[1.1.3] MKS Lite - A lighter, friendlier colonization mod from USI [0.4.4]

[Fraz86]

I would love to use MKS-L, but one issue in particular precludes my enjoyment the mod:

Inflatable modules are fully crew-able and fully functional (e.g., agroponics can be activated) even when uninflated. There is no practical reason to actually inflate the modules; only for appearances. For me, the result is unbalanced and immersion-breaking. Why use a Hitchhiker when a Scout Hab can carry the same number of Kerbals in a fraction the space (in fact, the uninflated module has less volume than the 4 Kerbals it can carry), less than 1/3 the mass, plus it even comes with 2.5x greater crashTolerance?! Other mods with deployable parts (Porkjet's Habitat Pack, Nils' Kerbal Planetary Base Systems) made their modules useless when undeployed; I would be very happy if MKS-L did the same.

Edit: This complaint, of course, is in no way meant to disparage the otherwise excellent work RoverDude has done on this mod.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Fraz86

[goldenpsp]

5 minutes ago, Fraz86 said:

I would love to use MKS-L, but one issue in particular precludes my enjoyment the mod:

Inflatable modules are fully crew-able and fully functional (e.g., agroponics can be activated) even when uninflated. There is no practical reason to actually inflate the modules; only for appearances. For me, the result is unbalanced and immersion-breaking. Why use a Hitchhiker when a Scout Hab can carry the same number of Kerbals in a fraction the space (in fact, the uninflated module has less volume than the 4 Kerbals it can carry), less than 1/3 the mass, plus it even comes with 2.5x greater crashTolerance?! Other mods with deployable parts (Porkjet's Habitat Pack, Nils' Kerbal Planetary Base Systems) made their modules useless when undeployed; I would be very happy if MKS-L did the same.

Edit: This complaint, of course, is in no way meant to disparage the otherwise excellent work RoverDude has done on this mod.

You could just not put people in them.

[Fraz86]

2 hours ago, goldenpsp said:

You could just not put people in them.

I could also install the most blatantly overpowered of mods and promise myself not to use them in a "cheaty" manner, but I don't want to, because I'd rather just use mods that are well balanced and don't require me to impose imaginary rules regarding how I play the game.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Fraz86

[RoverDude]

There's a bit of a far cry from an OP engine vs. a part with crew capacity (That you will hardly ever use if you're using the mod right).  Easy enough to sort as I have the code elsewhere, but has been fairly low on the priority list as it's not breaking.

[goldenpsp]

1 minute ago, RoverDude said:

There's a bit of a far cry from an OP engine vs. a part with crew capacity (That you will hardly ever use if you're using the mod right).  Easy enough to sort as I have the code elsewhere, but has been fairly low on the priority list as it's not breaking.

To elaborate, in terms of MKS modules is there is a crowding factor.  So while you "could" fill all of those spots in inflatable modules, you will end up with an overcrowded situation and your MKS module functions will lose efficiency, in some cases a lot.

[Fraz86]

14 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

There's a bit of a far cry from an OP engine vs. a part with crew capacity (That you will hardly ever use if you're using the mod right).  Easy enough to sort as I have the code elsewhere, but has been fairly low on the priority list as it's not breaking.

I don't mean to imply that they're of equivalent severity. I'm merely attempting to illustrate that "don't use it that way" isn't really a helpful answer when addressing issues of balance and exploitability.

[blu3wolf]

The entire game is based on arbitrary rules that you set for yourself. Even which mods you install, arbitrary and self enforced. So far the argument seems to be that you lack the self control needed to stop yourself from using deflated inflatables. I'm sure there is a better argument to be made than that!

[Fraz86]

This isn't about self control - it's about balance, immersion, game mechanics that follow logically expected behavior, and the sense of quality that comes with attention to detail.

I originally discovered this issue when I deflated a hab after forgetting that I had Kerbals inside. Later, I was trying to figure out where my Kerbals were, and found all 4 of them inside the deflated hab. This was immersion-breaking for me. The realization that inflating these modules is "just for looks" was quite disappointing. And the fact that a deflated hab turns out to be outright superior to a Hitchhiker for transporting Kerbals is obviously not an intended use of the mod. I'm not saying it's a huge issue, but it certainly is an issue, and for some users (like me) this kind of thing is a significant turn off. RoverDude said he already has the code and it will be easy to sort out, so why not fix it?

