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

[Rodger]

I really like the idea of more tailored configs for the ISMs! I hope you post them some day

[RoverDude]

Even better would be a PR

Additional configs are pretty cheap.

[FrontLineFodder]

51 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

There's no issue in alternate ISM configurations - but rather than changing the color it probably makes more sense to just increment the number decal.  If you come up short, let me know (I can always make new ones).

Thanks RoverDude,

I noticed you have up to #20 already in the MKS package

I'll see if I can do a PR for the part file, though retaining the existing entries would put the total of FSfuelSwitch over 30

I was thinking, can the part model have Multiple overlapping Flag textures ?

eg.   +  =  

This makes it easier to see at a glance, and would reduce the textures needed otherwise

Edited April 26, 2017 by FrontLineFodder
cant get images to show :-(

[FrontLineFodder]

30 minutes ago, FrontLineFodder said:

Thanks RoverDude,

I noticed you have up to #20 already in the MKS package

I'll see if I can do a PR for the part file, though retaining the existing entries would put the total of FSfuelSwitch over 30

I was thinking, can the part model have Multiple overlapping Flag textures ?

eg.   +  =  

This makes it easier to see at a glance, and would reduce the textures needed otherwise

 + =

images

[Kobymaru]

1 hour ago, FrontLineFodder said:

This would mean the Workshop (or refinery/assembly plant) module it is attached to would have the capacity to store all the output from using all of it's input items, before Logistics would be required to move items.

Is this a foolish idea ?

This is a wonderful idea! Could you do one for Machinery and one for SpecializedParts as well? I have dozens of storage parts because they are required for disconnected bases and I would really really like to reduce their number.

Edited April 26, 2017 by Kobymaru

[FrontLineFodder]

50 minutes ago, Kobymaru said:

This is a wonderful idea! Could you do one for Machinery and one for SpecializedParts as well?

yes I plan to

[Kobymaru]

21 minutes ago, FrontLineFodder said:

yes I plan to

Great to hear!

ps.: I think the color diversity is also a great idea, it's a pity that the ISM's and the Ranger SupplyPak's can't be told apart.

[FrontLineFodder]

Just now, Kobymaru said:

Great to hear!

ps.: I think the color diversity is also a great idea, it's a pity that the ISM's and the Ranger SupplyPak's can't be told apart.

This is what I was thinking:

[Gilph]

22 hours ago, Cynor said:

@voicey99 I did think it was something more on the USI-LS type thing, but since that really deals more with supplies I thought I'd post here. That said, I fully understand how things are calculated and how it all works. My point was simply that it seems very odd that the timers are different. If I launch a mission knowing I have 15 days of "supplies" (read starving) because that's the way the mod was designed, I'm expecting the same for Habitation by default. I'm not expecting to have to go through and modify settings like @danielboro mentions so I can actually still just launch a MK-1 Command Pod to Minmus and get it back.

There has been some good answers to this, but I think the best answer to this is that it's done on purpose.  I watch RD's Twitch channel on occasion and remember some comments in the lost forum regarding this.  It's always been the case that the Mk1 should support Mun missions, but something additional is needed for Minmus. The Hab settings provided an additional level of difficulty and progress to go to the outer moon. I don't really agree of syncing supplies to hab, because they are two separate problems.

Of course, if you do not agree to that philosophy, the settings can be changed. In fact, I have a Galileo Planet Pack career save going, which changes the distances of the two moons. So, I changed the Hab multipler from .25 to .45.  This allowed me to use the Mk1 to get to the closer moon, but not enough to get to the outer moon, which kept the original spirit.

[Kwarazi]

On ‎25‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 3:53 PM, Cynor said:

@voicey99 I did think it was something more on the USI-LS type thing, but since that really deals more with supplies I thought I'd post here. That said, I fully understand how things are calculated and how it all works. My point was simply that it seems very odd that the timers are different. If I launch a mission knowing I have 15 days of "supplies" (read starving) because that's the way the mod was designed, I'm expecting the same for Habitation by default. I'm not expecting to have to go through and modify settings like @danielboro mentions so I can actually still just launch a MK-1 Command Pod to Minmus and get it back.

