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

[sstabeler]

The point is that there are already several ways to prevent there being an excess in the first place.

1. Add more storage (if the problem is lack of storage)

2. Ship the Recyclables more often, or using larger-capacity haulers (if the problem is the flow of recyclables to where you are recycling them)

3. Add more recyclers (if the problem is lack of recycling capacity)

disabling DumpExcess would therefore not actually help people who want to recycle the previously-dumped excess, while being extremely annoying for people who didn't want to bother, since now they must figure out how to dispose of the unwanted Recyclables.

[LatiMacciato]

37 minutes ago, sstabeler said:

disabling

ok, but what about a toggle option for those who don't want to waste things?

Since I wrote the patch for snacks-recyclers I convert Soil to Recyclables which integrates perfectly into the MKS production chain it sort of makes sense?

I just try to make a useful suggestion, Ideas can be good or bad. I think having a toggle option can be a good thing because recycling is a good thing while wasting resources is always bad.

Edited November 21, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[sstabeler]

I can see your point, but that sounds like either a lack of storage, or a lack of anything to do with the Recyclables- either that, or I think you can set a governor on the converter that produces the recyclers to slow it down a bit.

 

Basically, the problem is that apart from the fact that I'm not sure a toggle would even work, the toggle would introduce another thing to cause headaches when RoverDude is adding new parts- for what isn't really a common problem.

[LatiMacciato]

Hmm. I'm not here to cause damage regarding headaches or anythng! Adding more engineers or more recyclers would cause the chain be more efficient too, right?

Thank you for your reply!

EDIT: There is also the option to implent thing like this via PatchManager written by @linuxgurugamer

Edited November 21, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[sstabeler]

More adding more recyclers IIRC would help, but yeah, that's probably a better plan.

[RoverDude]

Hopping in - dumpexcess is there to prevent things shutting down due to lack of storage   I would rather some stuff spill out than an entire production chain shut down and kill off kerbals.

 

[LatiMacciato]

It was not my intention to kill anyone by making a suggestion to add an optional option.

I see status quo 4 the win.

[RoverDude]

No need to be dramatic either.  Sheesh.

[LatiMacciato]

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

No need to be dramatic either.  Sheesh.

Was not trying to, just tried to make a suggestion and there is no problem at all, I accept things as they come. I just disagree in opinion thatfor the suggestion.

EDIT: I take it, there not any chance any suggestion that adds minor optional things to MKS?

Thanks for reply.

Edited November 21, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[RoverDude]

1 hour ago, LatiMacciato said:

I take it, there not any chance any suggestion that adds minor optional things to MKS?

Seriously... now you are just being a jerk.  May want to re-think your approach a bit.

[LatiMacciato]

1 minute ago, RoverDude said:

Seriously... now you are just being a jerk.  May want to re-think your approach a bit.

 

11 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

ok, but what about a toggle option for those who don't want to waste things?

Since I wrote the patch for snacks-recyclers I convert Soil to Recyclables which integrates perfectly into the MKS production chain it sort of makes sense?

I just try to make a useful suggestion, Ideas can be good or bad. I think having a toggle option can be a good thing because recycling is a good thing while wasting resources is always bad.

aye. Ideas can be good or bad. Obviously mine was not fitting in and that is totally ok to me. My approach in first place was asking here in the forums with the words "I hope this might just be a feature to toggle all dumping or for specific parts that has the nodes/output resources.". This was not ment as request or a must apply thing rather a statement of me in hope seeing such feature. As said, Its ok to me if you don't think it fits.

[Stevie_D]

I think you dont realize, @LatiMacciato saying things like

Quote

I take it, there not any chance any suggestion that adds minor optional things to MKS?

and

Quote

"I see status quo 4 the win."

comes off as extremely passive-aggressive.

I think all RoverDude is asking, is that you converse in a way that doesn't have you hinting at him being a un-co-operative meglomaniac. Text is a very difficult medium to convey yourself in sometimes, so it might not be your intention, but thats obviously how it is coming across to him (and me).

Edited November 21, 2018 by Stevie_D

[goldenpsp]

49 minutes ago, LatiMacciato said:

 

aye. Ideas can be good or bad. Obviously mine was not fitting in and that is totally ok to me. My approach in first place was asking here in the forums with the words "I hope this might just be a feature to toggle all dumping or for specific parts that has the nodes/output resources.". This was not ment as request or a must apply thing rather a statement of me in hope seeing such feature. As said, Its ok to me if you don't think it fits.

Ideas are great.  There have been plenty of times that players have had suggestions that ended up being implemented into the mod.

 

Where you went off the rails was a comment like this...

2 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

EDIT: I take it, there not any chance any suggestion that adds minor optional things to MKS?

Which implies the opposite, ie @RoverDude is against user suggestions, which he most definitely is not.

 

Edit- @Stevie_D posted at the exact same time as I did.  Not my intention to pile on.

Edited November 21, 2018 by goldenpsp

[LatiMacciato]

I agree text is sometimes hard to understand and to interpret! I'm not speaking english in my main language, however It was not my intention to sound passive-agressive. After I read my written text I agree that it sounded worser than it was in my head before I typed it.

Its good to have a conversation about ideas and glad and thankful I'm not completely unheard and sorry if my words sounded like me beeing a jerk.

I understand the principle of balance therefor the reason for Recyclables in MKS. That is the reason i was thinking about not wasting them. I took the argument @RoverDude wrote that he disagrees because it would stop the converters and parts doing their job. I can accept that.

