[1.12.x] USI Life Support

[prog]

Hevak, "of" could have different meaning. Think about it as "that is part of". BTW, I took nothing as an insult as well so let's just keep constructive discussion.

[Hevak]

Hevak, "of" could have different meaning. Think about it as "that is part of". BTW, I took nothing as an insult as well so let's just keep constructive discussion.

A constructive discussion is all I was doing and all I did. I made it a point to state it was nothing personal. And also said you have some interesting and good ideas. I simply stated my idea as to why I felt it doesn't fit as a part of this mod. I also stated that it would be a good mod implemented on it's own that could integrate with any life support mod out there as well.

I absolutely love Roverdude's work. And like you I like mods to fit my gameplay as best as possible. If he implements this or some form of it great. I'm all for him doing what he feels like. And I'm all for people getting the type of mods and gameplay they desire. Might it affect my decision to use the mod? sure. Just the same as this mod affected my decision to move from TAC to USI life support. It doesn't mean anything is bad as I said. It just doesn't fit what I want to do.

this would be great as side mod to implement with integration for any life support as I've seen a few people bring up stress mechanics before. I think someone either did or tried to do this with another mod in one way or another as well. And as a separate mod it would also allow more people to use it also, since each life support has a niche of users it seems. I also think it would allow for better implementation and development if it wasn't tied to a specific Lifesupport mod.

i also said if it was implemented here that I would like it to be completely optional. As then people can choose to use it or not. Which is another reason I feel it's best served as a separate mod.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Hevak

[johnsonwax]

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

Universal Storage has a dedicated NOMS wedge.

[RoverDude]

So let me hop in and help keep things simple

I have no intention of expanding the scope of what this mod does.. it's a very basic, very simple (and somewhat whimsical) take on life support. One resource in, one resource out, one timer. One side effect, and any bits surrounding it are intended to prevent exploitation, etc.

Refinement is always an option. Adding more bits that do not directly lead to it's core goals are not. As I said, my guiding vision on building this mod was pretty simple. If KSP implemented life support, what would it look like? and thus far I'm pretty happy with where we've landed.

[CorBlimey]

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

Indeed!

ahh, yes of course. I forget the penalty for failing is grumpiness not death.

TACLS never gave me those exciting resuce missions, to be honest, because I always was so conservative they would have a decade of spare supplies and never come remotely close to running out. I might as well have just gimped myself with a penalty to ISPs or stuck some useless mass on each ship.

Now, I can actually see myself with a colony on emergency rations, subsisting, and my having to send a resupply shuttle to oil the engine.

[RoverDude]

That's pretty much the idea

I think the Kerbal's disregard for safety should only naturally extend to life support.

[Hevak]

So let me hop in and help keep things simple

I have no intention of expanding the scope of what this mod does.. it's a very basic, very simple (and somewhat whimsical) take on life support. One resource in, one resource out, one timer. One side effect, and any bits surrounding it are intended to prevent exploitation, etc.

Refinement is always an option. Adding more bits that do not directly lead to it's core goals are not. As I said, my guiding vision on building this mod was pretty simple. If KSP implemented life support, what would it look like? and thus far I'm pretty happy with where we've landed.

Have you any thoughts on some sort of minor recuperation period for starved kerbals that starve for a specific period of time? Maybe either a flat one of say an hour or two of game time, or maybe a day? Or possibly something that grows in accordance with the length of time a kerbal is starved maybe? Just a few ideas.

i think this may be a good possibility to prevent what might be considered an exploitation of the mechanics. I don't see it as one neccesarily, but I mean it is possible to say starve kerbals on a long mission to another planet, and send an unmanned supply ship along with it or later on possibly, or have food already there if a base is set up. I don't see this as a big issue or anything, but it could add a bit of flavor to avoiding prolonged starvation. It could also be a sort of extrapolated "hibernation" type mechanic. Meaning prolonged starvation sort of turns into a pseudo hibernation, and a longer starving period requires a short period to recuperate to simulate say a thawing or re animation period?

