[1.0.5] TAC Life Support v0.11.2.1 [12Dec]

[diomedea]

@ TaranisElsu (and others who may want to comment on this).

ON CONSUMPTION RATES

In case you ever want to add even more realism to your fine mod, please consider that resource comsumption rates are not to be a constant. I mean, I am absolutely fine with a normal Kerman consuming 1 of each resource a day, but in a normal condition only. With "normal condition", let me default to being relaxing on Kerbin, or enjoying a spacetrip without causes of concern.

There are a lot of circumstances when conditions are less-than-perfect for a Kerman. So, let me introduce the concept of "stress". A Kerman experiences stress in a variety of situations, like when doing hazardous jobs (EVA ?), heavy jobs (had they to lift and carry around some items during their walk on Duna?), training to keep his/her body fit (they must, if they have to reach Laythe and be of any use once landed), but most of all when experiencing high-G acceleration (in case you don't believe me, just look Bill or Bob, their horrified faces during launch tells enough).

On the contrary, we could have a device for long space journeys with the effect to reduce consumption rates. A sort of "partial life suspension" that will also make Jeb & Co. less reactive when activated (so, you have to switch that device off, or Jeb will take 10x more time than usual to perform even the simplest duty).

On top of that, we could also have a device measuring "stress" in real time for each Kerman aboard a ship. Sort of a "Life monitoring system", I reckon that was a standard item with human crews in space.

I am actually not asking you (yet) to make all of the above. But to start, to allow that to be implemented in future versions, allowing consumption rates to be calculated with regard to the "stress" variable. In case you allow this, I am going through your source files to see if I can understand how your mod works and if I can be of any help to implement any of the above (no promise, I have some expertise with other games but I am just starting with KSP).

[Aknar]

This is what I said earlier on the subject :

Do you think a Kerbal reaction script is within your reach? Playing with values could make them change faces and make them look worried when they are lacking resources. That would really be great. Let's push this far fetched idea to make them consume more or less depending on their state of mind. So that EVAs and launches would have a burnout effect on the Kerbals.

Can I add rationing as another idea of next upgrade to the mod? comfortable, normal, scarce, and survival? this would have an effect on the faces they make and the burnout if you ever managed to add it?

diomedea, I think this might be possible if modders can have access to the script for how kerbals react. We can base ourselves on this and add the G's indicator to the math to have a notion of stress that would increase or decrease resource consumption. It would really give life to Kerbals and their faces would take into consideration if they are out of resources and fighting for survival.

[diomedea]

@ Aknar: yes, you earlier put a lot of ideas, variable consumption of resources included but more or less that was lost to me, it seemed you were just considering how to make Kermen react to deprivation (beyond other points I am not going to discuss). While my point remains to have consumption of resources made variable based on (so called) "stress".

But I accept you were the first to have shown a concept of variable consumption of resources. In that sense, my proposal could be seen as going one step deeper about your concept.

What I propose does not imply (directly) to change the mood of Kermen, facial look or else. But certainly there are points in common among the two proposals. Dunno if any script could be tied to a calculation of a Kerman activity (your point, I believe) but you may be right; a Kerman activity is actually very much at the base of my "stress" concept, therefore modding such a script may be a part for including my proposals as well.

I certainly see the chance to have both become a reality, and working together.

But to tell more, I also would like to see other things about kerbonauts (not strongly related to Life Support) that also will have an effect on "stress" calculation. While I have to wait and see what Squad will be cooking for us in the future versions, I certainly expect Kerbonauts to be given much more attention; possibly with added values, performance statistics, training devices. Therefore I anticipate that stress may be calculated considering fitness, and Kerbs must undergo fitness sessions and tests before a flight.

[Aknar]

I didn't want to come across as trying to top your idea, I was merely agreeing . I'm glad to have someone else out there looking into the scripts, to try and see what can be done with these nice ideas . I only know how to play around with the .cfg files so my knowledge on the matter is limited so i'd be more than happy if you found out how to make this possible

[Aknar]

TaranisElsu, If you find the time, could you send me the TAClifesupport.dll and lifesupport.cfg where waste resources are deadly please? I hope it's not too much to ask. I'll type in the values, I just need a copy paste of the resources line, changed to the names of waste resources, so they can kill Kerbals if container fills up to max.

[diomedea]

... I'm glad to have someone else out there looking into the scripts, to try and see what can be done with these nice ideas .

