Universal Storage 1.4.0.0 (For KSP 1.4.x) 13th March 2018

[OOZ662]

That would be like playing X3 Reunion and having to manually fly all your trading ships for your growing empire.

*Shudder*... Two hundred ships.

CLS-4-lyf

(This message is more than 10 characters now.)

[SpacedInvader]

If such a thing has dual support for ECLSS, I'd be happy. Right now, I prefer that mod for its simplicity in life support (O2 and CO2), but it has a slow-loss Oxygen regeneration cycle and I don't want to set up a high orbit mission control junction in Remote Tech 2 until I have a solution for absolute unlimited regen. Mainly because I've stated elsewhere, I'm a set-it-and-forget-it kind of guy. I don't want to be running maintenance courier missions beyond the first few setup runs. That would be like playing X3 Reunion and having to manually fly all your trading ships for your growing empire.

*Shudder*... Two hundred ships.

Why not just run without it? If you want something that will be fine on its own as a closed loop, you could just assume that it's built into the ship standard and not need to simulate it at all. My thinking is that if you want to simulate life support, you'd have to deal with the fact that it's a complicated system that has lots of potential for resupply needs. That all being said, I did the math over in the TACLS thread and even if you assume some advanced tech, you'd need 9 2.5m x 5m greenhouses to support a single person based off of minimum requirements for arable land.

[Lekke]

Why not just run without it? If you want something that will be fine on its own as a closed loop, you could just assume that it's built into the ship standard and not need to simulate it at all. My thinking is that if you want to simulate life support, you'd have to deal with the fact that it's a complicated system that has lots of potential for resupply needs. That all being said, I did the math over in the TACLS thread and even if you assume some advanced tech, you'd need 9 2.5m x 5m greenhouses to support a single person based off of minimum requirements for arable land.

That would turn KSP into space farmers .

[SpacedInvader]

That would turn KSP into space farmers .

Maybe, but there has to be something for them to do on a year-long trip to another planet. The simple fact of the matter is why bother using a realism / difficulty mod if you're going to try to work around it anyway. Sure I would love to have a good greenhouse, but I want it to be well balanced.... Being able to slap a part onto a ship and then completely forget about food requirements is equivalent to creating an easy-mode, in which case, why bother wasting the parts or disk space when its not actually enhancing the experience?

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

Why not just run without it?

Because that defeats the purpose of having to engineer specifically for that. It's like people looking at really advanced manufacturing mods in minecraft and going 'why not just play in creative?' They fail to understand that logistics is a fun system to manage until it scales up. Then it becomes work. I've got my own server with the Monster Pack. I've got a small scale manufacturing operation up and running with only minor weekly maintenance supplying what I need to build a huge factory of my own design, which will then be used to crank out massive amounts of supplies that virtually put me in creative. The difference being that it's all legit, and I BUILT that manufacturing base without magically appearing blocks, from the sticks up.

I want life support so I can account for engineering for O2 and CO2 consumption. I want the consequences to exist for not doing so. Not just 'pretending' that it is so with a glassy-eyed stare. But I don't want the headache of micromanaging the entire system, especially when I'm focused on other tasks. I don't want to stop what I'm doing on a multi-year mission because I realized that I need to fly a courier mission to a satellite base before its crew dies of asphyxiation. I don't want to time warp through a screwed up orbit path and realize my station crew are skeletons floating in a death-bath of CO2 while Blue Danube Waltz plays on station loudspeakers.

People forget, in the real world, huge operations like this are run by tens of thousands of people working in an invisible concert. There is a person in each position who's every waking breath is dedicated to their assigned task. Logistics is run in the background by an endless stream of people looking at and managing something. The problem this brings up in a game is that some people want to simulate some of this concert, but are faced with the problem of the fact that one player cannot be expected to realistically multitask past half a dozen operations before it stops being fun and starts being a CHORE.

That's why I want something like this. I want to mess with the logistics and engineer to account for them, but I want to be able to get it up and running and then move on.

