What kind of life support would you like to see in stock?

[Grumman]

Oxygen, Water and Food are of course the three must-have components for a life support system. How about having different kinds of foods (meat, vegetables, bread, etc...) and drinks (water, soda, lemonade, etc...) and a Happiness stat for Kerbals. If Happiness is down for a long time, sanity will suffer.

Now, happiness is influenced by the types of food and drinks the kerbals are given (for example, fresh meat and vegetables will increase happiness and health), but of course, as in real life, the foods which are the yummiest, will get unhealthy.

That's a lot more finicky than we want for stock life support - a bunch of new resources and three needs that need to be micromanaged. It would be better to just make it a simple "unhappy kerbals eat more" relationship, with unhappiness caused by claustrophobia (a combination of lack of living space and lack of bravery) and boredom (a combination of a lack of company and stupidity).

[pincushionman]

That's a lot more finicky than we want for stock life support - a bunch of new resources and three needs that need to be micromanaged. It would be better to just make it a simple "unhappy kerbals eat more" relationship, with unhappiness caused by claustrophobia (a combination of lack of living space and lack of bravery) and boredom (a combination of a lack of company and stupidity).

I like how this ties the existing stats to gameplay, but even this becomes micromanagement. It's going to be tough enough to plan supplies for missions (see my previous post) without having to work out variable consumption rates per crew member and account for ill-defined living spaces. For stock it would be best to stick with a flat 1 unit/day (or hour, whatever. The point is it's an abstract unit so might as well make it easy to calculate), perhaps with an added wrinkle that tourists use 1.5 or something.

[Wjolcz]

My thread got merged with this one:

In my opinion life support has to happen sooner or later. I know some people don't like the idea of it, but I don't think they should be forced to use it. Everyone should have fun on their own rules and that's why it should be toggleable.

So let's keep it as simple as possible:

• Kerbals need electricity (CO2 filtering, water purification, heat, whatever) and food to survive. Food should be stored in the modules with crew. You can decide if you want to hold the crew in it or fill it with supplies instead.
  

• Greenhouse module (roughly the size of the lab module with big, glass windows) that would support X number of Kerbals for infinite amount of time. Needs a lot of electricity to grow food (AFAIK it's been done on ISS and other spacecraft, just on lower scale, so why not simply make the farm bigger?).
  

• Messages that would take into account the nearest low-dV transfers (or full implementation of KAC) for the bodies your Kerbals are on/orbiting with a rough calculation that would allow you to resupply them (r4pt0r's idea).
  

If the crew runs out of food it dies after, lets say, a month of not eating. They don't leave corpses, though. Simply disappear and are marked as "Missing In Action" on the crew list in KSC.

That's pretty much it. No need for the resource tab to get cluttered. The only new things we add to the system is one new resource and a part to generate it. The food has mass, of course.

Edited August 18, 2015 by Veeltch

[Red Iron Crown]

Merged into the existing life support discussion thread.

[Wjolcz]

Merged into the existing life support discussion thread.

But... But this idea is already in this thread!

[regex]

But... But this idea is already in this thread!

Well, then there was no need to post a duplicate thread, now was there?

[Wjolcz]

Well, then there was no need to post a duplicate thread, now was there?

Just wanted to have it separated. It's easier to read the OP than something stretched within few posts that you need to scroll through the whole thread to get the idea, though I guess you're right. If everyone posted a slight variation of someone's idea we would get flooded with threads really fast.

[klgraham1013]

Thread denied!

[Higgs]

IF we "must" have life support, one kind of life support comes to mind. Life Support. That's it. 1 term to fit the job. Simple.

[WinkAllKerb'']

way to speak for myself, but, i just want to see it implemented stock one way or another at first, then i ll could tell:

:confident: @ squad while waiting for it happen.

Edited August 21, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''
heyyyyy there's some antenna over there !i! xDr

[waterlubber]

I really don't want life support. If it was added, something similar to USI-LS would be fine. A simple part, that weighs about 2tons, and looks like a science lab, will be the "hydroponics greenhouse". It would have 60-70% efficiency without any speciality kerbals. However, with one engineer and one scientist, it approaches 100% efficiency. (Level 5 = 100%). Having low stupidity would increase efficiency, but two level 4 kerbals will be enough to run it, even if they're morons. It can also process Ore into Mulch, and therefore food. A smaller .5-ton 1.25m part, the Recyclotron, would convert 50% of mulch back into food. That way, for longer missions (balanced to Duna, essentially) you can save mass in the long run. The Hydroponics Greenhouse would be for stations, and the Recyclotron for ships. The Hydroponics lab would require electric charge in the dark, but would not require and would be more efficient in sunlight. It could operate at Eeloo with RTG's, but would prefer to be temperate, and near Eve or Kerbin's orbit.

[JedTech]

I would be disappointed if Water was not important in the stock game. One of the main things we hope to find in our exploration of the solar system is Water.

I suggest a LS feature that requires "Supplies", "Water", and "Electricity".

[tater]

I would be disappointed if Water was not important in the stock game. One of the main things we hope to find in our exploration of the solar system is Water.

