Life Support - TAC or USI?

[goldenpsp]

40 minutes ago, Cornholio said:

I know that they're not packaged in that way, but I view USI and MKS as modules to the same suite. 

Which is completely unfair when replying to a lifesupport only thread, as each LS mod works equally well as a standalone mod.  There was a time that TAC-LS was pretty much our only LS option for MKS, yet you aren't holding TAC-LS to the same standard.

[RoverDude]

Yes, NASA would.  A lot of the plans out there for interstellar missions involve growing their own food along the way, as well as oxygen extraction, ISRU fuel for the return trip, etc. - you may want to do some research on the topic, it's interesting reading.

[RizzoTheRat]

14 hours ago, Cornholio said:

I am definitely taking this off topic, but do you think that NASA would plan an interplanetary mission where the crew would only survive and return if they were able to locate a finite amount of specific resources and refine them for use?

I suspect yes but not with the first trip manned, if you've read/seen The Martian I think they probably got it right there, the ascent stage landed and began refining fuel a long time before the crew arrived.  We tend to take more shortcuts with Kerbals though.

[RoverDude]

Yep, loved that book   Gave me lots of nifty ideas of things to incorporate into the mods - and prepping for a major release (likely tonight, it's a lot of final testing and packaging).

[RizzoTheRat]

Ooo, I'd better finish off my lift and shift rover tonight then

[jonrd463]

On 2/1/2016 at 4:43 AM, RizzoTheRat said:

I suspect yes but not with the first trip manned, if you've read/seen The Martian I think they probably got it right there, the ascent stage landed and began refining fuel a long time before the crew arrived.  We tend to take more shortcuts with Kerbals though.

I just established a Duna outpost following the defunct Copernicus / The Martian model, and it was one of the most satisfying bits of gameplay in KSP I've had in a long time. First, I established a RemoteTech network providing an unbroken connection between Duna and Mission Control. Next was a Scansat survey for resources and a suitable landing zone. Following that, I sent out a miner/refinery and Duna Ascent Vehicle, with a crate containing Pathfinder base equipment (sorry, Roverdude! I am using USI-LS tho) right behind it. Finally, I assembled the main transport vessel and lander in LKO and sent 3 Kerbals on their way. Upon arrival and landing, I assembled and deployed the base modules, and hooked up all the plumbing for the ISRU.

The base is equipped for 3 years. I have a Duna transfer window in a few months and will send an USI-LS greenhouse to extend the life of the base.

Sorry for veering off topic. Just wanted to describe how one could make an enjoyably complex mission with what mods provide, including life support, despite not being 100% realistic.

[cantab]

Something to consider that I don't think has been mentioned. TAC Life Support is basically stable. It hasn't changed much and it probably isn't going to. Start using it, build to work with it, and you're good. USI Life Support is still under heavy development and we can expect new features and requirements to emerge, balance changes on parts, and so on. Even with the number of config options Roverdude puts in, don't be surprised when an updated version makes your old ship designs no good or even puts your Kerbals on strike.

[Vim Razz]

It's worth noting that TAC-LS and USI-LS don't conflict with each other.  I've been running both of them and Snacks all together for a while now and having a lot of fun with it.

The added mass required for each mission along with the varying consequences for running out of food, supplies, or snacks can lead to some entertaining complications and decision making. (If you happen to be the sort who's entertained by that kind of thing, at least.)

[Madscientist16180]

On 1/2/2016 at 6:09 PM, Vim Razz said:

It's worth noting that TAC-LS and USI-LS don't conflict with each other.  I've been running both of them and Snacks all together for a while now and having a lot of fun with it.

The added mass required for each mission along with the varying consequences for running out of food, supplies, or snacks can lead to some entertaining complications and decision making. (If you happen to be the sort who's entertained by that kind of thing, at least.)

So, you do say that both can be used together? Does the Kolonization part allows to create/recycle ressources for both LS system? Or do I have to set-up a proper TAC recycling rig somewhere on my bases? 

Using TAC in my career, i'd like to try USI but if i remove TAC, i'll break some ships actually in space.

[RoverDude]

UKS will not be very happy if you have both installed, so I would not recommend it.

(Side note - if you're looking to just swap out LS without breaking existing ships, leave the TAC-LS parts, and remove the TAC-LS DLLs, etc. and that should sort it)

[Vim Razz]

11 hours ago, Madscientist16180 said:

So, you do say that both can be used together? Does the Kolonization part allows to create/recycle ressources for both LS system? Or do I have to set-up a proper TAC recycling rig somewhere on my bases? 

Using TAC in my career, i'd like to try USI but if i remove TAC, i'll break some ships actually in space.

What @RoverDude said.  They can be run together if you're not running anything else with them that wants you to pick either one or the other. (MKS/OKS, and some of the configurable container mods, I think.  I forget which ones have trouble.)

I'd recommend setting up a separate game install, though.  That makes it easier to experiment without permanently screwing everything up if you don't like the results.

