NPC Spacecraft

[GreeningGalaxy]

I've read over the What Not To Suggest and I think this doesn't fall into any of those categories, but stop me if I'm wrong about that.

Anyway, there are lots of people on here who want aliens, right? Except aliens aren't really within the scope of the game, and are also on the list of things that won't be included/shouldn't be suggested. Sure, aliens might be a silly idea for KSP, but it would still be fun to have some other active force besides you in the game, wouldn't it?

There's also people who like playing with weapons, right? BDA, Skillful, or even just detachable 'missiles' which are just fuel tanks and engines? Only problem is, there's nothing to shoot at but your own stuff.

Enter randomly-placed, non-player-controllable spacecraft.

They'd probably be mostly your own designs, maybe with a few "secret" stock designs that only show up as NPCs, and their position and state of stage attachment when found would be governed by how much delta-V they have (i.e. you wouldn't find a space shuttle orbiting Jool, but you could easily find one of your short-range landers on the surface of Minmus). I'd imagine they'd be relatively rare to find - space is a big place, and, particularly early in the game, I wouldn't expect many agencies to have the power of spaceflight. In fact, that might add something of a race element to the game - You might be the first off the ground, but you'll have to work some to be the first to any given destination.

Ostensibly, they'd belong to rival space programs. The tracking station would be able to pick them up in the vicinity of Kerbin in much the same way as asteroids, but further out, you might only be able to detect them by flying there yourself. At that point, your ability to detect them might depend on a number of things, such as:

-Operational state of the NPC (running ships containing live kerbals will be easier to find than derelicts, just because of radio traffic)

-Antennae on your own ship (this could be a double function for resource scanners - finding other ships)

-Skill level of crew members

-Size of NPC ship

Naturally, the NPCs would be in different states of repair. You could easily find crash debris or halves of ships that didn't make it down to the surface of a planet in one piece, orbiting derelicts with important parts missing, and, of course, fully-operational craft with missions of their own. These last ones might have variable behavior - they might, for instance:

-Try to rendezvous with you once detected- after all, most kerbals are probably very curious by nature, and they'll want check out that weird blip on the radar just as much as you do.

-Run away from you if you try to approach them.

-Ignore you completely- they have more important business to attend to than your silliness.

This would also give rise to a bunch of new options and gameplay mechanics:

-You could dock to a derelict ship, assuming it has a docking port, and siphon off whatever resources are still left aboard.

-You could also board a ship which is mostly functional but lacks crew and claim it for yourself, assuming the previous owners were so kind as to leave the door unlocked.

-Contracts could require you to deliver supplies to a stranded ship, salvage a derelict, tow an NPC satellite or station into a new orbit, or otherwise help out spacecraft in need.

Of course, combat will be something many people will be looking for. I don't think space combat, being as notoriously complex as it is, would find much of a place in stock KSP, but that won't stop people from mounting weapons on their craft anyway. In the stock game, I would imagine destroying (or colliding with) other people's ships would lower your reputation significantly, and they might start to run from you more often if your notoriety got particularly high. This would also, of course, open the door to all kinds of complicated combat-based mods - it wouldn't take much more than what you can already do with Mechjeb to make an NPC ship launch things at you, after all.

In general, I think having NPC ships in the game would greatly improve its immersiveness in a way that wouldn't complicate the existing mechanics too much. It would also add a constantly-changing element to the gameplay, which would keep players interested for longer, and would further diversify contracts and make the game more exciting - who doesn't love finding strange ships?

So, what does everyone think? Would NPC spaceships improve KSP?

[Bill Phil]

Technically NPC "flights" already exist...

[tater]

Yep, all kinds of people will chime in that this is an awful idea, but it's a good idea. The game needs a space race, and a source for those stranded kerbals.

[Mitchz95]

I think this sounds awesome, but not for stock KSP. When I was new I got a lot of enjoyment imagining myself being the first space agency to get to anywhere beyond Kerbin; getting a mission to Duna only to find another ship already there would ruin that immersion.

This would work much better as a mod.

[tater]

If time actually mattered in KSP (like KCT, for example), and there was the Union of Kerbal's Democratic Republics in a space race, it would be cool to find that there is a booster gap that must be conquered.

[Robotengineer]

I would support having 'Ghost Ships'. It seems like we will be getting stranded Kerbals with crew pods strewn around everywhere, I don't see why having ghost ships would be different. It would also be cool to have strange objects, like monoliths, that you have to return to Kerbin for study that would yield reputation, science and funds.