Edited December 31, 2015 by Fraz86

[goldenpsp]

4 minutes ago, Fraz86 said:

This isn't about self control - it's about balance, immersion, game mechanics that follow logically expected behavior, and the sense of quality that comes with attention to detail.

I originally discovered this issue when I deflated a hab after forgetting that I had Kerbals inside. Later, I was trying to figure out where my Kerbals were, and found all 4 of them inside the deflated hab. This was immersion-breaking for me. The realization that inflating these modules is "just for looks" was quite disappointing. And the fact that a deflated hab turns out to be outright superior to a Hitchhiker for transporting Kerbals is obviously not an intended use of the mod. I'm not saying it's a huge issue, but it certainly is an issue, and for some users (like me) this kind of thing is a significant turn off. RoverDude said he already has the code and it will be easy to sort out, so why not fix it?

 

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

 Easy enough to sort as I have the code elsewhere, but has been fairly low on the priority list as it's not breaking.

 You could do something useful and log this as a github issue so Roverdude doesn't forget about it.

[insert_name]

mind adding remote tech compatibility for the comm thing

[RoverDude]

If you toss a pull request I'd be happy to add it - I personally don't use RT

[sirreality]

So I've been diving deeper into the math behind the mod in preparation for my first Minmus base, and wanted to share my findings.  First off, thanks for a great mod RoverDude, both here and all your other work.  It really is appreciated!  A summary of my data is available here, showing the relative rates of consumption of all the different MKS-L converters, along with some stock for reference.  A number of conclusions came out of the data:

1) The working supply chain takes 10 Supplies, to 10 Mulch (Kerbal's digestive tract), to 1 Fertilizer (Hab Module's Recycler), to 20 Organics (Ag Module's Agroponics with dirt), to 20 Supplies (Hab Module's Habitat).  Thus, it is only necessary to have a Hab Module, Ag Module, power, and dirt for a self-sustaining base.

2) Each unit of dirt, when used in the above supply chain, is capable of providing 0.02 Supplies.  Each unit of Supplies lasts nearly 1 Kerbal-Day (actually 5h33m).  Thus, each unit of dirt you have at a base provides an additional 400 Kerbal-seconds of life support.  Because of this, it is not feasible to simply deliver dirt to an orbital station occasionally, or bring a large supply of it with you as I thought it might have been originally.

3) The Nom-o-Matic's "Greenhouse" converter allows you to grow supplies in mulch, yielding 1 Supply for every 2 Mulch.  Because of infinite sums, this doubles your effective supply time when you are not self-sustaining as in 1) above.  Weighing in at 1.5t (1.6t with 100 Supplies), this makes it only weight-economical to add to a ship if you already have 2,467 supplies or more (equivalent to 5 1.25m NOMS).  So, add 5 1.25m NOMS, then add a greenhouse.

4) The larger Nom-o-Matic's Agroponics module is of use only when you have no Dirt available, and of limited use even then.  It uses 0.4 fertilizer and 2 Mulch to make 2.4 Supplies.  However, since Fertilizer is made from Mulch at 10% efficiency, this is actually like it using 6 Mulch to make 2.4 supplies - a losing proposition and inferior to its simple "Greenhouse" function.  Put another way, this is the only spot in the resource chain where Fertilizer is not worth 10x the mass of Mulch.  To align with the Ag Module's "Agroponics" it would either require 0.04 fertilizer and 2 Mulch, OR make not 2.4 but 6 supplies.  This would make the Nom-o-Matic's Agroponics a viable dirtless alternative to the Ag Module for a closed loop system, but could NOT create supply excess as with the Ag Module.

5) When compared to the Convert-o-Tron 125, the Comm-Lab's ISRU converters are exactly as efficient w.r.t Ore but 50% efficient w.r.t. Time and Electricity (it demands the same EC flow, is half-as-fast, but will eventually put out the same amount of ore).  I'm not sure this fits the label as a "very low efficiency fuel refinery" - it might be more accurate to say it's a half-speed fuel refinery.  As the Convert-o-Tron 125 is a full tech level up (requiring fully upgraded R&D), this seems potentially too strong for it's tech level.  Up to you, ultimately, but I would still be happy to use it at half its current refining efficiency.

6) The Power Pack is VERY strong compared to vanilla options despite being accessible earlier and lighter.  It can convert 1 Ore into 250,000 EC, while the Convert-o-Tron 250 and Fuel Cell (Array) can only get 340 EC out of 1 Ore, while being 28% slower to boot!  Again, up to you overall, merely doing the math.

