totm may 2024 [1.12.x] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

[dboi88]

17 minutes ago, wile1411 said:

But that's awesome! I'm early on in my MKS game and only just landed on the Mun, but I'm currently working contracts to scrape enough unlocked HAB benefits together to launch my Minmus mission. I'm going to have to hire a scout tonight and start that mission NOW!

Any reason the Scout isn't one of the new skills added or that just something that was overlooked? The pages says 9 news skills for a total of twelve (Scout now being one of them). Scout is only mentioned in the "Crew Skills Breakout Table" part of the wiki page. 

I can submit a wiki page edit if that helps, or should I leave that to those who have had experience with the GitHub wiki formatting?

The scout is a brand new addition that no one's added yet. Feel free to edit the wiki yourself. See us here if you want to discuss any changes. Get help with markup or simply ask some to give your changes a pass over.

 

[symmeclept]

<Snip>

1 hour ago, Mandella said:

The need to have material kits to "simply" inflate a module took me by surprise the first time too, then I understood the logic. The kits comprise the "materials" you are filling the module with to turn it from a simple pressurized balloon into an actual working facility, whether hab or greenhouse or whatever...

It does make sense, and now I make sure I have plenty in store for my build-a-base projects...

That actually makes sense. It just caught me off guard. I haven't played in a while, and MKS is constantly changing, I guess I missed it. Lesson learned.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Val
Non-content

[dboi88]

13 minutes ago, symmeclept said:

That actually makes sense. It just caught me off guard. I haven't played in a while, and MKS is constantly changing, I guess I missed it. Lesson learned.

Glad you got everything sorted. Please feel free to PM me if you want to bounce anything around while getting back up to speed. 

[cyberKerb]

41 minutes ago, dboi88 said:

The scout is a brand new addition that no one's added yet. Feel free to edit the wiki yourself. See us here if you want to discuss any changes. Get help with markup or simply ask some to give your changes a pass over.

Thanks - I've made the wiki modification to add a little info on the Scout.

Only bit I wasn't 100% sure about was the Crew Skills To Function Table so I added a "Hab/Home Timer Immunity" function and hoped it would make sense to someone else reading it for the first time. Not quite sure if timer immunity qualifies as a function, but it seemed the right place for it.

 

[dboi88]

Just now, wile1411 said:

Thanks - I've made the wiki modification to add a little info on the Scout.

Only bit I wasn't 100% sure about was the Crew Skills To Function Table so I added a "Hab/Home Timer Immunity" function and hoped it would make sense to someone else reading it for the first time. Not quite sure if timer immunity qualifies as a function, but it seemed the right place for it.

 

Great Job! On behalf of everyone this will help, thanks a lot. I agree with the way you've added it in there it makes perfect sense.

[Val]

It seems tempers have cooled down, but I'd like to remind everyone:

Posting while angry is more likely to get you infraction points, than getting people to listen to you.

Don't do it. 

[sh1pman]

11 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Do both vessels have a Kerbal in them?  One requirement for sharing stuff is that the vessels are occupied.

And yep if you can remove the MechJeb stuff that will help me test.

Here is the new one: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/46597246/LSBug.sfs

And yes, both vessels have Kerbals in them. Resource sharing is fine - it's just that the Kerbal in one vessel doesn't benefit from the recyclers on another one.

[damerell]

I'm a bit confused about the new roles, and I think I'm missing something obvious. (Vexingly, the comment on them "spelled out by RoverDude" was lost in the threadmageddon). From the table on the Wiki, it seems that the classic three roles are "just better" than the others - why bring a medic, farmer, or biologist, when a scientist can do all three?

[LatiMacciato]

5 minutes ago, damerell said:

I'm a bit confused about the new roles, and I think I'm missing something obvious. (Vexingly, the comment on them "spelled out by RoverDude" was lost in the threadmageddon). From the table on the Wiki, it seems that the classic three roles are "just better" than the others - why bring a medic, farmer, or biologist, when a scientist can do all three?

well, I guess to have cheaper replacement-Kerbals, its all about the funds (and specific tasks)

Edited January 17, 2017 by LatiMacciato

[dboi88]

4 minutes ago, damerell said:

I'm a bit confused about the new roles, and I think I'm missing something obvious. (Vexingly, the comment on them "spelled out by RoverDude" was lost in the threadmageddon). From the table on the Wiki, it seems that the classic three roles are "just better" than the others - why bring a medic, farmer, or biologist, when a scientist can do all three?

