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

[RoverDude]

15 minutes ago, MaxwellsDemon said:

Okeydokey.   I think I'll fall back to the previous version.

Mind you, I see where it could be useful, but it doesn't fit into my gameplay.  No offense, and love your work!   

Sure, just bear in mind there is no support for older versions.

[Vinhero100]

Hello!

I Just made a post asking if the Inflatable habitation modules were bugged, since I couldn't inflate them. But then I found out you need to do it on EVA, and the inflatable Tundra Ring costs 46000 MaterialKits and 4000 ElectricCharge to open. I have those resources, but it still dosn't work! Is this a common bug that can be fixed by re-installing MKS/OKS, or is it something more complex? Thank You!     

Edited March 18, 2017 by Vinhero100

[RoverDude]

Should totally work if you have those resources.  If it is not, let me know.  Also please make sure you have the latest USI Tools from this repo first:

 

https://github.com/BobPalmer/UmbraSpaceIndustries/releases

@sh1pman - FYI, I removed a few things that squared away my munar lag problems.  YMMV.  Scatterer, Distant Object Enhancement, RealPlume/Smokescreen.  I left in SVE but only the EVE and SVE folders, and went with low res.

[sh1pman]

4 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

@sh1pman - FYI, I removed a few things that squared away my munar lag problems.  YMMV.  Scatterer, Distant Object Enhancement, RealPlume/Smokescreen.  I left in SVE but only the EVE and SVE folders, and went with low res.

You mean the timewarp lag? I have Scatterer, EVE, SVE and Distant Object installed, and it lags like hell while in timewarp.

[RoverDude]

11 minutes ago, sh1pman said:

You mean the timewarp lag? I have Scatterer, EVE, SVE and Distant Object installed, and it lags like hell while in timewarp.

Mine lags in general (at least on the Mun).  No changes other than removing those mods got me back to 60fps

[Wyzard]

59 minutes ago, Vinhero100 said:

But then I found out you need to do it on EVA, and the inflatable Tundra Ring costs 46000 MaterialKits and 4000 ElectricCharge to open. I have those resources, but it still dosn't work!

Make sure the MaterialKits are in a container that has local warehousing enabled — otherwise the EVA kerbal can't access them.  (This confused me recently too.)

[sh1pman]

@RoverDude So removing these 3 mods fixed the lag problem? Ok, I'll remove them as well. If it works, I might even bring OPM back, and hopefully it won't be too bad.

Edited March 18, 2017 by sh1pman

[RoverDude]

@sh1pman - YMMV let me know how it works out.  Same, I'd like to have OPM back as well

[zabieru]

14 hours ago, FirroSeranel said:

Ah, so the Colonization Module can't do that... and the Med Bay can't extend hab timers, then?

Correct. Two different modules that do different things with the same resource. (Though of course letting the hab timer run down and then un-touristing the kerbals has the same end result.)

[TauPhraim]

6 hours ago, RoverDude said:

If you want to take a crack and changing that, I'd be happy to take that PR, then I can bundle the goodies back up and push them to @TheReadPanda 's github

Here goes. Some implementation remarks in the PR.

[RoverDude]

@TauPhraim - thank you!

 

[Vinhero100]

2 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Should totally work if you have those resources.  If it is not, let me know.  Also please make sure you have the latest USI Tools from this repo first:

 

https://github.com/BobPalmer/UmbraSpaceIndustries/releases

@sh1pman - FYI, I removed a few things that squared away my munar lag problems.  YMMV.  Scatterer, Distant Object Enhancement, RealPlume/Smokescreen.  I left in SVE but only the EVE and SVE folders, and went with low res.

It worked! I saw that the new version was just 2 days old,and mine must have been a few months. Thank You! 

[FirroSeranel]

8 hours ago, DStaal said:

Something you may want to keep an eye on:

 

 

Oooh, an eye indeed!

[FirroSeranel]

9 hours ago, RoverDude said:

The Tundra ones are based off of NASA lunar base plans

That being said, there are plans for additional part ranges.  Really just a matter of finding the time.  I could also be coaxed into more high end Duna modules if someone logs a Github issue

 

2

Ahh, I see. Those Athlete rover bases / cradles are actually extremely clever. I'd love to see something like that in KSP, but the coding for it would be nightmarishly complex unless you just used the "control every joint" approach in the Servo Controller and put it on the user. Well... or just didn't worry about active, terrain-reading suspension, which I'm sure the NASA design includes, and let suspension and joint flexing handle it "good enough".

