RoverDude

That bit is out of date as it caused some issues - they now forcefully unlock everything, so there's no way to keep them out of the supply tins (which was the design intent). i.e. you are not meant to intentionally starve your kerbals or hide supplies from them to bypass the supply requirements.

Really? You know, it may be for the best for you to drop them. I find your post unnecessarily rude, and not having to support someone with this kind of attitude is hardly a threat.

Possibly

FYI - adding a UI for the config in the next release

heh, fair enough.

No, it does not dynamically change - it's 15 Kerbal days so if you're using earth time... yeah, you're going to run out a lot earlier and consume more.

@ctbram - you really need to cool down. Seriously. Look at the timer... you very likely ran out of supplies.

Never say never, but there's no real reason to, as there's nothing I can do with three resources that I can't achieve with one.

...and if he would have been using TAC-LS, the pilot would have already been dead USI-LS has a much more generous grace period than TAC-LS does for 2 of the three TAC resources (only food lasts longer than supplies at 30 vs 15 days).

Glad you dig it, but also give some serious credit to @helaeon who helped out with a ton of code

Whatever works for your game, go for it

Water is handled via the high efficiency recyclers, which dramatically reduce supply consumption by using harvested water, so this is already represented. Remember - supplies are not food. They represent water, oxygen, and food all in one. And the largest chunk of that is water.

I recommend CTT.

Crashes were likely memory pressure. And RCS/SAS only works underwater - re-enable them once you splash down.

And we gave you serious answers. You're asking for a new game (i.e. hundreds of hours / thousands of dollars in opportunity costs), and I don't anticipate anyone taking this on unless it happens to be something they wanted to do anyway. Your best bet is to either do it yourself, or look for a game that already has what you are looking for (i.e. Civ 5 in Space).

It would break all kinds of things, and also be a bit weird because of the sheer volume of supplies required (as the majority of the mass is the water used not only for drinking, but for hygiene, etc.)

TBH, if you're using Kolonization I'd just go with USI-LS, as it has habitation as well as supply. So it does put you in the same place, but all of the bits are compatible and are designed to play together. Really depends on which is the priority for your save, and only you can answer that one.

Actually, the original issue was that in order to have asteroids 'worth it' (they were to be the primary ore source, planetary ore was secondary), we either had to increase asteroid mass (which broke contracts), break conservation of mass with the drills (i.e. get more ore out of an asteroid than it had mass), or compromise with a lossless conversion (which is the option we chose).

@blnk2007 - thanks! FYI - there will be a new version coming out, and one thing I did was tweak the engines to be high thrust low efficiency. So rather than a slow steady burn, they tend to 'punch' in a short burst. This plus some fin stabilization should help folks out in early career.

Actually, the Otter Submarine has all kinds of goodies on it for underwater shenanigans (including ballast tanks)

I apologize for being such a prolific enabler

Heya! The best bet would be for someone to make a module manager patch for this. That being said, I'm not sure what kind of an effect Kerbalism's replacement of converters and drills will have on USI Kolonization - i.e. dynamic efficiency, required resources, and thermal were all bypassed (tho I expect @ShotgunNinja would be in a better position to update what happened with those mechanics). - Dynamically changing efficiency is pretty core to how UKS changes efficiency based on the crew and their skills. - Required Resources are absolutely core - it's how I handle letting people ship out very light shells, then filling them up with machinery in-situ. Bypassing this unbalances all of the parts and removes the entire point of most of the production chain. - Thermal - specifically core thermal, and the accompanying specialization bonuses are pretty central to drills, ISRU, nuclear reactors, and thermal control systems. Bypassing these removes the need for radiators and specialist kerbals, which is also a big balance issue. - I'm not sure if Kerbalism takes into account crew specialization bonuses - I vaguely recall not seeing that step in the code that @ShotgunNinja posted. Remember that USI Kolonization is not a parts pack, it's a gameplay mod - and it leverages a lot of the stock mechanics (source: I wrote a lot of those stock mechanics!). So while a MM patch will get stuff to (technically) 'work', it may behave in a way that's unpredictable, or breaks major mechanics. This is in no way a dig on Kerbalism - it's an awesome mod. But just be aware that it uses a different set of assumptions and compromises than stock. Now, if you just want to use UKS as a parts pack on top of Kerbalism, a MM patch should do that. Tho in that case, I'd recommend using MKS-Lite instead of UKS since it already simplifies some of the mechanics above, and the impact to gameplay would be a bit less severe. (Side note: USI-LS does not go from mulch to supplies anymore. It goes Mulch+Fertilizer to supplies :))

That's correct. The intent of the MPL change was to provide an alternate gameplay path to doing biome hopping. So if you want to toss a small lander with a scientist and grab all of the Minmus biomes, or you find it more interesting to land and set up a Minmus science base, you can take your pick. Or do a combination of the approaches. That's kinda the idea

The point we're making is that what you are asking for is pretty much an entire game - one that would take a significant amount of effort, and one that's in a very niche area of KSP (militarization). And we're talking about something that would be measured in months of development time and hundreds of hours. But I do understand that you may not have realized the size of the request you were putting out there. To be honest, you'd probably be better off picking up a good space warfare sim off of steam. Or, if this is really something you want, begin learning what it takes to do mods, and work your way up to building this yourself. All of the tools are free, and the only investment you need is time - which is what you're asking someone else to invest for you, and ultimately, will be the best way to get precisely what you want (and you'd learn some valuable skills along the way).

Not asking for much are you?