[WIP] A noob's attempt at Maintaining and Rebalancing Civilian Populations

[GGumby]

6 minutes ago, DStaal said:

Nah, I think you have that right.  I tend not to do that, for a couple of reasons.  One, they don't fit with my normal base parts (UKS and Planetary Base Systems); two, leaving construction equipment around my base slows down my computer.  My construction setups tend to be mobile, so I can move them when I'm done building a base.  Three, it doesn't really solve the CLS issue - to move around I have to EVA my Kerbals.  (Which is easier on the ground, but still more awkward than an internal transfer.)  Four, I can get higher productivity per part count in other ways - and even on ground bases that's important.

Where I tend to use it is in my first orbital build station - I only have a couple of usable engineers at that point, so they need all the help they can get.  Past that, I tend to go with other parts, even as is.  As I said - my inclination to balance it would be to add EC use - it's an automated factory by description, so all of that has to run off of something.  Then you have to worry about how to power it, instead of how to staff it.  Which is a different challenge, but not necessarily an easier one.

Sounds like a good Idea, but i would also need to implement an interstellar config to make it run off of MW power when the mod is detected. My reasoning for that is because using some of the generators you can generate obscene amounts of EC. I guess i can make it take up like 90% of the load of the large reactor. i need to figure out how i would go about revising the code from regolith to stock. Probably somewhere in the api i can take a looksie at that.

Edited May 20, 2016 by GGumby

[GGumby]

Any Feedback i can get in terms of balancing is invaluable so keep it coming my way!

[DStaal]

I think 90% of a reactor is probably overdoing it - you can only get 15 productivity out of the part, after all.  Yes, it's a lot per Kerbal, but one Workshop can get you 50 productivity, fully staffed.  (Average Kerbals in both - well experienced badasses can do a bit better, but that still only brings you to 30 at max, vs 100 max in the Workshop.)  So if you want to get really high productivity from this you'd need a few.  A full Gigantor of EC should be enough, in my opinion.  Remember, if you're powering it by solar you'll need batteries as well - for when you're not in the sun.  (And if they've got nuclear reactors, that's a lot of extra weight and is a late-game part anyway.  Let them run it at that point.)  Another thought - for career - is the price point to buy it.  I'd expect the construction vehicle to be expensive for it's mass.  (I didn't think of it earlier because I've been playing science mode, where price isn't a concern.)

[SpaceMouse]

7 hours ago, GGumby said:

The problem isn't parts, its mostly script, i have actually yet to clarify  ?Biospheres dont properly facilitate their alleged capacity?

But i defenately want to look into what you got, im thinking about adding a couple of buildings alot later on down the road to increase the need for more buildings!

my main concern is that it might conflict with the current art style.

It would definitely conflict with the current art style, most of my parts are either stock like or heavily inspired by.

[GGumby]

22 minutes ago, DStaal said:

I think 90% of a reactor is probably overdoing it - you can only get 15 productivity out of the part, after all.  Yes, it's a lot per Kerbal, but one Workshop can get you 50 productivity, fully staffed.  (Average Kerbals in both - well experienced badasses can do a bit better, but that still only brings you to 30 at max, vs 100 max in the Workshop.)  So if you want to get really high productivity from this you'd need a few.  A full Gigantor of EC should be enough, in my opinion.  Remember, if you're powering it by solar you'll need batteries as well - for when you're not in the sun.  (And if they've got nuclear reactors, that's a lot of extra weight and is a late-game part anyway.  Let them run it at that point.)  Another thought - for career - is the price point to buy it.  I'd expect the construction vehicle to be expensive for it's mass.  (I didn't think of it earlier because I've been playing science mode, where price isn't a concern.)

Im warming up to this idea more as i understand more and more of  the context of the situation.

maybe like a few gigantors like 2-4

Edited May 20, 2016 by GGumby

[BetaguyGZT]

Looks like you're in good hands.  I'll leave ya to it.

[DStaal]

2 hours ago, GGumby said:

Im warming up to this idea more as i understand more and more of  the context of the situation.

maybe like a few gigantors like 2-4

(And note there are no nukes in base game - the gigantor is the best you can do.  Oh, and remember that there's probably *other* EC demands on that ship as well - lights, SAS, command, maybe even life support.)

