Which Life Support Mod

[Sarge82nd]

So, I want to download A life support mod. It will either be TAC life Support or Ioncross Crew Support. Which one should I download or should I wait for Squad to make a life support update (if they do). Your feedback is greatly appreciated

Cheers

[regex]

For me, Ioncross just added more parts. I haven't tried the TAC one, mainly because I don't like the hex-cans.

My suggestion is to not use one. You'll either figure out how to game the system quickly (and just add more parts) or you'll end up doing more robotic missions. That being said, TAC looks more involved if you enjoy that aspect of it.

[Moon Goddess]

@regex, can I ask what would you like out of a life support system, that isn't just "adding new parts"

To me the biggest goal of a life support system to me is insure that a mission to requires more planning than I mission to orbit.

[regex]

@regex, can I ask what would you like out of a life support system, that isn't just "adding new parts"

Challenge.

What I found happened with Ioncross is I would build my ship as normal, slap on an oxygen tank and a recycler, and something to power the recycler, and call it good. I literally wouldn't need to worry about oxygen for a year. If I was doing a longer journey, or carrying more Kerbals, I'd just add more oxygen and recyclers as needed. The components were so light they barely affected my delta-V, so I never really noticed them. In the end I just ended up with more parts on my ship, which is pretty much the most useless thing to a KSP player using a laptop.

Edited September 5, 2013 by regex

[Moon Goddess]

You might like TAC then, I'm using that now. The lack of recyclers definitely makes it where you can't just not worry about O2. I've been flying resupply flights to my space Station. It's not perfect though, I do feel like it's missing "something"

[regex]

You might like TAC then, I'm using that now. The lack of recyclers definitely makes it where you can't just not worry about O2. I've been flying resupply flights to my space Station. It's not perfect though, I do feel like it's missing "something"

I've been waiting patiently for it to mature and will probably try it once 0.22 comes out (new save and all that).

[Captain Sierra]

When TAC does get recyclers and their own storage tanks, I plan on giving it a test. Ioncross is very easy as recyclers plus a few big tanks and you are set for years.

[Specialist290]

A smart way to do recyclers might be to intentionally make them underpowered so that by default they only restore a small fraction of what a single kerbal uses in a day, or fine-tune the unit conversion factors so that the ratio of fresh units restored / waste units consumed is always less than 1:1.

That way, instead of just slapping a supply tank and a recycler on there and calling it a day, you could seriously weigh your options as to whether it's better to carry a bunch of resource tanks, or to use fewer tanks and a recycler that can replenish some of the resources your kerbonauts use, but not all of them.

[regex]

A smart way to do recyclers might be to intentionally make them underpowered so that by default they only restore a small fraction of what a single kerbal uses in a day, or fine-tune the unit conversion factors so that the ratio of fresh units restored / waste units consumed is always less than 1:1.

Ioncross used a 0.5:1 ratio, IIRC, which was still way too much. I'd say something on the order of 0.1:1. Even then, if you use realistic masses for supplies you still end up with completely manageable situations. The big problem is that KSP is not realistic in any sense of the word: engines are underpowered, use a lot more fuel, the distances are shorter, etc... Any sort of challenging life support mod is going to have to balance with an eye towards gameplay rather than real-world comparisons.

Not to mention the fact that it is perfectly reasonable in KSP to send a supply truck right alongside your mission ship since budgets are of no concern (and I doubt career mode will have us face NASA-style budget challenges either) and you don't ever have to worry about equipment failure.

[DChurchill]

The big problem for me with life support mods is the lack of persistence. If you're not flying that particular ship, then the life support resources don't deplete. Plus, I don't really want to have to manage every conceivable aspect of a space flight. I don't play Dwarf Fortress, either.

[Keome]

I use Ioncross because when I decided to use a life support mod, TAC wasn't as developed.

[Moon Goddess]

I'm pretty both IonCross and TAC both deplete resources of inactive ships based on the amount of time you've been away when you return.....

If you don't want to manage every aspect of space flight, that's cool, please don't be negative about it here in the thread with those of us that do though.

I was just thinking, YOu know what I'd love to see someone impliment in a LS mod. Living space. Something the makes sure you can't just send 3 kerbals to Jool in a mk1-2 pod for 6 years.

I'm not sure the logistics of it yet, but some module that declares a part like hitchhiker as having living space, and the more kerbals you have the more living space you need to have... and I'm thinking not like a resource that depletes but something maybe like raises a kerbals stupidity over time in space flight reduced by the amount of living space you have.

Still something I'm thinking about... but like just thinking, if you're going to send 3 kerbals to Mun a pod is fine, even for Minmus as well, but like 3 Kerbals to Duna you need to send a Hitchhiker, and Jool would require a maybe even a Hitchhiker each...

[regex]

I was just thinking, YOu know what I'd love to see someone impliment in a LS mod. Living space. Something the makes sure you can't just send 3 kerbals to Jool in a mk1-2 pod for 6 years.

I'm not sure the logistics of it yet, but some module that declares a part like hitchhiker as having living space, and the more kerbals you have the more living space you need to have... and I'm thinking not like a resource that depletes but something maybe like raises a kerbals stupidity over time in space flight reduced by the amount of living space you have.

Still something I'm thinking about... but like just thinking, if you're going to send 3 kerbals to Mun a pod is fine, even for Minmus as well, but like 3 Kerbals to Duna you need to send a Hitchhiker, and Jool would require a maybe even a Hitchhiker each...

^^ This is something I would love to see in a life support mod, although I'd go with one Hitchhiker per two Kerbals, or even one (that's all personal, really, you could even do it as a "difficulty" setting). Or maybe create some arcane formula that would add up crewed versus non-crewed space and the sanity it provides. For instance, having a Cupola could alleviate some additional stress created by the lack of a Hitchhiker, or an uncrewed lander pod could do the same to a lesser extent. Single-kerbal spaces versus multiple kerbal spaces, some abstract "free room" statistic per module (pods having less than Hitchhikers...)

