RoverDude

Building separate pull/push lists would be more code which means more work and more potential bugs. And given how small nuke storage is, if you have a large amount in PS, it's going to be a very very long time before you can use it all. As noted earlier in the thread, Machinery will be allowed to be transferred via PL.

They are cheap for a reason In a lot of cases, they are going to be a lot more cost effective (and just as good) as a specialist. ..or in some cases better, like farmers and kolonists.

Random is being deprecated. No more cheap pilots, etc. (that was a bug)

The cost for non-specialists is more like 10K...

To be honest, given how it works currently, and the low cost, you might as well just dismiss and hire what you want. And anything that had a cheaper path would have to be carefully balanced as to not game the system.

Multiple professions would be a no-go just based on how KSP works.

There will be an update to how the AC works in the next patch

You need this: https://github.com/BobPalmer/CommunityCategoryKit/releases/tag/1.2.2.0

Likely backwards. And pro-tip: Please post screenshots in daylight. There's a different TAC-LS config floating around that the community was working on...

hm, unfortunately I don't use TAC-LS these days, but I expect one of the folks that helped with the configs can chime in? As always, if someone sorts this I take pull requests

Machinery is not included in local logistics by design. It is available in planetary logistics in the next patch. Having these defaulted as off (they used to default as on) caused too many support issues.

That was an accident, and is resolved in the next version.

Also, the old config will remain as an optional add-on. But integrated support out of the box will be with GC, which is bundled.

I found the relevant Wiki page in about five seconds. https://github.com/BobPalmer/MKS/wiki/Crew-Skills-Impact-on-Parts

Did you check the Wiki and/or the included KSPedia?

EU should no longer be going to PS (if it is, let me know, and I will test/fix it in the upcoming patch). The intent is that the tradeoff for infinite free EC is to have to run about with maintenance crews. Though the timing for this could be tweaked if need be. FTT, that's the Orca command pod That was always the design intent. But I am open to convincing why it should be otherwise

Maintenance range is, I believe, 500m

Ok what that tells me is a couple of the PDUs (Duna and Tundra) need some balancing for the amount of EU/DF they can hold.

FYI, on the MKS side since it has other ways of making MatKits, the ore converter will not be present (though the Ore->MatKits option will likely re-manifest with MKS-Lite, similar to how MKS adjusts OSE Ore->MatKit converters).

Define chewing through like crazy please (all of the reactors should be lasting several years - also please confirm you are or are not using NFE as that changes reactor behavior). As noted below, working with @allista to produce DIYKits off-Kerbin, though the infrastructure will be significant in MKS-land (as it should be). EL is not explicitly blacklisted, but given that MKS will have its own built-in construction tools with the bundling of GC, it is not something I am going to focus on. A compatibility patch (basically the current config) will remain available as a separate download, and the models will be deprecated given that EL has its own models, and those two were due for a refresh anyway - and I would rather invest the time/effort in models for GC instead. EL has fully functional parts that come with it, and EL defaults like survey stations for the Pioneer Modules and workspace, etc. will remain. Kerbal creation is on its way once the dust settles on the GC integration, since all of the pieces are finally dropping in place, and MKS is (almost) 'Done' from my standpoint. There are just a few extra parts that I would like to get in first. Correct. As the OP states, off-world colonization is extraordinarily hard. 100% self-sufficiency to the point that you would have the infrastructure to build rockets of unlimited size and with the same tech that you could build on Kerbin is exponentially more difficult. Being able to do this all with a handful of survey stakes has always been a bit immersion breaking IMO. There should be a path... but that path should also be non-trivial. That one is the Habitation module for the Karibou, it just needs its options set correctly.

Eventually, it is on the list (but it's a long list). Luckilly the main MKS mod is entering a pretty stable state which clears the way to sort out its config options.

Yeah I need to play with the parachutes more

And that release will be very soon I'll test some things in the interim For the first question, add a larger tank (something with a couple of days storage) and just visit it periodically. For the second, show me the vessel in question.

Ahh - my mistake. I expect the issue then is that logistics consumers look for inputs on standard converters... and I expect that the part in question does not have one. (thinking) I expect making it a warehouse may solve the issue for that particular part.

Sure - go for it Ok, easy one. The current GC Workshop is not a Logistics Consumer. In the next MKS release, workshop functionality will be embedded in the Ranger workshop and the Tundra assembly plant, and no other modules (as the whitelist for all crewed parts is not included with GC-Core). Once I furnish @allista with a new mobile workshop model, an analogue will be added to MKS (only diff is that the GC-Full one will be model welded, and the MKS one will be lego-like so it can be dropped in via the new Osprey Construction Platform). Nope- they are intentionally not transferable. Nuclear refueling will be a manual process (though fortunately, a rare one).