[1.2] OSE Workshop - KIS Addon: (v1.1.0 - 2016.11.03)

[taniwha]

rabidninjawombat: CP is you? If so, then when I get it going, we will have to talk quite a lot more .

[rabidninjawombat]

rabidninjawombat: CP is you? If so, then when I get it going, we will have to talk quite a lot more .

Correct I took it over development from MichaelHester07 about 2 months back. (new thread is in my signature) and feel free to shoot me a forum PM anytime (or skype if more in depth discussion is needed)

[Neowulf]

Checking the wiki parts list of stock parts shows a massive difference in funds/ton (dry weight).

M-Beam 200 I-Beam is the cheapest at 66.66funds per ton.

GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector is the most expensive at 880,000funds per ton.

Using 2 resources covering those extremes it is possible to mix them so the funds and mass cost of the input materials matches the output product. That closes any economy breaking exploits.

[RoverDude]

Checking the wiki parts list of stock parts shows a massive difference in funds/ton (dry weight).

M-Beam 200 I-Beam is the cheapest at 66.66funds per ton.

GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector is the most expensive at 880,000funds per ton.

Using 2 resources covering those extremes it is possible to mix them so the funds and mass cost of the input materials matches the output product. That closes any economy breaking exploits.

Agreed

[ObiVanDamme]

I would really love to here more about this Progeny (system? ) you are working on. Sounds promising, would be curious to see if its anything similar to what i have in mind for the future of Civilian Population.

As far as that goes in Civ Pop, civilians are treated as resources (they are an actual defined resource) but they do consume life support, and will go and leave your colony base based on if are are in the positives or negatives in life support, they are also recruit-able as Kerbanauts with the right buildings. You CAN launch them from KSC to your colony, but they will also immigrate on their own as well. (and they will reproduce if you have a high enough population)

On the Topic of OSE Workshop, I assume Obivandamme wouldn't have any objection to incorporation of a workshop functionallity(via MM) into a new part of Civ Pop (as Rover and Angel-125 have don with MKS/Pathfinder) if i decide to do so?

You can of course add the Workshop module to your parts if you like to. I am very happy that so many other mod authors (on my scale 3 is very much) like the idea of what I am doing and want to include it. Please go ahead and let me know, when you did it, so that I can add you to the list of mods that work together with OSE Workshop in the OP.

- - - Updated - - -

Checking the wiki parts list of stock parts shows a massive difference in funds/ton (dry weight).

M-Beam 200 I-Beam is the cheapest at 66.66funds per ton.

GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector is the most expensive at 880,000funds per ton.

Using 2 resources covering those extremes it is possible to mix them so the funds and mass cost of the input materials matches the output product. That closes any economy breaking exploits.

That's exactly what we want to do. Ideally the first resource will have a lower funds/ton ratio than the cheapest stock part and the other one a higher funds/ton ratio than the most expensive part. In that case there would always be a ratio of the two resources that would allow to consume the correct mass of resources when hitting the price of the part. This step is the fine tuning we talked about, but before we can do that I need to get the multi resource system up and running.

Edit: Did you calculate the funds/ton of each part by yourself or is there a list available? I was wondering if most of the parts clutter around a certain range to give a good idea where a possible starting point for the resource costs could be placed.

Edited August 20, 2015 by ObiVanDamme

[Neowulf]

That's exactly what we want to do. Ideally the first resource will have a lower funds/ton ratio than the cheapest stock part and the other one a higher funds/ton ratio than the most expensive part. In that case there would always be a ratio of the two resources that would allow to consume the correct mass of resources when hitting the price of the part. This step is the fine tuning we talked about, but before we can do that I need to get the multi resource system up and running.

Edit: Did you calculate the funds/ton of each part by yourself or is there a list available? I was wondering if most of the parts clutter around a certain range to give a good idea where a possible starting point for the resource costs could be placed.

I just did it by sight initially, but I did just copy&paste most of the data from the wiki into a google docs sheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O7ismmzFr07c59wTH0-MlwXNoc3dQ279YHUo4D803fQ/edit?usp=sharing

Does not include fuel tanks (a royal pain to re-edit all the cost values) or the heat shields (wonky data there, one is entirely ablator costs). Probably should have left out the solid boosters instead of adding their dry mass and cost values. Funds/ton is rounded up to make it easier to read.

