[1.12.X] Kerbal Planetary Base Systems v1.6.15 [28. April 2022]

[DStaal]

I wouldn't change how a purifier is implemented - at least, not on our level.  (I can see an argument for changing it in USI-LS - basically excluding it from the recycler cap mechanic and have it applied afterwards, but that's not the level we're talking about.)

I just think that thinking about it as a converter helps keep in mind that it's a very different animal than the normal recyclers - and has very different pluses and minuses.

[ibanix]

Ok, so we'll keep it as water-powered recycler.

I've also realized that the only two drills in stock KPBS are water and ore. If we want to use any other resources (minerals, hydrates, gypsum), then we need to add a new drill. I had already made in-line versions of the -250, -500 and -750 for later UKS integration, but I'd prefer to keep those separate. 

Do we include a multi-purpose community resource pack part drill as part of USI-LS compatibility?

 

 

 

 

[tsaven]

1 hour ago, DStaal said:

Which is exactly why I like it - Life support is so vital, that being unable to produce it can mean it's impossible to set up a colony at all.  With the algae farm using ore and the normal gypsum route then you have two choices for getting to fertilizer instead of one, so you can hunt for whichever one you can find.  (Although using something besides Ore, like minerals or something, might work as well.) 

Holy smokes there's a lot going on in this thread.  My $0.02 on this issue is that Minerals wouldn't be a bad idea; it fits in with the real-world in that most fertilizers are primarily composed of either Nitrogen, Phosphorus or Potassium, and secondarily have Calcium, Magnesium or Sulpher.

Of course, that's not speaking to the balance of the mod or resource distribution, but it's fun to think about

22 minutes ago, ibanix said:

Ok, so we'll keep it as water-powered recycler.

I've also realized that the only two drills in stock KPBS are water and ore. If we want to use any other resources (minerals, hydrates, gypsum), then we need to add a new drill. I had already made in-line versions of the -250, -500 and -750 for later UKS integration, but I'd prefer to keep those separate. 

Do we include a multi-purpose community resource pack part drill as part of USI-LS compatibility?

I would support keeping the part and mechanics as simple or close to USI-LS as possible. And given that the mod doesn't by default include a way to make fertilizer, perhaps it's best to leave it out unless someone is also using UKS. 

My understanding of RD's intent and how the mod works is that while fully self-sufficient Kolonies are possible, they should be extremely difficult and expensive to set up and likely require multiple sites spread over a planet/moon in order to generate all the resources needed.  Hence the Planetary Logistics, due to the rarity of finding Water, and Gypsum, and Ore and Minerals all at the same place.

Another option: is it possible to have an OR command when configurations are loaded?  For example, if only USI-LS is installed, then the Algae farm would use Ore, but if UKS + USI-LS is installed, it could require Gypsum (or Minerals, or something else, and maybe water as well).

Edited June 15, 2016 by tsaven

[DStaal]

9 minutes ago, tsaven said:

I would support keeping the part and mechanics as simple or close to USI-LS as possible. And given that the mod doesn't by default include a way to make fertilizer, perhaps it's best to leave it out unless someone is also using UKS.

Another option: is it possible to have an OR command when configurations are loaded?  For example, if only USI-LS is installed, then the Algae farm would use Ore, but if UKS + USI-LS is installed, it could require Gypsum (or Minerals, or something else, and maybe water as well).

I agree with both of those ideas.    The second idea is definitely possible using MM.  (Not exactly 'or' - the USI-LS would be default, and then have a UKS patch that mods that.)

Another idea is just to have a separate drill pack that isn't necessarily tied to either one of these.  Then people can add drills if they want, and the algae farm is only really useful with drills.

[Nils277]

Wow...not been looking here for a short time and a LOT happened. This sounds like we have a solid foundation for the support package here. 

I will add my two Cents tomorrow after I slept, it's already quite late here.

If you need anything, E.g. sources for the drills etc, let me know. 

[ibanix]

28 minutes ago, DStaal said:

I agree with both of those ideas.    The second idea is definitely possible using MM.  (Not exactly 'or' - the USI-LS would be default, and then have a UKS patch that mods that.)

