TauPhraim

It works perfectly with planet packs. Just beware that: resource repartition is randomly generated, so you might end up with your dream planet having no water at all etc ... (I don't know what the stock planets guarantee about that). Just scan before sending all you've got planet packs I've seen tend to have some of the cool planets quite far away, which means long transfer times. If you play with life support, I suggest using the "Deep freeze" mod.

This mod adds in game explanations about efficiency/load calculations done by MKS. It mostly shows intermediate steps, so that you can determine where this "843.52% load" is coming from (and how to improve it). Known limitations: it works by reverse engineering, rather than introspection, so it is prone to becoming incorrect when MKS changes (it seems correct at the time of writing this) since it explains in-game vessels, it cannot be used for mission planning. My view is that, although formula are complicated, by seeing them explained often enough, you can eventually get a good enough feeling of how all this works by yourself it displays the "ideal" load, that you would get if a converter had room to store it's ouputs, and had enough available inputs. KSP can further reduce the load, for example if an input resource is not available, but is produced by another slower converter. Source code. License: Download. Installation instructions: Just unzip in KSP (the zip contains a GameData folder). If you installed MKS already, you should manage. Dependencies: MKS and USI Life support

Could someone (probably @RoverDude) do some cleanup in MKS github issues ? Many of them seem rather old/invalid. I know it's not cool work, but even done quickly with some false-positive closures would probably be better than the current huge list I think.

Which versions of MKS/USI are you using ? Do you have the full (code) stack of the error ? What is the name of the "bubble" ?

Hi @RoverDude, shouldn't the Sifters benefit from MKS bonuses (especially geology) ? Or do you see them as base kickstarters only, and want to keep them low-output in the long run ?

The ranger batteries do not have a MKSModule on my install (I really meant this litteral module, not "any part from MKS the mod").

If you mean I made an error writing the formula, I don't think so. All converters use the geology bonus. Some use it twice (squared), this is the default. But some use one of the other bonuses. Example the Tundra Ag has "BonusEffect = ScienceBoost", so it will use geology*botany

Per planet: For each MKSModule (mostly converter parts), for each Kerbal on board the whole vessel with FundsBoost skill: gain 1 "point" per second (only 0.1 if in orbit). Geology research = 100% + square_root(points gained) / 10000 Ex: 2 converters, 5 Kolonists on board. During 116 kerbin days (=2.5million seconds) => 150% Geology

I read the code and understood the formulas. They are complex, and I'm not fond of spending much effort rephrasing them all here, where it will soon get buried into hundreds of forum pages, inaccessible to anyone. I also think such information should be in-game (not even in a wiki), so I'm working on an in-game description tool. It's still "work in progress" quality, but seeing the recent questions, here it is. Feel free to try. Despite the "work in progress", feedback is welcome. (I will publish the code soon and maybe screenshots. Let me know if you are interested, and I will give this higher priority). Unfortunately, regardless of the unfinished state: it has been done by reverse engineering, rather than introspection, so it is prone to becoming incorrect when the game changes (it seems correct for the current version of MKS though) since it explains in-game vessels, it cannot really be used for mission planning. My view is that, although formula are complicated, by seeing them explained often enough, you can eventually get a good enough feeling of how all this works by yourself

This screenshot's one looks correct: geology 200%, squared = x4. 3 water bays = x3. Total x12, and you're not far from 1200%

It depends a lot on the module. Which one are you interested in, and do you have/plan to have efficiency parts around ?

By the way I think the governor on efficiency parts can be simply removed, as it probably dates from a time when efficiency part bonuses were running wild. But now (and even before the removal of Kolony bonuses on them to a lesser degree), they don't have a killer impact anymore, so tuning things by switching them on/off is enough. This would free some room/name in the interface, should a governor be added for converters. (though I must say "governor" is not the best of names to me, it makes me think of a person But I'm not native english speaker).

I agree this can be a problem, but not specific to unmanned bases (a power shutdown could kill your Kerbals or something). A governor on all converters would be cool.

Take the 250MPU: with a full cargo of machinery, it can convert 470 000 minerals into 94 000 chemicals. Suppose it would take 3 years to do so with reasonable rates. Now with crazy bonuses, what if it takes only 30 days ? In the end you can still send your engineer for maintenance every 3 years, and you'll still have 94k chemicals every 3 years.

While I agree that they're too strong in general (and with that square thing, they're also coming stronger later, when you need them less), for MPUs, does it matter as much as for sustainable bases ? If you consider an unmanned base's goal is to convert a given supply of machinery into something else, it should not come as a problem that this happens faster than expected.

No, it's squared 221 squared is close to 481. Any MKSModule gets *geology. Then depending on its "BonusEffect", it also gets either *geology (which is the default effect), or *Botany, or *Kolonization. So parts with a default MKSModule get geology squared.