 

2 minutes ago, LatiMacciato said:

well, I guess to have cheaper replacememt-Kerbals, its all about the funds

@LatiMacciato has it spot on. I'd also like to add my thoughts on the professions. I like to role play a lot with my KSP saves. So being able to tailor all my crews for their specific bases is awesome. So i reserve my expensive main 3 professions for 'missions' but if i just need a crew on my mining outpost ill send a medic, quartermaster and miner. For my refinery outposts an technician, medic, quartermaster. Some of my bases have science wing's which i fill with a mix of 5 or 10 farmers/bilogists/kolonists. Or i'll add an extra hab wing and send 10 Kolonists.

This saves the expensive purchasing of countless main professions or the normal grindy rescue missions.

[zabieru]

Yeah, they're cheaper. Plus you'll notice that some of the roles get double kolonization bonuses: Farmers can only do part of what Scientists can (ag modules, but not lab research or whatever) but for Kolonization purposes they count as both a Scientist AND a Pilot.

They're definitely not meant to replace or improve on actual astronaut-kerbals. They're mostly a solution for that lategame problem you used to have in MKS where you needed another engineer but the price to hire new kerbals was jacked crazy high by your multiple colonies and bases...

[Kobymaru]

11 hours ago, TauPhraim said:

Are mechjeb and KER parts a problem ? (else I could remove them). But the biggest potential problem is I'm using Galileo planet pack. I should probably transplant the ship to another install.

Some unsolicited advice:

Use Mod parts only sparingly . Especially KER and MechJeb, because they are not strictly required for the functionality. The reason is that a) mods change, and updates take long. They would hold you back unnecessarily in your save after a KSP update, for example and b) it's just way easier to debug without them.

In your situation, you can install this 

. It is a simple and light-weight patch. Alternatively, there's a KER setting that enables it without using the part on your vessel.

Then you can remove the parts either with KIS, or with the "Disassemble Part" option from MKS or even with KSPPartRemover, but this requires you to have Mono.

 

[Li0n]

I have a small suggestion for MKS and its new profession sets :

Unlock those new professions with the tech tree. We don't need farmer until we unlock greenhouse, quartermaster until unlock part for Planetary Logistic, etc

I haven't fully experiment with last changes in MKS (yet) so this proposition might be unreasonable/too hard to implement/plain stupid... But I think it will help new player to not get lost with the bunch of new kerbal's profession and add some more role-play to the game.

[WuphonsReach]

General design rules that I've been using:

• Recyclers are not shared
• EC storage is not shared
• Supplies / Mulch storage is not shared
• Hab-time is shared (150m range)

You can use flex-o-tubes to link vessels (base components) together to form one single vessel that does then share things like recyclers, EC, and storage.  The downside is that large linked bases are more likely to summon the kraken.

Because of those design constraints, I give each "module" (collection of parts that will standalone) enough recycling power to handle the maximum expected number of kerbals.  Then I pack along extra batteries (20-50k EC), mulch storage, and supply storage, enough to last at least 30 days under full capacity / load while running on rails in the background.

(I'm not a fan of designs that require you to visit the base more frequently then every 30 days.)

[sh1pman]

2 minutes ago, WuphonsReach said:

General design rules that I've been using:

• Recyclers are not shared
• EC storage is not shared
• Supplies / Mulch storage is not shared
• Hab-time is shared (150m range)

You can use flex-o-tubes to link vessels (base components) together to form one single vessel that does then share things like recyclers, EC, and storage.  The downside is that large linked bases are more likely to summon the kraken.

Because of those design constraints, I give each "module" (collection of parts that will standalone) enough recycling power to handle the maximum expected number of kerbals.  Then I pack along extra batteries (20-50k EC), mulch storage, and supply storage, enough to last at least 30 days under full capacity / load while running on rails in the background.

(I'm not a fan of designs that require you to visit the base more frequently then every 30 days.)

I wish recyclers were shared. It kinda defeats the purpose of disconnected bases if you still have to add powerful recyclers to every vessel. If I have a water purifier running, everyone should benefit from it, not just the kerbals that are stationed on the same vessel. 

[damerell]

Ahhh. That makes sense. I'm playing about in sandbox so of course the extra costs weren't evident.