Another idea is just to have a separate drill pack that isn't necessarily tied to either one of these.  Then people can add drills if they want, and the algae farm is only really useful with drills.

So I think we've got:

* Base USI-LS support; no Algae Farm support because of the lack of drill. Uses the  Comes with KPBS.

* USI-LS Closed Loop package: Includes Algae Farm support and drills for CRP resources. Needs KBPS and USI-LS. Ignored if UKS Compatibility installed.

* UKS Compatibility package. Has inline versions of UKS drills, and all the other UKS stuff.

 

I wrote up the changes so far into a proposal changes page: https://github.com/ibanix/UKS-KPBS_Compatibility/wiki/USI-LS-Compatibility-(Proposed)

 

 

 

[tsaven]

2 hours ago, ibanix said:

Regarding overall balance: First, I feel that KBPS should use the USI-LS mechanics, but not try to replicate USI or UKS parts directly, because it's not a 1:1 mapping. We should make for reasonable balance of challenge to utility and allow for KBPS to evolve.

For individual parts, here's how I've been thinking about doing things:

* Mk1 Habitat: Entry level living space. Low-efficiency recycler. No Hab bonus.

* Mk2 Habitat: Advanced living space. Medium-efficiency recycler. No hab bonus.

* Greenhouse (Large): Supports other living spaces by growing food. High-volume mulch-and-fertilizer-to-supplies converter. Low-to-medium-efficiency recycler. Low-grade hab bonus (1.25 - 1.50).

* Greenhouse (Small): Entry level greenhouse. Low-volume mulch-and-fertilizer-to-supplies converter. No recycler, no hab bonus (too small). 

* Cupola: Crew psychology benefit. High-grade hab bonus (1.75 - 2.0).

* Science Lab: Provides science, but can use lab equipment for (expensive) recycling.  High-efficiency recycler (using high-volume of water); low hab bonus (1.25 max). 

* Central Hub: Capstone integrated module. Integrated science lab. High-efficiency recycler (using moderate-volume water). No hab bonus. 

* Algae Farm: No equivalent in USI-LS. Converts hydrates to water and gypsum to fertilizer to allow for closed-loop life support. UKS has parts for this, but just having a single part here would allow for closed-loop based on fertilizer or water without having to add all the other UKS parts and mechanics.

For just these parts, we should avoid other resources, so anything using Substrate, Ore, etc. for life support should drop off. That should be the domain of UKS-like parts. The above gives us a simple and complete life support loop based on only Fertilizer, Mulch, and Water; with the Algae Farm there just to allow resource extraction to close the loop. 

Thoughts?

 

I agree with most of this.  What are your guesses on low/med/high efficiency recyclers? I would expect that Low would be 25-50%, Medium would be 60-70%, and High in the 90% range but requires Water.

My thoughts:

• MK1 Habitat
  • 9 Months hab time, no bonus
  • 50% recycler for 3 Kerbals
    • Going off RD's guidelines suggest 62%, I support nerfing it a bit for balance
• MK2 Habitat
  • 18 Months Hab time, no bonus
    • According to RD's guidelines, it would be 14 months.  I feel an additional month per crew capacity is justified due to the reasons I've mentioned earlier, and I'd also support increasing the weight of the module a bit to justify this extra time and the recycler
  • 70% Recycler for 4 Kerbals
• Greenhouse (Large)
  • Mulch+Fertilizer = Supplies converter, speed and ratio to match the Nom-O-Matic 25000 (Or a bit slower, as I find the stock N.O.M.s pretty OP)
  • 25% recycler for 5 crew
    • If I were king of the world I'd remove this completely, as I think having all three of these features in one part is still OP and recycling is more of a job for the Habitats
  • Hab Bonus of 1.5
• Greenhouse (Small)
  • Agree with you totally here.  Make it match the N.O.M. 5000, or even a little slower/less efficient
• Science Lab
  • I've never been a fan of using a science lab as a recycler from a gameplay standpoint, but I understand why RD implemented it to give a dedicated Recycler that didn't require additional parts.  I think your idea of balancing it by requiring a LOT of water is a good move.
• Central Hub
  • 37.5 Months Hab time, no bonus
  • 90%+ Recycler requiring 18 water/hr
• Algae Farm
  • Not sure this belongs in the mod for just USI-LS, due to reasons mentioned in my prior post. Being able to do a closed loop with such a small and light part strikes me as quite OP.  Especially if it can do both Hydrates > Water and Gypsum > Fertilizer.