TBH, I am only at the very beginning with KSP modding, though I know where my towel is with other game mods and some programming. What I believe to have pretty clear is that I need a variable instanced for every Kerman in game, to represent his actual stress. This variable must be initiated to be = 1.0 at game start (No logic to actually calculate its value until somebody takes that task, me included). And of course, to have this variable enter the calculation about resources consumption/transformation (I believe are at lines 133-135 and 139-141 in GlobalSettings.cs, with the source of this mod).

I have begun looking through the methods exported by Unity DLLs, have seen a few about animations as well but can't say which does what (while still looking for proper references). Therefore I can't promise to come out with anything useful for your idea in general. But who knows...

[sidfu]

only found 1 bug with the dev version thats at launch pad if u eva before u launch the kerbal will have 0 resorces on him

[Aknar]

I finally got my waste disposal system working. Uses the mesh from stock RCS. Can't get the visuals though (i've been trying yellow flame and light, If anyone has an idea...)

It spends electricity and WasteWater AND Waste. I only need to change one value to make one for CO2. It's used on small crafts that can't afford the weight of recycling, and were it is easier to just dump waste.

I would need a nice idea for a Waste disposal system that only does Waste and can represent it in a decent manner. I integrated both recyclers into the hitchhiker and as the last resource, waste of all sorts, can't be recycled, I need a fancy looking and compact disposal hatch.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Aknar

[cyberKerb]

Like a minority of people on this thread (wile1411 and regex), I'm wondering why all resources have the same value. It doesn't make much sense in that case, might as well only have one resource for them all.

The thing that drove me to make my minor change to the cfg file was that I wanted to modify "something" so the resources remaining indicators weren't all in sync all the time unless I added different sized canisters. As I'm a little slow to realize stuff, I mistakenly tried modifying both the rates and the canister size but ended up using different maths for the same duration.

In the end, I came around to regex way of thinking and now very much agree that the consumption at 1 per day for each resource is much simpler to plan and at a glance, know what you have left.

I did try to modify the canister content sizes slightly (I left the density of the resources alone) to get the resources out of sync for how long each canister lasts. However, I've since dropped trying that and just tweaked the new carbon extractor to require 0.4 water resource to function. I had it at 0.5, but it chewed through water a little quick for my tastes. For testing, I had a Mk1 command pod with a TAClifesupport (80 days + 3 for command module) , 1 carbon extractor & 1 water recycling (ignore electricity for the test as I was using the NUK power source).

With full warp on it got to the ~82days limit before the food ran out as expected, but I only had used 10% of oxygen (due the the 90% efficency of the extractor). The cool bit was that I still had about 50% of the water left (against due to the extractor needing water due to my tweak to the cfg file).

Edited November 25, 2013 by wile1411

[Aknar]

Oh... Well, for now I mainly changed consumption values keeping oxygen at 1 but changing the two others plus the waste values, so recycling is less efficient. I still need to tweak values but it's starting to look nice. Now I need to figure out a way to do that on EVA values.

[TaranisElsu]

I had a chance to do a little testing so here is a new mostly untested dev release.

*** Keep in mind that this is still mostly untested and probably contains a few more bugs. Do not blame me if problems exist. ***

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ys0zq0hg88c5jse/TacLifeSupport_pre-0.6.13328.6.zip

I will try to answer the recent comments when I have time.

For now:

only found 1 bug with the dev version thats at launch pad if u eva before u launch the kerbal will have 0 resorces on him

Um.... don't do that ? On a serious note, thank you for bringing it to my attention. I will look into it.

[sidfu]

I had a chance to do a little testing so here is a new mostly untested dev release.

*** Keep in mind that this is still mostly untested and probably contains a few more bugs. Do not blame me if problems exist. ***

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ys0zq0hg88c5jse/TacLifeSupport_pre-0.6.13328.6.zip

I will try to answer the recent comments when I have time.

For now:

Um.... don't do that ? On a serious note, thank you for bringing it to my attention. I will look into it.

little more info to help u on it. first before stage or anything u eva. the kerbal comes out but everything even electricty is empty also it dont auto switch to keral u have to ] switch to them.

[fenderzilla]

what we really need is a stasis chamber, where the kerbals can go and hibernate so they won't use as much food. useful for insanely long jouneys like eeloo and back.