I'd like something like TAC, but it's too complex and KSP's engine is still too inefficient and unstable in my opinion for huge, overly sophisticated structures needed to run it. I had the biofuels mod installed a few months back and I was well on my way to an orbital refueling depot and shipyard. But it just took too much out of the system just to load the physics for all the parts for it to be worth it. It stopped being fun when I couldn't even get it to behave with everything shunted into the framerate delta operation. It even started causing Kracken Attacks.

And I don't want to just hack the oxygen regenerator and change the recovery rate to an even 1:1. I want something accounted for and balanced to do the job. Something to work for, but not so overly sophisticated that I have to break my computer just building the complex. Not until the game engine is fixed to handle physics more efficiently, we have 64 bits of memory address to work with so we can put all the tasty bells and whistles on and not have to worry about waiting five minutes to run a three-second task.

Does this mentality make sense to you? I want to play with the logistics, but I don't want to get stuck playing 'space logistician' for the rest of the game. That's what automation and properly balanced setup are for. It's a game. If I wanted to do work, I'd ask Squad for a salary.

Edited June 27, 2014 by AdmiralTigerclaw

[Lekke]

Maybe, but there has to be something for them to do on a year-long trip to another planet. The simple fact of the matter is why bother using a realism / difficulty mod if you're going to try to work around it anyway. Sure I would love to have a good greenhouse, but I want it to be well balanced.... Being able to slap a part onto a ship and then completely forget about food requirements is equivalent to creating an easy-mode, in which case, why bother wasting the parts or disk space when its not actually enhancing the experience?

I do agree with you on that a closed system with a 100% defeats the purpose of using a life suport sytem. I use TAC (even though the parts are ugly) and I tried out MKS but I found that a bit too extreme. A simpler version would be perfect. And the concept of a good greenhouse would indeed be a good addition. It would add a sense of realism if you had to pack stuff to make a greenhouse run during a long voyage or a colony even.

[Lekke]

I'd like something like TAC, but it's too complex and KSP's engine is still too inefficient and unstable in my opinion for huge, overly sophisticated structures needed to run it. I had the biofuels mod installed a few months back and I was well on my way to an orbital refueling depot and shipyard. But it just took too much out of the system just to load the physics for all the parts for it to be worth it. It stopped being fun when I couldn't even get it to behave with everything shunted into the framerate delta operation. It even started causing Kracken Attacks.

That's why the concept of MKS is very nice idea but to set up everything it's too part intensive and overly complex.

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

That's why the concept of MKS is very nice idea but to set up everything it's too part intensive and overly complex.

Agreed. And it's not very intuitive. I set everything up on the ground just to see how the equipment functioned. Couldn't get it to do anything. ANYTHING. I don't want an 'endgame' mod to work with where I don't even get the opportunity to figure it out until after a week of setup. And while I adore the kethane mechanic. It REALLY needs a '-1' option for deposit sizes so it can be played in 'unlimited' mode. The idea of moving mining operations is just another one of those things I file under 'logistics has become a CHORE'. Especially since things like KAS and kethane are Ad Hoc'd into the game and require a lot of work just to play. It was awesome when I managed to make a C-5 Galaxy styled transport plane, and drove a commsat truck into it and tied it down with winches, but just getting both vehicles loaded in, and then tying the whole thing down was a chore best left to doing once or twice, not repeatedly.

I was successful, by the way.

[SpacedInvader]

Because that defeats the purpose of having to engineer specifically for that. It's like people looking at really advanced manufacturing mods in minecraft and going 'why not just play in creative?' They fail to understand that logistics is a fun system to manage until it scales up. Then it becomes work. I've got my own server with the Monster Pack. I've got a small scale manufacturing operation up and running with only minor weekly maintenance supplying what I need to build a huge factory of my own design, which will then be used to crank out massive amounts of supplies that virtually put me in creative. The difference being that it's all legit, and I BUILT that manufacturing base without magically appearing blocks, from the sticks up.

I want life support so I can account for engineering for O2 and CO2 consumption. I want the consequences to exist for not doing so. Not just 'pretending' that it is so with a glassy-eyed stare. But I don't want the headache of micromanaging the entire system, especially when I'm focused on other tasks. I don't want to stop what I'm doing on a multi-year mission because I realized that I need to fly a courier mission to a satellite base before its crew dies of asphyxiation. I don't want to time warp through a screwed up orbit path and realize my station crew are skeletons floating in a death-bath of CO2 while Blue Danube Waltz plays on station loudspeakers.

