Merkov

Ah. I thought it seemed too easy.

Wait, something just occurred to me: this part only appears if USI-LS is installed. Both USI-LS and KPBS bundle CCK (for good reason, since both have LS parts). If we add the cck-lifesupport tag, will that make it appear everywhere it's supposed to, or will it still not show up in the advanced tab?

I believe that is a Sigma Binary Easter egg.

Yeah, I was afraid of that. The only alternative I can think of is soft deprecating the part and introducing a new one, but I'm not sure if that's really any better.

Hmm... Ideally then it would have a name starting with KKAOSS_LS, since it is purely a Life Support part, but changing the name would have unfortunate effects for anyone who is currently using that part...

As per DStaal's post right after mine, what I forgot to take into account was that there isn't a really easy way to use what we're working with. Right now, I think the plan is to make sure we have the pure USI-LS balancing done, then submit all of those changes to you. The "problem" is that some of these changes are made against the USI_LS MM patch, and others are made in the config files for their respective LS parts. In one case, we're actually creating a brand new config, re-using the carbon extractor's model, but creating a new part with it for use with USI-LS. I somehow managed to forget all of that when I suggested letting others test what we have here. I'm still not opposed to people trying out our configs, but they aren't in a user-friendly/accessible format right now. We'd probably see more requests for help 'installing' them (I hesitate to call anything that only involves configs 'installing', but I digress) than we would any feedback on balance.

Hmm... Then I've managed to confuse myself. Even when CCK is installed, there is a KPBS tab that appears when you open the advanced filters tab. the K&K USI Recycler's name starts with KKAOSS (not KKAOSS_LS) but I can't seem to make it show up there.

Hey @Nils277, quick question for you: what causes a part to appear in the Planetary Base tab? Over on the MKS/KPBS Integration side, we noticed that the USI recycler (the big one) doesn't seem to appear in the Planetary Base tab. Snooping on the CCK dev thread, I saw that you mentioned that any part whose name began with KKAOSS but not KKAOSS_LS would show up there, but I know that things have changed post CCK.

It sounds like what you really want is this: This lets you land your own powered stages yourself.

I haven't had a chance to fire up KSP in the past few days. If I do later this week, I'll see if I can replicate the issue. As for reading logs, I'm afraid I'm of no help.

I seem to recall that Science Alert often needed to be tweaked to work with DMOS, not the other way around, so I'm guessing that the DMOS tools probably work fine, but [x] science isn't using them properly. (NOTE: this guess is purely based on gut feeling, not any actual knowledge.) Is there any rough documentation on the tools that other mods can use to interact with DMOS? I'm brand new to code and really most computer things in general, but I'd like to tinker with this and see a small change on [x] Science's side is all that's needed. I know that a lot of people like both DMOS and [x] science. Thanks!

That's true... I guess I've just gotten used to doing that as I go the last couple of weeks...

Just to add onto what @DStaal said: right now, converter parts are being setup in such a way that they do not make use of specialist skills at all, and there are no efficiency parts/bonuses, like USI-LS NOMs. Once we start into stage 3 and really integrating MKS, we will be re-doing USI-LS integration again, but focused on using all of the bells and whistles provided by MKS. The configs as they are now are meant for @Nils277 to be able to ship with KPBS so that anyone who runs USI-LS, with or without MKS, has a set of parts that is balanced. Once we finish stage 3 (which will happen after we START stage 3 ) then those with USI-LS will have balanced KPBS parts, and those with USI-LS AND MKS will have parts that are balanced, but have extra functionality/depth. Also, thought for DStaal and Nils227: Once we finish that greenhouse config, do you guys thing it would be worth making a post in the KPBS thread letting anyone who uses it and USI-LS that we have configs and people can test them if they so desire? We don't even have to do a proper release, if we want to limit it to people who can pull the files from Github. I'll be honest, I'm just typing this idea as it's coming to me, but I thought I'd at least mention it.

Awesome, thanks. Let's see if I can do this without breaking anything...

Hey @RoverDude, quick question for you: I was looking at the USI-LS CTT config, and I noticed that the Nom-O-Matic greenhouses are referred to by their old names. I see that @SirCharizrd17 tried to make a pull request a while back to fix it, but it looks like something happened. I was going to try fixing and re-submitting the fixes in a new pull request, but I just wanted to confirm: do you prefer pull requests to be made against the DEVELOP branch? I know I've read it before, but I cannot for the life of me remember which it was. Thanks!

