[1.12.x] USI Life Support

[Ian-C]

And there are supplies on that station? Screenshot please, including your resource panel.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the response RoverDude, it was missing supplies i was thinking that supplies were made by the modules.

[endl]

Can you iterate on conditions for death related to this mod im a bit confused as you talk about vacation being the penalty or did you mean something like standard death is still possible?

[Kaa253]

...

Note that this is still in an alpha state

It seems to be 99% ready for release to me. The best KSP life support mod I say. I love the way it is very simplified and minimal.

The missing 1% is that besides the Nom-O-Matic 5000 I found a complete lack of container support for mulch so I added a small 100 mulch capacity to each of the life support containers for my own convenience. Maybe not the best way to do it as you probably shouldn't store your mulch and supplies in the same box! Maybe the mulch storage setup is intentional. Maybe it says Kerbals will dump mulch in a greenhouse if there is one available but otherwise it has to go overboard?

Edited May 14, 2015 by Kaa253

[ExavierMacbeth]

It seems to be 99% ready for release to me. The best KSP life support mod I say. I love the way it is very simplified and minimal.

The missing 1% is that besides the Nom-O-Matic 5000 I found a complete lack of container support for mulch so I added a small 100 mulch capacity to each of the life support containers for my own convenience. Maybe not the best way to do it as you probably shouldn't store your mulch and supplies in the same box! Maybe the mulch storage setup is intentional. Maybe it says Kerbals will dump mulch in a greenhouse if there is one available but otherwise it has to go overboard?

Think its deliberate. Most LS mods are set to dump waste products if there is no storage for them. After all why store the waste if you have no way to recycle it anyway? Its just extra mass on the rocket.

And I agree with the 99% complete. I think the only thing that is really needed is more UI components for VAB/SPH and other screens for planning & monitoring. But that has already been mentioned a few times

[RoverDude]

Thanks, giving the UI a pass or three next time this mod is up in my go-around of mod refreshes

[Tarheel1999]

Can you iterate on conditions for death related to this mod im a bit confused as you talk about vacation being the penalty or did you mean something like standard death is still possible?

Is this not answered in the original post? Or do you have a specific question that is not addressed there? Hungry kerbals go on strike and refuse to work until resupplied. Death is or will be an option.

[CorBlimey]

sorry for asking the bleeding obvious, but 1 supply = 1 Kerbal day? E.g. 1 Kerbal needs 2 Nom O Matics to process all of his/her 'mulch'?

edit: hmm, maybe I am missing something or that can't be it. Sticking 400 supplies on a mk 1 capsule gives me 370 days of supplies, so it seems a little over 1 per day. Random

Edited May 14, 2015 by CorBlimey

[ExavierMacbeth]

sorry for asking the bleeding obvious, but 1 supply = 1 Kerbal day? E.g. 1 Kerbal needs 2 Nom O Matics to process all of his/her 'mulch'?

Yes 1 supply = 1 kerbal day.

No to the 2 Nom O Matics... A single Nom O Matic can keep up with a single kerbal's supply usage. What happens though is that your only getting a 50% return. Two of them will do the conversion faster but you will still end up with only half the supplies you started with after the mulch has all been reprocessed. Basically they extend the time needed between resupply but it is not a closed system.

EDIT: For a full closed system you would want to add the Aeroponics/Kerbitat setups from MKS into the mix. As they let you get better conversion rates or InSitu supplies fabrication (from mined water & substrate).

Edited May 14, 2015 by ExavierMacbeth

[CorBlimey]

Yes 1 supply = 1 kerbal day.

No to the 2 Nom O Matics... A single Nom O Matic can keep up with a single kerbal's supply usage. What happens though is that your only getting a 50% return. Two of them will do the conversion faster but you will still end up with only half the supplies you started with after the mulch has all been reprocessed. Basically they extend the time needed between resupply but it is not a closed system.

oh yeah, silly me. Of course, mulch input > 1

Still, are you sure about 1 supply = 1 day? I put 400 on a Mk 1 pod and the gui timer indicated 370 days left

Edited May 14, 2015 by CorBlimey

[ExavierMacbeth]

oh yeah, silly me. Of course, mulch input > 1

Still, are you sure about 1 supply = 1 day? I put 400 on a Mk 1 pod and the gui timer indicated 370 days left