[dboi88]

6 minutes ago, WuphonsReach said:

The downside is that large linked bases are more likely to summon the kraken.

@WuphonsReach that's some good advice right there. In regards to the kraken i have faith! I'm confident now that kraken issues on large bases are now a thing of the past with the new ground anchor. If roverdude ever takes it away from me i'll find out where he lives .

2 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

I wish recyclers were shared. It kinda defeats the purpose of disconnected bases if you still have to add powerful recyclers to every vessel. If I have a water purifier running, everyone should benefit from it, not just the kerbals that are stationed on the same vessel. 

Hmm i'm not sure what i think about that. I've always had in my head that a life support system wouldn't clean air and water from a disconnected base. I think i like the idea of having the right sized recycler for each mini base.

[sh1pman]

32 minutes ago, dboi88 said:

Hmm i'm not sure what i think about that. I've always had in my head that a life support system wouldn't clean air and water from a disconnected base. I think i like the idea of having the right sized recycler for each mini base.

But there are invisible EC cables that distribute power, remember?

It'd make sense if there were invisible air/water pipes as well.

[dboi88]

12 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

But there are invisible EC cables that distribute power, remember?

It'd make sense if there were invisible air/water pipes as well.

Yep, that's why i'm not sure what i think about it rather than against it. I love me some resources via wi-fi  

Spoiler

Resources via wifi is a joke in case anyone get's their panties in a twist  

 

[Kaa253]

52 minutes ago, dboi88 said:

I'm confident now that kraken issues on large bases are now a thing of the past ...

While I have the same confidence that big single vessel bases are now viable I have always liked the idea of a village of small and disconnected facilities. For that reason I enjoy the MKS small steps to a big colony approach and try to follow it. Kraken or no.

My vision for living on the Moon or Mars is one where it doesn't require 2 hours to don your suit to just to take a walk next door or to simply enjoy the view. (Yes, I have been watching the ISS space walks - or more like space hand over hand "translations" on NASA TV  ).  

[benad]

Hi @RoverDude, just wanted to leave a big thanks here for releasing and maintaining your mods. They've added so much to my game play.

[Jacke]

4 hours ago, Kobymaru said:

Use Mod parts only sparingly . Especially KER and MechJeb, because they are not strictly required for the functionality. The reason is that a) mods change, and updates take long. They would hold you back unnecessarily in your save after a KSP update, for example and b) it's just way easier to debug without them.

In your situation, you can install this 

 

Because of issues with them, I've always avoided using mod's functional parts, those that allow access to the mod's functions, and instead used Module Manager scripts to add their functions to stock parts, usually command pods.  And I check when the mods update to see if I have to edit my scripts.

As working examples, you can use the scripts in @Malah's Stock Plugins, which is currently supported (unlike the above mod).

In the spoiler below is my MM script for parts-free MechJeb, which also changes the tech at which MechJeb functions are unlocked to Start, as well as add MechJeb functions when there's an External Command Seat (and I high suggest using the mod Take Command to get the full benefit of the External Seat).  As for KER, I just use its own internal setting to enable parts-free.