 

3 hours ago, DStaal said:

A lot I should respond to, I'm going to start here:

On the MK-3 modules: While building in the Garage form factor makes sense, I'd like to float an alternate idea (grab whatever parts you want, if any): Have two normal form-factor parts - a 'factory mechanicals' and a 'factory workshop'.  The mechanicals would be a heavy and hot part that uses a lot of EC (and technically has the converter) - but doesn't have any crew capacity to give production.  The factory workshop gives crew capacity and workspace, but doesn't produce anything on it's own - it needs the mechanicals to do conversions.  So you have to ship up both, for the combined mass.  (And large overall size.)  I think making the mechanicals hot could balance against reducing the overall mass somewhat as well.  (Heat always being awkward to deal with, vs. mass only being an issue during transport or construction.)

It would also be a somewhat modular design: You can have different mechanicals that produce different things, and add them individually to a base as needed, or just add production as your population grows.

I concede the point that giving the large Greenhouse that much of a Hab multiplier would be quite OP.

And this is a really interesting idea as a way to handle Industrial production, as an idea I like it.  But it sounds like it would require significant code changes, in addition to modeling.  I'm not a developer but I can imagine getting a production system like that to integrate well with UKS would get messy very quickly.

[ibanix]

@tsaven: Take a look at  https://github.com/ibanix/UKS-KPBS_Compatibility/wiki/USI-LS-Compatibility-(Proposed)

 

[tsaven]

9 minutes ago, ibanix said:

@tsaven: Take a look at  https://github.com/ibanix/UKS-KPBS_Compatibility/wiki/USI-LS-Compatibility-(Proposed)

 

Sweet, looking at it now.  Doesn't seem to be a way for me to comment on it without changing things, but most of my thoughts are in line with my giant wall-o-text post above.

[Rafael acevedo]

9 hours ago, Nils277 said:

Wow, that is a lot of kerbals, and definetely also a lot of parts. I'd guess i would get 0.1 to 0.2 FPS max for this. Looks really impressive by the way!

 

Thanks, actually I get between 4 and 5 fps, my new one gets a steady 7 fps 

[DStaal]

I can't respond in depth until I get off work (and my cell), but a couple of notes:

I still see a mulch to fertilizer converter - that's a good way to run out of supplies accidentally. Let's not. Also,  I think the large Greenhouse is possibly overpowered. 

I don't think my idea on the two - part factories would require a code change: conceptually it's no different than a MK-V Smelter. 

[ibanix]

13 minutes ago, DStaal said:

I still see a mulch to fertilizer converter - that's a good way to run out of supplies accidentally. Let's not. Also,  I think the large Greenhouse is possibly overpowered. 

I don't think my idea on the two - part factories would require a code change: conceptually it's no different than a MK-V Smelter. 

Where are you seeing that? Do you mean the Algae Farm? The idea there is to have a fertilizer-production mechanic based on ore+mulch. I believe this is currently included as default in the official KBPS release. The only way to run out of supplies accidentally here would be if you ran both the Algae Farm and another Converter, and your output of Mulch was not enough to feed both at once. On the other hand, you could just as easily "accidentally" run out of fertilizer and then later out of supplies. Both are cases of users not paying attention. The option should stay.

 

In which way did you see the Greenhouse as overpowered?

 

[DStaal]

5 hours ago, ibanix said:

Where are you seeing that? Do you mean the Algae Farm? The idea there is to have a fertilizer-production mechanic based on ore+mulch. I believe this is currently included as default in the official KBPS release. The only way to run out of supplies accidentally here would be if you ran both the Algae Farm and another Converter, and your output of Mulch was not enough to feed both at once. On the other hand, you could just as easily "accidentally" run out of fertilizer and then later out of supplies. Both are cases of users not paying attention. The option should stay.

 

In which way did you see the Greenhouse as overpowered?

