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

[goldenpsp]

3 minutes ago, dlrk said:

It was just a question. No need to reply for Roverdude, he can decline himself.

Or he can just like my reply, which will give the answer and save him some time.  Time he can then use on his mods to keep the USI goodness flowing. 

[dlrk]

2 hours ago, goldenpsp said:

Or he can just like my reply, which will give the answer and save him some time.  Time he can then use on his mods to keep the USI goodness flowing. 

Lol, fair enough. I figured more people would stick on 1.4.5 with procedural parts and MFT still on 1.4.5

[mbaryu]

Just now, dlrk said:

Lol, fair enough. I figured more people would stick on 1.4.5 with procedural parts and MFT still on 1.4.5

I'm still on 1.4.5, but I'm also on an old version of MKS    Waiting to upgrade on the slower mods!

[Das_Sheep]

So here's a question that I'm fairly sure is just me misunderstanding something: I have a small preliminary base (read, cobbled together pile of bits) now, I've taken into account the cooling required of the various reactors and drills etc and put various versions of radiators (from Heat Control) around the base with what I thought was a generous margin. 

The problem is that after a while heat keeps building up, especially after time warp. Adding more radiators only slows not eliminates the positive heat.

Am I best just sticking on a couple of ranger thermal control systems? 

[mbaryu]

43 minutes ago, Das_Sheep said:

So here's a question that I'm fairly sure is just me misunderstanding something: I have a small preliminary base (read, cobbled together pile of bits) now, I've taken into account the cooling required of the various reactors and drills etc and put various versions of radiators (from Heat Control) around the base with what I thought was a generous margin. 

The problem is that after a while heat keeps building up, especially after time warp. Adding more radiators only slows not eliminates the positive heat.

Am I best just sticking on a couple of ranger thermal control systems? 

I've noticed this as well.  With larger reactors it seems to happen less, though perhaps that's because they aren't anywhere near their (heat) maximum.

[TackleMcClean]

1 hour ago, Das_Sheep said:

So here's a question that I'm fairly sure is just me misunderstanding something: I have a small preliminary base (read, cobbled together pile of bits) now, I've taken into account the cooling required of the various reactors and drills etc and put various versions of radiators (from Heat Control) around the base with what I thought was a generous margin. 

The problem is that after a while heat keeps building up, especially after time warp. Adding more radiators only slows not eliminates the positive heat.

Am I best just sticking on a couple of ranger thermal control systems? 

 

37 minutes ago, mbaryu said:

I've noticed this as well.  With larger reactors it seems to happen less, though perhaps that's because they aren't anywhere near their (heat) maximum.

I might've seen this explained on the github repo, not sure and can't find it anymore.
Basically I had similar issue with setting up a drilling base where my very hefty cooling just wasn't enough for my small nuclear reactor.

The explanation was that the drills reserve a lot of cooling even if they're not using it, so you will need an abnormal amount of cooling to suffice.

[DoktorKrogg]

21 hours ago, TackleMcClean said:

Would it be a fair guess that the upcoming version will fix issues regarding multipliers from multiple bays?

Also, will that only be for 1.5.* players? Will I have to update from 1.4.5?

I just submitted PRs this afternoon to fix the multi-bay converter issue you described. Turns out it was a design issue, not a bug, so I had to re-engineer how swappable converters work just to fix this one issue.   The good news is that the new system will give us more flexibility in terms of what a multi-bay converter can do and opens up some interesting possibilities for future parts. The bad news is that all the converters in existing saves will reset back to their defaults and shut down. @RoverDude already made a post explaining how to minimize your pain if you choose to upgrade an existing save. We're also adding some new in-game settings to allow you to adjust the cost of swapping converters (all the way down to 0 if you want), as well as toggles for the EVA-only and RepairSkill requirements.

The official stance on backports to previous versions of KSP is that we don't do backports. That said, I have been testing these converter changes on both 1.4.5 and 1.5.1 simultaneously while I've been working on them and so far I have run into no issues. So once we do finally put out a new release, just try it on 1.4.5 and see if it works. Chances are it will. Just don't come back here qq'ing about bugs in 1.4.5 if there are any because we probably won't fix them. 