Overall, an absolutely fantastic mod that warranted a good interesting look into some more of the math behind it.  There are potentially some areas for rebalance, but it's not game-breaking by any means.  I look forward to your continued excellent work, and appreciate your thoughts on these points.

Edited January 12, 2016 by sirreality
Math in 2)

[RoverDude]

Thanks for the insight   I like seeing stuff like this, since it helps me balance things accordingly.

[sirreality]

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

Thanks for the insight   I like seeing stuff like this, since it helps me balance things accordingly.

You're very welcome!  I have a great amount of respect for what you and the other modders do, and I'm far better at picking apart engineering cycles and math than any creative/generative stuff.  After looking at the descriptions a bit more, it appears to state that the larger Nom-o-Matic is NOT intended to be used with ISRU Fertilizer, but rather pre-packed Fertilizer.  I'm working on the math for that atm, to be posted in a second sheet at the above link. 

[nathan1]

I decided to try out a life support mod, so I downloaded MKS-L and USI-LS and have been playing around with them. After building my base on Minmus my habitation module didn't seem to be producing supplies. After a lot of testing I finally figured out that while it has a crew capacity of 4, it doesn't convert organics into supplies fast enough for even 3 kerbals. That the conversion speed supports fewer kerbals than the crew capacity did not seem to be indicated in any of the descriptions anywhere, and it seems counter-intuitive to me.

Since the habitation module is effectively converting poo into fertilizer and vegetables into prepared meals it seems to me that it should have a conversion speed fast enough to support the 4 kerbals in the habitation module.

Note: I'm not suggesting that the efficiency of resource conversion be changed; only the speed.

[sirreality]

Spent ENTIRELY too long figuring out optimal open-loop configurations and break-evens.  This is the final result:

[sirreality]

2 hours ago, nathan1 said:

I decided to try out a life support mod, so I downloaded MKS-L and USI-LS and have been playing around with them. After building my base on Minmus my habitation module didn't seem to be producing supplies. After a lot of testing I finally figured out that while it has a crew capacity of 4, it doesn't convert organics into supplies fast enough for even 3 kerbals. That the conversion speed supports fewer kerbals than the crew capacity did not seem to be indicated in any of the descriptions anywhere, and it seems counter-intuitive to me.

Since the habitation module is effectively converting poo into fertilizer and vegetables into prepared meals it seems to me that it should have a conversion speed fast enough to support the 4 kerbals in the habitation module.

Note: I'm not suggesting that the efficiency of resource conversion be changed; only the speed.

Good catch, I didn't see that when I was going through all my maths.  If you look here, you'll see that while each Kerbal consumes 0.5 Supplies per 10,000s, the Hab Module can only produce 1 Supply per 10,000s.  I completely agree that it is a little strange the Hab Module can only actually support 2 Kerbals completely when it can hold 4.  What do you think, would it make more sense to increase the rate to support it's capacity, or decrease it's capacity to 2 to match the rate?  Either is a simple config file change you could easily do - or if you let me know which one you like, I can do it for you. 

EDIT:

Upon further consideration of the rates involved, I think the following would be appropriate adjustments:

1) Double the Hab Module's "Habitat" Converter from 1E-4 to 2E-4 per second.  This brings it in line with both its capacity and with the production rate of the Organics by the Ag Module.  As it stands now, you need two Hab Modules (with space for 8 Kerbals) to handle the Output from one Ad Module, and it would only provide food for 4 Kerbals.  It would also change the rate-limiting step from the "Habitat" (with a buildup of Organics that can't be used anywhere else) to "Recycler" (with a buildup of Mulch which can be used in the Greenhouse).  This would provide a reason to include a greenhouse in a self-sufficient base, as there isn't one currently.

2) Double the Ore Consumption rate of the Comm-Lab ISRU to make it not just half-as-slow as the Convert-o-Matic 125, but half-as-efficient.

3) Increase the Ore Consumption rate of the Power Pack "Generator" from 1E-4 to 0.1.  This brings the ore consumption rate in line with all other things that consume ore, makes it meaningful, and reduces the EC/Ore from 250,000 to 250.  This is far more in line with the net 340 EC/Ore a Fuel Cell and Large Convert-o-Tron can achieve at the next Tech Tier.  It would also mean that you could not run an entire base off the power of 1 Regolith Sifter's Ore Production, but instead use it to supplement your solar panels.