 

Sorry, yeah I do forget about the fact that the current Algae farm ore conversion uses mulch as well - the config reading of it makes the difference in consumption more apparent, so I don't think about it as much.  (And I wasn't looking over things very close - as I mentioned, I was on my phone in my car, as I don't work at a desk.)

For the greenhouse, the main reason I think it might be overpowered is that it's got the supply generation, the recycler (both of which are common on greenhouses) and habitation.  The last of which makes sense realistically - but it's an outlier in USI.  That said, running the numbers you've got about half the tonnage towards the recycler and half towards habitation, which should keep it balanced.  (Again, I didn't have the ability to do that on a quick look over.)

It might also be interesting to split the tonnage for the central hub between hab time and hab multiplier - it looks big and spacious enough for recreation facilities.    But really, the end result should be about the same if we keep things balanced.

Now, on all of this we've been focused on the habitation and supply mechanics of USI.  My patches are towards the wear and repair mechanics of USI-LS, (as well as adding in EL and OSE Workshop support) and we still probably want to deal with workSpace and livingSpace, which is a hidden mechanic in USI that influences productivity.

 For parts with crew capacity, wear is something we can pretty much ignore - RoverDude's patches in USI-LS will cover the basics.  (Unless we want to adjust.)  But parts like the small greenhouse or the algae farm should probably have wear as well.  The question is how many ReplacementParts they should have - RoverDude usually puts in 100 per seat and/or 500 per command chair, but there's really no guidance on parts without.  In general a part wears out (uses ReplacementParts) at a rate of 0.000001 (per second) - I believe that's at 100% efficiency.  (That is: Rated efficiency.  Usually parts in USI operate at *over* 100% efficiency, as the get boosts from other parts and engineers/scientists, etc.)  As it wears out (loses ReplacementParts) it's efficiency drops.

My thought reading over what I just wrote is to give them 100 ReplacementParts each, as well as the modules to enable wear.

Then of course we'd want a way to repair - that's not in USI-LS, but it is in UKS, IIRC.  My patches clone the airlocks as 'workbenches'; small workshops that allow an engineer to do automatic repairs.  The question is if we want other parts that do the same, or if we want to design better parts for that.  (Or even just a distinct texture...)  Note that these parts are fairly rare even in UKS - the only parts with the 'automatic repair' are the MK-V workshop and the orbital workshop.  Also, to do repairs you want Machinery (which an engineer can convert into ReplacementParts, IIRC) - so we'll need to work out storage and amounts there as well.  Again, under UKS some parts require a minimum level of Machinery to operate - if we're doing a full compatibility mod we'd probably want the Greenhouses, the Algae farm, and maybe the various recyclers to require that as well.

LivingSpaces and workSpaces are something I'll need to do some research on - I think you need them to get Kolonization bonuses, and they also affect efficiency and habitation, I believe.  But details elude me at the moment.  (I know I've seen some someplace.)

[ibanix]

To be honest, I'm clueless on wear, and will happily defer to you on that area.

Part of the reason I'm not so worried about the Greenhouse is the recycler is fairly low grade (35% is my suggestion). 

Isn't workspace and livingspace mainly used by UKS? Can we ignore that for USI-LS only installs? (Or set sane and simple defaults).

 

 

 

 

-

[tsaven]

2 hours ago, DStaal said:

For the greenhouse, the main reason I think it might be overpowered is that it's got the supply generation, the recycler (both of which are common on greenhouses) and habitation.  The last of which makes sense realistically - but it's an outlier in USI. 

It might also be interesting to split the tonnage for the central hub between hab time and hab multiplier - it looks big and spacious enough for recreation facilities.    But really, the end result should be about the same if we keep things balanced.

Under UKS some parts require a minimum level of Machinery to operate - if we're doing a full compatibility mod we'd probably want the Greenhouses, the Algae farm, and maybe the various recyclers to require that as well.

I mentioned it before, but I agree that with all three functions the Greenhouse is over powered.  I feel it would make the most sense to remove the Recycler completely, leaving just the Supply Converter and Hab Bonus. 