[TackleMcClean]

Awesome!

Just so I get this correctly - a new version will come out, and that will only be a single new one for 1.5.1, and it's this one I'll try on 1.4.5 and see if it works?

[RoverDude]

heh, @DoktorKrogg beat me to it   No official backports are done.  I'll be doing PR-a-rama again once everything is good to go.  Will also be doing a modeling stream on Wednesday at around 8pm EST (give or take)

[dlrk]

Lol, fair enough. Hopefully, DRE and Procedural Parts will get bumped and it won't be an issue

[mbaryu]

2 hours ago, TackleMcClean said:

I might've seen this explained on the github repo, not sure and can't find it anymore.
Basically I had similar issue with setting up a drilling base where my very hefty cooling just wasn't enough for my small nuclear reactor.

The explanation was that the drills reserve a lot of cooling even if they're not using it, so you will need an abnormal amount of cooling to suffice.

Oh!  Yes that makes a lot of sense.  That explains why KSP interstellar did what they did with wasteheat as well.  Thanks!

[goldenpsp]

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

heh, @DoktorKrogg beat me to it   No official backports are done.  I'll be doing PR-a-rama again once everything is good to go.  Will also be doing a modeling stream on Wednesday at around 8pm EST (give or take)

@RoverDude FYI.  I'm sure you are aware, but with the latest KAS release some things seem like they may have changed for larger pipes in some circumstances.  Just was perusing that thread.  Don't know if it affects MKS at all.

 

 

[RoverDude]

huh... I was not aware.  Will have to take a look

[Das_Sheep]

So here's a mad one. 

Would adding an option to the ranger inflatable hab be as simple as a MM patch so it could be used as either of its habitation options OR have the same stats as a stock lab minus the recycle? 

I'll be honest the question is purely from an aesthetic point, the round lab looks weird tacked onto my bases

[The-Doctor]

Any plans to bring back MKS Lite? I like MKS and what it adds it just scares me 

[voicey99]

17 hours ago, The-Doctor said:

Any plans to bring back MKS Lite? I like MKS and what it adds it just scares me 

MKS Lite has been merged into MKS proper, by way of being able to adjust settings controlling stuff like machinery consumption etc to emulate Lite.

[Punslinger]

I've been having a weird issue with a Tundra Assembly Plant I have on Iota (GPP).  It's manned by a two-star Technician, and currently producing 0.0104 SpecializedParts per second.  When I start up the MaterialKits bay, MKS reports that it's producing only 0.0003 units per second.  The plant still has 1960/2000 Machinery left, so it's not efficiency loss due to age.  And I'm not using any MaterialKits to produce Machinery, ColonySupplies, or TransferCredits.  A ground test with a brand-new plant also manned by a two-star Technician gives me a production rate of 0.0049 units/sec.  Still not as good as I seem to be getting with SP, but a lot better than .0003.

The only thing I can think of is that, not knowing about the multi-bay bug, I tried to change the third bay of the Iota plant to MaterialKits and forgot to stop the converter first, so maybe that borked something somehow?  Changing it back to Machinery (but not running it) didn't seem to fix anything.

Screenshot included:

Spoiler

https://imgur.com/a/PO7Eakj

Edited to add: I've noticed something else after further testing.  A craft with one Assembly Plant produces MaterialKits at .0054/sec.  A craft with three Assembly Plants, each with one bay set to MaterialKits, produces only .0018/sec per plant, for a total of .0054/sec with all three bays running!

Further edit: Hmm, now we're getting somewhere.  Adding storage for MaterialKits seems to decrease the rate of production.  I added two of the round 2.5m containers to the craft, to add storage for 9000 units of MK, and the production rate dropped to .0049/sec as I saw before.  Adding two more for a total of 18000 units of storage dropped production down to .0026/sec.