[GreeningGalaxy]

It would also be cool to have strange objects, like monoliths, that you have to return to Kerbin for study that would yield reputation, science and funds.

That would definitely suit the idea well. Non-ship, non-asteroid movable artifacts. As for the people who complain about not liking to be beat to destinations, I hear you, but at the same time, that race element is a huge part of space exploration in real life. However, it's likely that NPC ships able to land on surfaces of planets (or at least, ones that actually make successful landings) would be quite rare, thus giving you lots of time. Also, since the NPC ships will largely be only your own creations, it's probably your own fault if you have a rocket capable of going somewhere and someone else actually does it first.

[AbacusWizard]

There must be other space agencies out there; how else would all those kerbalnauts get into lonely orbit to need rescuing?

I don't want to see weapons in stock but I would enjoy some inter-agency competition... and even cooperation under certain circumstances; perhaps other agencies might hire you to launch something that they can't, or perhaps you could hire another agency to run refueling missions that you don't want to bother with yourself.

[Sampa]

I say no. Npc ships in orbit with you is a waste of ram that be better used elsewhere in the game. If they are added, they had better come with the option to disable,their spawning.

[Kegereneku]

I am not against the idea (even got my own idea) but the implementation would make us argue for month for a feature that isn't strictly speaking needed although it have potential.

First let's it be clear : the game will never simulate the launch of another company in "real time", it is physically impossible of that. The best I see it do is freeze your game and tell you upfront :

"Kerbal X launched a spacecraft in orbit" -> you see a new orbit vehicle appear

"Kerbal X spacecraft made his injection burn" -> the orbit changed and its rocket is now on a ballistic trajectory

Fortunately since KSP deal with enormous time frame there should be enough leeway for the computer to do so without breaking our own rhythm.

So we can at least emulate the idea. (the hardest would seem to be to gather database of design with pointer for IA to use correctly)

Where the debate will likely heat over is how "important" they should be, how threatening.

- Must they suddenly appear anywhere in space or follow phase like Launch(hidden)-Orbit->Travel->Orbit->Landing(hidden)->Landed ?

- Do their maneuvers use physically calculated amount of dV ? (remember that the game can't simulate them)

- Do they have their own space center ?

- At which space do they advance ? (veterans KSP player will likely run circle around AI who look unbeatable to new players)

- What are the difficulty setting for those NPC thingy ? (correct game-design do no ask you to know intricately the system before choosing, and adaptative AI are hard to do even for good studio)

- Do they actually have a budget/funds ? (remember we don't simulate as much as emulate)

- Do they compete over the very same contract as us ?

- What is the goal ? Science, Money ? Colonization, Exploitation of space resources ? (the last two are an absurdity at this tech-level if you ask me)

- Should they be able to drain a science pool before you do ?

- Could we scavenge their spaceship/wreck for parts ?

- Can we claim as our own asteroid ? (go check out space treaty on wikipedia)

- can we dock with them ? How it is deal with ? (a simple "part belong to you ? Y/N ?" should do the trick but maybe not)

- can we pay them/can they pay us to use our (better) launch pad ? Refuel spacecraft ?

- can we buy/sell them design ? (unlikely since they would need pointer to know what the spacecraft is good for, asking in turn to prove the ship can do the job)

...etc

(If you answered yes to all of the above, you have no understanding of game-design)

Lastly I somehow fear the worst over : "what do they represent ?" (from the fanbase not the devs who are rational being)

Myself I'll be a pain in a ass and vehemently criticize any attempt to do propaganda over the "superiority of glorious profit-driven privately-founded space venture over incompetent budget-leech government program" ...or the reverse. So I propose we would be better just assuming our and their space program are equivalent (aside I'm a proponent of some sort of periodic-budget as an anti-frustration feature).

[Daze]

I really think that this is a beautiful suggestion and Squad have absolutely to look forward for this.

Especially for the thing of non-controlled craft

[Moonfrog]

Why not include a ermm, there was a system in a game called Spore, that would send your designs to like a server, which would then update other peoples games with planets and species that others had created. You could have other peoples debris in orbit, or other peoples stations in orbit, or probes on other planets. Matter of taking one thing from each persons game and adding it to your own.

[RainDreamer]

I thought they were talking about having stranded kerbal actually have a dead spacecraft with them in the future, instead of just being a lone kerbal?

[GreeningGalaxy]

I thought they were talking about having stranded kerbal actually have a dead spacecraft with them in the future, instead of just being a lone kerbal?