I don't know how you would degrade Kerbal performance because their stats really only affect facial expressions. That's the real hurdle.

[Moon Goddess]

Oh I'm aware... this is in the EARLY planning stages.... That post took an hour to write while the idea formed in my head...

I really would like to have the amount of space required based on how long your out there, rather than just a set rate of 1 per 2. I think people can be confined to a smaller space for the months to Duna than they can for the years to Jool.

Finally an idea worthy of me studying the Kerbal API, I have some C# background...

[regex]

I really would like to have the amount of space required based on how long your out there, rather than just a set rate of 1 per 2. I think people can be confined to a smaller space for the months to Duna than they can for the years to Jool.

That's a good idea. Combine that with cramped versus uncramped and crewed versus non-crewed spaces, then add some other stats to Kerbals (the main one in my mind is "stress") that can be used in interesting ways... I think when 0.22 and science comes out there can be some meaningful things to affect Kerbal performance.

I'm currently (lazily) looking into how to randomly cause damage to ship parts, break rover wheels, etc... So far I'm just exploding parts at random, but imagine fuel leaks or engine failures causing stress and that affecting the quality or time it takes to do repairs.

Finally an idea worthy of me studying the Kerbal API, I have some C# background...

DO EEEEET

[Starwaster]

I'm pretty both IonCross and TAC both deplete resources of inactive ships based on the amount of time you've been away when you return.....

If you don't want to manage every aspect of space flight, that's cool, please don't be negative about it here in the thread with those of us that do though.

I was just thinking, YOu know what I'd love to see someone impliment in a LS mod. Living space. Something the makes sure you can't just send 3 kerbals to Jool in a mk1-2 pod for 6 years.

I'm not sure the logistics of it yet, but some module that declares a part like hitchhiker as having living space, and the more kerbals you have the more living space you need to have... and I'm thinking not like a resource that depletes but something maybe like raises a kerbals stupidity over time in space flight reduced by the amount of living space you have.

Still something I'm thinking about... but like just thinking, if you're going to send 3 kerbals to Mun a pod is fine, even for Minmus as well, but like 3 Kerbals to Duna you need to send a Hitchhiker, and Jool would require a maybe even a Hitchhiker each...

Each habitable part might then require some sort of sanity or stress factor assigned to it, with 'pods' having the worst of it and larger ones like the hitchhiker pod being a bit better and greenhouses and the big 6 kerbal dome being a lot better. (I forget who makes them, same person for each one). (actually greenhouse isn't habitable I don't think but its presence could be a mitigating factor because it gives Kerbals somewhere to go to unwind and look at something green that doesn't remind them that they're locked up in a cannister with a bunch of other Kerbals)

[FacticiusVir]

A serious (RL) issue with having your Kerbals cramped up in a small space for months at an end would be the physical impact - without regular & rigorous movement and exercise, your Kerbals with suffer serious muscle and bone atrophy. Sounds like the easiest "punishment" for not giving your Kerbals enough space is to prevent them from EVAing - so no flag planting if you don't take care of them.

[Moon Goddess]

I made a blog post about what I was thinking at this time... http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/entry.php/909-Habitation-Space-for-Long-Duration-Space-Flight

I don't wanna hijack this thread anymore lets talk there...

[apoch1999]

so anyone using ion cross, is there a forum thread for it? im having an issue where my kerbals just dissapear with plenty of oxygen and electricity. on liftoff they will be there then 3 seconds into liftoff they just dissappear one by one 2 or 3 seconds apart

[Temeriki]

Bobcats H.O.M.E. 2 plugin thingy has hab landers with upgrades, one being an inflatable hab module the other being and inflatable greenhouse. In a life support module/plugin I want to see a few things o2/co2, clean/dirty water, food/waste(fertilizer). Any hab module as long as it powered should be able to last a week without any additional supplies/tanks. O2 and CO2 recycling is a sore point, as of now we just dump our excess CO2 and make more O2 out of waste water electrolysis. Excess CO2 should be dumped overboard if the air system is powered, if its not powered instead of an increase in CO2 there should be a drop in O2 (that means lack of oxygen should cause kerbal death, not rise in co2), if someone is running a greenhouse, CO2 could be converted back into O2, wastewater converted back into water, while increasing food generation. Water/wastewater can be recycled at 100% efficiency with electricity via electrolysis. This gives a person the option of storing only water for future generation of water and oxygen. Food can be generated via electricity with an algea farm (giving you your space food production), that could also recycle CO2 into O2. In order for any life support module to make sense in the long term is for some sort of greenhouse module (space deployable for space stations or ground deployable for planets). I can hear the cries already "But Temeriki, that means you can have 100% efficiency with only electricity", my response to you is SO? With a small crew and large enough greenhouses you could run at 100% efficiency (well 99.999999%). Well technically youd have excess of something, most likely water and O2, food production would be your limiting factor, with a space algea farm youd most likely need 2 to support one kerbal, with greenhouses lets say 1 kerbal each. This would require you to bring excess food and water for the transfer phase of colony missions, and require large bases to support more than a few kerbals. The life support parts should be heavy along with water storage, this would require one to actually have to plan for their additional weight. If someone wanted to get real fancy you could have water collectors on liquid planets (eve, kerbal and laythe), and oxygen generators on planets with atmosphere, just throwing ideas out there, Im trying to learn the plugin system myself to see this come to fruition.

[KerbMav]

I think this thread is worth a revival, as there are now three mods around.

Until now I did not really care for this aspect/option of modding, but now I would like some insights form other players what they think are the pros and cons of the three?