I suggest a LS feature that requires "Supplies", "Water", and "Electricity".

Then Oxygen, then every other little thing.

LS need only account for power (used for the craft's LS systems), consumables (aggregated into ONE value), and optionally "waste" (RoverDude has said why waste is a good optional to add above).

That's it.

The added complexity of adding the different consumable resources is complexity for its own sake, with no actual value, IMO. Any parts/systems that are needed to utilize this complexity can simply be baked into existing parts. You can "bottom line" all into how much added mass is needed, and what the efficiency is (by altering the consumption rate of the consumables). Any system should have the fewest possible things to have to track. I have yet to see an example of a "complex" LS need where it cannot be done equally without tracking XX resources.

[WinkAllKerb'']

- 24th May 2015, 01:52 - answering: Designing Valentina Kerman, a perfect badass Kerbonaut by danRosas

I've always seen the Kerbs as genderless (up till now), I liked to think of them as asexual plant-people. Hence how they're able to survive in tiny capsules for years on end. They feed on sunlight!

But yeah, whatever, it's not like it's a big deal. It doesn't change the core game.

always mostly thought the same (aside the genderless thingy wich depend of the species) so:

N P K (& a few others nutrient eventually), water, light, co².

(wich could also be an interesting approach to talk about "most" plants and vegetals needs, and add an extra "teaching" 'layer' to ksp aside the rocket science thing, metaphorically speaking)

Edited August 21, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''
+ it would be cool as i won't have to do that part of my "in stand by" mod again if squad go this way ; ) xDr @ _ _ _ _ _

[monstah]

Then Oxygen, then every other little thing.

LS need only account for power (used for the craft's LS systems), consumables (aggregated into ONE value), and optionally "waste" (RoverDude has said why waste is a good optional to add above).

That's it.

The added complexity of adding the different consumable resources is complexity for its own sake, with no actual value, IMO. Any parts/systems that are needed to utilize this complexity can simply be baked into existing parts. You can "bottom line" all into how much added mass is needed, and what the efficiency is (by altering the consumption rate of the consumables). Any system should have the fewest possible things to have to track. I have yet to see an example of a "complex" LS need where it cannot be done equally without tracking XX resources.

Agree with everything here, and dig the "waste" option.

[panzer1b]

As long as it can be disabled i really dont care.

And if it cant be disabled, then im modding it out (or downloading a mod someone else made lol).

While im not fundamentally against life support systems, i just feel it will get too tedious to bother with (and make me switch to pure droids and drone craft which dont care about food). While initially it may be fun to have the immersion, sending resupplies out constantly will quickly get old especially when you end up having 100s of kerbals out in the kerbol system. And things like food resuppliers/growers/whatever will be what, excessive part counts you need to add.

I just feel that having a sort of hard limit on how long you can last without resupply would be more annoying in the long term then fun. Think about it, right now with fuel, yes you need to resupply long term missioins a few times, but you only need to supply them when you run out or low on fuel, something that is in my opinion fun but not tedious or annoying especially with teh advent of IRSU parts which make local supplying rather possible. That, and you can forget abotu a ship you dont feel like working with for the time being, and can focus on whatrever you feel like working on at the moment, never do you need to go out of your way to make sure noone dies (unless they happen to be on a collision course with something ).

That, and its also tough to balance, make the resource drain very low, and it can be ignored, while making it too high, and it becomes a pain in the arse to deal with. I know a slider would let everyone set their own preferences, but i feel its a waste of time to bother to code in a arguable controversial feature, when half the people playing the game (i know im speculating, no idea how many run life support now) would disable it anyways.

That, and who actually says that kerbals even need stuff liek oxegen, food, ect. There are many theories they are plants, or some kind of robot, who knows. Its not like every lifeform needs food, energy yes, but robots can harvest energy from teh sun, or if the sun isnt availeable, just plug into the capsule's outlet . Provided you have energy, and arent actually altering your mass (ofc if you grow then youd need some matter or food or whatever), but whos to say that kerbals arent just the same size and never change form, and if they do not produce any waste (assume they recycle their own waste and convert it back into something they need) the only thing kerbals would ever need at all is energy of some kind (if they can walk then need to use energy).

Edited August 21, 2015 by panzer1b

[WinkAllKerb'']

As long as it can be disabled i really dont care.

...

yup yup, it's an important additionnal micromanagement layer regarding mission duration and ressuply planification.

As you said it won't please everyone gameplay wise. Some people won't like it, and some will. so yup why not the ability to disable it when launching a career.

Edited August 21, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''

[panzer1b]

If wildlife is going to be added, you can hunt to get snacks.

HECK YES!

Finally a reason for having all those ibeam+sepatron or other varieties of missiles on your craft other then defending yourself from pirates.

That and every kerbal gets a rifle! Now i can have actual infantry combat! PLEASE IMPLEMENT HUNTING (or just give the kerbals all rifles so they can shoot at each other)!

I have to suggest this to BDArmory, kerbals are right now defenseless, they need to have firepower!