My Kerbals might just need to work harder then >.<

Edited November 21, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[TackleMcClean]

On 11/20/2018 at 5:35 AM, tsaven said:

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.

I don't doubt there's way to rack up even more heat with manual drills as well, but I'm talking about automatic drills.

Considering automatic drill, there is no way to run two drill heads at the same time - unless I'm missing something.

I don't have a vessel at the moment to screenshot sorry.

[LatiMacciato]

speaking of screens, here is something I created with also MKS (fully functional orbital stations beeing just below the 70 part limit):

Spoiler

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[RoverDude]

FYI - new constellation up.  Note that this will reset your swappable bays.  So be sure to visit your bases beforehand, and there is an option to disable bay swap costs you can flip on so that you can reconfigure bays post-install.  Should sort any outstanding issues, but please let me know.  I'll push out the specific releases once I have a bit of confirmation that this constellation release did not break stuff.

 

https://github.com/BobPalmer/USI_Constellation/releases/tag/2018.11.22.01

[DStaal]

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

FYI - new constellation up.  Note that this will reset your swappable bays.  So be sure to visit your bases beforehand, and there is an option to disable bay swap costs you can flip on so that you can reconfigure bays post-install.  Should sort any outstanding issues, but please let me know.  I'll push out the specific releases once I have a bit of confirmation that this constellation release did not break stuff.

 

https://github.com/BobPalmer/USI_Constellation/releases/tag/2018.11.22.01

Minor comment, but I'd hate to see this in the main updates:

Module Manager's current version is 3.1.1.

[RoverDude]

Ah thanks - I'll do a check for latest.

 

[Wyzard]

On 11/22/2018 at 7:44 AM, RoverDude said:

I'll push out the specific releases once I have a bit of confirmation that this constellation release did not break stuff.

This is more of a USI-LS thing, but since you posted about the constellation in the MKS thread, I'll respond here.

After installing the new constellation and starting the game, I noticed a lot of warnings in the logs about being unable to find PartModules like ModuleHabitation and ModuleLifeSupport.  Looking at the configs, I see that the module names have changed: ModuleHabitation is now USILS_HabitationSwapOption, for example.

While you may have good reasons for doing that, it breaks compatibility with all other mods that integrate with USI-LS.  Nertea's excellent station-parts mod, for example, has a bunch of life-support and habitation parts that no longer actually provide any USI life-support or habitation functionality.  That's likely to surprise users and annoy mod authors, so if at all possible, please include an MM patch that updates parts with the old modules to use the new ones instead.

On a different note, the constellation's MKS Parts folder includes a subfolder called "New folder" that includes a bunch of configs whose filenames say Atlas, but they're actually all copies of Tundra parts.  The result is that some of the Tundra parts appear twice in-game.

[donoya]

So I'm a bit out of the loop. What's a constellation? Is that just another way to say an experimental update? Or is that the name of a new mod? I haven't been on the forums much since the late alpha/early beta days of KSP... 

Edit: never mind. Just needed to check the link. But another question I have is: how to download it? Do I have to do a manual install for experimental/development builds, or is there some way to do this with ckan?

Edited November 24, 2018 by donoya

[Brigadier]

1 hour ago, donoya said:

Edit: never mind. Just needed to check the link. But another question I have is: how to download it? Do I have to do a manual install for experimental/development builds, or is there some way to do this with ckan?

Yes, the constellation is a manual install.  However, it's a straightforward drag and drop.

Edited November 24, 2018 by Brigadier

[Gilph]

8 hours ago, Wyzard said:

This is more of a USI-LS thing, but since you posted about the constellation in the MKS thread, I'll respond here.

After installing the new constellation and starting the game, I noticed a lot of warnings in the logs about being unable to find PartModules like ModuleHabitation and ModuleLifeSupport.  Looking at the configs, I see that the module names have changed: ModuleHabitation is now USILS_HabitationSwapOption, for example.

While you may have good reasons for doing that, it breaks compatibility with all other mods that integrate with USI-LS.  Nertea's excellent station-parts mod, for example, has a bunch of life-support and habitation parts that no longer actually provide any USI life-support or habitation functionality.  That's likely to surprise users and annoy mod authors, so if at all possible, please include an MM patch that updates parts with the old modules to use the new ones instead.

On a different note, the constellation's MKS Parts folder includes a subfolder called "New folder" that includes a bunch of configs whose filenames say Atlas, but they're actually all copies of Tundra parts.  The result is that some of the Tundra parts appear twice in-game.

Having the same issue. Also, the LS home screen is blank when try to configure it in the Home station screen.

Edit1: logs are here

Edited November 24, 2018 by Gilph

[RoverDude]

@Wyzard - to the first point (modules changing), this is a totally breaking change.  Mods are going to have to adjust  (or folks are going to have to toss in some PRs).  Normally I leave this to the modder, but if some of your favorite parts are not converted, then there's always the option of tossing me a MM PR that I can include with USI-LS.  Unfortunately I do not maintain patches for these (the original mod authors do).  

(Edit)

Actually... I expect a lot of these mod authors don't even maintain a compatibility patch... they rely on PRs for that.

 

Edited November 24, 2018 by RoverDude

[LatiMacciato]

Mind I ask, will the Orbital Logistics change too? The current orbital logistics parts dumping TransportCredits, will this also change?

Edited November 24, 2018 by LatiMacciato