You'd have to search this thread. There is a decimal loss in there somewhere. I think Rover said it was like 1.08 per day usage or something "because math" was his reason. But its close enough ball park until we get a prediction timer for the VAB/SPH

[CorBlimey]

You'd have to search this thread. There is a decimal loss in there somewhere. I think Rover said it was like 1.08 per day usage or something "because math" was his reason. But its close enough ball park until we get a prediction timer for the VAB/SPH

ah ok. makes (Kerbal) sense, and ties in with mulch 1.08 per day on the nom o matic. Thanks for the help.

Edited May 14, 2015 by CorBlimey

[ExavierMacbeth]

Yea its not really something I pay much attention to half the time. I generally over compensate so my timers always report almost double digit years... just for trips to the Mun. Depends on how much I expect to leave them there while I do other things

EDIT: Also keep in mind that they also consume a tiny ammount of electric charge per day too. If you fail to provide it they may loose your stockpile of NOMS out the airlock while fumbling with the container in the dark... and I do mean ALL of it. Safeguard I think Rover built in to keep ppl from cheating the system

Edited May 14, 2015 by ExavierMacbeth

[CorBlimey]

Yea its not really something I pay much attention to half the time. I generally over compensate so my timers always report almost double digit years... just for trips to the Mun. Depends on how much I expect to leave them there while I do other things

EDIT: Also keep in mind that they also consume a tiny ammount of electric charge per day too. If you fail to provide it they may loose your stockpile of NOMS out the airlock while fumbling with the container in the dark... and I do mean ALL of it. Safeguard I think Rover built in to keep ppl from cheating the system

wow that seems harsh. I frequently lose all power briefly when transmitting stuff or cleaning out experiments. Hmm

[ExavierMacbeth]

wow that seems harsh. I frequently lose all power briefly when transmitting stuff or cleaning out experiments. Hmm

Its not instant. USI LS has a 15 day "grace period" before the kerbals completely lose their minds lol. So temporary power loss isn't a big issue, just make sure you don't timewarp with closed panels

[RoverDude]

wow that seems harsh. I frequently lose all power briefly when transmitting stuff or cleaning out experiments. Hmm

Best to be careful then tbh I get to do more entertaining 'rescue mission spawning mechanics' precisely because there is no death penalty - it makes some things interesting

Its not instant. USI LS has a 15 day "grace period" before the kerbals completely lose their minds lol. So temporary power loss isn't a big issue, just make sure you don't timewarp with closed panels

Indeed!

[prog]

I agregated some ideas about lifesupport in feature request here.

https://github.com/BobPalmer/USI-LS/issues/10

Sorry for providing only ideas and no pull request but unity is not my favorite platform to code things for.

[guitarxe]

Are there any other parts that can hold NOMS?

[goldenpsp]

Are there any other parts that can hold NOMS?

Other than what? Other than the 4 containers in the mod?

[endl]

hey roverdude will you be adding this to the usi catalog soon? since this is no longer in the WIP section of the forums. also if its not too much to ask but could you include the patch readiness for KSP in the catalog it would be nice to have a master list on the catalog page itself without having to double check each thread, im sorry i know its hard for you to support so many things but your such a "awesomerover" its hard for me to keep track of what mods are playable from you.

Edited May 15, 2015 by endl

[guitarxe]

Other than what? Other than the 4 containers in the mod?

Yes. More different form containers. Something for spaceplanes in particular.

[goldenpsp]

Yes. More different form containers. Something for spaceplanes in particular.

Not at this time at least.

[Hevak]

I agregated some ideas about lifesupport in feature request here.

https://github.com/BobPalmer/USI-LS/issues/10

Sorry for providing only ideas and no pull request but unity is not my favorite platform to code things for.

Sorry this is a long post. But you had quite a long and interesting list of things suggested. And the below is nothing negative or personal just my thoughts

While you certainly have some great and interesting ideas there, and of course everything up to Roverdude as far as what is implemented, I'm going to have to vote against the stress implementation you brought up. Nothing against you or the concept, I just don't agree with it or think it really fits with this mods intended concept. From what I understand about ROverdudes explanation and implementation, In reality this life support is sort of intended to be a bit of a life support light. Not as limited as snacks is, but not as involved as TAC.

