[1.12.X] Kerbal Planetary Base Systems v1.6.15 [28. April 2022]

[TheRagingIrishman]

  On 11/10/2016 at 4:32 PM, DStaal said:

Though I can't be much direct help, I offer what help I can give.  If nothing else, I still have the GitHub and GitLab repos with configs for storage, EL, and a height adapter available, which I can add control of.  (Or you can fork, of course.)

Some of those configs would need to be modified slightly I know - storage currently adds Planetary storage to the large storage containers, when MKS has moved it to a logistics center, for instance.  It'll probably need to get moved to the Central Hub.

Expand  

 

I'll fork the github repo and start working on it. I'll have a fair amount of time this weekend (and no ability to play KSP) so I can definitely get some work done.

[Benji13]

So this implement USI LS into the greenhouses n stuff? If so I am definitely downloading. 

[Justinjah91]

First off, thank you for this amazing mod. I absolutely love this base system.

I was wondering if the IVA textures are supposed to be low resolution (This isn't a criticism, I'm just wondering if I've got something set incorrectly). I have all of my texture details and anti-aliasing on max, but the sticky notes in IVA are still illegible. Please don't misread my post; I understand that this is provided for free when there is no obligation to do so. I just want to make sure I'm not missing out on something.

Edit: I love it when I try to take screenshots of the problem and the problem magically disappears.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Justinjah91
Problem magically disappeared

[AmpCat]

Noticed this vanished from CKAN. I'm totally capable of installing it manually, but I'm also lazy, and love it when software auto-updates things for me.   And the fact that CKAN can't gracefully upgrade from a manual install when it does finally make it there, makes it all the more aggravating to have both manual mods and CKAN managed ones.

Any reason why it's not on CKAN? Don't yell at me for asking, just curious.

[tsaven]

I'm not sure how much help I can be, as I made the mistake of getting myself another job so my free time is decidedly more limited.

However, my understanding with the new UKS changes is that every cabaility or converter efficiency is directly tied to mass of the part.  This should make it a bit simpler, as I know last time we spent a good deal of time debating exact module specs for balance and gameplay. 

I haven't seen if RD has made his new balance guidelines available, but when he dos that will give us a solid starting point. 

[Nils277]

  On 11/11/2016 at 12:30 AM, AmpCat said:

Noticed this vanished from CKAN. I'm totally capable of installing it manually, but I'm also lazy, and love it when software auto-updates things for me.   And the fact that CKAN can't gracefully upgrade from a manual install when it does finally make it there, makes it all the more aggravating to have both manual mods and CKAN managed ones.

Any reason why it's not on CKAN? Don't yell at me for asking, just curious.

Expand  

I have absolutely no idea, why KPBS is not listed on CKAN anymore. It is not even in the list of incompatible mods. I have done nothing to remove it or similar. Will file an issue on Github, maybe the devsknow why KPBS is missing.

  On 11/11/2016 at 3:04 AM, tsaven said:

I'm not sure how much help I can be, as I made the mistake of getting myself another job so my free time is decidedly more limited.

However, my understanding with the new UKS changes is that every cabaility or converter efficiency is directly tied to mass of the part.  This should make it a bit simpler, as I know last time we spent a good deal of time debating exact module specs for balance and gameplay. 

I haven't seen if RD has made his new balance guidelines available, but when he dos that will give us a solid starting point. 

Expand  

At least habitation for USI-LS is not tied at all anymore to the mass. And the parts from MKS seem to be kinda unbalanced some are really op with more than 100 KerbalMonths, others have nearly no months or multiplier at all although they are bigger or heavier and should have the same purpose.

[tsaven]

  On 11/11/2016 at 6:45 AM, Nils277 said:

At least habitation for USI-LS is not tied at all anymore to the mass. And the parts from MKS seem to be kinda unbalanced some are really op with more than 100 KerbalMonths, others have nearly no months or multiplier at all although they are bigger or heavier and should have the same purpose.

Expand  

I thought it was directly tied to mass as well?  There are some parts that are insanely powerful, like the new Hab ring, but that comes at the expense of weighing 50+ tons.

[Wyzard]

I just recently started using this mod and I really like the little wedge-shaped containers!  Together with the 2.5m (round) storage racks, they'd actually work well as a standalone mod, independent of the planetary stuff — they provide a great way to build a generic "container transport" ship that can be loaded up with whatever type of resources need to be transported at the moment.

