11 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

This is a summary of the previous exchange between @KSK, @Bottle Rocketeer 500, and myself.

KSK origionally said

On 6/1/2017 at 10:46 AM, KSK said:

If I'm running Kerbin's first space program (which I clearly am because I'm racking up a string of world firsts) then what were all these companies doing before I came along? Why not have companies spawn (for want of a better word) and grow, depending on how I run my space program. Give them some history and update that history depending on what I do.

Maybe Probodobodyne start off as two telecoms engineers working for another company. Inspired by your first Duna probe, they decide they want to found their own satellite company. Probodobodyne then spawns as a contract provider and starts offering satellite related contracts. Bonus points if those contracts happen in any sort of logical progression. Maybe the Comsat market has been largely cornered by another company, so Probodobodyne decide to contract you to set up their spiffy Munar mapping cluster. Then they progress to offering you targeted landing missions to drop their ore detecting landers at strategic spots. Assuming you choose to do that for them, they team up with another company to build mining facilities - and start offering appropriate contracts for those.

To which I replied

On 7/6/2017 at 1:04 PM, KerBlitz Kerman said:

Same. That is very well thought out. Maybe you trade science to the COMPANIES for some of their products and if, say KerboDyne goes out of business you lose all their products that you haven't allready gotten. Say if I fail some of their contracts their products become more science and cost expensive.

BR500's reply...

On 7/6/2017 at 1:21 PM, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

The problem with the company going out of business thing is that then, at the end of the tech tree, you wouldn't have all the parts.

My Reply

On 7/6/2017 at 1:24 PM, KerBlitz Kerman said:

Eggs-axtly, it would be in settings on ultra hard mode. also then if you kontact kompanies individually byebye single techtree. You would prioritize K-dyne C7, Probodyne, and rockomax above all. STRATEGY GALORE!!!

 

KSK's Reply

On 7/6/2017 at 1:51 PM, KSK said:

Opinions may reasonably differ on this point but I would regard that as a 'feature not a bug'. As in - if I don't use a particular part, there's an in-game way of pruning it from my VAB list. Also, as  @KerBlitz Kerman mentioned, it introduces an element of strategy into contracting. One company might ask you to do all manner of crazy stuff - but you suck it up because they supply that key part (such as fuel lines). On the other hand, another company might want you to field test launch clamps on Duna or something equally silly, but you don't much care if they go bust, so you tell 'em to shove their contract in their engine bell and ignite it.

You could also balance this by having new companies spawn to provide you with parts once you research the requisite tech. For example, say I've allowed most of the aircraft parts companies to go under/stop trading with me because I don't care about planes and haven't made them a focus of this playthrough. I research the final 'flight' node in the tech tree, unlock RAPIERs - and a startup company spawns with the aim of capitalising on this cutting edge technology I've just developed. The prototype RAPIERs are expensive as heck, only available in small numbers and, if part failures are switched on in your game, more than usually prone to failure, reflecting their cutting edge status.

if you persevere with them though, the company grows, the supply of RAPIERs increases and they become more reliable. Conceivably - again assuming this feature is available - you also get access to the relevant part upgrades as a loyal customer.

Again BR500 replied

On 7/6/2017 at 1:56 PM, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

With the added logic that new companies could spawn to replace old ones at a different time, it makes such more sense to have KerBlitz's logic.

My sadly reasonable response

On 7/7/2017 at 4:38 PM, KerBlitz Kerman said:

@KSK I'm going to play the role of somebody who disagrees right now, but I wholeheartedly agree with your proposals.

1.) Memory. Those new company's names and flags will take up a lot of memory for every save as well as save files individually increasing load time and increasing lag. A problem for those who play on toasters.

2.) Sheer difficulty. Some players won't like the difficulty.

3.) Programming difficulty. I suggest we contact avid modders like @Nertea and @linuxgurugamer to see if such a patch is reasonable, possible, won't make KSP too lag intensive, as well as being non-memory intensive.