I don't think a Hab Multiplier makes sense for the Command Hub. If you check out the IVAs, there's a small lounge upstairs with a TV and some couches, but most of the area inside is taken up with bunks on the second floor and offices/science lab/command console on the first floor.  I don't see any more recreational space in there than I do for the Mk1 & 2 habitats, sticking with RD's guidelines seems to make the most sense.

Now I'll be the first to admit that I don't have as clear of an understanding of the nuts and bolts of this mod as you guys do, but I really think you're nerfing the Habitats unnecessarily.  I saw that while the Recyclers for them are now limited to the number of crew they service (Which makes sense), the Recycler percentages are far below what RD's guidance would suggest and to be honest, below what I feel makes sense.  Is there a reason for this?

With regards to Wear and Tear, I think there's a difference between which parts consume MaterialKits and which consume Machinery.  I think any of the Converter modules consume Machinery, while all Habitation modules consume MaterialKits. 

Edited June 16, 2016 by tsaven

[taniwha]

23 hours ago, Nils277 said:

On 15/06/2016 at 5:59 AM, LordOfMinecraft99 said:

Does this mod have parts to support Extraplanetary Launchpads? Thanks!

Not yet, but i'm currently working on it.

Just wanted to let you know there's documetation (.lyx file) in EL's github repository in the Documentation directory. It's very much WIP but the section for modders detailing the modules (model requirements, part requirements, and config fields) is fairly complete.

[Nils277]

9 minutes ago, taniwha said:

Just wanted to let you know there's documetation (.lyx file) in EL's github repository in the Documentation directory. It's very much WIP but the section for modders detailing the modules (model requirements, part requirements, and config fields) is fairly complete.

Ah, that will be very helpful. Thank you!

 

7 hours ago, DStaal said:

[SNIP]

It might also be interesting to split the tonnage for the central hub between hab time and hab multiplier - it looks big and spacious enough for recreation facilities.    But really, the end result should be about the same if we keep things balanced.

Now, on all of this we've been focused on the habitation and supply mechanics of USI.  My patches are towards the wear and repair mechanics of USI-LS, (as well as adding in EL and OSE Workshop support) and we still probably want to deal with workSpace and livingSpace, which is a hidden mechanic in USI that influences productivity.

Then of course we'd want a way to repair - that's not in USI-LS, but it is in UKS, IIRC.  My patches clone the airlocks as 'workbenches'; small workshops that allow an engineer to do automatic repairs.  The question is if we want other parts that do the same, or if we want to design better parts for that.  (Or even just a distinct texture...)  Note that these parts are fairly rare even in UKS - the only parts with the 'automatic repair' are the MK-V workshop and the orbital workshop.  Also, to do repairs you want Machinery (which an engineer can convert into ReplacementParts, IIRC) - so we'll need to work out storage and amounts there as well.  Again, under UKS some parts require a minimum level of Machinery to operate - if we're doing a full compatibility mod we'd probably want the Greenhouses, the Algae farm, and maybe the various recyclers to require that as well.

LivingSpaces and workSpaces are something I'll need to do some research on - I think you need them to get Kolonization bonuses, and they also affect efficiency and habitation, I believe.  But details elude me at the moment.  (I know I've seen some someplace.)

The next patches will include special parts for OSE Workshop and EL. They could be of course be modified too, to be compatible with UKS. Regarding workshops and similar stuff i would say, that these parts might fit in well there.

7 hours ago, ibanix said:

To be honest, I'm clueless on wear, and will happily defer to you on that area.

Part of the reason I'm not so worried about the Greenhouse is the recycler is fairly low grade (35% is my suggestion). 

Isn't workspace and livingspace mainly used by UKS? Can we ignore that for USI-LS only installs? (Or set sane and simple defaults).

Workspace and livingspace is only used by UKS. It is not present in USI-LS only installs.

 

[ibanix]

8 hours ago, tsaven said:

I mentioned it before, but I agree that with all three functions the Greenhouse is over powered.  I feel it would make the most sense to remove the Recycler completely, leaving just the Supply Converter and Hab Bonus. 