Still another edit: Never mind.  After more careful testing, it looks like it's just the Kolony Inventory UI that's bugged.  The amount of storage doesn't affect the rate of production, and two workshops with MK bays produce twice as much as one.  I feel silly.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Punslinger

[Georry]

The Atlas Harvester (Large) is in the start node of the tech tree when using CTT, is this a you problem or a them problem? it also only costs 100 credits to put on a ship. 1.5.1 with the latest constelation installed manually and CTT installed through CKAN

https://imgur.com/a/apGY2SF

[Terwin]

59 minutes ago, Georry said:

The Atlas Harvester (Large) is in the start node of the tech tree when using CTT, is this a you problem or a them problem? it also only costs 100 credits to put on a ship. 1.5.1 with the latest constelation installed manually and CTT installed through CKAN

https://imgur.com/a/apGY2SF

I believe the CTT config files are in the MKS package, but I would not be surprised if they were maintained by one or more people outside of the main USI Dev team.

[infinite_monkey]

What happened to the 20m domes? Have they ever been released?

[Brigadier]

7 hours ago, infinite_monkey said:

What happened to the 20m domes? Have they ever been released?

Not yet.  When I asked the same question during one of his recent streams he said possibly in the next release (Soon^TM)

[TackleMcClean]

I'm still trying to figure out the cooling system for drills.

Are you supposed to only ever just use one drillhead? And the purpose of multiple separators is for the flexibility allowed in changing to something else being mined?

No matter how much cooling I add to the vessel, it's impossible to cool a drilling using 2 or more drilling slots.

[LatiMacciato]

Hiyas, I accidently went into some thinking towards the wasting of Recyclables (meaning the "DumpExcess = true" value). I hope this might just be a feature to toggle all dumping or for specific parts that has the nodes/output resources.

thatfor I wrote a little cfg to disable the wasting:

// disable wasting of Recyclables on all capable modules
@PART[*]:NEEDS[MKS]:HAS[@MODULE[*]:HAS[@OUTPUT_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]]]
{
	@MODULE[*]:HAS[@OUTPUT_RESOURCE] // :HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]]
	{
		@OUTPUT_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]
		{
			@DumpExcess = false // default -> true
		}
	}
}

Feedback is always welcome!

[tsaven]

2 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

Hiyas, I accidently went into some thinking towards the wasting of Recyclables (meaning the "DumpExcess = true" value). I hope this might just be a feature to toggle all dumping or for specific parts that has the nodes/output resources.

thatfor I wrote a little cfg to disable the wasting:

// disable wasting of Recyclables on all capable modules
@PART[*]:NEEDS[MKS]:HAS[@MODULE[*]:HAS[@OUTPUT_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]]]
{
	@MODULE[*]:HAS[@OUTPUT_RESOURCE] // :HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]]
	{
		@OUTPUT_RESOURCE:HAS[#ResourceName[Recyclables],#DumpExcess[true]]
		{
			@DumpExcess = false // default -> true
		}
	}
}

Feedback is always welcome!

The problem with doing this is that it will shut down the converters in the event that you do run out of storage for recyclables.  Because many people in the intermediate stages of playing with USI don't convert them back into processed resources, this would be a near-crippling behavior.

If it works for your playstyle more power to you, but this would be an extremely detrimental change and I doubt RD would take it as a Pull Request.

On 11/11/2018 at 7:53 AM, TackleMcClean said:

I'm still trying to figure out the cooling system for drills.

Are you supposed to only ever just use one drillhead? And the purpose of multiple separators is for the flexibility allowed in changing to something else being mined?

No matter how much cooling I add to the vessel, it's impossible to cool a drilling using 2 or more drilling slots.

Post pics of your vessel and the right-click menu of the drill while it's running.  If you've got high bonuses from onboard engineers or something, they can generate quite a lot more heat than you expect.

[LatiMacciato]

19 hours ago, tsaven said:

The problem with doing this is that it will shut down the converters in the event that you do run out of storage for recyclables.  Because many people in the intermediate stages of playing with USI don't convert them back into processed resources, this would be a near-crippling behavior.

If it works for your playstyle more power to you, but this would be an extremely detrimental change and I doubt RD would take it as a Pull Request.

Well, it works out both ways. Say having is such thing as toggleable option for each part or enabled/disabled for all parts at once a bad idea as suggestion or prosposal?

EDIT: btw for me the multi-converter parts only take one converter type per part in 1.5.1 like multi-bays don't exist which make many converter parts useless in latest KSP GTI caused this issue, I uninstalled it and all went back.

Edited November 21, 2018 by LatiMacciato