RoverDude

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

Recommended Posts

I'm sure this has been asked before (but no way am I reading through 259 pages), but how is compatibility with Interstellar Extended? It's not listed on the wiki in the mod compatibility page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Puckpuck said:

multiple small, specialised bases spread out

I do the multiple specialised bases too and it does prevent the unplayable result. My first "farm" base however tends towards becoming the Head Quarters base and it needs lots of containers to allow interaction with planetary and orbital logistics going on between the spread out bases.  There are other things I can do such as not leave the crew lander and the Malemute rover always parked beside the base.

This really becomes an issue late in the tech tree (career). I am considering making a patch on some big and heavy container and giving it a small to moderate capacity for nearly every resource type with the usual MKS logistics modules. A late game "warehouse" part if you like. That way I could reduce the part count by disassembling all the small early kolonization stage containers and replace them with just one big unwieldy all-purpose warehouse. I expect I will do it soon as it doesn't feel cheaty to my way of interpreting the MKS kolony development abstractions. Others may freely disagree but they may also have 32 Gb RAM :)

ps. Actually thinking about what I just said... I am confusing the physics engine speed with amount of RAM and they are different things of course.

Reading about PhysX3 in Unity 5 suggests we may get a 2x improvement in physics engine speed due to improved multi-threading in KSP 1.4. I can dig that!

Edited by Kaa253

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Kaa253 said:

I expect I will do it soon as it doesn't feel cheaty to my way of interpreting the MKS kolony development abstractions.

Why would it be cheaty? I have to bring/build a giant "barn" with logisticks functionality.... and this needs many efforts to do this... like build a SPH big module out there... late phase warehouse with machinery wear as it will be a mostly automated beast ...

And if the volumes are more in 3,5m range and the masses correspond with the containers and a Tundra Logistic Module, it wouln'd be overpowered?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Kaa253 said:

.....am considering making a patch on some big and heavy container and giving it a small to.... 

There is/was a part welder mod that I used to use to reduce part count on big ships by fusing various structural parts/lights  or identical fuel tank parts together that used to work quite well. Not if the mod has been maintained though as haven't used it for a while, was a life saver on my older computer! Also was good for making tug modules with structural, tanks and rcs all combined into one part. 

Share this post


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

However since getting the hang of how planetry logistics work and utilising colony supplies (which I'd pretty much ignored before) I now tend to have multiple small, specialised bases spread out. Seems to be working quite well so far! Transport between the bases for maintenance/repair can be a bit annoying and time consuming but I think that's more down to my lack of ability at building good, efficient transports! 

May I suggest a solution?  Build a rover, and let it drive:

 

Share this post


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

May I suggest a solution?  Build a rover, and let it drive:

 

Ohhhh interesting! Will definitely give this a try! I tried using the mechjeb rover autopilot for long drives before but it usually ended up in tipping over/explosions... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Puckpuck @Urses @voicey99 and anyone else who cares...

Don't get too attached to how Orbital Logistics works in the pre-release. It was marked pre-release for a reason. :wink: We have already talked about making some potentially save-breaking changes to it. So if you want to help us play test it and help us find bugs like resources not being transferred, etc., that is certainly encouraged and benefits us all. But please, please don't dump hundreds of hours into a save that is dependent on any pre-release feature we put out. They are subject to change and I can tell you for sure that Orbital Logistics is going to undergo some changes before final release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DoktorKrogg. I generally stop updating the odd mod here and there when I have a reasonably stable mod mix unless I know that a particular update is a really worthwhile bug fix. I do have KSP-AVC installed and it says I currently have 4 mods that are a little behind on minor versions. I am not going to touch them. In my experience you have an even chance to pick up a nasty bug. I even hold off on mods offering significant feature improvements. I play through a career until I reach Eeloo / Plock and the Alcubierre Drive or else a major KSP upgrade drops; whichever comes first. I don't expect I will change or update any mods now until 1.4 and Making History and that will be an occasion to start a brand new career. If I am updating and changing mod sets it always means I am starting a new career.

As far as I am concerned you can save-break now or at any time in the future - as much as you like!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kaa253 said:

As far as I am concerned you can save-break now or at any time in the future - as much as you like!

I don't think it will ever be our intention to break saves if we can avoid it but in the case of pre-releases in particular, we can't promise that there will be an upgrade path from the pre-release version to the final version without running into a problem or three.

I commend your discipline in being able to resist clicking those download buttons in KSP-AVC as soon as they appear. I cannot.  :D

Share this post


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

I commend your discipline in being able to resist clicking those download buttons in KSP-AVC as soon as they appear. I cannot.  :D

Wait, KSP AVC is a mod manager?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Puckpuck said:

There is/was a part welder mod that I used to use to reduce part count on big ships by fusing various structural parts/lights  or identical fuel tank parts together that used to work quite well. Not if the mod has been maintained though as haven't used it for a while, was a life saver on my older computer! Also was good for making tug modules with structural, tanks and rcs all combined into one part. 