Are there any plans to add containers for additional resource types from the community resource pack?  I'm using Nertea's Near Future Propulsion , Near Future Electrical, and Cryogenic Engines , so it'd be nice to have containers for things like lithium, argon, uranium, and LH2.  (If not, I'm tempted to create them myself for my own use, but I have zero 3D-modeling skill so they'd all look like the existing LFO container.)

I just started a new career game so it'll be awhile before I'm ready to start building offworld bases, but I'm looking forward to building a Mun base with ISRU and a rover to carry fuel containers over to rockets that land nearby. 

[Nils277]

  On 11/11/2016 at 7:02 AM, tsaven said:

I thought it was directly tied to mass as well?  There are some parts that are insanely powerful, like the new Hab ring, but that comes at the expense of weighing 50+ tons.

Expand  

It was, but not anymore.
E.g.
MKS 'Duna' Kerbitat

• 4.45t
• 2 KerbalMonths
• Multiplier of 1.4.

MKS 'Ranger' Habitat Module:

• 2.656t
• 83 KerbalMonths and 16.8 Kerbalmonths plus a Multiplier of 5.2 (it has two habitation modules)

The MKS 'Tundra' Habitation Ring weights 'only' 7.07t in my install and has 497.5 Kerbalmonths. It is really big though.

The Duna kerbitat seems to have a bit less less than originally suggested, the last two have way more. I had a hard time trying to balance against these huge differences.
Also having KerbalMonths and a Multiplier was undesirable when i had it in the Greenhouse (or was it the lab?) some time ago and removed it therefore. This also seems to be ok now

  On 11/11/2016 at 7:11 AM, Wyzard said:

I just recently started using this mod and I really like the little wedge-shaped containers!  Together with the 2.5m (round) storage racks, they'd actually work well as a standalone mod, independent of the planetary stuff — they provide a great way to build a generic "container transport" ship that can be loaded up with whatever type of resources need to be transported at the moment.

Are there any plans to add containers for additional resource types from the community resource pack?  I'm using Nertea's Near Future Propulsion , Near Future Electrical, and Cryogenic Engines , so it'd be nice to have containers for things like lithium, argon, uranium, and LH2.  (If not, I'm tempted to create them myself for my own use, but I have zero 3D-modeling skill so they'd all look like the existing LFO container.)

I just started a new career game so it'll be awhile before I'm ready to start building offworld bases, but I'm looking forward to building a Mun base with ISRU and a rover to carry fuel containers over to rockets that land nearby. 

Expand  

Hmm...adding different looking containers for every Resource listed in the CRP would be a bit too much. Maybe a container with a fuel-switch and different icons would be useful. The question is: how do i determine which resources are actually needed? I might add container for NFP and NFE and Cryogenic Engines though.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Nils277

[Kobymaru]

  On 11/11/2016 at 6:45 AM, Nils277 said:

 And the parts from MKS seem to be kinda unbalanced some are really op with more than 100 KerbalMonths, others have nearly no months or multiplier at all although they are bigger or heavier and should have the same purpose.

Expand  

Note also, that in order to get the hab onus, you need to deploy the hab ring, which requires 44000 units of MaterialKits (which will be added to the mass). Yes, that's the correct number of Zeros. The smaller inflatables require less but still a lot of MaterialKits. Not sure if that changes your opinion on balance.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Kobymaru

[Kobymaru]

  On 11/11/2016 at 7:25 AM, Nils277 said:

MKS 'Ranger' Habitat Module:

• 2.656t
• 83 KerbalMonths and 16.8 Kerbalmonths plus a Multiplier of 5.2 (it has two habitation modules)

Expand  

When deployed, it's 10.647t. Also, the description is misleading: it's not 83 KerbalMonths and 16.8 Kerbalmonths+6.2 Multiplier but  83 KerbalMonths or16.8 Kerbalmonths+6.2 Multiplier.

You can choose between the "Hab-Common" and "Hab-Quarters" modules in the VAB, or you can change them on EVA with an engineer, paying a small fee (61 SpecialedParts, 305 MaterialKits and some EC).

 

  2 hours ago, Nils277 said:

The MKS 'Tundra' Habitation Ring weights 'only' 7.07t in my install and has 497.5 Kerbalmonths. It is really big though.

Expand  

When inflated, it weighs 53.08t.

[Nils277]

  On 11/11/2016 at 9:29 AM, Kobymaru said:

Note also, that in order to get the hab onus, you need to deploy the hab ring, which requires 44000 units of MaterialKits (which will be added to the mass). Yes, that's the correct number of Zeros. The smaller inflatables require less but still a lot of MaterialKits. Not sure if that changes your opinion on balance.