[WinkAllKerb'']

Agree with everything here, and dig the "waste" option.

definetely an important things too ; ) http://www.duneinfo.com/Content/images/arrakis/costumes/stillsuit-jacket.jpg

...

The added complexity of adding the different consumable resources is complexity for its own sake, ...

Conceptually, and for the said metaphorical realistic long/far flight/travel problematics related & conceptual teaching purpose, nope, it has to use a few ressources layers and not only one.

May be not much, may be only 2 or 3 could be fine to apprehend the inherent balancing required concept behind life support thingies, one layer only imho tend to be too simplistic regarding that, especially depending the audience.

Edited August 22, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''
pdigin typo ...

[tater]

definetely an important things too ; ) http://www.duneinfo.com/Content/images/arrakis/costumes/stillsuit-jacket.jpg

Conceptually' date=' and for conceptual related teaching purpose, nope,[i'] it has to use a few ressources layers and not only one.

May be not much, may be only 2 or 3 could be fine to apprehend the inherent balancing required concept behind life support thingies, one layer only tend to be too simplistic regarding that.

No, it doesn't. It's not one resource, it's one aggregate mass value for multiple resources. Mass. That's it. LS systems recover a % of O2, water, etc. They scrub waste CO2. The net result is X kg added mass needed per astronaut per day to the system. Give a concrete example where the needless added complexity is actually useful for teaching anything past the simple understanding that LS involves multiple factors. That can be added to the part descriptions, edu content taken care of.

My principal observation in using TAC was that my right click menus became annoying to the point of me not using it any more.

- - - Updated - - -

Instead of "noms" or other silly names, I'd prefer to see LS supplies called "consumables." The part description could include what is actually included.

The "balance" issues are all in design, so I would create a new set of LS parts, as well as values for extant crewed parts. The LS parts would be LS hardware, not consumables. Maybe they do a check like "connected living spaces," so they must be a child part of a crew container, or connected. They would chance the efficiency of scrubbing/recovery for the habs connected as a function of total connected crew aboard. Some might explicitly mention that they get a bonus if a power cell is used (water), for example, or might even function as one. The description would explain that they produce a small amount of power using fuel/oxidizer to generate water for LS.

net result is just lowering consumption slightly. (The balance of consumables loaded would be shifted to what is actually needed).

Edited August 22, 2015 by tater

[WinkAllKerb'']

what about 1 part (set of 1 part with different size cymlindre/mk2 3 etc.) with tweakable for "a few" different ressources value inside the said part to balance (kinda like current oxidizer/liquid fuel set up) and eventually variable need depending of mission, crew and contracts ?.

I tend to believe that not all mission need the same things exactly, each time, thats what i m thinking about behind this.

simplistic implementation exemple: (not limitative at all)

pilot could consume more this less that

scientist more this less that

engineer more this less that

extra mission need/goal/contract

or something alike

got your point regarding 'part count/assembling/ship design' but i definitely think a few different ressources value management layer is interesting. (without adding too much complexity, of course)

Edited August 22, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''

[tater]

Why would a pilot breathe, eat, or leave CO2 at a higher or lower rate than a scientist?

[WinkAllKerb'']

not sure may be this :

§ ; ) §

and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution and for same reason your asking me and i m don't asking you about it but made you ask it ; ) somehow it's like asking why not only one athlete win all the olympic medal in all sports ; specialisation, task sharing and a said specific being needs ; )

also, yup yup, it was a simplistic implementation approach as conceptual exemple but may be there other way to implement this a more polished way. or after all why not just like this as some sort of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emphasis

Edited August 23, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''

[tater]

There is a threat din the Science forum about Mars One (LOL). It links to an article that has the debate between the MIT paper authors who basically demonstrated in great detail why it is not a viable plan. I watched the vid. One of the more interesting stats they gave was the mass of spare parts required to keep the life support functional based upon RL data from ongoing LS maintenance on ISS. It amounted to multiple full Dragon loads of parts for a 26 month resupply period to have just a 50% chance of having the right parts available. Their figure for one crew of 4 for 26 months was 10,000kg of spare parts for a coin-flip capability to fix any LS problem (bad odds when the next possible resupply is 26 months). They show 9 Dragons required for the first 4 people (preloading with supplies, etc). The MIT guys show that they would need 4 more just for LS spare parts (wow).

This makes what we normally think of as "consumables" look pretty easy, mass wise.

I don't think any LS mods include this at all, so I bet their mass numbers are really optimistic. For a simple, stock system this just means increasing the mass of LS supplies used per kerbal, per day. It's also an entirely legit reason for having an engineer aboard reduce consumption (he's fixing the LS all the time). No outposts should be 100% efficient unless they have the capacity to manufacture spare parts (EPL?).

It might also be cool to have cheaper and lighter, but needs more resupply vs heavier, and way more expensive to need lower resupply.

Edited August 24, 2015 by tater

[Wjolcz]

...

I'm struggling to understand what gave you so much rep to get you to the light green group.

Guys, let's keep the LS as simple as possible. Electricity + Supplies should be all that is needed to keep your crew alive. If you wan't more complex LS just mod it in.