That said... I'm not a huge fan of just directly converting NASA stuff. The cylindrical design makes it aerodynamic and much easier to launch, which matters a ton on Earth... not so much on Kerbin, where you can easily launch a rocket sideways with Moar Boosters. Additionally, it's a very strong design for the outer shell, which matters a lot in real life--not so much in KSP where parts are rigid bodies and only joint flexing is an issue.

And while that rover, which I've seen on TV specials before, while very cool for real life, wouldn't work at all in KSP with its high center of mass, and rovers' uber-flippiness. Plus to be fair, a real lunar rover with living quarters will have the patience to go 20-30 kph. In a video game, I'm not willing to spend hours and hours driving a rover, so I need it to be stable at 120 (low-30's in m/s). Though BonVoyage does help with that a -lot-.

I do have to say though... XD Yours are much prettier than NASA's.

Not criticizing you, by the way. Just friendly discussion.

[betelphi]

Two questions:

1) If I wanted to modify EnrichedUranium and Depleted Fuel to work in planetary logistics for my personal use, how would I go about doing so? 

2) When a drill has multiple separators, how does the heat and electricity usage work vs. what is listed in the VAB? If the VAB says a separator consumes 600 ec/s then does having 5 separators running consume 3000 ec/s? Similar question for heat usage, does turning on multiple separators increase heat usage and is it additive ie, I need 5 times the radiators for a 5 separator drill? 

EDIT 1) I have found a 'blacklist' that includes enriched uranium and depleted fuel, but I am somewhat of a noobie when it comes to KSP mods so I don't know how to compile a MKS Gamedata folder that includes any changes I may make in the Source directory from the github master. Any help in that area would be GREATLY appreciated

 

Edited March 19, 2017 by betelphi

[FirroSeranel]

6 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Mine lags in general (at least on the Mun).  No changes other than removing those mods got me back to 60fps

I recently learned that practically everybody totally misunderstands the Max Physics Delta setting... you might want to try changing that to improve FPS with visual mods installed.

Basically, in a nutshell... everyone -thinks- it adjusts physics accuracy or physics framerate. It doesn't.The physics always runs at 50 physics frames per KSP Second. If your CPU can't handle 50 physics frames per real second, the game just goes into slow motion and runs at something less than 1 KSP second per real second. No matter how much it chugs though, it always runs at 50 physics frames per Kerbal Second, always. (Disclaimer: Unless you're using Physics Warp, which actually does reduce physics framerate)

So what does that slider do? Basically, it tells the game how much graphics framerate you're willing to sacrifice to try to give a little extra oomph to the physics engine. That might make sense if Unity used PhysX or Cuda Cores to augment its physics engine, but it doesn't. It doesn't even use multiple CPU cores (in the same vessel). So sacrificing graphics framerate for physics framerate doesn't make much sense, as the only difference it makes is the tiny bit of coordination your CPU is doing. This means it's far from a 1:1 tradeoff. In my experience it's more like 10:1. As in, if you would get 60 FPS and 60% physics rate, and you move the slider up, you'll get 10 FPS and 63% physics rate. That, to me, is a no-brainer. In my testing since I learned that, I've found that you probably won't see very much increase in physics framerate no matter where you set that slider. On the other hand, it makes a HUGE difference to graphics framerate, which is really where much of the quality of life is in the game.

After all, if you're in a situation where you know the physics engine doesn't need much accuracy (simple low-torque vacuum burns, for example), you can use physics warp, and take a 150-part craft running at 50% physics rate, up to about 200%, with 4x physics warp. Even during normal launches, especially with GravityTurn, I frequently have no trouble at all running it at 2x to get a big launch vehicle up to the high 90% range, running nearly real-time. If your graphics card, on the other hand, is sacrificing so much to try to help the physics engine, that you're getting an unplayable 5 FPS, there's nothing you can do about that short of exiting to the main menu and changing that slider.

I manually set mine to 0.02 in the config files, and since then, I never drop below about 40 FPS, even if the game's physics crawl down to 12% of real-time.

Edited March 19, 2017 by FirroSeranel

[FirroSeranel]

Do Kerbal stats actually do anything in MKS? As far as I know, they do nothing at all in stock, other than determine the types of animations in the crew portraits.

The reason I ask is because for nothing stats with no real in-game effect, to have impact on hiring costs, is a bit strange to me.