It doesn't really change the side effects and still keeps it pretty simple. The only issue I could see with it is a way of communicating the resupply waiting period issue in game. It Could end up slightly less simple for unexperienced players as well.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Hevak

[futrtrubl]

Have you any thoughts on some sort of minor recuperation period for starved kerbals that starve for a specific period of time? Maybe either a flat one of say an hour or two of game time, or maybe a day? Or possibly something that grows in accordance with the length of time a kerbal is starved maybe? Just a few ideas.

i think this may be a good possibility to prevent what might be considered an exploitation of the mechanics. I don't see it as one neccesarily, but I mean it is possible to say starve kerbals on a long mission to another planet, and send an unmanned supply ship along with it or later on possibly, or have food already there if a base is set up. I don't see this as a big issue or anything, but it could add a bit of flavor to avoiding prolonged starvation. It could also be a sort of extrapolated "hibernation" type mechanic. Meaning prolonged starvation sort of turns into a pseudo hibernation, and a longer starving period requires a short period to recuperate to simulate say a thawing or re animation period?

It doesn't really change the side effects and still keeps it pretty simple. The only issue I could see with it is a way of communicating the resupply waiting period issue in game. It Could end up slightly less simple for unexperienced players as well.

I'd say it pretty much removes the side effects. Why bother give them food at all? You usually have plenty of time in an SoI to hit one of the recuperation periods and then just keep orbiting away until another and do stuff. Why have a life support mod if you aren't going to use it to support the life of your kerbals.

[RoverDude]

I think it overcomplicates things. And if someone wants to have food waiting there or do secondary supply missions, I am ok with that, since in both cases it's likely easier to just send supplies with your ship in the first place

[Hevak]

I think it overcomplicates things. And if someone wants to have food waiting there or do secondary supply missions, I am ok with that, since in both cases it's likely easier to just send supplies with your ship in the first place

That was my other thought. I'd really only see it as more being able to just fly a ship on strike to another SOI and linking up negating the need for supplies at all at times. Or for just doing a round trip and starving them the way back or something. But it was just a thought, and yeah it is more work to dock or send other ships. Just wanted to throw it out there

I'd say it pretty much removes the side effects. Why bother give them food at all? You usually have plenty of time in an SoI to hit one of the recuperation periods and then just keep orbiting away until another and do stuff. Why have a life support mod if you aren't going to use it to support the life of your kerbals.

well as seen above Roverdude nixed it anyways, but I think you mistook my post, I may not have explained it well. Because it didn't remove any side effects in any way. What I meant was starved kerbals wouldn't instantly go back to work after being starved for awhile. They would take some more time to go back to work once fed or in the kerbin safe zone. So it actually added a bit more to the side effects not removed them. It would make one more likely to not starve them for long periods if they needed more time even after being fed to work again.

For instance right now on any mission that takes less than 15 days to get to destination and do whats needed why send supplies? If youre good enough and can go there and set up a decent reentry ( depends on reentry difficulty of course.) in one go you can fly ther and back with no supplies and get instant control back once in the kerbin safe zone. In my idea you wouldn't because they would need a period of time to regain consciousness or be well enough to function again, or however one wants to rationalize the time it takes for kerbals to function again after being fed. So even if you reach the kerbin safe zone after starving them you wouldn't gain control back in time to control anything on the ship. That's what i was going for.

But it's all good just was throwing some thoughts and ideas out there on some possible tweaks..

Edited May 16, 2015 by Hevak

[Dreadp1r4te]

So when 1.0 came out, I resolved to add TACLS to my mod lineup to make things more... interesting. I wanted to be able to set up colonies, which MKS/OKS allowed me to do just beautifully, and integrating with TACLS so that I actually had to make resources with those colonies to keep them alive sounded like a fun idea. I was a bit hesitant because I try to avoid mods that are "too complex" because I feel they're not quite in the spirit of Kerbal... just my opinion, mind you; the mods themselves are fantastic but it took some doing to convince myself to try them. Lo and behold, when I went to KSP's forums to download TACLS, I discover this; a mod that seamlessly integrates with one of my favorite mods already, and keeps the whimsical, amusing nature of the Kerbals alive and well. Fantastic work, Roverdude, thanks a ton for all you do.

[RoverDude]

Awesome

And yep, it's a fine balance - this mod definitely does not fill the same niche TAC-LS does (TAC-LS already does a fantastic job in that niche). but for the niche that it does fill, I'm pretty happy so far with the results.

[futrtrubl]

What I meant was starved kerbals wouldn't instantly go back to work after being starved for awhile. They would take some more time to go back to work once fed or in the kerbin safe zone. So it actually added a bit more to the side effects not removed them. It would make one more likely to not starve them for long periods if they needed more time even after being fed to work again.

Ahh, then I did misunderstand.

[chootrain]

I found some inconsistency with the electrical drain during time warp. I'm not sure if its a bug or made by design.

Having life support on board drains electricity. Nominal EC drain (for me) is 0.01 charge/s at 1x time warp.