People forget, in the real world, huge operations like this are run by tens of thousands of people working in an invisible concert. There is a person in each position who's every waking breath is dedicated to their assigned task. Logistics is run in the background by an endless stream of people looking at and managing something. The problem this brings up in a game is that some people want to simulate some of this concert, but are faced with the problem of the fact that one player cannot be expected to realistically multitask past half a dozen operations before it stops being fun and starts being a CHORE.

That's why I want something like this. I want to mess with the logistics and engineer to account for them, but I want to be able to get it up and running and then move on.

I'd like something like TAC, but it's too complex and KSP's engine is still too inefficient and unstable in my opinion for huge, overly sophisticated structures needed to run it. I had the biofuels mod installed a few months back and I was well on my way to an orbital refueling depot and shipyard. But it just took too much out of the system just to load the physics for all the parts for it to be worth it. It stopped being fun when I couldn't even get it to behave with everything shunted into the framerate delta operation. It even started causing Kracken Attacks.

And I don't want to just hack the oxygen regenerator and change the recovery rate to an even 1:1. I want something accounted for and balanced to do the job. Something to work for, but not so overly sophisticated that I have to break my computer just building the complex. Not until the game engine is fixed to handle physics more efficiently, we have 64 bits of memory address to work with so we can put all the tasty bells and whistles on and not have to worry about waiting five minutes to run a three-second task.

Does this mentality make sense to you? I want to play with the logistics, but I don't want to get stuck playing 'space logistician' for the rest of the game. That's what automation and properly balanced setup are for. It's a game. If I wanted to do work, I'd ask Squad for a salary.

I can understand this mentality quite well as this is one of the big reasons I fall in and out of love with Eve. Sometimes it feels like a job and then other times it feels like a wonderful space game. That all being said, I guess I lean more towards being a space logistician than you do, so I would personally prefer to run said supply deliveries, while at the same time trying to engineer my craft to minimize the need. Doing things like calculating out the balance for a life support cycle and then overbuilding a little can often go a long way towards preventing supply runs from becoming routine.

Sadly, you are quite right when it comes to KSP's shortfall when dealing with large, complex ships. I have personally taken to launching things up as individual pieces and then once they are all up there and built, I'll weld as many parts as I can and then hyperedit the construction back into place. This gives me the experience of putting it up there, but then cuts down on the part count, helping my system handle the larger craft. Another approach I've thought about taking is to add life support tanks to the real fuels tank definition of the service module so that I can have all the tanks necessary for supporting a kerbal built right into the service module without having to have any extra parts attached. Ultimately there are ways around KSP's limitations, though it may often feel like cheating, but I'm seriously looking forward to 64-bit KSP with better physics and far fewer limits.

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

I can understand this mentality quite well as this is one of the big reasons I fall in and out of love with Eve. Sometimes it feels like a job and then other times it feels like a wonderful space game. That all being said, I guess I lean more towards being a space logistician than you do, so I would personally prefer to run said supply deliveries, while at the same time trying to engineer my craft to minimize the need. Doing things like calculating out the balance for a life support cycle and then overbuilding a little can often go a long way towards preventing supply runs from becoming routine.

Sadly, you are quite right when it comes to KSP's shortfall when dealing with large, complex ships. I have personally taken to launching things up as individual pieces and then once they are all up there and built, I'll weld as many parts as I can and then hyperedit the construction back into place. This gives me the experience of putting it up there, but then cuts down on the part count, helping my system handle the larger craft. Another approach I've thought about taking is to add life support tanks to the real fuels tank definition of the service module so that I can have all the tanks necessary for supporting a kerbal built right into the service module without having to have any extra parts attached. Ultimately there are ways around KSP's limitations, though it may often feel like cheating, but I'm seriously looking forward to 64-bit KSP with better physics and far fewer limits.