I heard that too. Apparently it was announced on Reddit. [grumbles]

Why not include a ermm, there was a system in a game called Spore, that would send your designs to like a server, which would then update other peoples games with planets and species that others had created. You could have other peoples debris in orbit, or other peoples stations in orbit, or probes on other planets. Matter of taking one thing from each persons game and adding it to your own.

Spore's content-sharing system would be absolutely perfect for KSP, but I don't know how hard it would be to implement (especially since it would require fast, high-capacity constantly-running servers on the developer's side). Mod craft would also be tricky.

Anyway, that's beyond the scope of this particular thread, but it's a superb idea.

[tater]

One way to build NPC ships would be a kind of shared multiplayer.

If you tick the "Space race" career game option, then there are NPC ships. It also means that YOUR ships, research, and building upgrades, are uploaded to a server (along with the game day (year 1, day 123, etc). Your game will keep some slightly randomized version if where the competing program is in time. They are at your some standard level of development +- XX days. When your game needs to create a craft for that program, it uses crafts built by other players at the right level of development.

So in a sense, a form of multiplayer.

Ideally, use an inland space center, and incorporate soviet-style stock alike parts, then use the opposite competitor from what the player has selected. All the craft would be sort of novel because they'd be a different program/style, and they'd be craft made by other players. The game might even sample certain entire missions of other players… if the craft fulfilled any part of the Explore the Mun contract, then THAT craft is used as the competing craft---including how it ended up (so if a player makes orbit, sends science, then has a rough landing, then bang, you get a rescue mission.

Edited March 1, 2015 by tater

[Tw1]

I think this sounds awesome, but not for stock KSP. When I was new I got a lot of enjoyment imagining myself being the first space agency to get to anywhere beyond Kerbin; getting a mission to Duna only to find another ship already there would ruin that immersion.

I agree with this much, but think it could work as a post-tech tree, post getting to most places thing. So you still are getting the all firsts, and making most of the major moves.

[GreeningGalaxy]

I am not against the idea (even got my own idea) but the implementation would make us argue for month for a feature that isn't strictly speaking needed although it have potential.

First let's it be clear : the game will never simulate the launch of another company in "real time", it is physically impossible of that. The best I see it do is freeze your game and tell you upfront :

"Kerbal X launched a spacecraft in orbit" -> you see a new orbit vehicle appear

"Kerbal X spacecraft made his injection burn" -> the orbit changed and its rocket is now on a ballistic trajectory

Fortunately since KSP deal with enormous time frame there should be enough leeway for the computer to do so without breaking our own rhythm.

Sure, there would probably be some kind of notification system. And no, it wouldn't 'simulate in real time', especially when it's out of physics range, but there could easily be a moving blip on the map if a ship you've detected is doing maneuvers.

So we can at least emulate the idea. (the hardest would seem to be to gather database of design with pointer for IA to use correctly)

Where the debate will likely heat over is how "important" they should be, how threatening.

- Must they suddenly appear anywhere in space or follow phase like Launch(hidden)-Orbit->Travel->Orbit->Landing(hidden)->Landed ?

That's a tossup, IMO. It seems like it would be trivial to make a map blip go through a few maneuvers, but some (particularly derelicts) could easily just spawn in place.

- Do their maneuvers use physically calculated amount of dV ? (remember that the game can't simulate them)

The possibilities here are interesting - of course they're not going to simulate the same way player-controlled ships do, but they might do something far more lightweight and of similar end result. Mods such as MechJeb and KER are already quite good at figuring out which stages are which and calculating dV, and the latter is already a planned feature if I remember correctly. So all you need to do is to have your little map-blip keep track of how much dV it's using as it moves (not a very heavy operation) and then figure out which parts of itself (spent stages) it needs to delete whenever a certain stage runs out of fuel. The ships would never execute burns (apart from ones designed to flee or approach you) when inside physics range, so you could get away with instantaneous accelerations, too. It's not perfect, no, but it would be very computationally inexpensive (especially considering how infrequently it would occur) and would probably be relatively simple to add.

- Do they have their own space center ?

Inland KSC, anyone?

Nah. There's no reason they would need their own space center as of the current scope of the game. That keeps it ambiguous as to where the ships came from, and could also be a good case for having ships spawn randomly instead of having their launch and all their maneuvers actually traced.

- At which space do they advance ? (veterans KSP player will likely run circle around AI who look unbeatable to new players)

They probably won't advance at all. There might be derelict ships in LKO right from the start (the product of space exploration long before you started), but since the NPCs will be limited to your own craft and spawn very rarely, it's unlikely that you'll see running ships and ships capable of landing anywhere beat you there unless you let them.