Whenever I increase time warp, the electrical drain increases with the time warp (2x speed - 0.02 charge/s, 10x speed - 0.1 c/s, all the way up to 100x - 1 charge/s)

But whenever I time warp 1000x and faster, the EC drain drops down to the nominal value (0.01 charge/s).

Is this intentional? Am I nitpicking at the smallest details?

Relevant log for the time warp (didnt see anything out of the ordinary):

[LOG 16:59:41.254] Reference Frame: Inertial

[LOG 16:59:41.273] [Progress Node Complete]: RecordsSpeed

[LOG 16:59:41.275] [Progress Node Complete]: RecordsDistance

[LOG 16:59:41.555] [Progress Node Reached]: Orbit

[LOG 16:59:41.557] [Progress Node Reached]: Kerbin

[LOG 16:59:41.558] [Progress Node Complete]: Orbit

[LOG 16:59:42.739] Unpacking Untitled Space Craft

[LOG 16:59:52.902] [PlanetariumCamera]: Focus: Untitled Space Craft

[LOG 16:59:52.922] [PlanetariumCamera]: Focus: Untitled Space Craft

[LOG 16:59:52.969] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texBackground.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.972] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texBackground_left.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.974] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texNoPath.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.976] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texPath.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.979] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texNoOmniDish.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.981] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texDish.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.983] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texOmni.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.985] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texOmniDish.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.987] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texNoCone.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.989] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texCone.png) success

[LOG 16:59:52.992] RemoteTech: LoadImageFromRessource(texSatellite.png) success

[LOG 17:00:46.230] Packing Untitled Space Craft for orbit

[LOG 17:00:58.063] [AsteroidSpawner]: New object found near Kerbin: Ast. DFB-275!

USI LS settings file

LIFE_SUPPORT_SETTINGS

{

SupplyTime = 64800

CausesDeath = true

ECAmount = 0.1

}

[johnsonwax]

This is normal behavior in the stock game. If you look in Squad/Resources/ResourceDefaults.cfg you'll see:

RESOURCE_CONFIGURATION
{
	HeatEnabled = True			//Thermal effects for generators and drills
	ECMinScale = 100			//Do not calc scaled EC till this warp
	OverlayStyle = 1			//(Integer) 1=Line, 2=Dot, 3=Solid
}

So warp over 100 and it just ignores EC. You can increase that value there and it'll carry across to everything in the game. Not sure if that's changeable via MM, but I wouldn't be surprised. MM is wizardry.

[RoverDude]

Actually.... I wrote that code for stock

It does interpolation after 100x warp - and when in doubt, will err in favor of the player. This mostly has to do with batteries and intermediary storage over very large chunks of time (i.e. extreme warp or unattended/catchup processing).

[chootrain]

Oh snap, you're totally right. Thanks!

LS were the first resource I had to deal with, so I though it was this mod. Sorry.

Roverdude: you update KSP almost like if it was your job..

[Olsson]

Is there a way to remove the orange suits immunity? Right now thats the only thing that makes me use TACLS instead of this.

EDIT: I'm a long time player of KSP, I enjoy improved stock but not a fan of a 100% realism take like FAR and TACLS.

But I use orange suits alot and it would add more depth for me if they weren't immune. I mean this is my personal preference and I understand and agree with the choice to make the immune for the mod.

But there might be a simple .cfg edit to make them non-immune?

Edited May 17, 2015 by Olsson

[masterP]

Is it possible to produce more supplies than consume in a spacecraft?

[johnsonwax]

With UKS, you can mine water/substrate and make supplies and turn a surplus that way, but there's no way to turn a profit just from mulch->supplies.

[RoverDude]

Correct. You can go farming with MKS/OKS, but not on a space station (conservation of mass and such)

[goldenpsp]

Man I love these mods, but it's making my head hurt... :-)

[KerbMav]

I lost all of my active and archived contracts, I think it happened after either a quickload in space, switching a vessel from a long distance, a kerbal from a rescue contract being killed by USI-LifeSupport or maybe ShipManifest trouble.

Can you see anything in the log that might narrow it down?

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3sth7matznes7tv/AACb9Hngcennw12ZuBGNexG2a?dl=0

[Benno]

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?

It seems to me that the Pioneer module should have some minimal mulch storage capacity? It's supposed to have an integrated greenhouse for converting mulch to supplies, but the greenhouse can't work if there is no separate storage for mulch. Am I missing something?

[RoverDude]

It's assumed the pioneer module is attached to an MKS base unit, or in the case of OKS, tied to a storage unit.