Yeah, I feel you there. The welding mod would be so much better if there was a way to apply it without:

1: Increasing your parts file count.

2: Having to exit the game to use it.

I wonder if there's a way to-

I have an idea. I need to talk with Ferram...

[Lekke]

Agreed. And it's not very intuitive. I set everything up on the ground just to see how the equipment functioned. Couldn't get it to do anything. ANYTHING. I don't want an 'endgame' mod to work with where I don't even get the opportunity to figure it out until after a week of setup. And while I adore the kethane mechanic. It REALLY needs a '-1' option for deposit sizes so it can be played in 'unlimited' mode. The idea of moving mining operations is just another one of those things I file under 'logistics has become a CHORE'. Especially since things like KAS and kethane are Ad Hoc'd into the game and require a lot of work just to play. It was awesome when I managed to make a C-5 Galaxy styled transport plane, and drove a commsat truck into it and tied it down with winches, but just getting both vehicles loaded in, and then tying the whole thing down was a chore best left to doing once or twice, not repeatedly.

I was successful, by the way.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v430/admiraltigerclaw/CommTruckDeployed_zps6ae5ed41.jpg

I did a test build on the Mun, it worked pretty well but like you said with the deposits being far spread I had to drive in resources. And rover wheels don't like low gravity. I really love the concept of harvesting some stuff offsite of the main base, or even trucking in components from another site but the game just doesn't handle driving well. As to counter the part count issue I had divided up my main base into several smaller sections sort to speak, each spaced out in 3 km distance as not to be in render distance of one another, only when driving between those sections I did load 2 of them at a time but that was a minor issue. But trucking in the missing resources over a 100 km is just not doable on a regular basis. Simplified with less basic resources would go a long way in solving some of it though.

If you weld stuff, it footprint of the welded part is pretty small cause it doesn't need to load another texture. But it does need some fine tuning. It doesn't handle modules well and manually deleting attachment nodes is annoying.

Edited June 27, 2014 by Lekke

[SpacedInvader]

Yeah, I feel you there. The welding mod would be so much better if there was a way to apply it without:

1: Increasing your parts file count.

2: Having to exit the game to use it.

I wonder if there's a way to-

I have an idea. I need to talk with Ferram...

Way to be cryptic...

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

I did a test build on the Mun, it worked pretty well but like you said with the deposits being far spread I had to drive in resources. And rover wheels don't like low gravity. I really love the concept of harvesting some stuff offsite of the main base, or even trucking in components from another site but the game just doesn't handle driving well. As to counter the part count issue I had divided up my main base into several smaller sections sort to speak, each spaced out in 3 km distance as not to be in render distance of one another, only when driving between those sections I did load 2 of them at a time but that was a minor issue. But trucking in the missing resources over a 100 km is just not doable on a regular basis. Simplified with less basic resources would go a long way in solving some of it though.

If you weld stuff, it footprint of the welded part is pretty small cause it doesn't need to load another texture. But it does need some fine tuning. It doesn't handle modules well and manually deleting attachment nodes is annoying.

I sent Ferram a PM with an idea of seeing if vessels that are idle could have their constituent parts' physics calculations 'packed' away and stored while a single calculation takes over the job. After all, I see no reason why a station, which is all but idle, needs to have all its parts running physics equations non-stop if those equations amount to 'nothing's happening captain'. The idea behind it is essentially, if it doesn't need to be done, don't do it. A kind of 'half-on-rails' method.

[Lekke]

Have you seen the new greenhouse mod Admiral? The value's of return seem intresting.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/84246-0-23-5-MunSeeker-Greenhouse-Mk1-%28TAC-Life-Support-add-on%29

[SpacedInvader]

I sent Ferram a PM with an idea of seeing if vessels that are idle could have their constituent parts' physics calculations 'packed' away and stored while a single calculation takes over the job. After all, I see no reason why a station, which is all but idle, needs to have all its parts running physics equations non-stop if those equations amount to 'nothing's happening captain'. The idea behind it is essentially, if it doesn't need to be done, don't do it. A kind of 'half-on-rails' method.

The question then would be at what point to do you switch to full physics mode?