@Cynor Your not expected to change the settings, the idea is you play to the challenges the mod provides if you need to add Hab to get somewhere then you have to find a way to add it from the various parts as was said by the author and others the idea is you can get to Mun without to much effort but from then on everything will kick in if you try for longer missions or try and go further.

I love it as it is as it makes me think and really plan how I am doing missions I have not altered any of the default settings.

 

[DStaal]

14 minutes ago, Kwarazi said:

@Cynor Your not expected to change the settings, the idea is you play to the challenges the mod provides if you need to add Hab to get somewhere then you have to find a way to add it from the various parts as was said by the author and others the idea is you can get to Mun without to much effort but from then on everything will kick in if you try for longer missions or try and go further.

I love it as it is as it makes me think and really plan how I am doing missions I have not altered any of the default settings.

On the other hand, the settings are there for you to adjust the challenge to whatever you believe is appropriate and reasonable if you wish to, and I can see his point - it's a minor change, and if it feels right to him there's no reason not to make it.  He'll still have to deal with both Supplies and Habitation on longer missions.

[Odonian]

Are we supposed to be able to share enriched uranium through planetary logistics? It appears as an option on the nuclear fuel containers, but enabling it doesn't seem to do anything for me.

[DStaal]

10 minutes ago, Odonian said:

Are we supposed to be able to share enriched uranium through planetary logistics? It appears as an option on the nuclear fuel containers, but enabling it doesn't seem to do anything for me.

Nope.  It's specifically excluded.  I'm not sure about depleted uranium off the top of my head, and that is also in those containers.

[Odonian]

How would I go about circumventing that? Not being able to share enriched uranium between bases this way is not fun to me. I remember it not being possible with MKS prior to when it updated with KSP 1.2, too, but I would just edit nertea's nuclear fuel containers to include the planetary logistics module and I would have uranium teleporting through the ether without a problem. I miss being able to do that and it isn't obvious to me how to change it now. I know RD puts a lot of effort into his mods to have them work a certain way and I mostly love how they work, but I find this particular design choice frustrating.

Edited April 27, 2017 by Odonian

[FrontLineFodder]

1 hour ago, Odonian said:

How would I go about circumventing that? Not being able to share enriched uranium between bases this way is not fun to me. I remember it not being possible with MKS prior to when it updated with KSP 1.2, too, but I would just edit nertea's nuclear fuel containers to include the planetary logistics module and I would have uranium teleporting through the ether without a problem. I miss being able to do that and it isn't obvious to me how to change it now. I know RD puts a lot of effort into his mods to have them work a certain way and I mostly love how they work, but I find this particular design choice frustrating.

looking at the code, It is a hardcoded blacklist containing "EnrichedUranium", "DepletedFuel", "Construction", "ReplacementParts" & "ElectricCharge". so you could recompile the code ?

alternatively, put a feature request in asking for the blacklist to be manually configurable via config file ?

[Gilph]

Hi, these ideas are all great, but I can't help but to think we should look at this at a more architectural level.

These things were blacklisted to protect them from automated transfer processes that may transfer things in a way that will break things, especially during catch up processing. So, I think it's time to take another look at the automated processes to make sure they work, as expected, during catch up. There are a lot of things going on in your typical unconnected collection of vessels that make up a colony:

1. Warehousing shares resources with their in-range neighbors, but it appears to happen at the individual tank level (not at the collective vessel level), which causes the occasional problem. PL also pulls resources from their virtual tanks, but using a separate process.  Those two different ways of sharing resources don't always work together seamlessly.
2. PDU power sharing doesn't always work correctly. If you have a local power source attached ( like a nuke) that is too small to supply all needed power, and you expect that a PDU will make up the difference, it doesn't always work in a catch up situation.
3. Local Logistics is a great feature, and it does work at the vessel level, but has issues with the automated processes kick in and will undo transfers automatically that you just made manually.
4. Maintenance is a fine mechanic, but you do not get to specify the source of the transfer, which kind of defeats the purpose of blacklisting these things.

Add the fact that tank flow control doesn't always work, tanks locks aren't always respected, local storage on resource converters can complicate resource management, etc.