[diomedea]

@ fenderzilla: Yes, whatever we call it (cryogenic chamber, life suspension, hybernation device) the effect is to reduce methabolism --> reduce consumption of supplies --> allow longer journeys. That is one of the possibilities opened by allowing a variable rate of consumption, you may find Aknar already introduced this concept @ post #271 and myself mumbling about "life suspension" (among other things) @ post #276. Welcome to the club!

[Guest]

Just send a probe ship along with supplies.

If you can indefinitely suspend/recycle resources then why are you even playing with a life support mod? At least when you bring along a "picnic ship" you not only have to fly it, but you have to rendezvous and dock up to use it.

Edited November 25, 2013 by regex

[diomedea]

@ regex: yours is a valid approach, proof is the "picnic ship" is what is used in reality to keep the ISS crewed.

However, let me explain my view on this. If humans ever will be sent to external planets and beyond, the best strategy will be as depicted in "2001: a space odissey". With at least part of the crew hybernated. If you consider it, we are actually closer to a successful cryostasis than to a fusion drive, though the latter is more commonly depicted in space games.

Anyway, I don't want to suspend consumption of consumables altogether, rather to be able to reduce it (at a price: a cryostatic chamber is a pretty heavy item to bring in space). And also to increase the rate of consumption when the circumstances require. Therefore the amount of supplies available on board remains an important logistical factor in planning a space mission. I like realism, therefore I play with this mod; but in my view we have to be able to use foreseeable technology as well, or we shouldn't even send a kerbal beyond Duna.

[Guest]

I like realism, therefore I play with this mod; but in my view we have to be able to use foreseeable technology as well, or we shouldn't even send a kerbal beyond Duna.

Why not? Using this mod I've sent "picnic ships" to Jool and Eeloo to support my all-in-one Grand Tour Kethane Lander, and I'll probably end up sending another one to Dres to support the return trip. Even if I had "moments of panic" where my Kerbal used more, it wouldn't exactly have affected the trip because I plan with a large margin of error and life support supplies aren't exactly heavy.

In the end, this is more personal preference. I get where you're coming from but I'm the sort of player who will just delete those parts because they make life support meaningless (to me). I mean, I really should be testing the new recyclers to help TaranisElsu out but I just don't want to use them; they take all the fun out of the mod.

[diomedea]

Why not? Using this mod I've sent "picnic ships" to Jool and Eeloo...

IMHO, and again it is a matter of personal opinion, your solution would be more expensive if the cost of each ship was computed. For me it is, again, a matter of reality to consider also the cost, even if the game puts no limit in that regard. Then, again IMHO, it could become a nightmare to keep routinely sending ships. You are running your mission with a huge logistical train behind, and that kind of approach generally spells disaster in all kinds of operations in our world... (maybe not on kerbin, however).

In the end, this is more personal preference.

Absolutely concur. I totally respect your approach, as well.

I mean, I really should be testing the new recyclers to help TaranisElsu out but I just don't want to use them; they take all the fun out of the mod.

You certainly are a skilled modder yourself, therefore better at finding what may not run right. But you also have the right to play (and test) what you like.

@ TaranisElsu: if you like, I could have a look at those recyclers. Maybe you will have to tell me one thing or two about what to catch, however.

[TaranisElsu]

little more info to help u on it. first before stage or anything u eva. the kerbal comes out but everything even electricty is empty also it dont auto switch to keral u have to ] switch to them.

Fixed. Note that going on EVA and returning causes the vessel to count as "launched." I also fixed the bug where turning off resource flow allowed the Kerbals to live indefinitely. Any part with resource flow turned off is now ignored when doing any of the calculations.

Again with the disclaimer: *** Keep in mind that this is still mostly untested and probably contains a few more bugs. Do not blame me if problems exist. ***

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dkbzbnryjpqm51u/TacLifeSupport_pre-0.6.13329.2.zip

I mean, I really should be testing the new recyclers to help TaranisElsu out but I just don't want to use them; they take all the fun out of the mod.

@ TaranisElsu: if you like, I could have a look at those recyclers. Maybe you will have to tell me one thing or two about what to catch, however.

These last changes actually had nothing to do with the recyclers. I reworked the tracking and consumption calculations so that it can help monitor far away vessels and it should work better when loading a vessel after being gone for a really long time (2+ years). Another concern is around docking/undocking.