I'll add the fuel tanks after work tonight. And if you want to treat solid booster fuel/heat shield ablator as normal construction mass I can add/fix those entries.

Quick look and more than half the parts are in the 1000-10,000 funds/ton range. But it is pretty spread out.

[ObiVanDamme]

I just did it by sight initially, but I did just copy&paste most of the data from the wiki into a google docs sheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O7ismmzFr07c59wTH0-MlwXNoc3dQ279YHUo4D803fQ/edit?usp=sharing

Does not include fuel tanks (a royal pain to re-edit all the cost values) or the heat shields (wonky data there, one is entirely ablator costs). Probably should have left out the solid boosters instead of adding their dry mass and cost values. Funds/ton is rounded up to make it easier to read.

I'll add the fuel tanks after work tonight. And if you want to treat solid booster fuel/heat shield ablator as normal construction mass I can add/fix those entries.

Quick look and more than half the parts are in the 1000-10,000 funds/ton range. But it is pretty spread out.

thank you for that effort. i will take a look at that and see if that helps in the process of finding a good implementation

[taniwha]

Using 2 resources covering those extremes it is possible to mix them so the funds and mass cost of the input materials matches the output product. That closes any economy breaking exploits.

Go out, mine the raw materials, produce both input materials, produce crazy expensive parts, recover, infinite profit. Actually, you don't need to do anything with the raw materials, you still get infinite profit.

If you use no consumable resources (LiquidFuel, Oxidizer, etc), or replace them in the process, and get 100% refund on parts when you recover, then anything you have mined results in infinite profit because you had zero cost.

Anyway, you need to make 200 gravioli detectors to get one ton of detectors (1760000 funds, your math (or the wiki) is out by a factor of two).

Another problem with your (plural) idea: by creating a crazy-expensive resource, you have made a crazy profit recoverable. You cannot win.

The real problem is KSP's recovery mechanic: it is geared purely for refunding returned parts and has no concept of generated parts flooding the market (who needs 200 gravioli detectors?) Teach KSP about supply and demand, and you will fix the "economy breaking exploit"... by smashing the economy.

Edited August 20, 2015 by taniwha

[Angelo Kerman]

Strictly hypothetical question: what if you had a part module added to each part that you 3D print, and then watch for vessel recovery, and upon recovery, set the part cost to zero? Would that work?

[ObiVanDamme]

Go out, mine the raw materials, produce both input materials, produce crazy expensive parts, recover, infinite profit. Actually, you don't need to do anything with the raw materials, you still get infinite profit.

If you use no consumable resources (LiquidFuel, Oxidizer, etc), or replace them in the process, and get 100% refund on parts when you recover, then anything you have mined results in infinite profit because you had zero cost.

Anyway, you need to make 200 gravioli detectors to get one ton of detectors (1760000 funds, your math (or the wiki) is out by a factor of two).

Another problem with your (plural) idea: by creating a crazy-expensive resource, you have made a crazy profit recoverable. You cannot win.

The real problem is KSP's recovery mechanic: it is geared purely for refunding returned parts and has no concept of generated parts flooding the market (who needs 200 gravioli detectors?) Teach KSP about supply and demand, and you will fix the "economy breaking exploit"... by smashing the economy.

that is the real problem. the exploit works with stock parts by recovering liquid fuel and oxidizer. it is just not as efficient. i do not think we can solve this, but i was hoping to make it less bad. as long as you do not have costs for the process itself and only need to buy the infrastructure once you can break the economy.

[Kowgan]

Thank you very much, Obi. Both for clarifying and for keeping things simple!

I'm really curious how is that new resource gonna interact with the game. If I understand it correctly, each item production will have a ratio between those two resources to match its cost and avoid "ridiculous profits"?

-wall of text snip-

Considering how much it costs to hire enough kerbals (stock) to make the procedure worthwhile, I don't see the problem with "ridiculous profits". Anyway, they are a fact of life when you own the entire production chain.

Couldn't agree more.

Strictly hypothetical question: what if you had a part module added to each part that you 3D print, and then watch for vessel recovery, and upon recovery, set the part cost to zero? Would that work?

