Eaten by Black Hole

Life supports

Basic Question About Life Supports  

56 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you play KSP with Life Support mods?

    • Yes.I love planning my missions correctly.
      28
    • Not really.
      28


Recommended Posts

Nice biased poll you got going there, implying that people who dont use life support mods are somehow playing the game incorrectly.

There is no right or wrong way to play KSP. We can play it however we want. That's why they let us mod, or not mod, to our hearts content.

Edited by ZL647
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the poll is a bit off-putting by implying that people who disagree with you are somehow "wrong".  Also, I think there needs to be a third option.  I think an appropriate set of voting options would look like,

  • Yes, always
  • No, never
  • Sometimes (please explain)

For myself, I'm in the "sometimes" category.  Most careers I don't happen to use it.  Once in a while, though, I do, just for variety.  I'm not "religious" about it one way or the other-- it's a gameplay element that sometimes I like and sometimes I don't.

Anyway, I haven't voted in the poll because there's currently no option that covers my usage of life support.  ;)

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

I used to leave LKO...

Right now waiting on USII to finish their re-balance so I can rebuild my LS calc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree the poll should be worded differently. I've been using USI as well and think its great, but no knock to anyone who doesn't. Its a bit more thought and commitment to a game thats already pretty time consuming. I personally like that kind of logistical planning and scratching out the algebra for mass break-evens but not everyone does. 

Edited by Pthigrivi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted to use life support in my latest career. The only one that was so full of bugs so I abandoned it before I actually started using it for long term missions.
So yeah, gonna probably try again, on another ocassion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy using a simple LS mod now, but when I was new, I thought I'd never want the added complexity & hassle.  Somewhere along the line, I decided I was up to - and wanted - the extra challenge.  I use Snacks primarily, and I've dabbled with USI as part of checking out an almost entirely different set of mods in an alternate install.   Both are pretty good at adding semi-realistic limitations without being too involved.  Although I do miss firing off Jeb to Eeloo in a Mk 1 pod or external command seat :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On those occasions when I do play with a life-support mod, I usually use TAC-LS, which generally seems to work pretty well and has mechanics that I like, for the most part.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an incorrect planner of missions and proud.

If I can forget chutes, solar panels, heat shields (to name but a few), then the last thing those little green fellas need is me taking care of the catering.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Snark said:

I agree that the poll is a bit off-putting by implying that people who disagree with you are somehow "wrong".  Also, I think there needs to be a third option.  I think an appropriate set of voting options would look like,

  • Yes, always
  • No, never
  • Sometimes (please explain)

For myself, I'm in the "sometimes" category.  Most careers I don't happen to use it.  Once in a while, though, I do, just for variety.  I'm not "religious" about it one way or the other-- it's a gameplay element that sometimes I like and sometimes I don't.

Anyway, I haven't voted in the poll because there's currently no option that covers my usage of life support.  ;)

^^This^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The Aziz said:

I wanted to use life support in my latest career. The only one that was so full of bugs so I abandoned it before I actually started using it for long term missions.
So yeah, gonna probably try again, on another ocassion

Aziz,where are you from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only correct way to play KSP is pure stock. Implying any differently is a blasphemy of the highest order and a violation of the One Prime Directive "Thou Shalt Not Mod", which is punishable by violent eye-rolling and derisive laughter.

Repent now, and we may suffice with mocking you until your sins have been atoned.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who provide life-support but expects Kerbals to sit in the same chair for years without moving is playing it wrongly ^^.

That is - for any significant timeframe circulation, relaxation and exercise space would be as important as food & water.  A trip to Mun's only a normal work-shift but Minmus, a week each way, would already require additional faciiities even if only on the scale of a real world truck's sleeping berth.  Interplanetary stuff would require at least an additional cabin, such as the hitchiker.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pecan said:

That is - for any significant timeframe circulation, relaxation and exercise space would be as important as food & water.  A trip to Mun's only a normal work-shift but Minmus, a week each way, would already require additional faciiities even if only on the scale of a real world truck's sleeping berth.  Interplanetary stuff would require at least an additional cabin, such as the hitchiker.