- What are the difficulty setting for those NPC thingy ? (correct game-design do no ask you to know intricately the system before choosing, and adaptative AI are hard to do even for good studio)

The 'difficulty' for the NPCs will presumably be constant and difficult - they won't launch things often, and they won't get further than you much because they're restricted to your designs. This latter feature means that they'll be seen to advance at about the same rate as you in terms of science and unlocked parts.

- Do they actually have a budget/funds ? (remember we don't simulate as much as emulate)

No. More likely, there will be a random chance at any given point in time for a ship to launch. Determining factors in how likely it is will include the cost of the ship in question, transfer windows, and current number of NPC ships spawned, but there wouldn't need to be any money or resource calculation on the part of NPC agencies.

- Do they compete over the very same contract as us ?

Maybe, but not by default. A certain contract might be "Get there before [rivalcorp] does" and then a specific NPC ship would spawn for the duration of the contract and race you to the destination, but that's just a specific instance. Ordinarily, their contracts would be completely different from yours (aka nonexistent, there'd be no real 'contracts' for NPCs, only simple AI goals).

- What is the goal ? Science, Money ? Colonization, Exploitation of space resources ? (the last two are an absurdity at this tech-level if you ask me)

Who knows? Presumably their goal is the same as yours.

ISRU is planned for 1.0, but NPC ships wouldn't necessarily have to use it.

- Should they be able to drain a science pool before you do ?

Nah. Presumably they're not sharing their R&D knowledge etc. with you, so science found by you will always be new to you.

- Could we scavenge their spaceship/wreck for parts ?

This is probably beyond the scope at the moment, because you can't even scavenge your own ships for parts. That's to say nothing of mods, though.

- Can we claim as our own asteroid ? (go check out space treaty on wikipedia)

This has nothing to do with the subject of NPC spaceships, nor does the Outer Space Treaty necessarily mean anything in KSP.

- can we dock with them ? How it is deal with ? (a simple "part belong to you ? Y/N ?" should do the trick but maybe not)

Docking with derelicts will immediately transfer ownership of them to you (right of salvage, if only because it would make a good game mechanic). Docking with live ships could work any number of ways - it might handle the docking node differently, so the ships continue to act as two separate entities with limited resource-transfer capabilities, or it could be impossible - after all, it is trivial for a ship that doesn't want to be docked with to avoid it.

- can we pay them/can they pay us to use our (better) launch pad ? Refuel spacecraft ?

Use of launch facilities is probably out of scope. There could easily be towing/refueling contracts, though.

- can we buy/sell them design ? (unlikely since they would need pointer to know what the spacecraft is good for, asking in turn to prove the ship can do the job)

...etc

Nope, they'll just flat-out steal your designs, slap a random flag on them, and launch them. As for use, "they'll figure it out," aka they'll just calculate the dV, cut loose the stages that will be expended, and spawn in place. This means they might get slightly varying performance out of your designs than you, but you can just handwave that away with 'modifications' - after all, you probably won't see more than the orbital transit stage of any of the NPC ships.

(If you answered yes to all of the above, you have no understanding of game-design)

Thanks. Several of those weren't even yes/no questions. Anyway, I totally bow down to you and your clearly superior and ultimate understanding of game design. Have mercy on us underlings, O Lord.

Lastly I somehow fear the worst over : "what do they represent ?" (from the fanbase not the devs who are rational being)

Does it matter? That will be left up to the player's imagination. It's hard to imagine there will be any real-world representation (ie USA vs Russia), anyway.

Myself I'll be a pain in a ass

Don't worry, you've succeeded.

and vehemently criticize any attempt to do propaganda over the "superiority of glorious profit-driven privately-founded space venture over incompetent budget-leech government program" ...or the reverse. So I propose we would be better just assuming our and their space program are equivalent (aside I'm a proponent of some sort of periodic-budget as an anti-frustration feature).

I don't understand what you're saying here, but it sounds like politics, which is a banned topic. The exact mode of operation of the other space industries (whether they're private or belong to national governments) will be totally left to player speculation.

- - - Updated - - -

I say no. Npc ships in orbit with you is a waste of ram that be better used elsewhere in the game. If they are added, they had better come with the option to disable,their spawning.

A waste of RAM? NPC ships would use practically no RAM at all, no more than having one of your own flights in progress uses. To make matters better, NPC ships will be rare, probably at a rough maximum at five or six in the entire solar system at any point in time, and they'll have a spawn chance inversely proportional to the cost, so big ships (which could lag out your game with their part count if allowed to come within physics range) will be rare.

And yes, there will probably be an option to turn them off as well, if you really just can't stand not being the first to get anywhere.

