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

[sh1pman]

Can Smelt-o-magic serve as an efficiency part for other Smelt-o-matics?

[DStaal]

Before I submit it as a PR: Does anyone know of any reason not to increase 'staticAttachBreakForce' on the Ranger Anchor Hub by a factor of 10?  (I'm tired of them falling over the moment I try to attach something to them.)

[zabieru]

33 minutes ago, DStaal said:

Before I submit it as a PR: Does anyone know of any reason not to increase 'staticAttachBreakForce' on the Ranger Anchor Hub by a factor of 10?  (I'm tired of them falling over the moment I try to attach something to them.)

Seems legit: they don't have a lot of ground contact, but the center of gravity should be fairly low (except you can't do that in KSP, of course) and it looks like there's room for little shocks in those legs. They ought to be fairly stable.

Have you tried the ground tether? Does it work for this?

[DStaal]

30 minutes ago, zabieru said:

Seems legit: they don't have a lot of ground contact, but the center of gravity should be fairly low (except you can't do that in KSP, of course) and it looks like there's room for little shocks in those legs. They ought to be fairly stable.

Have you tried the ground tether? Does it work for this?

Tried it.  Doesn't help.

At the moment you can place one out on level ground (attached to the ground), attach it to your ship with a flex-o-tube, and then when you attach something slightly heavy (say a Ranger Workshop) it'll fall over - detaching itself from the flex-o-tube, which will hang in mid-air.  I don't believe that's intended.     The current break force is 10.

Mostly I'm asking to see if anyone knows why it's so low, and if there's something else I'm not considering.  I know that there can be issues with things like having things explode when you attach them to the ground as well, so I want to be sure this wasn't the fix for some other issue.

[RoverDude]

3 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Can Smelt-o-magic serve as an efficiency part for other Smelt-o-matics?

Nope

3 hours ago, DStaal said:

Before I submit it as a PR: Does anyone know of any reason not to increase 'staticAttachBreakForce' on the Ranger Anchor Hub by a factor of 10?  (I'm tired of them falling over the moment I try to attach something to them.)

Works for me

 

[Baladain]

11 hours ago, Terwin said:

Efficiency parts provide a total bonus of EfficiencyPartsMass/ActiveProducersMass

Meaning if you have 10 tons of efficiency parts and 5 tons of producers you will get a +200% boost

As such, if you go from 1 producing bay to 3 producing bays, the per-bay bonus will drop to 1/3 for each bay.

The primary utility of the efficiency part setting is letting you keep using your older parts with less functionality to perform more advanced processes.

So unless you are using ranger parts and producing most of your mass on-site with material kit production, you are generally better off just shipping in the heaviest parts you can when you want to improve production(to save on part-count).

With a 3 star engineer, a refinery set up as chemicals/metals/polymers and 10 smelters, I have an efficiency of 152%

This does not produce enough materials to keep pace with a single ranger inflatable workshop set to material kits.

Is this as designed, or am I missing something?  Is there another way to boost the efficiency of the workshop other than a 4 star engineer?

Machinery is at 100%.

[TheRagingIrishman]

2 hours ago, Baladain said:

With a 3 star engineer, a refinery set up as chemicals/metals/polymers and 10 smelters, I have an efficiency of 152%

This does not produce enough materials to keep pace with a single ranger inflatable workshop set to material kits.

Is this as designed, or am I missing something?  Is there another way to boost the efficiency of the workshop other than a 4 star engineer?

Machinery is at 100%.

Why not just add a second workshop?

[Baladain]

Just now, TheRagingIrishman said:

Why not just add a second workshop?

The shortfall is < .02  just seems wasteful

[DStaal]

@RoverDude, another minor one, but I'm not sure what you'd like to do with it: The Karibou Emergency Shelter is nearly identical to the Ranger Mini-Habitation Module - except that the former provides habitation time, while the latter provides a habitation multiplier.  Which is fine, it's neat to have both, but it's *very* easy to mix them up in the VAB and not notice that they are two separate parts.  Could we get some differentiation between the two?  (Even just coloring the box on one blue or something - just so it stands out in the VAB's mini-icons that they are different.)

