Best way to build a base

[Jestersage]

So far, I have success with modular base using the "base with small wheels" method, aka each module have 4 of the smallest wheel that allow them to slowly move into position.

However, I am wondering would it be better to use a "bottom crane rover" to move the base modules? Or go the other way around and Just make a base on wheels?

[septemberWaves]

It depends on three things: play style, patience, and part count.

Firstly, which method would you enjoy more?

Secondly, which would take you more time, and would you be willing to take the extra time for the method you prefer?

Thirdly, how much lag do you experience with extra parts? A rover can save parts if there are a lot of base modules, but for only a couple of modules it can be better to just make them individually mobile.

Consider these things and that should help you decide.

[Blaarkies]

modules with wheels are bad for scalability(unless you can decouple them wheels) because part-count leads to lag.

Crawler design is good(rover fits underneath the modules), but i suggest using a claw on the rover(instead of docking ports). First, it's less parts, second you can pivot the module on top of your rover a bit, this gives you some freedom to nudge the position for docking. I just went ahead an put claws on everything(modules connect to others using a claw). I tried the all docking ports thing once, and its pain on the Mun. You need extensive testing, but the KSC grounds are far too flat to truly test the design

My older method was a class 1 lever forklift with a claw at the front, some aeroplane gear at the front(in addition to the rover wheels) and a 9ton fuel tank at the back and some reaction control. Drive up, claw a module, pop the aeroplane gear and drive around. The modules had docking ports, but this forklift had enough reaction control(and Vernors) to nudge itself untill the docking port fit. It was cool, but a hassle to get into orbit in the first place

Edited February 21, 2017 by Blaarkies

[Whisky Tango Foxtrot]

My technique is to put a docking port on the top of my modules, lower it down to the surface using a lifter vehicle equipped with RCS and at least level 2 SAS, set the navball to surface mode and the SAS to radial out hold (ensuring that the module stays upright,) set my main engine throttle to just enough to cancel out gravity and then manoeuvre the module into place using RCS thrusters. I've already added a couple of extensions to my Mun base using this technique. It requires some fairly precise piloting but is still fairly manageable and the only extra part that you need to put on your module is the top docking port (and even that can be placed on a decoupler if you don't want to keep it on your base.)

Edited February 21, 2017 by Whisky Tango Foxtrot

[Freshmeat]

I had great success with the Konstruction mod. It has height adjustable wheels, so you can carry modules beneath the crane and dock them at the correct height with ease. A thread in mission rapports can be seen here. After the thread, I found out that the cradles are somewhat unstable, and had to retract most of them to avoid jumping base syndrome. Still working on the details, but it will probably involve supports attached with KIS.

[Guest]

Crash a lot of ships in some general area, then assemble a base with KIS/KAS using whatever parts survived.

[Blue_J]

In my current career save, my plan is to (largely) design my bases in a single piece, then build them on-site using Extraplanetary Launchpads. I've built several huge (mostly) vanilla space stations orbiting Kerbin in previous games, but my problem is that by the time I've launched, aligned, and docked nine or twelve segments, (plus a half-dozen supply missions,) I'm usually too bored of repetitive launches to put together interplanetary missions and I wind up quitting KSP for a while. I'm kind of hoping that an orbital shipyard that I ship parts up to will take some of the grind out for me. I could be seriously wrong about this - it could wind up being worse, for all I know - but I'm at least trying to make new mistakes.

(Additionally, in an effort to keep the part count of my bases and stations low, I'm planning on using a few of the 11 m and 15 m spherical tanks from MKS. I've never tried launching one, and I'm sure it's not impossible, but yikes, it does not look particularly fun or easy. Building them in orbit seems much more reasonable.)

[A civilian]

I've just completed my first ever base on Minmus, and here's how i did it. Since it was a Career save, money was on my mind. So I sought to design a reusable shuttle/lander that i can just keep on refueling. That lander looks like a spaceplane. At the back is a Construction Port Sr. , which allows me to dock my modules to it and land them horizontally. I land the modules, and use the lander's wheels to move and dock the base parts. Once building with just the lander proved difficult, I sent a construction rover. Although setting up the lander and the initial base parts would be costly, if the base has ISRU and mining drills then it would be a vital asset. With the lander, laboratory, command hubs, mining necessities, power generation, everything cost me about 1.5 million credits, which is surprisingly lower than I expected. 

[Klapaucius]

I'd love to see some pictures.

[Tonka Crash]

KPBS has flexible corridors you connect on EVA.  This reduces docking & alignment problems. Below was built by docking together the first couple of pieces, but most of the expansion was done by linking with flexible corridors.