I don't think it would be that simple to differentiate between parts that have been 3D printed and parts that have been built and launched the classic way. That's just a guess, though. Edited August 20, 2015 by Kowgan

[ObiVanDamme]

Strictly hypothetical question: what if you had a part module added to each part that you 3D print, and then watch for vessel recovery, and upon recovery, set the part cost to zero? Would that work?

maybe that is the easiest solution. as far as i know there is a part cost modifier interface. i did not check how it works but maybe setting the value of each printed part to zero will remove the problem. the issue with returning harvested resources is a stock problem and might be reduced by nit having an expensive resource like taniwha already mentioned. i will investigate in that direction.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you very much, Obi. Both for clarifying and for keeping things simple!

I'm really curious how is that new resource gonna interact with the game. If I understand it correctly, each item production will have a ratio between those two resources to match its cost and avoid "ridiculous profits"?

that was the idea with the two resources. unfortunately this will only remove the problem with bought resources. if you can harvest it without any additional effort you can still create infinite funds.

[Kowgan]

Another solution idea (although it has clear downsides) is to prevent the workshop from working in the KSC. The player must spend time driving it somewhere else, or funds launching it to orbit/another body in order to print things.

Or maybe you can even combo this with Angel's idea and have that 0 cost printed part only when the part is built around the KSC.

As Taniwha mentioned before, I don't see a problem with profit, since you actually spent some time with the production.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Kowgan
reorganizing post

[smjjames]

Another solution idea (although it has clear downsides) is to prevent the workshop from working in the KSC. The player must spend time driving it somewhere else, or funds launching it to orbit/another body in order to print things.

Or maybe you can even combo this with Angel's idea and have that 0 cost printed part only when the part is built around the KSC.

As Taniwha mentioned before, I don't see a problem with profit, since you actually spent some time with the production.

Except that you don't have to go all that far to get out of the KSC biome.

[ObiVanDamme]

Another solution idea (although it has clear downsides) is to prevent the workshop from working in the KSC. The player must spend time driving it somewhere else, or funds launching it to orbit/another body in order to print things.

Or maybe you can even combo this with Angel's idea and have that 0 cost printed part only when the part is built around the KSC.

As Taniwha mentioned before, I don't see a problem with profit, since you actually spent some time with the production.

i think it is ok if you need to harvest the raw materials to make profit. this requires infrastructure, kerbals and time. i do not want the workshop to make profit if you place it on the launchpad with full containers and produce gravioli detectors in time warp

[Kowgan]

Except that you don't have to go all that far to get out of the KSC biome.

Maybe Obi can set a larger radius from the KSC center that he sees fit?

[RoverDude]

Yep, the key differentiation is 'set up infrastructure and mine resources (where it's pretty easy to ensure one of the key resources does not exist around the KSC or even on Kerbin, so no launchpad mining) vs. 'Attach a box of rocketparts, launch, create, timewarp, done.

There are a dozen ways to plug it assuming you're going for the latter not the former. Speaking purely from the MKS side (understanding other mods may vary) this is solved by making the infrastructure the chokepoint, along with a multi-resource model. So if someone gets to the point where they are making gravioli detectors on Minmus and shipping them back for profit... then by all means, you've earned the cash

(editing)

In a multi-resource model the easiest way to solve it would be to preclude one of the harvested components to be in the KSC's biome (so grasslands and shores). Or optionally have it completely gone from Kerbin, which in turn actually turns off-planet manufacturing into a profitable business and it's own mini-game

i.e. Handwavium is rare on Kerbin, so you can't mine it - but you can get Handwavium on Minmus or whatever (with appropriate rarity) - so you can either luck out and do everything in one spot, or have to do some planetary shipping, or (worst case) just ship the stuff in. And you can even turn said Handwavium into a nice, expensive, profitable mining resource.

(double edit)

Yeah... I kinda like this idea. I'll likely add a couple of new CRP resources that would be required for SpecializedParts manufacture, and banish said resources from Kerbin. Problem solved. Because if you're willing to do the capital investment in off-planet manufacturing for a fairly rare resource, and then want to ship stuff back and forth... rock on.