I don't think a Hab Multiplier makes sense for the Command Hub. If you check out the IVAs, there's a small lounge upstairs with a TV and some couches, but most of the area inside is taken up with bunks on the second floor and

Greenhouse: I would prefer to drop the Hab bonus. The greenhouse is a life-supporting module, in my mind; the Hab bonus is redundant. I know other people think of it as a "ooh, green stuff = happy people". In defense of the Greenhouse, the proposed Recycler is low-grade (35%) and the Hab bonus is intermediate (1.5). The Greenhouse is meant to greatly extend how long you can keep a base going. If it gets nerfed, we can reduce the recycler bonus and the hab bonuses. Does a recycler bonus of 30% and a hab bonus of 1.3 seem more reasonable?

 

I also don't think the Hab bonus makes any sense on the Command Hub: It already has the single largest amount of Kerbal-Months in parts. Hab bonuses are for modules that make life better for all the Kerbals on a base. Those would be the Cupola (shiny windows!), the Greenhouse (Kerbals love green things!), and the Science Lab (we can do science! and look at things through the telescope!). 

 

[ibanix]

Quote

Now I'll be the first to admit that I don't have as clear of an understanding of the nuts and bolts of this mod as you guys do, but I really think you're nerfing the Habitats unnecessarily.  I saw that while the Recyclers for them are now limited to the number of crew they service (Which makes sense), the Recycler percentages are far below what RD's guidance would suggest and to be honest, below what I feel makes sense.  Is there a reason for this?

I see it as for balance reasons. Remember that KBPS parts are not UKS parts, and that there needs to be clear distinctions between the KBPS modules. The more advanced modules are heavier, take more science to unlock, and have larger bonuses. Moving the recycler bonuses up on the Habitats makes me go "why do I need these other parts?". A Mk1 or Mk2 Habitat by itself shouldn't get very good recycling - you're running a base without a greenhouse, without a science lab, and without a water purifier.

The Mk1/Mk2 are mainly living spaces. In early bases, before the greenhouse is unlocked, you're going to have to ship in lots of Supplies to keep things going. I was pretty sure this was in-line with RoverDude's vision.

 

 

[Rafael acevedo]

Here is my base design mark 2 for my current game, hope you all like it 

Here is the life support stat for usi Ls for the base, below it are the stats for the other base in minmus that can be found a few post back. In case it helps you life support designers

Edited June 16, 2016 by Rafael acevedo

[DStaal]

9 hours ago, tsaven said:

I mentioned it before, but I agree that with all three functions the Greenhouse is over powered.  I feel it would make the most sense to remove the Recycler completely, leaving just the Supply Converter and Hab Bonus. 

I don't think a Hab Multiplier makes sense for the Command Hub. If you check out the IVAs, there's a small lounge upstairs with a TV and some couches, but most of the area inside is taken up with bunks on the second floor and offices/science lab/command console on the first floor.  I don't see any more recreational space in there than I do for the Mk1 & 2 habitats, sticking with RD's guidelines seems to make the most sense.

Now I'll be the first to admit that I don't have as clear of an understanding of the nuts and bolts of this mod as you guys do, but I really think you're nerfing the Habitats unnecessarily.  I saw that while the Recyclers for them are now limited to the number of crew they service (Which makes sense), the Recycler percentages are far below what RD's guidance would suggest and to be honest, below what I feel makes sense.  Is there a reason for this?

With regards to Wear and Tear, I think there's a difference between which parts consume MaterialKits and which consume Machinery.  I think any of the Converter modules consume Machinery, while all Habitation modules consume MaterialKits. 

As has been said: Having a hab bonus on a greenhouse is the unusual one.  I think as listed it's fine - but I wasn't sure until I ran the numbers.  If we were to remove either, remove the hab, not the recycler - but then the recycler needs a buff to re-balance.

The hab multiplier on the command hub was just an idea - and probably a bad one. 