[katateochi]

"Best" is ofcourse highly subjective. 
I've recently had a lot of fun building a base in a "realistic" construction style; almost everything was brought out in large KAS containers and assembled piece by piece on site with KAS/KIS (apart from a few modules that needed neat symmetry and a bit of clipping).
This required building a large crane on site first to lift heavy parts and a rover with an IR arm and magnet to move smaller parts around.
Also, like @Tonka Crash I used flexible docking ports (from Pathfinder, I think) to join foundation parts together.  But you could also use KAS/KIS connectors.  

I like this style of building, but it's pretty slow going.  The main point is it's fun, and the place looks like a construction site while you're building. But with KAS/KIS and some lifting gear you don't have to worry about designing things to line up and then finding that under different gravity or slight terrain humps that things are not quite in place.  and you get some cool screenshots;

 

[KerikBalm]

Tha tscreenshot from @katateochi looks pretty cool.

As far as modular bases, whether or not they have their own wheels, it will raise the part count. every module connection adds another 2 parts minimum to the base part count (just for the docking ports, I suppose you could use claws to reduce that to 1). Also, generally each module will rest on its own legs/wheels, which requires a minimum of 3 for stability (usually 4 if you're going for rough bilateral symmetry). 4 wheels or 4 legs makes no difference to part count.

A while ago I was using KPBS and its extendable rover wheels to move modules into position, but I still used 4 legs for the modules to sit on their own, so I stopped that and just went all stock and used 4x rover wheels.

What I was doing with KPBS was using a rover "truck" that would dock one section of extendable wheels to the front of a module, then dock to the back, then extend wheels (lifting the module), then it would drive into position, lower the module and undock. Then both sections would dock, and push the module the last few meters from the back (without wheels on the front, luckily that mod's wheels had good traction and torque).

Having a "tug" or "truck" can still be useful. If each module can drive itself, then each modules not only needs wheels and2 docking ports (or 1, but then you've limited base expansion options), but then it also needs a probe core and a power reserve/power generator.

So if you do a modular base, consider not giving each module its own power storage and probe core, but having a truck dock with it when moving it around.

Also, bigger modules are more efficient in part count (1x jumbo 64 instead of 8x FL-T800s, for example)

I was doing mk3 bay compatible modules to roll on/roll off of mk3 cargobays+ramps, and made some nice bases that way, but I've started looking at other options for airless/near airless worlds (still going with stock parts, and not something like mod "mk4" parts).

So I started experimenting with deploying stuff much bigger that what can fit in a mk3 bay:

... but recovery of the modules is pretty difficult. Its a pain to get the docking ports to connect when the dropship's landing gear is lowered.

If all you want to do is build a base in one place, and never have it move again, just drop larger but mobile base modules via "skycranes".

I like modular surface bases that I can redeploy elsewhere by retrieving modules, and for that, so far, the mk3 cargobay, and rover-modules that fit in it have been what works best for me.

with mod parts (KPBS)

[Sharpy]

Build on low-gravity world. Use KIS to attach/detach parts. Use RCS to maneuver base modules into place. Also, planetary bases Corridor Segment, Pathfinder's Mineshaft, and KAS port allow to connect base modules without sticking them together.

They really are game-changers, especially KIS and KAS.

Went from this:

\

to this:

 

 

 

[juanml82]

EPL has an expansion pad where you create extra parts for an existing station/base - the new parts/subassembly/actual ship saved in the VAB or SPH replaces the expansion pad when built. Using it for ground bases mean you have to look out for the orientation. It keeps part count down, as you don't need ports to connect segments and you don't have to carry all the parts all the way from Kerbin - you just build them on site once you have the initial infrastructure in place.

An incorrect orientation can lead to stuff like this

In this base, the original parts are the central tower, the properly segment directly connected to the central tower (which uses an MKS flexo tube for the connection) and the workshop in the shadow, which I send after realizing I had forgotten about an EPL workshop.

It eventually grew into this

And even larger (but I don't have a screenshot uploaded and I'm not at home to upload another)

[Zosma Procyon]

One shot massive rocket. I don't have any pictures available on this computer, but I start all of my bases with a large central structure w/ everything a base requires (a lab, converter, drills, cupola, and docking ports) atop truly massive rockets.

[Hydrothermalventclam]

I prefer building a rover and shoving all the modules into place.

The rover was specifically designed to have a low center of gravity (hence the RAPIERS), so I could accelerate fairly aggressively on minimus and not flip the rover.  Once I got the rover design nailed down, the base was fairly simple to assemble.

Edited October 4, 2018 by Hydrothermalventclam

[bigcalm]

This applies to MKS bases primarily, where you have to care more about landing spots....

