Jump to content

[1.12.x] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)


RoverDude

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, RoverDude said:

I'm working to sort how to remove CC as a hard dependency, though part of this is handling it on the CKAN side (I can handle it easily enough on the MKS side).

 

Please do, the current situation makes MKS uninstallable if IFS is needed for other mods (at least 5 I have installed), and you don't want a complete shambles of multiple tank switchers. Better yet, drop the hard dependency on GroundConstruction/ATUtils altogether.
While I like the idea of off-world construction, these extra hard dependencies = PITA for users. What was wrong with (optional) EL support anyway?

Edited by steve_v
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, steve_v said:

Please do, the current situation makes MKS uninstallable if IFS is needed for other mods (at least 5 I have installed), and you don't want a complete shambles of multiple tank switchers. Better yet, drop the hard dependency on GroundConstruction/ATUtils altogether.
While I like the idea of off-world construction, these extra hard dependencies = PITA for users. What was wrong with (optional) EL support anyway?

The hard dependency on GC is not being dropped.  Period.  Said it like... at least four or five times so far.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wary of ConfigurableContainers as well, having tried it out once before.  It's powerful, but cumbersome to use, and it doesn't play well with other fuel switchers, as noted by @PolecatEZ — to the extent of causing breakage that remains even if you remove CC.  I'm interested in GC, but I don't want CC in my game.

(For now, I'll be using @PolecatEZ's trick of removing both the ConfigurableContainers folder and the corresponding DLL.)

Edited by Wyzard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Wyzard said:

I'm wary of ConfigurableContainers as well, having tried it out once before.  It's powerful, but cumbersome to use, and it doesn't play well with other fuel switchers, as noted by @PolecatEZ — to the extent of causing breakage that remains even if you remove CC.  I'm interested in GC, but I don't want CC in my game.

(For now, I'll be using @PolecatEZ's trick of removing both the ConfigurableContainers folder and the corresponding DLL.)

just giving my 2 cents: for me it works out with CC (in combination with having @allista's Hangars I do have a better version of ART) and having certain mods making use of IFS (without having it installed explictly)

regardless there should not be any conflict tho.

regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LatiMacciato said:

regardless there should not be any conflict tho.

I just did a test and here's what I observed:

  • Started a new sandbox game in a clean install, no mods.
  • Installed Nertea's Cryogenic Engines, which bundles B9PartSwitch and patches the stock fuel tanks to be able to hold LH2.
  • In the VAB, configured a stock FL-T200 fuel tank to hold LH2+O instead of LF+O, and placed it on the launchpad with a probe core on top.
  • Quit the game and installed ConfigurableContainers.
  • Went back to the fuel tank on the launchpad.  It now had an empty resource bar for LiquidFuel, in addition to the full ones for LqdHydrogen and Oxidizer.
  • Opened CC's "edit tanks" window.  It only showed capacity for LiquidFuel and Oxidizer, no LqdHydrogen, despite the tank's right-click menu showing LqdHydrogen actually in it.
  • Quit the game and deleted ConfigurableContainers.
  • Went back to the fuel tank on the launchpad.  Now it had only the LiquidFuel and Oxidizer resource bars — the LqdHydrogen had vanished.

Bottom line: CC has its own built-in idea of what resource types a tank holds by default, and it does weird things if some other fuel switcher has already changed what a particular tank holds.  I don't want it doing those weird things in my career save, where I have vessels in space that've been configured with other fuel switchers.

(This in-depth stuff about CC issues is getting off-topic for the MKS thread, though, so I'm not going to post about it anymore.  Just wanted to have a clear and reproducible example of a conflict, since I don't think one had been posted yet.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since CC is a bundle of GC which is actually bundled by MKS it is a MKS-and-GC-and-CC-issue-thing (still unsure about the right thread tho :P).
I can see what you mean .. I just didn't experience such things happening .. using NF mods aswell.

EDIT: CC has an option for LH2O tanks .. try reconfiguring them again in the CC menu (hope that helps)

nvm me, I just re-read your post. this CC issue you might want to bring out at the CC thread tho.

maybe that's why I decided to re-start my career game (to have fun with rather more flexible tanks with CC than with the IFS ones from b9). There is defenetly an incompatiblity.