[dlrk]

I'm a bit confused about some of MKS' functionality. The wiki describes certain Kerbal's as providing bonuses to funds, science, and reputation. It also describes bonuses to 'botany research' and 'geology research'. Does MKS provide it's own research system, separate from KSP's? Do MKS bases passively generate funds, science, etc?

[DStaal]

30 minutes ago, dlrk said:

I'm a bit confused about some of MKS' functionality. The wiki describes certain Kerbal's as providing bonuses to funds, science, and reputation. It also describes bonuses to 'botany research' and 'geology research'. Does MKS provide it's own research system, separate from KSP's? Do MKS bases passively generate funds, science, etc?

MKS bases and stations both semi-passively generate funds, science, etc.  These are generated by all Kerbals in SOI (as long as there's an MKS part on their ship...), and can be collected by the Pioneer modules.  This is related to the Kolonization bonuses, which improve efficiency of various parts in that SOI.

So, having a scientist on a base will slowly increase how fast you can grow food (botany research), as well as providing a small collectable science gain.  An engineer will increase how well your drills and converters work (geology research), and provide a small collectable funds gain.  Pilots give a small collectable reputation gain, and increase kolonization.  (Which, if high enough, can negate hab timers on that planet if you meet a couple of other criteria.)

[Omnipius]

Has anyone noticed that the Tundra multi-hub is actually too short to accomplish the task of stepping down from 3.5m Tundra modules to 2.5m, Duna, and Ranger modules?

So, I connect a 2.5m Tundra (sitting in a 2.5m cradle) to the "middle" node of the a multi-hub (sitting in the 2.5m cradle). So far, so good. Everything is sitting flat on the ground. Add a ranger inflatable on the other side of the mutlihub to the lower node. Still good. Then, I connect a pair of 3.5m Tundras (sitting in the 3.5m cradle) to two of the upper nodes of the multi-hub. Now, the multihub, the 2.5m tundra, and the ranger are all hanging about 0.5m off the ground (The Kraken is hungry...). Monkeying around with lowering and raising cradle legs seems to have no effect.

Am I missing something or is this a design "bug"?

[dboi88]

2 hours ago, Omnipius said:

Has anyone noticed that the Tundra multi-hub is actually too short to accomplish the task of stepping down from 3.5m Tundra modules to 2.5m, Duna, and Ranger modules?

So, I connect a 2.5m Tundra (sitting in a 2.5m cradle) to the "middle" node of the a multi-hub (sitting in the 2.5m cradle). So far, so good. Everything is sitting flat on the ground. Add a ranger inflatable on the other side of the mutlihub to the lower node. Still good. Then, I connect a pair of 3.5m Tundras (sitting in the 3.5m cradle) to two of the upper nodes of the multi-hub. Now, the multihub, the 2.5m tundra, and the ranger are all hanging about 0.5m off the ground (The Kraken is hungry...). Monkeying around with lowering and raising cradle legs seems to have no effect.

Am I missing something or is this a design "bug"?

I'm pretty sure your hubs upside down

[Terwin]

2 hours ago, Omnipius said:

Monkeying around with lowering and raising cradle legs seems to have no effect.

Each cradle leg is extended/retracted/adjusted seperately.

100% is fully up while 0% is fully down.  The reverse of what I originally expected.

Adjust each let go 50% and deploy, then adjust them to get them where you want them.

I think they should have enough adjustment range to allow 2.5 and 3.75 parts to connect directly on flat terrain(but I have not tested that)

[Wyzard]

15 hours ago, DStaal said:

@RoverDude, another minor one, but I'm not sure what you'd like to do with it: The Karibou Emergency Shelter is nearly identical to the Ranger Mini-Habitation Module - except that the former provides habitation time, while the latter provides a habitation multiplier.  Which is fine, it's neat to have both, but it's *very* easy to mix them up in the VAB and not notice that they are two separate parts.

Wow, I hadn't noticed that those are separate parts.  They look identical.

The ranger mini-hab doesn't seem to provide a hab multiplier, though — it just provides 10 kerbal-months.  (It also says "Crew Affected: 0", but I don't know what that means.)  The Karibou emergency hab, on the other hand, provides one kerbal-month but says "Crew Affected: 10".