KSK responded

On 7/8/2017 at 0:41 AM, KSK said:

I have no idea about 3 but if 1 is a problem, even for toasters, then something isn't quite right. It shouldn't matter anyway - the game already handles a slew of company names and flags and all that we're proposing is that that number changes throughout the game. The way I envisage this working is that we would actually be starting off with a great many fewer companies and if the player decided to cultivate all the new ones that spawn throughout the game, growing the roster to its current size (or maybe slightly higher) as the game progresses.

Regarding 2, if those players can handle the rocket equation, building a spacecraft with adequate power, guidance, propellants etc., basic orbital mechanics, powered landings, rendezvous and docking - then I'm pretty sure they can handle a bit of strategy too. If they don't - well there's always Science mode and Sandbox mode. Career mode is already stripped back to the point where it's barely a game - any improvements to it are necessarily going to increase the difficulty. Seriously - aside from the normal rocket building and flying challenges which are present in any KSP game mode, what extra tasks does Career mode currently require the player to do? 

And besides my last response that is what we come up to. What do you think?

On 7/8/2017 at 11:20 AM, KerBlitz Kerman said:

I know what you mean and agree with what you are saying @KSK but the idea is that limitation of facilities presents difficulty in it's own right. However the coding most likely would be hard and may not easily be accomplished.

Edited by KerBlitz Kerman
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I quite like the idea of the individual companies having backstories and this kind of "auto pruning" feature. However, I also think that there should be some diffuculty setting for this. Like, off, easy, hard-ish and super ultra hardcore battle scarred missileman . Or something like that. I also think a way of balancing this "company goes bankrupt? too bad" is the ability to donate a certain sum of money to restart the company (albeit, with limited potential until you "re-level" them) and perhaps some sort of strategy that keeps siphoning a part of your money off to keep a company going.

Edited by qzgy
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please stop turning every C into a K... It makes my mind freak out.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Casualnaut said:

Please stop turning every C into a K...

This.  Kraken please, this.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the flags could be procedurally-generated to avoid taking up too much memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having the (k)companies would just be a backround simulation, which could run when anything having to do with contracts happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 7/8/2017 at 11:30 AM, KerBlitz Kerman said:

This is a summary of the previous exchange between @KSK, @Bottle Rocketeer 500, and myself.

KSK origionally said

To which I replied

BR500's reply...

My Reply

KSK's Reply

Again BR500 replied

My sadly reasonable response

KSK responded

And besides my last response that is what we come up to. What do you think?

When one spends the time to read this line of thought in its entirety, I think great merit will be found.  This- *especially* being "forced" to extend contracts to companies to preserve their manufacturing infrastructure - adds a brilliant level of strategy that adds enormous replayability, because how your new game flows depends entirely upon how those weird random missions drop.

I would like to add, it would be a viable strategy for the player to say, "You know, I am going to need that companies 'X' part in the future, so I won't let them go out of business.  I am not going to test farming in low solar orbit however.  I will accept the contract with no intention of executing it, and at least pay them the failed penalty money to keep them employed."

Edited by GarrisonChisholm
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say also you aren't the only Space Center, You can find others, but if you don't accept the contracts they go to other centers and may later refuse to sell you a part, but you can bribe them to lower the price/sell to you but bribes are like, multi-million :funds: investments. They cost so much that if you bribe often you run out of this: :funds:.

On 7/8/2017 at 2:25 PM, Casualnaut said:

Please stop turning every C into a K... It makes my mind freak out.

BTW... I know you play on PlayStation 4, but let's be honest, these are some loading Hints:

Something along the lines of: Misspelling Words

Something along the lines of: Adding K to every word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire contract paradigm is dumb, frankly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off...

By the time you unlock the first probe core you will not even be at the Mun. So how does putting a probe in Dunar orbit unlock Probodyne make sense?

And also on multiple space programs...

Capitalism.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2017 at 5:12 PM, Casualnaut said:

First off...

By the time you unlock the first probe core you will not even be at the Mun. So how does putting a probe in Dunar orbit unlock Probodyne make sense?

And also on multiple space programs...

Capitalism.

 

@Casualnaut All of these are just examples while disscussing how the contract system could be improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now