[1.1.2] Year 2200 - A Nuclear Future (Testing)

[MatterBeam]

Hi.

Year2200 is an all-encompassing mod that allows you to build a nuclear future.
It handles power generation, propulsion and new resources to manage.
The objective is a simple, integrated mod that balances gameplay options with realistic accuracy and minimal set-up.

Teaser Album:

Features:

Five nuclear reactors producing two types of output.
Four multi-mode engines.
New ISRU units and reworked resource converters.
Three nuclear resources and two fuels resources. 
Resource switching for all Ore and Fuel tanks.
Integrated Rocket-Building.

Requires:

Module Manager
Tweakscale

Recommended:

Real Solar System
Thermal Monitor

---

Downloads

SpaceDock.
Dropbox.
 

---

Completed:
Engine parameters.
Reactor resources and initial balancing.
Resource switching and converters.
Resource extraction and scanning.
Tech tree and costs

In development:
Stock power level .cfg file.

Planned:
Stock power level .cfg file.
Test for compatibility with other mods. 
Create tutorial.

Changelog:

v6:
Part placement on tech tree.
Increased engine thrust and power consumption.

v5:
Test release.

v4:
Finished up resource side: ISURU/MiniISRU now replaced by AdvancedIRSU, with separate LF/Ox/MP/LH converters.
Second round of temperature behavior balancing.
Increased reactor power density by about 2-3x.

---

Disclaimers:

This mod contains part models and textures from KSPI-Extended and Near Future Propulsion, so thanks to @FreeThinker and @Nertea for creating them
This mod contains plugins from InterstellarFuelSwitch and ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads, so thanks to @FreeThinker and @taniwha for providing them.

This work is Licensed under a Creative Commons

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Edited May 24, 2016 by MatterBeam

[FreeThinker]

Good luck

[MatterBeam]

Just now, FreeThinker said:

Good luck

Thanks.

This replaces SimpleNuclear and integrates SimpleConstruction, but they will be available separately.

[FreeThinker]

I suggest you make use of Warecrawler new engine switcher to allow you engine to switch between propellants on your thermal nozzle. Please just make sure your part don't have the same part names as KSPI

Edited May 8, 2016 by FreeThinker

[MatterBeam]

Just now, FreeThinker said:

I suggest you make use of Warecrawler new engine switcher to allow you engine to switch between propellants on your thermal nozzle. Please just make sure your part don't have the same part names as KSPI

I'll look into that in the future. For now, the multi-mode engines have two modes at most, and I hope to limit dependencies to a maximum. I have unique names for all parts, don't worry.

[PauloRazen]

Good luck. its feel nice.

[MatterBeam]

After a very time consuming temperature balancing pass for the reactors, I came to the decision that increasing the power density (the MW/ton) by about 100-150% was necessary. 

The reasoning was two-fold:
-At historical power output, the reactors would only be useful for very large payloads. For example, even the lightest reactor (Tokamak) with the highest Isp engine (MPD-Thruster) would only become advantageous over a simple chemical solution at dry masses of over 100 or so tons (and with very low TWR). A KSP player rarely ever gets 100 tons in dry mass. In perspective, that's a 1000 ton rocket with fuel... in space, not on the launchpad.
-I used rather conservative historical figures for the thermal reactors, and optimisitic figures for electric reactors. Since this is 2 centuries from now, I increased both to avoid the problem mentioned before.

I managed to mostly complete the ISRU side of things. The AdvancedISRU only does 1-to-1 resource conversions, but can perform many at the same time. For example, it won't make the perfect LF/Ox mix from Ore, but requires you to provide Water for Oxidizer, and Ore for LiquidFuel. 

One conclusion that resulted from various tests was that all cores shutdown or explode on time warp, so nuclear solutions for providing electric charge ( a small reactor plus electric generator, for example) always fail even if the thermal set-up is balanced in real time. I might have to provide a rebalanced radio-isotope generator to compensate, or a beefier Year2200 version....

Comment if you want pictures of the progress. 

[MatterBeam]

Test release up.

Edited May 23, 2016 by MatterBeam

[MatterBeam]

SpaceDock page created.

[ISE]

I appreciate your work and am very glad to see this mod! thank you for all the work and keep it up! 

Tnx again @MatterBeam Look forward to your progress 

[MatterBeam]

57 minutes ago, ISE said:

I appreciate your work and am very glad to see this mod! thank you for all the work and keep it up! 

Tnx again @MatterBeam Look forward to your progress 

I'm fueled by such encouragements. I'm going through a round of testing right now. Next step is to put everything in its appropriate place in the tech tree,

[MatterBeam]

v6:
Part placement on tech tree.
Increased engine thrust and power consumption.

v7:
Fixed Gimbal Modules on thermal engines.
Rebalanced Thermal Turbojet (Doubled consumption to 120MW max).
Rebalanced Solid Fission reactor (Output reduced to 1500MWt). 

Edited May 24, 2016 by MatterBeam

[CobaltWolf]

Shouldn't this be in Addon Development?

[MatterBeam]

Releasing v8. Lots of changes.

-Added nuclear fuels to the Nuclear Processing Plant.
-Reworked some engine MW consumption rates.
-Increased Thermal Turbojet mass. 
-Reduced output of Tokamak reactor from 6000 to 4000MWe (333MW/ton).
-Made progress in engine FX. 

Further discussion/development of this mod will be through the release thread.

[Txzeenath]

Not to be offensive in any way, just thinking out loud really. But why do we need two nuclear/future tech engine mods? I would think the development time would be better spent on a common plugin using github pull requests.

[MatterBeam]

1 hour ago, Txzeenath said:

Not to be offensive in any way, just thinking out loud really. But why do we need two nuclear/future tech engine mods? I would think the development time would be better spent on a common plugin using github pull requests.

Different power levels, different mechanics, different balances between realism and gameplay.

KSPI-E is rather realistic, much more complex and much more powerful (like a 64GW reactor and a 100000 Isp rockets ect).

Near Future is much more realistic despite concessions towards gameplay, quite complex but very weak (like 100kW reactors and 2kN engines).

USI is not realistic at all, easy to handle and balanced towards stock gameplay.

Mine, Year2200, is rather realistic, but easy to handle and with decent power levels (like 1.5GW reactors and 1000 Isp rockets).

[Txzeenath]

19 minutes ago, MatterBeam said:

KSPI-E is rather realistic, much more complex and much more powerful (like a 64GW reactor and a 100000 Isp rockets ect).

Near Future is much more realistic despite concessions towards gameplay, quite complex but very weak (like 100kW reactors and 2kN engines).

USI is not realistic at all, easy to handle and balanced towards stock gameplay.

Mine, Year2200, is rather realistic, but easy to handle and with decent power levels (like 1.5GW reactors and 1000 Isp rockets).

 

I don't really consider most of the other systems as comparable to this or KSPI-E, since they seem to fall closer to enhanced/improved stock, versus "kerbals on steroids". But being essentially a minimalist KSPI-E, I could see a niche for that.

My usual worry on any game when I start seeing mods that have a lot of overlap, is that it essentially causes a divide and "dilutes" the options to players. But having a lightweight KSPI could be beneficial as I've seen a fair number of people turn away or be discouraged by interstellar due to the complexity.

I'm curious how compatibility will be in the future, say, if I wanted to create a MM patch to make the parts use interstellar's units for mixing/matching (pfft. who needs balance :-p).

Edited June 9, 2016 by Txzeenath

[GhostboyDB]

Is this still happening?

[MatterBeam]

13 hours ago, GhostboyDB said:

Is this still happening?