Expand  

Yeah, that is kinda balancing the whole thing. The problem on my side is to find good values for USI-LS only, when MKS is not installed. Using the old suggestions, the support for USI-LS only would be far inferior to any current life support MKS adds. This would mean to me, that users can only have longer supporting bases when they have MKS installed. Which is kinda contradictory to the purpose of KPBS for providing bases for longer stays on other planets.
I'm aware that the values that i have currently in KPBS for USI-LS support are not well balanced when used together with MKS because they do not need any MaterialKits. My scope was to add balanced parts for USI-LS only.

I don't have nearly enough time to even 'learn' all of the mechanisms of MKS...and maintaining balance and interoperability with MKS' constant changes is entirely impossible for me.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Nils277

[Kobymaru]

  On 11/11/2016 at 9:49 AM, Nils277 said:

I'm aware that the values that i have currently in KPBS for USI-LS support are not well balanced when used together with MKS because they do not need any MaterialKits.

Expand  

To be clear, MaterialKits are used only for deployment of the inflatables.

 

  14 minutes ago, Nils277 said:

My scope was to add balanced parts for USI-LS only.

Expand  

Well but you can still do that! The stock Cupola Module provides a 1.65 multiplier and the Stock Hitchhiker provides 21 extra Kerbal months. Then, there are two mini-cupolas, one with 0.7, one with 0.5 mult + 1 hab-month. You could use those numbers for balancing.

Also, I don't see a fundamental problem with simply incorporating the "Hab-Common" and "Hab-Quarters" modules into your parts conditionally if MKS is installed.

 

  14 minutes ago, Nils277 said:

I don't have nearly enough time to even 'learn' all of the mechanisms of MKS...and maintaining balance and interoperability with MKS' constant changes is entirely impossible for me.

Expand  

This I understand completely. That's why balancing should probably be left to a USI-LS+KBPS player of your trust.

[tsaven]

  On 11/11/2016 at 9:49 AM, Nils277 said:

I don't have nearly enough time to even 'learn' all of the mechanisms of MKS...and maintaining balance and interoperability with MKS' constant changes is entirely impossible for me.

Expand  

Fortunately, you've got a pretty dedicated fanbase that is willing to offer suggestions.  I think you're right that the priority should be offering balanced support for USI-LS, and perhaps a few functions of MKS like the wear mechanic.  But trying to replicate RD's complex manufacturing scheme would be futile, even though I like your models and IVAs much more.

Right now I've actually held off on playing 1.2 as I'm still waiting on a few other mods to be updated before I can move my saves over (and UKS has some pretty notable bugs that still need to be sorted).  But once it does I will offer any input that I can.

[Nils277]

  On 11/11/2016 at 10:14 AM, Kobymaru said:

To be clear, MaterialKits are used only for deployment of the inflatables.

Expand  

I know  

  On 11/11/2016 at 10:14 AM, Kobymaru said:

Well but you can still do that! The stock Cupola Module provides a 1.65 multiplier and the Stock Hitchhiker provides 21 extra Kerbal months. Then, there are two mini-cupolas, one with 0.7, one with 0.5 mult + 1 hab-month. You could use those numbers for balancing.

Also, I don't see a fundamental problem with simply incorporating the "Hab-Common" and "Hab-Quarters" modules into your parts conditionally if MKS is installed.

 

This I understand completely. That's why balancing should probably be left to a USI-LS+KBPS player of your trust.

Expand  

Already did that, but i also wanted to include the one mod into my calculation that most certanly has the most balanced values    

[RoverDude]

FYI- with the dust settling, I will be publishing new balance guidelines for USI-LS.  Note that these are based on mass as well as volume.

[Nils277]

  On 11/10/2016 at 11:24 PM, Justinjah91 said:

First off, thank you for this amazing mod. I absolutely love this base system.

I was wondering if the IVA textures are supposed to be low resolution (This isn't a criticism, I'm just wondering if I've got something set incorrectly). I have all of my texture details and anti-aliasing on max, but the sticky notes in IVA are still illegible. Please don't misread my post; I understand that this is provided for free when there is no obligation to do so. I just want to make sure I'm not missing out on something.

Edit: I love it when I try to take screenshots of the problem and the problem magically disappears.

Expand  

To be honest, i too think that there are some textures that are a bit low res e.g. the Habitat MK2. I have learned a lot since then. Maybe one day in the far far future, there will be an overhaul of the internals. 