Edited by LatiMacciato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wyzard said:

I just did a test and here's what I observed:

  • Started a new sandbox game in a clean install, no mods.
  • Installed Nertea's Cryogenic Engines, which bundles B9PartSwitch and patches the stock fuel tanks to be able to hold LH2.
  • In the VAB, configured a stock FL-T200 fuel tank to hold LH2+O instead of LF+O, and placed it on the launchpad with a probe core on top.
  • Quit the game and installed ConfigurableContainers.
  • Went back to the fuel tank on the launchpad.  It now had an empty resource bar for LiquidFuel, in addition to the full ones for LqdHydrogen and Oxidizer.
  • Opened CC's "edit tanks" window.  It only showed capacity for LiquidFuel and Oxidizer, no LqdHydrogen, despite the tank's right-click menu showing LqdHydrogen actually in it.
  • Quit the game and deleted ConfigurableContainers.
  • Went back to the fuel tank on the launchpad.  Now it had only the LiquidFuel and Oxidizer resource bars — the LqdHydrogen had vanished.

Bottom line: CC has its own built-in idea of what resource types a tank holds by default, and it does weird things if some other fuel switcher has already changed what a particular tank holds.  I don't want it doing those weird things in my career save, where I have vessels in space that've been configured with other fuel switchers.

(This in-depth stuff about CC issues is getting off-topic for the MKS thread, though, so I'm not going to post about it anymore.  Just wanted to have a clear and reproducible example of a conflict, since I don't think one had been posted yet.)

Many thanks for this!

I don't know if it may be solved though; I check for IFS and B9 and other switches before patching tanks with CC, but there's not enough flexibility in MM to order the patches: most of them do the work in FINAL stage which is unordered.

But I will definitely try to resolve this mess.

4 hours ago, Wyzard said:

I'm wary of ConfigurableContainers as well, having tried it out once before.  It's powerful, but cumbersome to use, and it doesn't play well with other fuel switchers, as noted by @PolecatEZ — to the extent of causing breakage that remains even if you remove CC.  I'm interested in GC, but I don't want CC in my game.

(For now, I'll be using @PolecatEZ's trick of removing both the ConfigurableContainers folder and the corresponding DLL.)

@PolecatEZ

No need to remove ConfigurableContainers folder and dll.

All you need is to remove ConfigurableContainers/Parts folder. All the rest does not touch any parts in game, but is required for GC to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, James3838 said:

Is there a known issue with KIS items disappearing if kerbal enters or transfers to emergency shelter?  Looks like there is no inventory slot and items disappear.

Yes, this is a known issue. Every time you put your Kerbal in an inflatable part with crew space, your KIS items go poof.

I think that's because KIS adds storage only to those parts that have Crew capacity, but the inflatables don't have any capacity by default. Not sure what the real technical solution is, but we should probably create a GitHub Issue for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really love your mods!!

However, I'm still seeing NullReferenceErrors in v0.50.16 related to the Field Repair:

[EXC 21:10:43.451] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
    USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.PushResources (System.String resourceName)
    USITools.USI_ModuleFieldRepair.FinalizeMaintenance (System.String msg)
    USITools.Logistics.ModuleAutoRepairer.FixedUpdate ()

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did a couple of quick checks:

No inflatable parts have workshop functionality, even when inflated(old vessel, but the same vessel had workshop functionality on other parts)

Tundra assembly plant is only 50% workshop functionality.

 

I would expect the Ranger workshop and Tundra assembly plant to be around 100% as they are already workshops (although it may need to be a different configuration than making material kits or machinery, I did not check to see if that was an option).

The smallest 50% workshop I found was the tundra hub, so I will probably throw a couple of those on either my crew transport or the cargo hauler carrying the packaged base.(unless my final base package needs more than ~600 skill hours, at that point it makes sense to send up a ~250skh workshop rover kit as well)

Question: why is the 'short' version 10x the weight of the one with end-caps?(according to the wiki)

 

I was kind of hoping I could use an inflatable workshop as my initial assembly facility(even if it was at 50%), might even design a base with a missing workshop so that I can then transfer it over after the base is built.

(currently I am debating the utility of adding a nuclear fuel refinery to make the base truly self-sustaining.  It is already long enough I need to move it back and forth in the VAB to get at the ends though...  Much bigger than anything I would consider launching from Kerbin.)

 

Note: due to other mods, I removed several entries form ConfigurableContainers\Parts\Squat_patch.cfg, although just removing the whole directory would be easier now that I know that is an option.

I notice that there is already a configurable containers core mod, could GC switch to be dependent on that instead of the full mod?  Seems like that should address most of the concerns without limiting those who like CC.

 

edit: Ninja'd

Edited by Terwin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

@Fury1SOG - will take a peek.  Thought I caught all of these, probably missed a few.

@RoverDude, I put in a Github issue yesterday. It's similar to the perform maintenance issue I was having with the Duna PDU.  Also, I get the NRE when the workshop tries to do auto maintenance.  It will only do one part and stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kobymaru said:

Yes, this is a known issue. Every time you put your Kerbal in an inflatable part with crew space, your KIS items go poof.