Also, ships or stations built around TAC-LS don't translate to USI-LS well, so it would be hard to switch mid-game.  USI supplies and containers so heavy and bulky that you have to design around from the start them rather than trying to tack them onto existing hardware.  If you play with habitation space requirements enabled, then that brings even more creative constraints into play that just aren't an issue with TAC-LS.

[11of10]

Query: I tried using USI-LS in a RSS game, and it required a 3.75m supplies tank for 6 people for 38 days. Is that correct? TAC seems to give a much higher autonomy per unit of mass than USI.

Which one is more realistically based? 

Thank you

[Madscientist16180]

19 hours ago, RoverDude said:

UKS will not be very happy if you have both installed, so I would not recommend it.

(Side note - if you're looking to just swap out LS without breaking existing ships, leave the TAC-LS parts, and remove the TAC-LS DLLs, etc. and that should sort it)

Tks for the tips. I broke the technological threshold to build my first station last night, so will be starting playing around with USI today. I'm grateful for the tip on how to swap the mods without breakin my ships. So, i'll try a fully integrated USI game.

Installing.

[regex]

7 hours ago, 11of10 said:

Query: I tried using USI-LS in a RSS game, and it required a 3.75m supplies tank for 6 people for 38 days. Is that correct? TAC seems to give a much higher autonomy per unit of mass than USI.

Which one is more realistically based? 

Realism Overhaul recommends TAC LS and has its own configuration if you're looking for realistic.  USI LS uses abstractions and "Kerbalisms" where TAC LS with the RO config favors details and pays no attention to "game balance" because "game balance" does not exist in the real world.  It's a matter of taste which you use but if you're already leaning towards Realism Overhaul you'll be wanting TAC LS.

[Navy2k]

On 21.1.2016 at 4:55 AM, MeCripp said:

USI-LS is a kid's LS just like  Snack   IMO  TAC LS is far better if you want more real

Because TAC has oxygen water and food? but i always use the oxygen/Water/food tanks, sooo.

Leaves the converters to oxygen water and food, but I would take the greenhouse over them now.

I was strongly pro TACLS in the past but it feels "abandoned" to me and USI just brings added functionality while TACLS is "manage 3 resources in the same way with other base resources".

Greetings

Ben

[Table]

I don't think it really matters which one is better, I think everyone has their own preferences, I prefer TAC LS, with the retexture. Cuz it just looks cool

 

Both RoverDude, and TaranisElsu did a great job on these mods, so I think it's up to your preference.

[Stone Blue]

Just to add to the choices (and confusion ), here's another LS mod:
 

Also, JPLRepo has a sanity/mental health mod here:
 

 

[Noobton]

I like USI because it forces crew rotations and is not just enough to ship a bunch of probes with resupplies to keep my kerbals happy, also I like the not dying part because it allows for rescue missions.

[Manimal]

I have a problem running both mods in combination. During loading the loading stops at teh UKS Ag_Module.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8ievcm4sqgwqxcb/output_log.txt?dl=0

 

[DStaal]

4 hours ago, Manimal said:

I have a problem running both mods in combination. During loading the loading stops at teh UKS Ag_Module.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8ievcm4sqgwqxcb/output_log.txt?dl=0

 

Make sure you're UKS and USI-Core installs are up to date - that was a known issue a version or so back.

[Manimal]

I'm using 0.40.3.0, the latest that I found on the USI page. For the core I'm using the ones which come bundled with UKS.

[RoverDude]

Install KSP-AVC, it will show you which dependencies need updates.

[Domfluff]

TAC is older than USI Life support, and was definitely the best choice for a while. It's nice for Realism Overall saves, since the resources are real, meaning that it's easier to convert from genuine NASA numbers into a KSP game, and mods with realistic/detailed ISRU can do their things more directly.

That said, the Hab/Home mechanics of USI add a huge amount to the game. Hauling enough supplies to Duna to survive until the next transfer window was difficult to begin with, now the actual living space of the base needs to be thought about and planned for.

The softer default settings are also "stock-like" in design intent, since after the initial launch there is always a chance to rescue a mission failure - with the default settings you can always launch rescue missions or whatever if needed, and I think there's something to be said for that. You can clearly configure everything and turn it off, but USI Life Support is probably the closest to what Life Support would look like if it were part of the stock game.

[Manimal]

3 hours ago, Manimal said:

I'm using 0.40.3.0, the latest that I found on the USI page. For the core I'm using the ones which come bundled with UKS.

I'm using KSP-AVC and it does not complain. What I found is that TAC (0.12.1) is bundled with an older version of CRP (0.5.1.1 instead of 0.5.2.0). And another question, what is the difference between:

UKS_0.40.3.0

and

USI_Kolonization_Systems_MKS_OKS-0.40.3.0

 

they are the same size and apparently the same version?

 

 

[RoverDude]

Since you are using KSP-AVC, show me your addon list.  Because I suspect you are leaving out something.  Also where the heck are you getting those two different files?  

 

(Specifically, this screen here:)

Edited June 20, 2016 by RoverDude