As always, respect your work and merely attempting to apply my engineering eye to the system.

Edited January 12, 2016 by sirreality
Rate Suggestions

[RoverDude]

One hab per two kerbals is completely by design, so that bit will not be changing.  Just because you can physically stuff fifty people in your house for a party does not mean your septic system can support fifty people in there 24/7 for years on end

[mhoram]

1 hour ago, sirreality said:

Spent ENTIRELY too long figuring out optimal open-loop configurations and break-evens.  This is the final result:

 

Nice work!

There are a few details however that you don't take into account: how many Kerbals can you support with that setup and the duration of the trip.

A while back I investigated these things.

Edited January 12, 2016 by mhoram

[sirreality]

6 hours ago, RoverDude said:

One hab per two kerbals is completely by design, so that bit will not be changing.  Just because you can physically stuff fifty people in your house for a party does not mean your septic system can support fifty people in there 24/7 for years on end

Duly noted!  And oh goodness is that a fun mental image!

 

6 hours ago, mhoram said:

Nice work!

There are a few details however that you don't take into account: how many Kerbals can you support with that setup and the duration of the trip.

A while back I investigated these things.

Good work!  You are completely correct that I didn't take into account speed with those calculations.  It was already getting a bit overwrought.  This is just one level of abstraction and visualization of the data.

Quote

LIFE_SUPPORT_SETTINGS
{
    NoHomeEffect = 0            //Effect if a Kerbal becomes homesick
    NoHomeEffectVets = 0            //Effect if a Kerbai is a vet and becomes homesick
    HabMultiplier = 1            //Bonus to hab values (1 = default = 100% of the part's rated value)
    VetNames = Jebediah,Valentina,Bill,Bob
}

 

RoverDude, I wanted to ask about something I saw poking around in the config files.  Homesickness is something that is currently turned off, but seems like it can be enabled with a flag change.  What determines when a Kerbal gets homesick?  Also, what specific functions does the HabMultiplier effect?  The habmodule's conversion rates?

[RoverDude]

Homesickness comes into play in the next release, there will be details posted then   I just have to do it in conjunction with an MKS update

[sirreality]

On 1/6/2016 at 0:36 PM, insert_name said:

mind adding remote tech compatibility for the comm thing

 

On 1/6/2016 at 1:09 PM, RoverDude said:

If you toss a pull request I'd be happy to add it - I personally don't use RT

You should have just received a pull request from me.  In order to do this, I learned GitHub, modulemanager syntax, and even got Visual Studio running to scan the .dll's. You are quite the inspirational programmer!

On 1/12/2016 at 0:23 AM, sirreality said:

2) Double the Ore Consumption rate of the Comm-Lab ISRU to make it not just half-as-slow as the Convert-o-Matic 125, but half-as-efficient.

3) Increase the Ore Consumption rate of the Power Pack "Generator" from 1E-4 to 0.1.  This brings the ore consumption rate in line with all other things that consume ore, makes it meaningful, and reduces the EC/Ore from 250,000 to 250.  This is far more in line with the net 340 EC/Ore a Fuel Cell and Large Convert-o-Tron can achieve at the next Tech Tier.  It would also mean that you could not run an entire base off the power of 1 Regolith Sifter's Ore Production, but instead use it to supplement your solar panels.

What is your opinion on these changes?  If you're in favor (or have other numbers?) I could put in a pull request for these changes.  I'm seeing the allure ofmodding and using the github process and would love some more practice at it.   Obviously, don't want to step on your toes, nor spam pull requests at you.  Hope you're feeling better from the weekend sick!

[RoverDude]

Let me noodle them over, especially in light of the fact that I'm doing a fairly complete review right now (mostly figuring out how to make the processes a bit more intuitive and not quite stomp over eachother).

[sirreality]

7 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

Let me noodle them over, especially in light of the fact that I'm doing a fairly complete review right now (mostly figuring out how to make the processes a bit more intuitive and not quite stomp over eachother).

Totally fine.  It seems the RT pull request had validation issues on my end, figuring it out now.

[Joco223]

I'm trying to make a MKS-L base on Mun. Self-sustaining one. But every time i load it, or quickload, it just flies into the sky. I'm using KIS and KAS to assemble the base from one big container