug you again because of the habitation values but i'm quite confused...While working on USI-LS support for FUR i just saw that the Hitchhiker has a habitation time of 21 Kerbal Months while 'only' weighting 2.5 tons. This does not really seem to fit to the other values...especially the Orca you mentioned. Is it possible that there is an implicid distinction between normal parts and parts that are meant specifically for habitation? Does @dboi88 maybe have an idea? Is the Hitchhiker nerved massively when MKS is installed to fit the mass/habitation limit?

This is very possible, I hadn't considered that. I'm not sure what RDs intentions were for balancing with the stock parts.  I had thought his logic was parts that gave communal space would be multipliers, not give additional hab months. So yeah I'm a little confused here too. Part of it might be that his Kerbitat modules can be changed on the fly from adding months to being a multiplier, and maybe that flexibility is what justifies their mass? I'm just speculating here, maybe one of us should gently approach RD and see what the status of his guidelines are. 

I should have some time tomorrow evening to get back into KSP and look at the numbers again. I'm in New Zealand time zone though so it'll be at least a day from now. 

And PLEASE don't ever hesitate to ping me about this stuff! Your mod is amazing and you've put so much work into it, the very least I can do as a show of thanks is to help out with some config or numbers where I can.  Just wish I had more time. :)

Edited by tsaven
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I'm much more of a 'take it as is and deal with it' sort of guy when it comes to things like mass balance. So I've never considered this before. Looking at the config it's clear that the hitchhiker is hugely op. It doesn't get nerfed in respect of weight by any patches. I'll see if I can grab a few minutes from RD on his next stream.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nils277 @tsaven The more i look the less i understand. Small tundra Kerbitat has 2.41 months per ton, Large Kerbitat has 6.8 months per ton and the hitchhiker has 8.4 months per ton.

My best guess at this stage is that they're is something else entirely that's being included in the balance figures.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The latest revision (not version at this point - but major revision) of USI-LS added EC usage - and I think that's included in the balance calculations somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does not add up too... the small tundra Kerbitat has 2.41 months per ton and uses 0.495 EC/sec and the large Kerbitat has 6.8 months per ton and uses 1.925. So here the number of EC per hab month is relatively equal 

But the hitchhiker has 8.4 months per ton and uses only 0.525 EC/sec so it is way more powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nils277 said:

This does not add up too... the small tundra Kerbitat has 2.41 months per ton and uses 0.495 EC/sec and the large Kerbitat has 6.8 months per ton and uses 1.925. So here the number of EC per hab month is relatively equal 

But the hitchhiker has 8.4 months per ton and uses only 0.525 EC/sec so it is way more powerful.

My actual guess is that RoverDude spent a lot of time balancing the MKS parts - and then threw numbers at the stock parts.  :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be :D Well if @dboi88 has no luck in the next stream of RD i'll ask this whole thing in the USI-LS thread. This is really more a question about USI-LS in general and others who want to add/update support for it might also be interested in the balancing.

Edited by Nils277
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, DStaal said:

My actual guess is that RoverDude spent a lot of time balancing the MKS parts - and then threw numbers at the stock parts.  :wink:

Could well be, i know the balance sheet isn't finished and that all the detailed instructions in the USI-LS stock MM patch about balance were removed at the same time when 0.50.0 came out. So could have been a quick buff to get 0.50.0 out without the hitchhiker being under powered.

15 minutes ago, Nils277 said:

Might be :D Well if @dboi88 has no luck in the next stream of RD i'll ask this whole thing in the USI-LS thread. This is really more a question about USI-LS in general and others who want to add/update support for it might also be interested in the balancing.

I will see if he can give me a quick run down of the balance concepts but i won't push him for his sheet because i know he's not had time to finish it and is incredibly busy trying to get the new Construction mod out for allista, then he's got all his own models for the Eagle to do as well to get his Konstruction update out, it's unlikely we'll get the sheet for a while yet, and MKS is likely to have it's values changed again when the sheet is finished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of me wonders if the Hitchhiker being so powerful was done to give base USI-LS users a fighting chance to actually go interplanetary, since in stock you only really have hitchhikers and cupolas to help you get high hab times. 

Also, I like how DStaal started a lovely thread for us to discuss MKS balance which just means now we're discussing it in two threads instead of one. :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, i think we should leave the balancing/support for MKS in it's own thread and ask about USI-LS balance in the USI-LS thread as this is clearly mainly related to USI-LS :wink: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Merkov said:

Part of me wonders if the Hitchhiker being so powerful was done to give base USI-LS users a fighting chance to actually go interplanetary, since in stock you only really have hitchhikers and cupolas to help you get high hab times. 

Also, I like how DStaal started a lovely thread for us to discuss MKS balance which just means now we're discussing it in two threads instead of one. :P

standards.png

:D

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nils277 said:

@mafs Nope, the Central Hub and the Cupola are two different parts :wink: 

my fault, thank you for the reminder - in this case i suggest giving the central hub (and maybe the lab) survey-station capability as well - 

they both have lab functionality so it seems appropriate to me :sticktongue:  

Share this post


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

my fault, thank you for the reminder - in this case i suggest giving the central hub (and maybe the lab) survey-station capability as well - 

they both have lab functionality so it seems appropriate to me :sticktongue:  

Maybe this is not the best idea.

The EL Survey Station and the EL Polestick are both Tier 5 in CTT.

The K&K Hab and Lab are Tier 9.

 

Adding the Survey Station to the K&K Workshop seems to be the best soloution for me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2016 at 7:28 AM, Nils277 said:

To be honest, i too think that there are some textures that are a bit low res e.g. the Habitat MK2. I have learned a lot since then. Maybe one day in the far far future, there will be an overhaul of the internals. 

Thanks for the info :) Looking forward to it and will update the support accordingly. 

Doing a quick drive by.

When comparing a Hitchiker to a Tundra don't forget to account for machinery mass.  Also, stock modules are weird since balance is a consideration of both volume and mass... and I can't control that ratio for stock, so I have to pick one of the two to roll with (I would have to double check which I used).  In any case, probably a better topic for the USI-LS thread as I am much more likely to see it there :D

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now