So, I would suggest that the developers take a look at all of these features to see if they could be optimized, especially during catch up. Catch up is the default processing mode for almost everyone that has resource converting vessels, and making sure all these capabilities run nicely is pretty important.

Thanks

[Zharkov]

I tried searching for the answer before posting and apologize if I missed the answer somewhere.  On the Ranger Inflatable Habitation module there is what looks like the end of the Flexotube on the module once it is inflated.  Can I attach to that?  Or is it just decorative (beyond letting EVA entries and exits)?  I have the needed material and can attach tubes elsewhere, but not to the end of the hab module.

Thank you.

[DStaal]

48 minutes ago, Zharkov said:

I tried searching for the answer before posting and apologize if I missed the answer somewhere.  On the Ranger Inflatable Habitation module there is what looks like the end of the Flexotube on the module once it is inflated.  Can I attach to that?  Or is it just decorative (beyond letting EVA entries and exits)?  I have the needed material and can attach tubes elsewhere, but not to the end of the hab module.

Thank you.

I believe it's basically just an EVA hatch.  None of the inflatable modules can be attached besides their one attachment point, as inflation isn't really well handled in KSP.  (WBI works around this - but has other issues with inflatables.)

[Zharkov]

2 hours ago, DStaal said:

I believe it's basically just an EVA hatch.  None of the inflatable modules can be attached besides their one attachment point, as inflation isn't really well handled in KSP.  (WBI works around this - but has other issues with inflatables.)

Thank you for the explanation! Back to building we go...

[Sauge]

I have an issue with drilling on asteroid basically I cannot even start the drill when on the asteroid all I can do is retract/extend them but the start drill option is missing. my googlefu is failing me and I can't seem to figure out what am i doing wrong here is screenshot for illustration https://i.imgur.com/ozqGDP5.png however the drills seems to be working fine when testing on kerbin

Edited April 28, 2017 by Sauge

[DStaal]

1 hour ago, Sauge said:

I have an issue with drilling on asteroid basically I cannot even start the drill when on the asteroid all I can do is retract/extend them but the start drill option is missing. my googlefu is failing me and I can't seem to figure out what am i doing wrong here is screenshot for illustration https://i.imgur.com/ozqGDP5.png however the drills seems to be working fine when testing on kerbin

Drills work differently on asteroids - you need a drill rated for asteroids, and then it will gather all materials on the asteroid, IIRC.  That drill isn't rated for an asteroid.

[Sauge]

1 hour ago, DStaal said:

Drills work differently on asteroids - you need a drill rated for asteroids, and then it will gather all materials on the asteroid, IIRC.  That drill isn't rated for an asteroid.

Thanks, btw is there even USI/MKS drill that works on asteroids or just the stock one?

[voicey99]

20 minutes ago, Sauge said:

Thanks, btw is there even USI/MKS drill that works on asteroids or just the stock one?

I don't think there are any asteroid drills capable of extracting MKS resources so if you want to get them from asteroids, use USI Asteroid Recycling Technologies. It lets you extract rock from roids and run it through some stupendously inefficient converters to get water, minerals, metallic ore, substrate or karbonite (AWOW: ART increases asteroid mass into the hundreds of thousands of tonnes!). Since these resources are shared over multiple mods it's probable that another mod has the part/s you need.

[DStaal]

10 minutes ago, voicey99 said:

I don't think there are any asteroid drills capable of extracting MKS resources so if you want to get them from asteroids, use USI Asteroid Recycling Technologies. It lets you extract rock from roids and run it through some stupendously inefficient converters to get water, minerals, metallic ore, substrate or karbonite (AWOW: ART increases asteroid mass into the hundreds of thousands of tonnes!). Since these resources are shared over multiple mods it's probable that another mod has the part/s you need.

I believe asteroid drills work much like Dirt extraction - they get all the resources of the asteroid, regardless of what they would get under normal planetary use.

[voicey99]

1 minute ago, DStaal said:

I believe asteroid drills work much like Dirt extraction - they get all the resources of the asteroid, regardless of what they would get under normal planetary use.

What are these asteroid drills you speak of? Asteroids also only have a chance to have each resource, check CommunityResourcePack/Asteroid.cfg