It's also occurred to me that we may want to think a bit about tech tree placement of parts. Just looking at the recyclers for now (Carbon Extractor/Air Refresher, USI Recycler, and Water Purifier Containers) they should all be unlocked in that order in both tech trees I think. My get tells me that they should probably be available earlier in the stock tree than in the CTT, but I don't really have any reasons to back that up. For the CTT, I was thinking maybe Basic Science, Recycling, then Short Term Habitation? That's a bit of a jump at the end, but suddenly being able to get 82% recycling rates is kind of a big deal. For the Stock TT, I was thinking maybe Survivability, Basic Science, Advanced Electrics? I'm not as sure about that. Off topic, but I'm just noticing that there seems to be both a USI-LS recycling container as well as a USI-LS recycler. I have no idea as to how I missed that. Finally, the USI Recycling Container (and now the USI Recycler, I guess) are just called the K&K Recycling Container and K&K Recycler in game. Since we're adding the Air Refresher Container (name subject to change) and the Water Purifier Container, should we rename those parts to something less generic? I'm not completely sure we should, but I thought of it, so I thought I would bring it up. Edit: I suppose it's also worth considering where the large K&K Recycler should fit in the tech tree. Do we basically just consider it a bigger version of the Recycler Container and put it in the same places?

To be fair, this has been a remarkably civil discussion about CKAN, especially by CKAN discussion standards.

Okay, having a quick peek at the Algae Container: I'm guessing the ModuleSwappableConverter, or at least the resource cost, should only exist as part of stage 3, since a base USI-LS install won't have any way to make MaterialKits or SpecializedParts (the latter is the bigger issue, I think). According to the spreadsheet, the current throughput on the dry mode is overpowered, but the ratios are okay. I get almost exactly where we need to be mass and volume-wise if I drop the efficiency to 40%. (0.0003 Mulch, 0.0008 Ore gets you 0.00032 Fertilizer, suggested EC/s is 1.42. So, here's a weird thing: the spreadsheet doesn't just look at resource output to decide how big a converter/refinery should be, it looks at input as well. What this means is that when you tell the spreadsheet that you want to use a bunch of Water and Ore (even though much of it is getting wasted) and get back a small amount of Fertilizer and Mulch (the latter of which is really a waste byproduct) the spreadsheet sees the input resource "rate" and decides that the part needs to be much bigger/more massive to deal with that, which seems... odd. I think we'll probably want to be a bit flexible with the wet process. Maybe make the fertilizer output a little less than double (0.0005) and re-balance using your original ratios against that? It seems like the wet mode should be faster, but less efficient. Edit: I have no idea what the Soylent stuff says but I'm going to assume it's fine.

I think that's what he's trying to say. He has Gamedata -> WildBlueIndustries -> 000WildBlueTools AND He Has Gamedata -> WildBlueIndustries -> MOLE I think.

If you have a save from before you docked the two vessels, that would also be very useful.

On my phone right now, but that all sounds very similar to the stock cupola, so it seems reasonable to me.

I kind of like that set. The only mini issue I see is that it's completely different than any converter someone would encounter in base USI-LS, but I'm sure people will figure it out. I don't really know anything about Soylent, but I am following your discussion with DBowman on his thread. It seems like that support would be nice to have, especially since it looks like Soylent itself supports USI-LS fairly well.

Odd question, but are you actually out of supplies, or is it just the USI-LS window showing the "expired" status? I seem to recall seeing a few posts about odd UI messages, especially when docking/undocking.

Ooh, pretty. I actually like this a lot. Helps me keep track of what we're doing instead of there just being a jumbled list of parts in my brain. The only downside I see is that hab multipliers only affect a certain number of kerbals. If you make that number really high, then the part is pretty powerful on its own (sort of). If you make it lower, then stacking them doesn't really have much of an effect. Now, if we arranged it so that the part's hab multiplier always affects 1 more kerbal than the part contains, that might be a way to do it... I didn't think it quite looked like double, but I was also looking at the loss of headroom. As discussed above, counting floor space instead of just volume might be the way to go, so I'll go with a higher number. The hab direct is just me trying to live exactly within the confines of the spreadsheet (as much as possible, I'm trying to stay REALLY close to its suggestions first, then being creative second). The adding of hab time plus hab multipliers comes from swappable hab quarter/hab common parts where a part is very spacious compared to its mass, so it doesn't balance well when in hab multiplier mode. Adding hab months on top of a hab multiplier lets you use up spare volume without costing you any extra mass. I do see what you're saying, though, in that it doesn't actually make any sense. I'll see if I can get a comparison table or two thrown together for the converter side of thing. As an aside, how do you feel about the mass of KPBS parts compared to USI parts? I haven't had a chance to sit down and compare parts at all this week, but it seems to me as though the USI suite seems to assume parts ought to be more massive than KPBS parts.

That sounds like a challenge.