USI uses Hab and Home time to model this, which works great when mixed with SSPX or other hab modules. I like how it works with Kerbal-months with multipliers but feel like hab and home could be consolidated into a single value if reset happened when a player lands on any planet, not just Kerbin. So basically it would be a habitation value that counted the amount of time they were locked in a can that would be alleviated with the excitement of getting to EVA somewhere solid. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

So basically it would be a habitation value that counted the amount of time they were locked in a can that would be alleviated with the excitement of getting to EVA somewhere solid. 

I think that's actually why they're different, Hab time does get reset by "getting out of the can" like a landing trip or rover excursion, while Home time is supposed to represent the cumulative pressures of living in artificial environments since leaving Kerbin. I like the rationale, but the implementation is a little nonsensical since you can have your kerbals briefly stay at a luxury station in LKO to give them a really long Home timer before going interplanetary on a much smaller ship, then have your ship equipped with a small runabout to reset the Hab timer as needed. 

Kerbalism's psychological-status model of habitation looks interesting, but I haven't tried it yet.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First: @Eaten by Black Hole Echoing others above, I think that you should un-bias the poll a little. Maybe just a simple 'Yes' and 'No'.

On-topic: I personally don't use LS. I prefer the freedom of stock without life support. However, I do roleplay a little and ensure that all of my space stations and bases have greenhouses (from SSPXR) to provide a sustainable supply of food and adequate space for the crew to live in on their extended missions. Sending Kerbals on 100 year trips to Eeloo in nothing more than a Mk1 pod just seems unrealistic to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't play with life support mods, but I do roleplay the idea that Kerbals need more than just a seat in a tiny capsule if they are going to be living in space for more than a few weeks.

So any interplanetary ships, space stations, or off-Kerbin surface bases that my Kerbals have to inhabit I build bigger than strictly necessary, with more livable space (i.e. crew capacity) so they can move about inside, and I pretend that the unused crew capacity means more consumables so the remaining crew have greater endurance.  

Share this post


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

I think that's actually why they're different, Hab time does get reset by "getting out of the can" like a landing trip or rover excursion, while Home time is supposed to represent the cumulative pressures of living in artificial environments since leaving Kerbin. I like the rationale, but the implementation is a little nonsensical since you can have your kerbals briefly stay at a luxury station in LKO to give them a really long Home timer before going interplanetary on a much smaller ship, then have your ship equipped with a small runabout to reset the Hab timer as needed. 

Kerbalism's psychological-status model of habitation looks interesting, but I haven't tried it yet.

Yeah I see where RD was going with it and it works but if it were adapted into stock I might suggest it being simplified. Each hab/seat could keep its kerbal-month rating, but docking with another vessel would only increase the hab time if it had a higher rating (like docking with a fancy station). To balance that out the hab timer would reset after any vessel became "landed" on any body. So kerbals wouldn't get much relief from climbing from one tin-can to another, but being the adventurous creatures they are landing on another world would relieve their homesickness. Mainly though just like with supplies you can reduce your targets in the VAB down to a single value to keep things simple and predictable.

Edited by Pthigrivi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some solid mods that cover it already, but an official LS+Habitat expansion would be pretty cool. LS can be interesting, I think USI-LS has some good concepts and great customization for any level player. Add to it a mod like Earn Your Stripes where you can make orange suit vets and you get even more interesting play, for instance you can set veterans to be unaffected by hab time . LS should always be an option however!

Edited by Waxing_Kibbous
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

No, because Kerbals aren't human; and I've seen no evidence to suggest that they require any kind of life support.

1. Snacks.

2. This is pretty flimsy reasoning and you're better than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one heck of a biased poll! :D

But in answer: yes, always I play career games with USI life support (I like the habitation timer & simplified "supplies" resource) unless I'm doing a forum challenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:


USI uses Hab and Home time to model this, which works great when mixed with SSPX or other hab modules. I like how it works with Kerbal-months with multipliers but feel like hab and home could be consolidated into a single value if reset happened when a player lands on any planet, not just Kerbin. So basically it would be a habitation value that counted the amount of time they were locked in a can that would be alleviated with the excitement of getting to EVA somewhere solid. 

Incidentally, everyone, I'm going to claim longest real-life mission.
Based on absolutely no knowledge of all your particular situations and purely on the grounds that I've been stuck for a month at a time sailing across the Atlantic in small (30-40ft) boats, twice single-handed and once with one other.

(It's boring, not much else to say).

  • Like 1

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