To me these ideas kind of start to make it more involved than TAC somewhat and kind of moves away from the whole "light" life support it seemed to be. I also think the amount of work is too much, and taking too much time away from what seems to be the intended concept of this mod being created. You mentioned "simplicity" then "uncluttering simplified life support" not sure what you mean but this mod is simplified, that was the whole intent of this mod I thought. And simplicity itself tends to be uncluttered. I believe your stress aspect just starts to add clutter and less simplicity back into this mod.

As I understand it a big reasons why you brought up the stress was to prevent "gaming the system" and starving kerbals. So I could see a function to maybe make kerbals require a bit of a recuperation period after starvation would be a much better and more acceptable way to fix the exploration opportunities that are there. But the reason I don't like the whole stress idea is that I really don't see it adding much more than headaches and such to the whole life support process, since it now seems you have a whole other resource that's not even tracked in a sense. And it also seems to overlap many functions of USI LS already in place.

EC is already accounted for and causes supplies lost, if you want you can blame that on stress already and kerbals doing rash things resulting in the loss of supplies.

Orange suits not striking doesnt need a "sane explanation" neither does the kerbin safe zone. This is a game first and foremost. And a realistic simulation only in passing really. Orange suits are special, rationalize it however you want, but the non striking was a pretty conscious design decision and I don't see the need for any kind of explanation beyond what was given. The safe zone arises probably more due to the fact we only deal with "supplies" and not 3 resources. Because on kerbin in the safe zone there is plenty of opportunities for breathable air. Also there are only 4? Orange suits. So they are limited and it also offers a bit of a helpful way for newer people to learn the ropes, as well as a couple kerbals to hold in reserve for rescue ops.

Making hungry and starving kerbals build up stress faster, then striking sooner because of it basically negates the whole starving mechanic, or is the whole starving mechanic really your whole stress idea being implemented in an easier more trackable function that can be controlled and dealt with better? Seems like it to me.

There are already severe consequences available as well, death is an option, as well as nothing really more severe than having a ghost ship of kerbals just floating around or away somewhere because they are all on strike or even worse dead. I don't see the need or any kind of realism being added by having them randomly activate or deactivate anything on a ship or bases. I don't see what this "adds" to the whole concept of this mod.

I know kerbals are all somewhat stupid if you will, and rush to space in junk and love explosions, but I really don't see how not eating adds stress, but my spaceship and sole protection falling apart around me is great and fun. I understand kerbals like explosions and all that, but why add stress and then not have them stressed out by their craft falling to pieces around them on reentry and such? Seems you wanted sane reasons for things and more realism in a way, but this seems counter to that. Also you really didn't add anything to help alleviate stress. I mean shouldn't there be a way to alleviate it other than supplies? There is already a use and penalty to supplies.

dont take this as anything personal. You have some great ideas as I said. These are Just my feelings on the ideas brought up. But I do think that if people like this concept and want a hardcore mode and these things to deal with, that It eould make a great standalone mod that could integrate with any life support mod available. I think it would be much better as a separate mod though. And in reality if it's a hardcore mode, it really does become a separate mod in a sense anyways. I feel it's best served on it's own and allow the two mods to be tweaked and managed independently.

If Roverdude does feel like adding such things to this mod then I would absolutely ask that the whole stress part be completely optional as I do not want this at all. There is already enough micromanaging going on as far as multiple crafts, maneuver points and rendezvous windows, as well as mks bases if people use it like me. I don't really see any fun or addition to gameplay personally by now having to constantly check on my crews.

I do think there should be some sort of recuperation period as far as starved kerbals though. Maybe a day or something to let them eat and get some strength back, that certainly solves a few of the issues as to why you seemed to want the stress thing and I think it's good to have a bit of a way to prevent kerbal torture and "gaming the system" as I said earlier.