On the recycler on the habitation parts - not equaling RoverDude's suggestions makes them underpowered in relation to the MK-V hab and the OKS Hab ring. (So, I agree with you not ibanix.)  I'm not sure why these parts would be worse on a per-Kerbal basis than those.  Remember that 'recycling' means more than just food: It can mean cleaning the CO2 out of the air, or filtering the water, or just being able to wash their clothes.  Now, if we increase the number of Kerbals it can recycle for than we can keep the percentage down - again, think of being able to run a laundry for a group of people - you'll reduce the amount of clothes you'll need to keep things sanitary, but it doesn't mean you can clean the air.  So, if the point is to keep the differentiation, allowing lower recycling on more Kerbals is better than just nerfing the part entirely and making the MK-V Hab a better choice.  You'll still need the supplies, though you can run larger bases.

On Wear and Tear: Yes, converters consume Machinery.  I was a bit off on the ReplacementParts path (I really should know better than to type up stuff I'm not fully up on at 2:30 am...): Everything's going to need replacement parts, but that's in the background; it's a hidden resource.  Engineers doing maintenance can convert MaterialKits to ReplacementParts.  (They also refill Machinery and Uranium if needed.)  That's a UKS mechanic, not a USI-LS one.  (Machinery can be created via SpecilizedParts in the MK-V workshop.)  I need to double-check all of this to be sure I've got it right, when I have a moment...  (Some of this I 'know', in that I've read it, but then unless I'm having someone point something out I'll think about it wrong.)

Ok, I think I'm caught up...  If I have some time today I'll be reading RoverDude's notes on wear and on Kolaniazition bonuses.  (BTW: Yes, livingSpace and workSpace are UKS only, not USI-LS.)

[ibanix]

Ok, if you both think the recyclers are underpowered, what are the suggested values?

Note, these are the values for the UKS modules:

Module	Recycle %	Crew #	Water?	Tech Needed
Science Lab (stock)	70%	5
MK-V Scout Module	25%	2		Short Term Hab
MK-V Ag Module	25%	2		Short Term Hab
MK-V Hab Module	25%	2		Short Term Hab
OKS Hab Ring	25%	5		Long Term Hab
OKS Ag Module	25%	5		Long Term Hab
MKS/OKS Aeroponics	50%	5		Long Term Hab
MKS Pioneer Module	75%	5		Long Term Hab
Kerbitat Module	90%	5	yes	Long Term Hab
KPBS Mk1 Hab (Proposed)	30%	3		Short Term Hab
KPBS Mk2 Hab (Proposed)	50%	4		Long Term Hab

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On a strict numbers basis, the proposed Mk1 is slightly better than any of the MK-V modules, at the same tech level. The Mk2 is equal to the MKS/OKS Aeroponics module with support for one less Kerbal. It's better than the OKS Hab or the OKS Ag module.

So I still don't understand the "under-powered" comments.

 

Edited June 16, 2016 by ibanix

[DStaal]

		clearing bad table I can't remove...

[DStaal]

RoverDude's suggestions are based on the mass of the part - many of his current parts are inflatable, and therefore very light.  These parts are heavier, as solid pieces.  If you run the numbers, you'll see you get a lot less recycling per mass unit with these suggestions than you do with UKS parts.  That's what makes them underpowered - you can get more total recycling for less mass with other parts.  (Though it gets distributed differently.)

By mass, at the crew capacity of 3, the MK1 hab should be able to support a 60% recycler by RoverDude's guidelines.  My suggestion is to keep the numbers a bit lower, so we increase the crew it supports.  (Offsetting the mass in RoverDude's guidelines.)

That gives us:

• MK1 habitat: 35-40% recycler at 5 crew capacity. (Exact guidelines would be 37%, but anywhere in that range would be 'close enough'.)
• MK2 Habitat: 50% recycler at 5-6 crew.  (It's closer - I'd suggest 6 crew capacity, to be more inline with the idea of 'LS recycler for space+2' theme.)

[ibanix]

Ok then,

Mk1: 35% at 5 crew

Mk2: 50% at 6 crew

Anyone against this?

Also, based on the other numbers, the crew effected for the recycler on the Central Hub increases from 8 to 10. I'd also like to increase the Greenhouse recycler to 35% for 8 crew. That would be less efficient than the guidlines (which would be 47)%, but the Greenhouse also has the converter.

 

Revised proposed #s are here: https://github.com/ibanix/UKS-KPBS_Compatibility/wiki/USI-LS-Compatibility-(Proposed)