Spoiler

// MMJ-MechJeb-MC+KS.<date-version>.cfg
//
// Powered by ialdabaoth and sarbian's ModuleManager
//      http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/50533--/
// ModuleManager config coding by Jacke
//      http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/profile/103694-jacke/
// Licence Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
//      http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
//
// Include this file with mod MechJeb
//
// for MechJeb >= 2.1.1
//
// add MechJeb functions to all parts with MODULE ModuleCommand and/or KerbalSeat
//
// Version 20161224a
//
// 2016 Dec 24 Sat  changed to recreate existing MODULE MechJebCore to change the unlockTechs
// 2016 Dec 13 Tue  changed to one @PART block using '|' in :HAS code
// 2016 Dec 12 Mon  added :NEEDS[MechJeb2], added code block for KerbalSeat
//                  similar to Mahal's StockPlugins,
//                  renamed this file from MMJ-Graphotron-ModuleCommand
//                  to MMJ-MechJeb-MC+KS
// 2016 Apr 20 Wed  updated links for KSP new forum
// 2015 May 12 Tue  updated coding
// 2015 May 07 Thu  updated for KSP 1.0.2 and recent changes
// 2014 Aug 30 Sat  changed order of HAS tests
// 2014 Feb 20 Thu  MM coding by Jacke
//
// where    GameData/MechJeb2/
// what     MODULE MechJebCore
// file     all part files with ModuleCommand or KerbalSeat
// part     all parts with ModuleCommand or KerbalSeat
//
// Standard Command Modules and Kerbal carrying parts
//
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]|@MODULE[KerbalSeat]]:NEEDS[MechJeb2]:FINAL
{
	-MODULE[MechJebCore] {}		// delete any existing MODULE MechJebCore to change unlochTechs
	MODULE
	{
		name = MechJebCore
		MechJebLocalSettings {
			MechJebModuleCustomWindowEditor { unlockTechs = start }		// flightControl
			MechJebModuleSmartASS { unlockTechs = start }			// flightControl
			MechJebModuleManeuverPlanner { unlockTechs = start }		// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleNodeEditor { unlockTechs = start }			// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleTranslatron { unlockTechs = start }		// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleWarpHelper { unlockTechs = start }			// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleAttitudeAdjustment { unlockTechs = start }		// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleThrustWindow { unlockTechs = start }		// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleRCSBalancerWindow { unlockTechs = start }		// advFlightControl
			MechJebModuleRoverWindow { unlockTechs = start }		// fieldScience
			MechJebModuleAscentGuidance { unlockTechs = start }		// unmannedTech
			MechJebModuleLandingGuidance { unlockTechs = start }		// unmannedTech
			MechJebModuleSpaceplaneGuidance { unlockTechs = start }		// unmannedTech
			MechJebModuleDockingGuidance { unlockTechs = start }		// advUnmannedTech
			MechJebModuleRendezvousAutopilotWindow { unlockTechs = start }	// advUnmannedTech
			MechJebModuleRendezvousGuidance { unlockTechs = start }		// advUnmannedTech
		}
	}
}
//
// END OF MMJ-MechJeb-MC+KS.<date-version>.cfg

 

 

Edited January 17, 2017 by Jacke

[Gilph]

6 hours ago, WuphonsReach said:

General design rules that I've been using:

• Recyclers are not shared
• EC storage is not shared
• Supplies / Mulch storage is not shared
• Hab-time is shared (150m range)

You can use flex-o-tubes to link vessels (base components) together to form one single vessel that does then share things like recyclers, EC, and storage.  The downside is that large linked bases are more likely to summon the kraken.

Because of those design constraints, I give each "module" (collection of parts that will standalone) enough recycling power to handle the maximum expected number of kerbals.  Then I pack along extra batteries (20-50k EC), mulch storage, and supply storage, enough to last at least 30 days under full capacity / load while running on rails in the background.

(I'm not a fan of designs that require you to visit the base more frequently then every 30 days.)

Found out bullet three the hard way.

To be more specific, the supplies/mulch storage in the Ranger HAB inflatables are not shareable (maybe others), but there are other supplies/mulch containers that are, like the inflatable warehouses and the Kontainers.  I tried a "hotel" base with just Hab inflatables, and it would not pull supplies, and my AM did not pull the mulch to process.

To get around that, always have a Warehouse-enabled container for supplies/mulch, even if it's just the small one. I know warehousing/local logistics are being redone and that may change how this works.  Or, put your large Hab/Home devices attached to your AM so that mulch will accumulate locally, and you will only need the small container on the other bases so they can push/pull supplies and mulch from the kerbals that have to live there.

My workaround was that I kept the hotel and enabled all the hab quarters/hab common to share it with the other bases in range.  Moved all the kerbals out of the hotel.  My ASM base has a Tundra pioneer and the small supplies container.  Enabled the recycler and put two kerbals in. Put the rest in the AM base and enabled recycling on that Pioneer.  I did loose some overall base capacity and the hotel-attached recyclers are unused, but it still works, overall.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Gilph

[TauPhraim]

6 hours ago, WuphonsReach said:

Then I pack along extra batteries (20-50k EC)

What battery parts are you using for that ? Just stacking lot of stock batteries ? The MKS one has 6k so that's good, but you'd still need a lot.

[damerell]

If you're willing to go as far as TweakScale, TweakScaling up stock batteries produces - because the small batteries are longer in proportion to their width - thick large radius batteries with huge capacities. Nothing OP - the charge/mass ratio is unchanged, and you could stack a lot of the thin stock batteries to get the same effect, but it keeps down the part count.