[lancejammer]

15 hours ago, DStaal said:

Pilots give a small collectable reputation gain, and increase kolonization.  (Which, if high enough, can negate hab timers on that planet if you meet a couple of other criteria.)

I was going to ask what those other criteria were, but then decided to go figure it out myself.  Now I'm posting it here, so that others can be as lazy as I initially wanted to be!

Any Kerbal on a planet that has a Kolonization level of 500% and is in a vessel with a habitation rating of 1 year or more will be immune to habitation effects, as this world is now 'Kolonized'.

[jd284]

Yep, that's it.

Although I really think that should only apply to surface bases and not space stations. Or at least those should have a much higher hab requirement.

[Kaa253]

Does it apply to space space stations? Space stations do not contain Kerbals "on a planet". I wish and hope it DOES apply to space stations. I think it should. Once the planet below is Kononized they would be in a position to support their own low orbit transfers domestic space port.

[voicey99]

I believe the kolonisation stats apply to every craft in the SoI, landed or not (this was raised before with Kerbol apparently becoming kolonised).

[jd284]

 

6 minutes ago, Kaa253 said:

Does it apply to space space stations? Space stations do not contain Kerbals "on a planet". I wish and hope it DOES apply to space stations. I think it should. Once the planet below is Kononized they would be in a position to support their own low orbit transfers domestic space port.

Actually I don't know if it does... my highest so far is 157% so it'll take a while before I can test it.

Still, orbital stations are not colonies, I mean think about it. Earth has been "colonized" for thousands of years but its space stations are hardly comfy. So I don't think this unlimited hab time should apply to them...

[zabieru]

19 minutes ago, jd284 said:

 

Actually I don't know if it does... my highest so far is 157% so it'll take a while before I can test it.

Still, orbital stations are not colonies, I mean think about it. Earth has been "colonized" for thousands of years but its space stations are hardly comfy. So I don't think this unlimited hab time should apply to them...

Well, that's actually another edge case: Kerbin doesn't get kolony bonuses. So Kerbin-orbit stations can never get the 500% infinite-hab thing. Therefore, in some ways living on Gilly (which is far from home and has just enough gravity to drink from a cup, maybe, with a straw) can be more hospitable than a nice big ring-station right above the homeworld.

[Kaa253]

Full Kolonisation does not alter the supplies consumption, only habitation. (At least as I understand it - I have only reached about 140% myself). So you will still need to regularly run supplies up from the planet/moon below given that fertiliser production on a space station is not easy (but not impossible - think station built into an asteroid  ). Not exactly comfy.

[sh1pman]

8 minutes ago, zabieru said:

Well, that's actually another edge case: Kerbin doesn't get kolony bonuses. So Kerbin-orbit stations can never get the 500% infinite-hab thing. Therefore, in some ways living on Gilly (which is far from home and has just enough gravity to drink from a cup, maybe, with a straw) can be more hospitable than a nice big ring-station right above the homeworld.

Yeah, I don't think that kolonization bonuses should apply to space stations. It doesn't matter if a station is around Kerbin or Eeloo. They are just stations, with zero-g environment and tight quarters.

It certainly shouldn't matter which body you're orbiting. How would it make any difference? The planet is kinda far below. Kolonizing Kerbol makes even less sense. 

[DStaal]

In the old thread, I was doing a series on pics of landers.  I'll add another:

This was built as a base core, as probably evident by the name.  Parts are MKS and stock, with the exception of the solar panel, antenna, and lights, all of which could be either left out or replaced with stock.  It was shipped up empty - which is good, because there's no way for a Kerbal to get out at the moment.  An engineer will be needed to scrap the lander sections on either end, and to clear the attachment point from on top of the hatch.

[sh1pman]

1 minute ago, DStaal said:

In the old thread, I was doing a series on pics of landers.  I'll add another:

This was built as a base core, as probably evident by the name.  Parts are MKS and stock, with the exception of the solar panel, antenna, and lights, all of which could be either left out or replaced with stock.  It was shipped up empty - which is good, because there's no way for a Kerbal to get out at the moment.  An engineer will be needed to scrap the lander sections on either end, and to clear the attachment point from on top of the hatch.

Why didn't you put a separator between the airlock and the left karibou control module?