I think that's because KIS adds storage only to those parts that have Crew capacity, but the inflatables don't have any capacity by default. Not sure what the real technical solution is, but we should probably create a GitHub Issue for this.

There isn't really a "solution" other than to just not use this type of KIS storage.  It has been talked about in the KIS thread that the seat storage may go bye bye as it is a mess for reasons just like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, goldenpsp said:

 It has been talked about in the KIS thread that the seat storage may go bye bye as it is a mess for reasons just like this.

Do you mean "seat storage" as an implementation detail? If yes, then I don't care. However, I think there should definitely be some sort of small "personal" storage for Kerbals, and it should obviously not be emptied when entering a craft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kobymaru said:

Do you mean "seat storage" as an implementation detail? If yes, then I don't care. However, I think there should definitely be some sort of small "personal" storage for Kerbals, and it should obviously not be emptied when entering a craft.

I am saying that your initial thought is correct.  Seat inventory is only present if the part has crewed capacity.  In addition it only works to add things in the VAB if a kerbal is present in that seat (as it is not actual storage on the craft).  Due to these constraints the whole seat inventory has been a support issue and the current maintainer of KIS has talked about a desire to change how it works.

Until that happens the best advice is to put away your tools before entering any vessel to ensure you don't accidentally lose them.

You could open a github issue, but given that @RoverDude actually removed seats from deflated parts at one point I doubt he has a desire to add them back.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so I feel rather stupid asking this, but is there any reason I can't find any containers or tanks that hold specialized parts? I have several of the USI mods (MKS, Konstruction, FTT, Malemute, EXP, SUR, ART, SUB, USICore, CCK, CRP) , alongside EPL and some others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RoverDude I have searched this thread for this problem and haven't seen anyone else with it.  

I recently started making some adjustments to my moonbase, but now I can't switch the drills to a different type? So I started doing some testing and I can no longer change anything that you can switch modes while on EVA for drills, smelt-o-matics or the tundra modules or the inflatable modules.  It appears there are no exceptions thrown, it just fails silently.  Repaint on the ISM works. The parts work as they are configured, but cannot be changed from EVA.

In this screenshot, the "B1 Refined Exotics => Polymers" button does nothing.  It does work in the VAB, which is how I switched it from the default. The Next Bay buttons do work and cycle the choice correctly, but I can't actually change it.

Here is a link to my KSP log of the game I took this screenshot in:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0STyNDHlUuyUVhXVk1jTE54bHc

97klKLp.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

General question for users of MKS: How long, in-game, does it normally take you to build a colony self-sufficient in Machinery?  On average?

I'm asking because I'm working on the KPBS integration pack, and one idea being thrown around a bit would be to basically have the KPBS parts be lighter to get into place - but require more machinery over time.  So the idea would be that they would be mass-balanced (or even mass-negative) by the time the colony gets to be self-sufficient, by the fact that you need more supply runs.

(Not sure how well this idea would work in practice - at the moment it's just an idea, but I wanted to get some numbers so that I could build simulations.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem IMO is that machinery draw is actually really light when compared to how long a base actually sticks around (I don't know how many folks have 100+ year saves).  Or to put it another way, the machinery is less a wear constraint and more a mass constraint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DStaal said:

General question for users of MKS: How long, in-game, does it normally take you to build a colony self-sufficient in Machinery?  On average?

I'm asking because I'm working on the KPBS integration pack, and one idea being thrown around a bit would be to basically have the KPBS parts be lighter to get into place - but require more machinery over time.  So the idea would be that they would be mass-balanced (or even mass-negative) by the time the colony gets to be self-sufficient, by the fact that you need more supply runs.

(Not sure how well this idea would work in practice - at the moment it's just an idea, but I wanted to get some numbers so that I could build simulations.)

 

3 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

The problem IMO is that machinery draw is actually really light when compared to how long a base actually sticks around (I don't know how many folks have 100+ year saves).  Or to put it another way, the machinery is less a wear constraint and more a mass constraint.

This.

I got mine done in about 3 months, but most of that was figuring stuff out and creating separate bases.  The M in MKS makes things cool, in that you can land pieces that don't have to be attached and build progressively. Also, chances are you landed a crate of Machinery nearby already, so you have a stash available until you get self sufficient.

In KPBS, it's a different scenario.  Things need to be attached, so you need to be more careful on how you grow.  Also, the capacities of each bay in MKS manufacturing fit together in a certain way, and that will be different in KPBS, so it's unclear how much hardware you will need to get it done.

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...