I think you're starting to get to the progression I had with this part: 'Oh, man, that's overpowered!'  'Huh.  Not as overpowered as it looks.'  I haven't quite gotten to 'It's a useless part', but it definitely has disadvantages.  It's clunky to use, it's hard to get in and out of (even the EVA hatch is placed oddly), it doesn't provide the astronomical amounts of production first glance makes you think it does... 

For the amount of ship it takes up, it doesn't actually provide as much production as you'd think.  It's still a good part - but if you have the Kerbals to exploit it, you can build other ships that are easier to work with that'll get you high production levels fairly easily.  (And this mod will get you the Kerbals.)  And, in the end all any of these save you is building time - If you've got a Workshop or the equivalent full of low-stupidity engineers your chokepoint is likely to be getting them building materials fast enough, not production.  As I've said: After a few iterations of building bases around the Kerbin and Mun, I tend to use it as just a low-level building kickstarter.  Get the infrastructure started, but then use other parts.  That high production bonus is nice (and I'd hate to do without out in my early spacedock, when I'm still Kerbal-constrained), but it's not everything.

[cashome]

On 20/05/2016 at 2:28 AM, GGumby said:

 i need to figure out how i would go about revising the code from regolith to stock.

the stuff tagged as #regolith can be removed compleatly by changing CivilianPopulationRegulator and MovieTheather to extend ModuleResourceConverter instead of BaseConverter and modifying the recipies in the various config files to match the format used in University.cfg

[EleSigma]

On 5/20/2016 at 9:42 PM, GGumby said:

Any Feedback i can get in terms of balancing is invaluable so keep it coming my way!

I played this mod on career mode using CTT and think it would make more sense if the parts for this mod started out in "Long Term Habitation" and filled the "Colonization" and "Advanced Colonization" category. The lower habitation tech categories are filled with MKS and Kerbal Planetary Base System parts, while the Colonization and Advanced Colonization categories are relatively bare. Plus it would make more sense as the purpose of this mod is the populating of other-worlds, and not just simple outpost and base building.

[Wetapunga]

Great to see this is alive again

 

I would love to see eventual remaking of the models. The plugin side works quite well, the models are a bit sad through.

[Deimos Rast]

On 5/28/2016 at 2:05 AM, Wetapunga said:

Great to see this is alive again

 

I would love to see eventual remaking of the models. The plugin side works quite well, the models are a bit sad through.

I kind of agree, but we're going to have to be more specific than that. I would say the "models" are fine, it's the textures that need a pass. Specifically, the landing legs, at the very least (last I checked). Large, single blocks of color have a tendency to stick out sorely.

Keep in mind though that, while I don't know the extent of GGumby's talents, so far he has confined himself largely to the plugin aspect. He may be a whiz with a brush for all I know, but if not, no shame in trying to bring on an extra set of hands (although I understand texture artists are in demand around here).

Either way, visually, things aren't that bad. The point is things are getting attention and getting improved, and we should all be thankful to GGumby for that.

Cheers.

[Tralfagar]

On 5/18/2016 at 5:08 PM, GGumby said:

Forcefully make kerbals grow over a period of time to facilitate population growth from low populations.(use "realistic" population growth functions, be it as simple as an exponential or a complex algorithm)(Recommendations welcome!)

 

Personally, I'm using a Logistic function for the growth rate.  It is simple to implement and gives at minimum two "valves" to control as well as encouraging large bases:  The maximum rate at half population/exponential windup (function of both r and K, below) and carrying capacity (maximum number of civilians, K).

rate = dN/dt = rN*(1-N/K)

N -> current (civilian) population

r -> maximum rate variable

K -> Maximum capacity variable 

In C#, it looks like this:

    double calculateGrowthRate (double maximumSeats, double maximumSteepness, double currentPopulation)
    {
      double populationGrowthRate = 0;
      populationGrowthRate = maximumSteepness * currentPopulation * (1 - (currentPopulation / maximumSeats));
      return populationGrowthRate;
    }

From there, multiply the returned value by change in time and update the population resource.