UbioZur Welding still exists -- with the caveat that it only really saves on part count, not FPS these days.

For my MKS (well, mostly USI-LS) needs and other needs, I will frequently take one of the stock Kerbodyne tanks and create a MM patch that clones the part to remove some of the LF/Ox and replace it with storage capacity for this or that (supplies, reaction wheels, batteries, mono-prop tanks, fertilizer/mulch storage, AR202 module, etc.).   The MM patch advantage is that it's modular and actually reduces the number of textures / polygons / etc. being drawn on the screen and simulated in physics.

Or I'll weld 2-3 stock parts together, then swap out the innards completely to give me what I need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, voicey99 said:

Wait, KSP AVC is a mod manager?

KSP is an "Add-on Version Checker - Issue Monitor" and it is absolutely fabulous. You may have seen miniAVC which is included in many mods. The full KSP-AVC is much better. It would be great if every mod supported AVC. At present it appears that almost all do. I install all mods manually (i.e. no CKAN) and with KSP-AVC watching my back I rarely have any mod setup difficulties. It will notify you at every KSP startup of any mod updates and provide an action button pointing to the update's download and the mod's change log as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kaa253 said:

KSP is an "Add-on Version Checker - Issue Monitor" and it is absolutely fabulous. You may have seen miniAVC which is included in many mods. The full KSP-AVC is much better. It would be great if every mod supported AVC. At present it appears that almost all do. I install all mods manually (i.e. no CKAN) and with KSP-AVC watching my back I rarely have any mod setup difficulties. It will notify you at every KSP startup of any mod updates and provide an action button pointing to the update's download and the mod's change log as well.

I've heard of AVC and what it does, didn't know if offered download links. That may be useful, but MiniAVC was a colossal PITA since it would pop up and screech about outdated mods when they might have been from 1.3.0 instead of 1.3.1, or a 1.2 mod that still worked for 1.3. It got so annoying I installed ZeroMiniAVC to get rid of it.

Edited by voicey99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I periodically go to my mod folder and do a file search on MiniAVC.dll and delete all results.

I understand why single mods have it, but the full version checking mod is so much better...

This mod desperately needs a walkthrough because u can't just botch it together like you can with basic rocketry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2018 at 7:26 PM, Kaa253 said:

I install all mods manually (i.e. no CKAN)

Ditto. Never been a fan of CKAN. KSP-AVC ftw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2018 at 4:35 AM, Kaa253 said:

This really becomes an issue late in the tech tree (career). I am considering making a patch on some big and heavy container and giving it a small to moderate capacity for nearly every resource type with the usual MKS logistics modules. A late game "warehouse" part if you like. That way I could reduce the part count by disassembling all the small early kolonization stage containers and replace them with just one big unwieldy all-purpose warehouse. I expect I will do it soon as it doesn't feel cheaty to my way of interpreting the MKS kolony development abstractions. Others may freely disagree but they may also have 32 Gb RAM :)

Actually this reminded me of a thought I had recently (not sure if anyone came up with this first, not claiming credit if so), but putting it out there for the powers that be:

Perhaps alter(ed?) Kontainer parts that were treated similar to how MKS handle bays in some Tundra modules and the drills.  So a 2.5m Kontainer might have say 4 bays, each of which roughly equivalent to a single 1.25m Kontainer.  The idea being you cycle through what's stored in that bay to mix and match what gets stored in it on the fly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

I'm not sure that's the right topic, sorry if it isn't.

 

I tried today my first attempt of an Akita rover, but it is stuck on the ground. The wheels are turning, but the whole rover won't bulge. Here a screen :

a987e2decec449b5f73d45c7c7e3ec45.md.png

 

I tried with a more simpler design (just the Akita core, caged cockpit, flatbed and wheels), same thing. If I swap the wheels with the ones of the Rat Pack rover, it works, but the Akita ones are more adaptated for this design.

 

Is there a way out of this ?

 

Thanks :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cassin, the wheels can be tricky; make sure they're not on upside down. I experienced the same thing once.

Try your model on Kerbin and see if it works there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cassin, make sure the wheels are facing in the right direction.  There is an entry for the Akita rover in the in-game KSPedia that will show you which way the wheels should face.  If I'm recalling things correctly(which I may not be) that front left wheel in your screenshot is backwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is on Kerbin, I tried on the runway, sorry for the dark picture :wink:

 

So, yes indeed my left wheels where backward, I didn't notice that. But I can't see the sense of turning them the other way, whatever rotation I try, they're still in that direction (and symetry don't work, radial or mirrored, I don't know why) :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if they are upside down, they are flat out not going to work because of how wheel colliders work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because you are using radial symmetry, not mirror.  

You are over complicating things :wink:  Your wheel is upside down.  reverse the direction, use ALT-click to copy.  Flip for the other side.  Done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My god I'm so dumb... I looked at the marking on the tyres for reference and didn't notice the axles where horizontaly... ... ...

 

So, it works ! Thanks :wink:

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.