  On 11/11/2016 at 12:15 PM, RoverDude said:

FYI- with the dust settling, I will be publishing new balance guidelines for USI-LS.  Note that these are based on mass as well as volume.

Expand  

Thanks for the info  Looking forward to it and will update the support accordingly. 

Edited November 11, 2016 by Nils277

[Rafael acevedo]

  On 11/11/2016 at 12:28 PM, Nils277 said:

To be honest, i too think that there are some textures that are a bit low res e.g. the Habitat MK2. I have learned a lot since then. Maybe one day in the far far future, there will be an overhaul of the internals. 

Thanks for the info  Looking forward to it and will update the support accordingly. 

Expand  

 Nils no rush you still have some of the most amazing Iva's around

[DStaal]

  On 11/11/2016 at 9:49 AM, Nils277 said:

Yeah, that is kinda balancing the whole thing. The problem on my side is to find good values for USI-LS only, when MKS is not installed. Using the old suggestions, the support for USI-LS only would be far inferior to any current life support MKS adds. This would mean to me, that users can only have longer supporting bases when they have MKS installed. Which is kinda contradictory to the purpose of KPBS for providing bases for longer stays on other planets.
I'm aware that the values that i have currently in KPBS for USI-LS support are not well balanced when used together with MKS because they do not need any MaterialKits. My scope was to add balanced parts for USI-LS only.

Expand  

One thought - from my understanding from reading the current USI threads, you can trade mass for EC usage in at least some cases.  Might be worth a look at balancing that way.  (And for the full MKS integration project you'd probably want to have something with ColonySupplies and a med center - which can reset habitation.)

[Wyzard]

  On 11/11/2016 at 7:25 AM, Nils277 said:

Maybe a container with a fuel-switch and different icons would be useful. The question is: how do i determine which resources are actually needed?

Expand  

Yeah, that's a bit tricky — ideally you don't want to have, say, Dirt or Antimatter as options for the switchable container if the player isn't using any mods that actually utilize those resources.  But if it's meant as just a generic fallback for resources that don't have their own specialized container, maybe that's not so bad.  The switchable container could be an optional extra that the player can choose whether to install, so people who don't need it can just leave it out of the game entirely.  You already have specialized containers for several popular mods, and I imagine that selection will gradually grow over time, so many people won't need the generic one.

[AmpCat]

  On 11/11/2016 at 6:45 AM, Nils277 said:

I have absolutely no idea, why KPBS is not listed on CKAN anymore. It is not even in the list of incompatible mods. I have done nothing to remove it or similar. Will file an issue on Github, maybe the devsknow why KPBS is missing.

Expand  

No reason is the best reason, I guess? Hope things get sorted out!

[Vorg]

I am seeing the X360 Small fuel tank textures are all wonky. Looks like the mapping was lost.

[Nils277]

  On 11/12/2016 at 4:59 AM, AmpCat said:

No reason is the best reason, I guess? Hope things get sorted out!

Expand  

Hope so. A bug report is filed, lets see what happens

  On 11/12/2016 at 7:48 AM, Vorg said:

I am seeing the X360 Small fuel tank textures are all wonky. Looks like the mapping was lost.

Expand  

The texture is upside down because of a moment of derp, will be fixed in the next version. 

[Benji13]

Could you please add a new part category for KPBS parts like USI did? I know it takes a while (from what I've heard) but it would neaten up the editor a lot. hanks or this great mod,

Benji13.

[Nils277]

  On 11/12/2016 at 11:57 AM, Benji13 said:

Could you please add a new part category for KPBS parts like USI did? I know it takes a while (from what I've heard) but it would neaten up the editor a lot. hanks or this great mod,

Benji13.

Expand  

This is already done  
Just open the file KPBS_config.cfg file in Kerbal Space Program/GameData/PlanetaryBaseInc and change the line: 
 

separateFunctionFilter = false 

to

separateFunctionFilter = True

This is also explained in one of the KSPedia entries of this mod  

@AmpCat & @Neroziat i got an answer from the CKAN team, KPBS is currently unavailable because the two mods listed as dependency 'Community Resource Pack' and 'Community Category Kit' are both still listed with KSP 1.2.0 as max version. A bug in the latest version of CKAN causes a mod with such dependencies to disappear completely, even from the list of incompatible mods. So we either have to wait for a fix in CKAN or for updates of the two mentioned mods.

Edited November 12, 2016 by Nils277