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

The question then would be at what point to do you switch to full physics mode?

I was thinking it would do so if a collision was detected, under any form of powered acceleration/input command, or major mass change such as a dock or undock. And I figure, not everything would be packed down, just the constant physics recalculations going on for all the parts. (That way it doesn't break solar panels or other resource components.) Perhaps with a leeway for a threshold of change, that was small bumps like a kerbal bouncing off the hull don't do anything, and light taps and minor shifts from reaction wheels don't trip it every other second.

And of course, it's off in an atmosphere... period.

I don't even know if it's possible though. But Ferram made FAR and KJE, so if anyone has enough expertise in messing around with how parts physics behavior works, it's him.

[SpacedInvader]

I was thinking it would do so if a collision was detected, under any form of powered acceleration/input command, or major mass change such as a dock or undock. And I figure, not everything would be packed down, just the constant physics recalculations going on for all the parts. (That way it doesn't break solar panels or other resource components.) Perhaps with a leeway for a threshold of change, that was small bumps like a kerbal bouncing off the hull don't do anything, and light taps and minor shifts from reaction wheels don't trip it every other second.

And of course, it's off in an atmosphere... period.

I don't even know if it's possible though. But Ferram made FAR and KJE, so if anyone has enough expertise in messing around with how parts physics behavior works, it's him.

I dunno... I kind of think the only way to fix the way KSP handles physics is if you disabled it for anything that doesn't need it at that time. For example, if you're orbiting in a pod with a service module, panels, RCS, and maybe a US ring full of parts (we did kind of take this thread on a joyride), then in reality the whole thing could be calculated as a single part, or maybe at most 3-5 parts keeping the panels, the engine, and then the rest of the structure. Then if there was an impact, it would only be at that time that the physics calculations would be enacted, and even then, it should be on an as needed basis (if the impact occurs at the back of the ship, the chute on the front doesn't necessarily need to suddenly start getting physics applied unless the impact is strong enough.

This applies to operating in the atmosphere as well. For example if you're using 6S service compartment tubes and you have a bunch of stuff in there, none of that really needs to have its physics calculated on a per-part basis. The same would hold true. Of course, if there were parts covered by fairings, such as solar panels, since nothing would happen to them unless the fairings came off early. Any part in the air stream would need physics calculations, but for the average rocket (at least the ones I build, and not so much with space planes) that would only be about 30-40 parts.

Anyway, basically the system would perform a state check on each part depending on the current situation and then decide whether or not physics for that part is needed. After the check, that part probably wouldn't need to be revisited until a situation change occurs (such as leaving the atmosphere or staging), or an impact event. It may also be useful to identify potential weak points as always getting physics calculations, such as docking ports. Theoretically, this could reduce the physics part count for things like stations to half or even less (maybe as low as 15-20 if you don't have too many sections) of what it would be in normal physics.

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

I dunno... I kind of think the only way to fix the way KSP handles physics is if you disabled it for anything that doesn't need it at that time. For example, if you're orbiting in a pod with a service module, panels, RCS, and maybe a US ring full of parts (we did kind of take this thread on a joyride), then in reality the whole thing could be calculated as a single part, or maybe at most 3-5 parts keeping the panels, the engine, and then the rest of the structure. Then if there was an impact, it would only be at that time that the physics calculations would be enacted, and even then, it should be on an as needed basis (if the impact occurs at the back of the ship, the chute on the front doesn't necessarily need to suddenly start getting physics applied unless the impact is strong enough.

This applies to operating in the atmosphere as well. For example if you're using 6S service compartment tubes and you have a bunch of stuff in there, none of that really needs to have its physics calculated on a per-part basis. The same would hold true. Of course, if there were parts covered by fairings, such as solar panels, since nothing would happen to them unless the fairings came off early. Any part in the air stream would need physics calculations, but for the average rocket (at least the ones I build, and not so much with space planes) that would only be about 30-40 parts.