Edited March 1, 2015 by GreeningGalaxy

[Guest]

I really like playing with weapons, and I think this would be a great idea, but NOT for stock KSP. I think the game is more about exploration of space on your own than of doing it against others. But I would immediatily download a mod that adds this feature!

[tater]

I really like playing with weapons, and I think this would be a great idea, but NOT for stock KSP. I think the game is more about exploration of space on your own than of doing it against others. But I would immediatily download a mod that adds this feature!

Why not stock? One, it would be a kind of functionality that might have to be done at the Squad level to work efficiently. Two, it would be another game mode/option. It's like saying, "KSP is really a sandbox game, any career nonsense would be cool as a mod, but not stock KSP." Radio box in career setup, "Competitive "multiplayer" Y/N?"

[GreeningGalaxy]

To be clear...

These things are not the point of my NPC spaceships suggestion:

-Direct, ongoing competition to get places first. Yes, if you go 20 in-game years without ever aiming for Moho, someone might beat you there. Also, there could be specific isolated contracts that involve racing someone somewhere. If you make any effort to go somewhere, though, beating the NPCs would be trivial. If you like, maybe the NPCs will never land anywhere you haven't planted a flag, but that sounds boring.

-Combat. Space combat is enormously complicated and wayyyy beyond the scope of KSP. Yes, people will do it. Yes, it will open up all kinds of doors for mods. However, it wouldn't be remotely mentioned in the stock game, and any stock weapons you built and fired at live NPCs would count the same as accidental collisions with NPCs in terms of reputation etc.

-Having 'multiplayer' without real other players / Spore-style galactic empire stuff. I don't think KSP is a diplomacy game, and there's no real point in naming specific factions for NPC ships in any case.

These things are the point of NPC spaceships:

-Depicting the kerbal race as the space-fixated bunch they appear to be. There's no reason your space program should be the only one if kerbals are as excited about going to space as everything in the game thus far would lead you to believe.

-Giving the game a more changeful element that improves the unknown factor with space exploration, even after you've explored all the planets.

-Provide additional interesting game mechanics that operate nicely with the ones already in place (contracts, docking, etc).

I realize that the devs have a vision here that doesn't involve combat or conflict. I don't mean to change that, only suggest something that would greatly expand it.

[Hcube]

Just my first impressions :

-having AI-controlled ships : Meh. I generally don't trust AIs, and if on top of that its kerbals piloting the ships...

-The part about "dock with an abandoned ship and drain its fuel/resources is AWESOME it's like finding an old relic and make an use out of it !

-Having some parts being used to find such ships, like antennas, would be really cool. They would show up on the map UI like the asteroids do in the mission control view. The range at wich you would detect them would depend on the antenna you use, etc. I'd love something like this.

[pandaman]

Personally I don't like the idea of NPC/AI ships or Kerbals. It somehow doesn't fit with how I see the essence or premise of the game.

[tater]

Personally I don't like the idea of NPC/AI ships or Kerbals. It somehow doesn't fit with how I see the essence or premise of the game.

The 1950s-60s timeframe is the USA/CCCP "Space Race." The pressure to beat the other side is what drove some very kerbal choices made by both sides in that period. I think that a space race could not possibly be better suited to the premise.

[Claw]

I absolutely love this idea in concept. Using player ships (or other generated content) to scatter things about. Although some people take great offence to the thought that "there is some other Kerbal space agency that launches stuff into my universe?!"

To that, I offer something. There is, in fact, another space complex on Kerbin. One hidden in the mountains that seems to have been completely forgotten...that I see very rare mention of on the forum anymore. Plus there's that shady island runway out there...

I would support having 'Ghost Ships'. It seems like we will be getting stranded Kerbals with crew pods strewn around everywhere, I don't see why having ghost ships would be different. It would also be cool to have strange objects, like monoliths, that you have to return to Kerbin for study that would yield reputation, science and funds.

Yes. I too would love there to be a bit more "back story" to lost kerbals. I just don't know how practical it is for something like a craft generator to be included in 1.0 to fill that gap.

Cheers,

~Claw

[pandaman]

The 1950s-60s timeframe is the USA/CCCP "Space Race." The pressure to beat the other side is what drove some very kerbal choices made by both sides in that period. I think that a space race could not possibly be better suited to the premise.

In that respect I agree, if a space race is the scenario squad have in mind then it would be appropriate. Though I do have reservations about NPCs.

As a way of explaining the otherwise inexplicable random stranded kerbal contracts then it works.

Edited March 1, 2015 by pandaman