Again just my thoughts. If this stress idea was implemented as mandatory it would certainly make me revalute my use of this mod. Which I really like in it's current form. It could use some tweakings for sure. And I don't mean that to stop anything from being implemented, it just means I'd have to find another mod or forget life support . But I kind of like this mods in it's sort of serious yet light hearted take on the whole life support gameplay. And I'd hate to see this feature take away time from this an his other mods. As I don't see it adding much, and not sure many that use this particular life support would want it either. As it's meant to be a less involved life support mod. But Maybe many do want this, idk.

And again sorry for the long post to any who try to read it all lol.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Hevak

[Vorg]

Are there any other parts that can hold NOMS?

The 4x mount from Universal storage looks like it works well holding 4 of the little green houses.

[prog]

"uncluttering simplified life support"

Sorry but I did not say that. Maybe word "from" will suit better than "of" there and cause less confusion, fixed.

Gameplay-wise what will change for you if there will be stress indicator in addition to supplies left? You'll have the same one single resource you cold control - supplies. The same numbers - kerbal who lost all supplies will have 15 days of productive time left. There will be safe zone around kerbin to feel more comfortable from start. There will be the same 4 orange suits invulnerable to stress. You agree to have recuperation period but then it will have no gameplay difference from having stress dissipation over time. All that scary things about activating parts and so on are there just for example of what could be used as additional consequences. So, what really differs then so much that you may stop using this mod if such thing will be ever implemented, except some decorative things and less tolerance to prolonged starvation?

Looks like that's you who took this small "pack of ideas to think about in a free time" as personal insult.

Edited May 15, 2015 by prog

[Hevak]

Sorry but I did not say that. Maybe word "from" will suit better than "of" there and cause less confusion, fixed.

Gameplay-wise what will change for you if there will be stress indicator in addition to supplies left? You'll have the same one single resource you cold control - supplies. The same numbers - kerbal who lost all supplies will have 15 days of productive time left. There will be safe zone around kerbin to feel more comfortable from start. There will be the same 4 orange suits invulnerable to stress. You agree to have recuperation period but then it will have no gameplay difference from having stress dissipation over time. All that scary things about activating parts and so on are there just for example of what could be used as additional consequences. So, what really differs then so much that you may stop using this mod if such thing will be ever implemented, except some decorative things and less tolerance to prolonged starvation?

Looks like that's you who took this small "pack of ideas to think about in a free time" as personal insult.

i took nothing as an insult, maybe you took my disagreement with your ideas as not part of what seems to be the purpose of this life supports intent as an insult.

And copied directly from your write up..

Hardcore mode is meant to be used by players who want both simplicity and uncluttering of simplified life support and more challenging gameplay at the same time.

i just personally as I said don't see it adding much to the gameplay of using this mod. Maybe you and others would love to have this and see it adding to gameplay. And like I said I could see this as a great stand alone mod that could easily integrate with any other life support mod, or even run on it's own.

but please forgive me for disagreeing with your ideas, and having my own as you do, and feeling I'm insulted in anyway.

also by the way, this is not the first time this idea has been brought up in life support discussions. Even within TAC. And I believe there is a life support or other mod that does deal with stress or stress like variables as well, or else there was at one time. It just feels better suited to it's own mod that can integrate with them.

Edited: also if nothing really changes as you state above then why add stress at all? It's just clutter then is it not? And again you mention prolonged starvation. Easily solved by a recuperation period, and not adding a stress mechanic which in the game sense becomes a resource. As it build and dissipates over time due to whatever constraints. Just like a resource. And most likely would be coded similar to a resource.

And really the only thing that could be taken as an insult is you saying I'm insulted and basically alluding to the fact that you can post your ideas for this mod, and someone can't post a disagreement to them, otherwise they are just insulted.

this is is a forum and a game that has 1,000s upon 1,000s of mods probably. So yeah I'm not insulted by your ideas. I just don't agree with them fitting in this mod or my gameplay as well. And as I've done many times I would decide on what mods I use based on that. Not because the modder or their ides or work Insults me lol. Just because I want different things in my gameplay as do you.

when Roverdude first brought up the idea and concept of his Life support I disagreed with him too. We had a few posts back and forth, he explained and listened to mine and others ideas, I liked what he said and thought. He didn't feel I was insulted in any way lol. Why should you? Still wasn't sure I'd like this mod until I tried it. I was completely civil and just posted my ideas contrary to yours. That's how things happen. We disagree that's life.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Hevak