I didn't test them in the field yet, but looking at the part files, the MPUs should be getting the Geology Bonus twice (ie squared), and nothing related to efficiency parts (when they're converters). Does that match your numbers ? (with a geology around 184% you should be getting that, with full machinery).

Number of kerbals have no effect, only the best one for each skill counts; Engineers increase some converters efficiency, but some other converters are boosted by scientists (or more specific new MKS classes). Again no need to have several same type Kerbals. The "pilots reduce overall efficiency" etc thing, does not look like it ever was the case in MKS. I think it's the mechanism for Extraplanetary Launchpads "productivity" (and might depend on *where* you put the kerbals too).

I don't think so. Or at least that's a very strange way of formulating it, not in the same order as the game calculates. I'm not saying this randomly, as I happen to be currently trying to write some in-game GUI that details some of the calculations. It currently produces correct results apparently, but that's for MKS version n-3 or 4. To anyone feeling like running random stranger's code, I can provide a sample dll, else it will need to wait until I reach a better state. The 5Lx part looks correct, but the rest less so: Kolony bonuses should be used. There's no L2 anymore now, and the efficiency parts are counted Kolony-wide, and do not all have the same value (so you can't just multiply by their number). Also having other converters benefiting from the same efficiency parts will lower your own gain.

I must admit I'm a bit afraid of updating too, but the issues you linked to are hardly game breaking What are the known (big) problems with current release ?

Yes you can add an entry: SCENARIO { name = KolonizationScenario scene = 5, 7, 6 KOLONIZATION { KOLONY_ENTRY { BodyIndex = 5 VesselId = e1d897bb-fe70-46df-8868-ad2065f4e9b4 LastUpdate = 2653597.2152637248 KolonyDate = 2653346.3856445421 GeologyResearch = 25000000 BotanyResearch = 4000000 KolonizationResearch = 1000000 Science = 0 Rep = 0 Funds = 0 } } } Use a random prerefably non-existing vessel ID. The body index of course has to be the one you want to boost. Then, the game calculates, for example (assuming unchanged settings): 25000000 ==square_root==> 5000 ==divide_by_10000 ==> 0.5 ==add_1==> 1.5 = 150% Geology research Do the obvious inverse to find out how much you need to write to get a given % research.

They define a Unity "float curve" (example of how it looks here). But then I'm not sure how the game uses that. Maybe you already know that much Funnily, I was trying to understand TemperatureModifier today too. My guess was that it tells how fast the temperature increases (ex: it would grow faster when at zero), but I think that's opposite to the few observations I made (temperature seems to grow slower at the beginning).

I assumed you'd change that to fix drills not being boosted. But another solution is to give drills the MKSModule I guess, thought that makes things even more inefficient (the 5s period is a quick win for optmization, but I fear this kind of things could cause problems like catchup not behaving like focused time and the like). They do have something in common (at least currently): they are boosted by the same skill, namely FundsBoost for Geology and Funds, for example. And I think FundsBoost=>Geology is not very self-explanatory, that's why I propose to separate/name a bit better.

With all respect I think I went into the woods, at least partly, investigating the code. I suppose you implemented this via the generic _bonusList map, but this is not filled for drills. This has been confirmed by voicey99's observations. If you try to fix it without a vessel module, each converter (each MKS module) will try to set a bonus for each drill on the vessel. At best, they will all set the same value, and it will be slow (all MKSModule doing the same calculations). Maybe there is a misunderstanding. What I mean is that currently, before clicking on "check kolony rewards", I have no clue about how much this will harvest. The "x% research" displays are almost unhelpful for that, as I could use them to predict rewards only if I remembered their previous values, and could perform the calculations myself. So I thought the rewards might as well be 100% hidden, allowing the "x% research" to be renamed if needed.

I don't think this is the case currently: drills only have ModuleResourceHarvester_USI, which is in USITools and does not have access to kolonization info. It implements IEfficiencyBonusConsumer but no one makes use of that, as far as I can tell (MKSModules query IEfficiencyBonusConsumer's of their own part only). (this would also be fixable by switching to a vessel module). Sorry for the late reply, but I don't have anything yet, I'm trying to get a better global picture first. At least for MKS converters (MKSModule), BonusEffect is set to "FundsBoost" (= geology) and is apparently never changed, so all converters are using that. (fixable by setting different BonusEffect in the parts config I suppose). Less technically, but I must highlight the terminology problem again too: some Kerbals are "Geologists", with a "GeologySkill". Yet they don't contribute to the thing displayed as "Geology research" (only to sifters efficiency). The "Geology research" is contributed to by Kerbals having a "FundsBoost" skill. This is more than confusing, and I think it would be futile to rely on a documentation trying to explain that (assuming people even search for it, because "geology"="geology" seems simple enough at first view). That's why I proposed additional research fields. With an interesting matrix of what-specialist-contributes-to-what-research, they would not all advance in lockstep. (and actually, once they're only used as kolony rewards, funds/science/rep totals need not be displayed at all in the dashboard).