Anyway, basically the system would perform a state check on each part depending on the current situation and then decide whether or not physics for that part is needed. After the check, that part probably wouldn't need to be revisited until a situation change occurs (such as leaving the atmosphere or staging), or an impact event. It may also be useful to identify potential weak points as always getting physics calculations, such as docking ports. Theoretically, this could reduce the physics part count for things like stations to half or even less (maybe as low as 15-20 if you don't have too many sections) of what it would be in normal physics.

There are a few things I can think of that would require per-part checking. Center of Mass is calculated on the fly in real time for active parts. That includes fuel loads. RCS thrusters also need to know where they are and what respect they have towards center-mass as well. Resources such as Oxygen and CO2 in the ECLSS mod also contribute to the center of mass shifts over time just from kerbals breathing. If you have to pop in and out of 'sub-packed' mode (I won't use 'packed' since looking at the debug, that apparently exists already for On The Rails) constantly every second.

If a 'full update' could work every X number of cycles, that could at least mitigate the problem.

But the reason I said 'no in atmosphere' is because there's just too much going on. Especially if you're running FAR. Unlike orbit, you really need to have all that data going real time for accurate physics. (As accurate as KSP gets anyway.)

[ialdabaoth]

RCS thrusters also need to know where they are and what respect they have towards center-mass as well.

Note that my RCSFX mod takes care of this, in that it uses the Thrust transform vectors from the .MU to determine where to apply RCS forces, rather than the RCS part's center of mass.

[erendrake]

I believe we might be off-topic for this thread.

[TurielD]

Ok, so here is the mod I've come to call RealTACLS:

ReaTACLS v0.1

This will convert the entire TACLS resource system to the new liters / CM-d (crew member day) as proposed by TaranisElsu. All life support resource densities have been reworked to match and all standard resource amounts have been corrected. This means that your pods will still have 1 day of resources for the max crew and also that all of the stock TACLS parts will still remain useful, including the resource recyclers so this *hopefully* should not break any games by suddenly depriving the crew of your long duration missions of their precious life support.

Anyway, please let me know if you find any bugs so I can start to iron them out.

EDIT: Also, I should mention that for full Universal Storage functionality for this mod, you will need all three US packs as certain parts from each pack are being reused as stand ins for TACLS parts until Daishi and Paul finish and release their proper TACLS pack.

Hmm... 7.2 liters of food per day? that's a hungry kerbal... Especially as he only produces .38 units of waste. That stuff has to be pure sugar... even then he should be producing a whole bunch more water

Also, all my Kerbals in my MKS Munbase just died instantly of oxygen deprivation. Though, of course, that's just cause the .cfg didnt do anything with saves. New-made modules seem to be in a good state

Edited June 27, 2014 by TurielD

[SpacedInvader]

Hmm... 7.2 liters of food per day? that's a hungry kerbal... Especially as he only produces .38 units of waste. That stuff has to be pure sugar... even then he should be producing a whole bunch more water

Also, all my Kerbals in my MKS Munbase just died instantly of oxygen deprivation. Though, of course, that's just cause the .cfg didnt do anything with saves. New-made modules seem to be in a good state

That's what I also think, however, research has shown that the ISS supplies that weight in food per CM-d. My thinking is that a lot of it is the water weight of prepackaged meals and beverages, and I'm currently trying to figure out how much consumption to take away from water to balance it out, but ultimately it may not change all that much. One thing to keep in mind about water use is that it's also used for things like bathing, which is part of a life support system, so even if there is water intake in the form of meals and beverages which are counted as food, there is a decent amount of water (3L I read somewhere) that is being used for activities other than hydration.

[SpacedInvader]

I believe we might be off-topic for this thread.

Thinking of trying to move this to its own thread, but not really sure where to put it...

[TurielD]

Hmm I see. My main problem with it right now is with reprocessing materials (like with a greenhouse) currently the absolute quantity of resources is reducing considerably.

There must surely be nearly as much Waste and WasteWater produced as there is Food and Water consumed, no matter the exact ratio of solids to liquids.

[CaelReader]

Making the bays work with FAR would mean encasing them completely in a collision mesh, meaning you wouldn't be able to stack and use them for larger payloads. I might release a alternative version later on if the demand is high.

6S shields things, yet is stackable and usable for large payloads, is there something about the science bay that prevents this?