== Surface Bases ==

Big bases, docked and welded on the ground can often be very wobbly, or suffer Kraken attacks especially when the drills are running, or later, as the centre of mass shifts.  Whilst there are some things you can do to mitigate this, there's no guarantees that the Kraken won't strike!  Some advice on mitigating it:
* When you pick a landing spot, make sure it's all the same gradient - gentle slopes are ok, but it must be the same gradient everywhere.  The Kraken will attack you if your base is not on level ground.  Dock as gently as you possibly can.  Docking at a slight angle can cause some parts to stick into the surface, meaning that when focusing on the vessel, some parts will be below the surface.
* Don't try and establish your base on a steep slope.  What will happen after a little mining of resources is that the base will be heavier and start to slide.  I had an Ike base once that suffered a catastrophic 2km downhill plunge due to starting on a steep slope.

* Bases can be put broadly in three types categories based on how they're constructed and expanded -- Disconnected bases, KIS-constructed bases and docked bases.  

 -- A disconnected base has multiple vessels within 150 metres of each other - so for example, having a habitation section, a mining section and a manufacturing section all as separate components landed near each other.  This setup in theory is kinder to your computer than having a single base because different vessels run in different cpu cores.  In practice, you end up needing extra parts on each vessel to make them work - aerials, batteries, extra storage, etc. so it ends up being just as laggy.  Easy to expand - just land another component within 150 metres.  (example -- Ike base)

 

 -- A KIS-constructed base is one where you start with a basic base or structure to which other parts can be manually attached by Kerbals using screwdrivers.  This type is relatively easy to expand but base setup generally takes a lot of time and normally requires a flexible construction rover to help.  KIS-construction techniques are often helpful in the other two base types.  (example -- Dres base).

 

 -- A docked base is one where multiple components are landed and then docked together on the surface typically using the Konstruction docking ports - these have an option to "weld docking ports" when docked, which effectively destroys the docking ports and makes it a single vessel.  In general, quick to set up, but a little hard to expand later if some parts are forgotten, at which point you may have to use KIS construction techniques.  Building your vessels so that the docking ports line up correctly can also be somewhat tricky, particularly if the ground you land on is not a constant slope.  (example -- Vall base)

 

All three variants are viable strategies and all can generally be expanded in future.  You can also do combinations - you can always attach extra stuff using KIS/KAS.

Carefully choosing your MKS base location is extremely important, especially if you want the base to be full featured at some point.  It can be very helpful to land an exploration rover in advance and carefully choose your base site before landing the main base.  Here are some general requirements, in rough order of importance.
* Flattish terrain.  All bases will move a little tiny bit every second that you're out of time-warp - a very slow slide down the hill.  The flatter the terrain, the better.  Also to be noted is trying to park it on a slope that is even.  That is, don't park it across a bit of slope that's at 5 degrees and another bit that's at 8 degrees - this is an invitation for the Kraken to attack because certain bits of the ship may load below ground.
* All resources.  Whilst it's unusual to find a biome that has everything that you need, it's often possible to find two areas (e.g. Highlands and Midlands) that are next to each other and between them have all the required resources.  An initial exploratory rover to pinpoint a landing site here is almost required, and it helps hugely if base vehicles are on wheels for fine tuning.  A "remote miner" is extremely helpful in this instance as well - which features kontainers, a drill, electricity generation and not much else to sit in that foreign biome less than 150 metres away whilst the main base pulls resources to itself.  Very generally, the most important resources are Substrate, Minerals and MetallicOre.  If your base is advanced enough to have machinery generation, then you'll effectively want all raw materials available.  If you have a vessel that can mine remotely and then fly back - that's fine, but these should be for the less common resources (exotic minerals, rare metals, uraninite)
* Equatorial.  Assuming that you have return ships waiting in orbit to be refuelled or simply to be rendezvoused with, having your base near the equator can simplify this hugely as take offs can be done at any time.
* A nice view.  As examples -- my Ike base is at the south pole with Duna on the horizon ; My Vall base is equatorial with Jool on the horizon ; My Dres base is right by the big canyon;

* You can also try the World Stabiliser mod - which attempts to try and put everything above ground when you load the vessel.
* There is an option in MKS where you can "Toggle ground tether", but I've never got it to work on any of my bases - it's synonymous with 'Make this base and anything parked nearby explode immediately" - which is good for screenshots but not much else.

[magnemoe]

KIS / KAS and other mods with connectivity help a lot, also not using landing legs, use structural elements to land on. Optionaly use landing gear you can raise to rest on structural elements, later also give mobility for fine tuning placement. 
Planetary bases mod has wheels you can raise too. 
My issue with landing legs is that it tend to get ship jump then docking or after mining and you don't need it on base modules you will land once. 

 

[Cavscout74]

This is my standard small base.  Single launch, has wheels for fine tuning the position, but they can be jettisoned & self-destructed once no longer needed.  Once landed, both landing engines on the ends as well as the center sky crane are jettisoned & destroyed.  The ends have docking ports for future add-ons if desired.   Holds 5, with power generation, docking port & antenna, so it meets the typical small base contracts in career.  When I want something bigger, I've done a mix huge single launch monstrosities and multi-part bases that are assembled on the ground.