[TaranisElsu]

I am cross-posting my response here so that others can see it (https://github.com/taraniselsu/TacLifeSupport/issues/5):

The consumption rates and other settings get saved to the

{KSP}/GameData/ThunderAerospace/TacLifeSupport/PluginData/TacLifeSupport/LifeSupport.cfg file, which is created the first time that you start up KSP after installing the mod. You can also edit them in game by clicking the "LS" button in the Space Center scene.

If you do change the consumption rates, it is recommended that you also check the densities which are saved in {KSP}/GameData/ThunderAerospace/TacLifeSupport/TacResources.cfg. You might also adjust the number of units of resources that each part gets which is in {KSP}/GameData/ThunderAerospace/TacLifeSupport/StockPartChanges.cfg.

Keep in mind that I set everything up so that Kerbals consume one "unit" of each resource per day, but each unit is a different amount (mass and volume). One unit of oxygen is 0.429 kg and 1.490 liters. One unit of water is 1.798 kg and 1.798 liters.

Most of my math and references can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aioc9ek3XAvwdGNsRlh3OVhlbTFBR3M4RW0zLUNTRFE&usp=sharing

[Patupi]

On hibernation, if it's done there should be a penalty for it. Obvious stuff would be 'can't EVA while in hibernation'. But there are some mods that require Kerbals to do tasks and there should be a way of disabling those tasks. Perhaps removing the Kerbal from the game (so no mods would detect them normally) and replace with a place holder. Alternatively make a new status for the Kerbal beyond 'alive' and 'missing in action'.

Another thing would be it should take considerable time to put someone into stasis and take them out. Otherwise it's too much of a 'cheat'. If you can wake them easily for any task during a journey it means you'd be stupid not to do it to save on life support. Also consider the first version made should have a danger factor. IE it's possible that a Kerbal can die during hibernation from random flukes. Fixed in a more advanced version. Perhaps on primitive versions, with a live kerbal tending them during the trip it lessens the risk. If it takes 2 hours to put someone in a tank, and 12 hours to revive them (just pulling numbers out of the air here) it would go a long way to making this a viable, but limited part.

[Patupi]

----snip --- double post----

Edited November 26, 2013 by Patupi

[rosenkranz]

Can modular fuel tanks be utilized with this? My thought is use a stretchy tank with compartments for the food, waste, water, wastewater and so forth rather than have a bunch of different parts.

If someone has already made MFT cfgs for these resources would you care to share?

[diomedea]

@ Patupi: I like your ideas, if ever we succeed in having a form of life suspension depicted, those are all valid points to consider.

I certainly need to define a 'state' for kerbals being aboard a ship but inactive, without any possibility to accomplish any task; that's not for life suspension only (e.g., I think we could have sleeping cycles, black-outs, possibly even illnesses in a far future).

It certainly should require time to get into or away from life suspension. I was thinking at least 8 hrs., but I have yet to see how long will take a journey to Jool or beyond when I use some of the advanced drives (not only stock game, but from other mods as well). If they reduce travelling there to only a few days, it would not make sense to get into/out of hibernation.

Very smart your idea about the risks from immature technology. That should be applied to all the advancements in game, maybe we could have a variable with each new device representing reliability, begins low when just discovered and increases each time it is used (exponentially up to 100%). I see a whole new branch developing in the space center here: technological improvements through parts testing, of course requires some labs to conduct (and the player will have to spend time and money to have his parts properly tested/improved). Eh, my tanks may even stop exploding on the launchpad...

However, I'm dreaming too much about how this game may develop.

[Patupi]

Hmm, sleep cycles and black-outs? Maybe from g-stress if using DE? That sounds interesting. As to the time it takes going in and out of hibernation... depends on the method of course. I was thinking going in should be relatively easy but still require some preparations. Even as low as half an hour might be workable. Coming out I assumed that even aside from the process of reviving someone there is going to be a time when the Kerbal is recovering from the procedure and is still unable to do anything, or to go back into hibernation. Too stressful without some nasty side-effects. Honestly the 12 hours I picked was a bit of an understatement. I could easily see days of recovery while the body gets used to operating normally, even re-training dis-used muscles etc. Actually, basing the recovery time on how long they were in hibernation might work, though I'd make it logarithmic, or at least a fixed base amount of time with an added time per day spent in hibernation so it doesn't ramp up too drastically on longer jaunts. IE 8 hours Plus 1 hour per 50 days spent in hibernation.