[DStaal]

28 minutes ago, FirroSeranel said:

Do Kerbal stats actually do anything in MKS? As far as I know, they do nothing at all in stock, other than determine the types of animations in the crew portraits.

The reason I ask is because for nothing stats with no real in-game effect, to have impact on hiring costs, is a bit strange to me.

Nothing in MKS that I'm aware of.  I'm not sure about OSE Workshop, it might - Ground Construction just cares about level, I believe.  EL is the only for-sure use for them that I know of.

[FirroSeranel]

Just now, DStaal said:

Nothing in MKS that I'm aware of.  I'm not sure about OSE Workshop, it might - Ground Construction just cares about level, I believe.  EL is the only for-sure use for them that I know of.

Ah, so maybe that's why he has it affecting cost. What does it do in EL, out of curiosity?

[DStaal]

Just now, FirroSeranel said:

Ah, so maybe that's why he has it affecting cost. What does it do in EL, out of curiosity?

It's a bit of a complex calculation...  Smarter Kerbals increase productivity more.  Courageous Kerbals increase their effect on productivity more.  (So: If they are smart, they increase it more.  If they are stupid, they *decrease* it more.)  Badassary has an effect as well - though I can't remember the full details there: Assume it's a good thing on smart Kerbals at least.    Class and level also calculate in: Engineers are better, and higher levels are better.

[zabieru]

1 hour ago, DStaal said:

It's a bit of a complex calculation...  Smarter Kerbals increase productivity more.  Courageous Kerbals increase their effect on productivity more.  (So: If they are smart, they increase it more.  If they are stupid, they *decrease* it more.)  Badassary has an effect as well - though I can't remember the full details there: Assume it's a good thing on smart Kerbals at least.    Class and level also calculate in: Engineers are better, and higher levels are better.

And, uh, "better" kerbals build stuff faster. (IIRC just on the final build, I don't think it matters for smelters or metal->rocketparts, but it's been forever since I played non-MKSed EL.)

[Urses]

RD stated some pages before that he don't plan to use courage/stupid.

In EL on other hand the stats alter the workshop produktivity and only this. No effect on driling or ISRU.

[jd284]

6 hours ago, betelphi said:

Two questions:

1) If I wanted to modify EnrichedUranium and Depleted Fuel to work in planetary logistics for my personal use, how would I go about doing so? 

2) When a drill has multiple separators, how does the heat and electricity usage work vs. what is listed in the VAB? If the VAB says a separator consumes 600 ec/s then does having 5 separators running consume 3000 ec/s? Similar question for heat usage, does turning on multiple separators increase heat usage and is it additive ie, I need 5 times the radiators for a 5 separator drill? 

EDIT 1) I have found a 'blacklist' that includes enriched uranium and depleted fuel, but I am somewhat of a noobie when it comes to KSP mods so I don't know how to compile a MKS Gamedata folder that includes any changes I may make in the Source directory from the github master. Any help in that area would be GREATLY appreciated

1) You need to install Unity or a Mono 3.5 development environment like MonoDevelop. This is way out of scope for this thread, try reading the general KSP modding threads, wiki pages and other resources.

Or petition RoverDude to make the blacklists a config option.

2) Yes the numbers are per separator, so with 5 of them (whether for the same resource or different ones) there'll be 5x as much output, heat, and EC usage. For heat, note the MKS heat pump ranger part, it's very powerful for landed bases and the VAB stats are way misleading.

[betelphi]

1 minute ago, jd284 said:

For heat, note the MKS heat pump ranger part, it's very powerful for landed bases and the VAB stats are way misleading.

I had thought so but last week I downloaded a new release of MKS and I think it may have changed because my minmus base with 8 medium drills and a nuclear reactor was overheating, and adding two more of those parts didn't help. Eventually I had to shut down most of my separators and use 4 large extendable radiators from stock. Is there any reason that the ranger heating part has changed its function in the update before last?

[FirroSeranel]

4 minutes ago, betelphi said:

I had thought so but last week I downloaded a new release of MKS and I think it may have changed because my minmus base with 8 medium drills and a nuclear reactor was overheating, and adding two more of those parts didn't help. Eventually I had to shut down most of my separators and use 4 large extendable radiators from stock. Is there any reason that the ranger heating part has changed its function in the update before last?

 

Where are you putting them? Keep in mind that heat dump parts can only actively pull heat from the heat-generating part itself, or its parent. Basically they pull heat from the part it's attached to, and one attachment out from there. More than that, and you'll be relying on internal conduction from other parts of your base, which may or may not be sufficient.