@Taniwha/Obi/Angel - I would like to start the dialogue sooner rather than later on the resource list, and would like to target the end of the month to have this sorted. With 1.1 floating out there, it's probably the best time to sort this, and I had enough trouble with 1.0 waiting for mods to sort out resources - I would prefer not to repeat that

Obi/Angel - Since this would be CRP (and I am unsure if Taniwha is interested in participation), I'll start the discussions there and worst case, it provides us a fallback if the timetable does not work for EL.

At the very least, it saves us from having an extremely bloated resource list

Edited August 20, 2015 by RoverDude

[Neowulf]

Go out, mine the raw materials, produce both input materials, produce crazy expensive parts, recover, infinite profit. Actually, you don't need to do anything with the raw materials, you still get infinite profit.

If you use no consumable resources (LiquidFuel, Oxidizer, etc), or replace them in the process, and get 100% refund on parts when you recover, then anything you have mined results in infinite profit because you had zero cost.

Anyway, you need to make 200 gravioli detectors to get one ton of detectors (1760000 funds, your math (or the wiki) is out by a factor of two).

Another problem with your (plural) idea: by creating a crazy-expensive resource, you have made a crazy profit recoverable. You cannot win.

The real problem is KSP's recovery mechanic: it is geared purely for refunding returned parts and has no concept of generated parts flooding the market (who needs 200 gravioli detectors?) Teach KSP about supply and demand, and you will fix the "economy breaking exploit"... by smashing the economy.

I just pulled the text from the wiki, so the data probably is off.

Stock mining can be economy breaking, yes. But if you factor in time it's not that big of a deal.

Say you have the 2 resource for construction: Cheap costs 67 funds per ton, and Expensive costs 1,760,000 funds per ton. If your mining drill and converter can churn out 1 ton of Cheap in 1 in hour, then tune it so it takes 26,260 hours to produce 1 ton of Expensive. Net effect is mining for profit takes you a lot of time, and cheaper rockets are faster to get the resources for.

Balance for funds/time and the only difference between the resources to a profit miner is the size and weight of the resulting cargo. But to a player actually playing the mod it rewards low cost parts as mass/time is skewed towards cheaper parts. In the time it takes to mine enough Expensive to make 1 gravmax you have mined enough Cheap to churn out 352 I-Beams.

[Jetsparrow]

Cheap costs 67 funds per ton, and Expensive costs 1,760,000 funds per ton. If your mining drill and converter can churn out 1 ton of Cheap in 1 in hour, then tune it so it takes 26,260 hours to produce 1 ton of Expensive.

New resource, same as the old resource?

Limiting it at the drill is a bit strange. Since we have a new intermediate resource for making parts, it can require a different ore (iron ore vs rare-earths?), less abundant and not as widely or uniformly spread. What is more important, it can require another converter, something much more bulky, fragile, expensive and further down the tech tree. It can require more power - and perhaps experienced kerbals to produce.

There is no reason why an end-game space program can't reap extreme profits from producing the more valuable resource. It just has to require a larger investment.

[goldenpsp]

Honestly in a single player sandbox game, if someone wants to use this mod to make mad funds let them. I don't see it as the modders job to have to deal with players lack of self control.

[Jetsparrow]

Another problem with your (plural) idea: by creating a crazy-expensive resource, you have made a crazy profit recoverable. You cannot win.

The real problem is KSP's recovery mechanic: it is geared purely for refunding returned parts and has no concept of generated parts flooding the market (who needs 200 gravioli detectors?) Teach KSP about supply and demand, and you will fix the "economy breaking exploit"... by smashing the economy.

There is no reason why the space program shouldn't be insanely profitable.

The profit isn't the problem, the way we gain it is. The same generic material, using the same cheap tools, is made into either a coffee mug or a precision scientific instrument. Of course it can be balanced out to make the graviolis take a lot to make.. from the same box of scraps. Or it can take a lot of scrap to make the graviolis... but then where did all that material go, and why is it no longer usable for anything? You can make recovered parts that were made in space bring no profit, but that makes even less sense.

With a second resource (rareEarths ore -> metals -> electronics? ) the problem can be addressed.

First of all, it feels natural for gravioli detectors and steel beams to be made from different stuff. While still a simplification, it is naturally obvious that the gravioli detector is a lot of expensive parts in a thin metal shell, and the beam is just plain old metal. Acknowledging at least this feels good.

Second, the insane profits from harvesting the second resource can be put behind a difficulty barrier.

- Put the largest deposits away from the Kerbin system, perhaps on Tylo or Eeloo.

- Make E-class asteroids most likely to contain rarer metals.

- The equipment to produce resource number two can be made a lot larger and heavier so you can't just launch a factory into space on a whim. More expensive and further down the tech tree too.

- It can also draw a lot more power, to the point where using solar panels and batteries for continuous operation is impractical even within Duna's orbit.

Edited August 21, 2015 by Jetsparrow

[Angelo Kerman]

Yep, the key differentiation is 'set up infrastructure and mine resources (where it's pretty easy to ensure one of the key resources does not exist around the KSC or even on Kerbin, so no launchpad mining) vs. 'Attach a box of rocketparts, launch, create, timewarp, done.

There are a dozen ways to plug it assuming you're going for the latter not the former. Speaking purely from the MKS side (understanding other mods may vary) this is solved by making the infrastructure the chokepoint, along with a multi-resource model. So if someone gets to the point where they are making gravioli detectors on Minmus and shipping them back for profit... then by all means, you've earned the cash

(editing)

In a multi-resource model the easiest way to solve it would be to preclude one of the harvested components to be in the KSC's biome (so grasslands and shores). Or optionally have it completely gone from Kerbin, which in turn actually turns off-planet manufacturing into a profitable business and it's own mini-game

i.e. Handwavium is rare on Kerbin, so you can't mine it - but you can get Handwavium on Minmus or whatever (with appropriate rarity) - so you can either luck out and do everything in one spot, or have to do some planetary shipping, or (worst case) just ship the stuff in. And you can even turn said Handwavium into a nice, expensive, profitable mining resource.

(double edit)

Yeah... I kinda like this idea. I'll likely add a couple of new CRP resources that would be required for SpecializedParts manufacture, and banish said resources from Kerbin. Problem solved. Because if you're willing to do the capital investment in off-planet manufacturing for a fairly rare resource, and then want to ship stuff back and forth... rock on.

@Taniwha/Obi/Angel - I would like to start the dialogue sooner rather than later on the resource list, and would like to target the end of the month to have this sorted. With 1.1 floating out there, it's probably the best time to sort this, and I had enough trouble with 1.0 waiting for mods to sort out resources - I would prefer not to repeat that

Obi/Angel - Since this would be CRP (and I am unsure if Taniwha is interested in participation), I'll start the discussions there and worst case, it provides us a fallback if the timetable does not work for EL.

At the very least, it saves us from having an extremely bloated resource list

Sounds good, I'll look for the discussion on the CRP thread.

[ObiVanDamme]

i like that. i will remove the launchpad factory exploit and look at the crp thread for the resource discussion. thank you all for that valuable feedback.

[Tarheel1999]

Honestly in a single player sandbox game, if someone wants to use this mod to make mad funds let them. I don't see it as the modders job to have to deal with players lack of self control.

Precisely. Please don't cripple the ability to test designs on kerbin to prevent people from making gravamaxes or in the case of EPL alcubierre drives. Exploiters gonna exploit.

Edited August 21, 2015 by Tarheel1999

[ObiVanDamme]

Precisely. Please don't cripple the ability to test designs on kerbin to prevent people from making gravamaxes or in the case of EPL alcubierre drives. Exploiters gonna exploit.

I will not limit the functionality of the Workshop in any ways. I will add one additional input resource and adjust the unit costs of those resources. Everything else will stay the same and will stay simple. It might get harder to create a complete off world factory because you might need to harvest additional resources and you need two intermediate products instead of one, like it is now. I did not yet decide if I will introduce a new harvestable resource for the stand alone version. Maybe you can still create verything you need from stock Ore, but at a less efficient recipe. The most complex scenario for stand alone installation is, that you need a single additional resource to make the new input resource, but that's it. All additional complexity will come from the MKS installation if you prefer that. And even if that is too complex you can still adjust all those parameters using MM. I will make sure, that all recipes are configurable.