who can build the cheapest eve vessel?

[mrhexed]

My eve vessel is so big, it needs 2 million to make due. can anyone get anything cheaper than this to eve? This is also judging on how early in the game you can get it. you can use re-usability to help your low cost mission *cough* mark thrimm *Cough*

This has to be a manned return mission and at least 16 kerbal capacity Visual mods and life support mods are always enabled. IRSU is not allowed, nor would you want to anyways. you can assemble it in orbit. It needs to be less than 2 million funds.

CairoJack, tell me if this thread is already taken

To the grading scale!

This mission would consider to be 2,000 points. each extra kerbal is +25 points. assembled in orbit +50. command seats are allowed, and if used, I can allow at least 25 for every kerbal put in command seat. every irsu unit used, -100 points. for every op mod, -300 points. that is the grading scale.

Edited September 19, 2017 by mrhexed

[Cpt Kerbalkrunch]

I will never be a threat to build the cheapest anything in this game, so I probably shouldn't be responding. I do love Eve however, so this caught my eye and I figured I'd help you out a little. First off, this has almost certainly been done; although if the challenge is no longer active you could probably pick it up. You're going to need to be a lot more specific though. To "go to Eve" would cost almost nothing. Even to land on it would be dirt cheap for an unmanned vessel. Actually, even a manned vessel would cost very little. However, if you mean to land on Eve and return, you have just upped the ante considerably. And you'll still need to be much more specific. Manned or unmanned? Bonus for extra Kerbals? Are you allowed to refuel or assemble in orbit? Are command chairs allowed? Which mods are allowed, if any? Is ISRU allowed?

For a challenge, players want clear-cut rules and goals. And a scoring system of some kind is always nice as well. We all measure ourselves against other players to a certain extent. A good challenge always breeds a bit of healthy (though good-natured) competition.

Not trying to down your idea in any way (I'm a big fan of The Purple Widow Maker), just trying to help you shape this challenge and future ones as well.

[mrhexed]

Just now, Cpt Kerbalkrunch said:

I will never be a threat to build the cheapest anything in this game, so I probably shouldn't be responding. I do love Eve however, so this caught my eye and I figured I'd help you out a little. First off, this has almost certainly been done; although if the challenge is no longer active you could probably pick it up. You're going to need to be a lot more specific though. To "go to Eve" would cost almost nothing. Even to land on it would be dirt cheap for an unmanned vessel. Actually, even a manned vessel would cost very little. However, if you mean to land on Eve and return, you have just upped the ante considerably. And you'll still need to be much more specific. Manned or unmanned? Bonus for extra Kerbals? Are you allowed to refuel or assemble in orbit? Are command chairs allowed? Which mods are allowed, if any? Is ISRU allowed?

For a challenge, players want clear-cut rules and goals. And a scoring system of some kind is always nice as well. We all measure ourselves against other players to a certain extent. A good challenge always breeds a bit of healthy (though good-natured) competition.

Not trying to down your idea in any way (I'm a big fan of The Purple Widow Maker), just trying to help you shape this challenge and future ones as well.

Thanks! I'll update the thread

[Human Person]

Concider me interested in another Eve Challenge. I agree with everything @Cpt Kerbalkrunch said.

 

In terms of funding ... 200.000 bucks might be doable, perhaps 100.000? Depends on the specific rules. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by Physics Student

[herbal space program]

47 minutes ago, mrhexed said:

This has to be a manned return mission and at least 100 kerbal capacity

100 Kerbals to the surface of Eve and back? Even one is a major challenge, one I have done exactly once myself TBH, so I can't even imagine trying to take such a thing on. 

Edited September 19, 2017 by herbal space program

[mrhexed]

Just now, herbal space program said:

100 Kerbals to the surface of Eve and back? Even one is a major challenge, one I have done exactly once myself TBH, so I can't even imagine trying to take such a thing on. 

What can I say?  I'm a ksp pro, I set really hard challenges. Or at least I consider myself a pro. I'm going to all the planets now

[herbal space program]

1 minute ago, mrhexed said:

What can I say?  I'm a ksp pro, I set really hard challenges. Or at least I consider myself a pro. I'm going to all the planets now

Now you're just trolling us. Zzzzz.....

[mrhexed]

Just now, herbal space program said:

Now you're just trolling us. Zzzzz.....

I'm not trolling you... I just set extremely hard challenges. the vessel doesn't have to be launched in one part. I'll remove the 100 kerbal part and put 16 kerbals. but it has to be less than 2,000,000 kerbucks.

[sevenperforce]

7 minutes ago, mrhexed said:

I'm not trolling you... I just set extremely hard challenges. the vessel doesn't have to be launched in one part. I'll remove the 100 kerbal part and put 16 kerbals. but it has to be less than 2,000,000 kerbucks.

Why not just say "16 kerbals to Eve's surface and back to the surface of Kerbin, no ISRU; who can do it for the lowest price"?

[mrhexed]

Just now, sevenperforce said:

Why not just say "16 kerbals to Eve's surface and back to the surface of Kerbin, no ISRU; who can do it for the lowest price"?

because I'm lazy... I have issues

Just now, herbal space program said:

100 Kerbals to the surface of Eve and back? Even one is a major challenge, one I have done exactly once myself TBH, so I can't even imagine trying to take such a thing on. 

I forgot to thank you for the suggestion

[sevenperforce]

2 minutes ago, mrhexed said:

because I'm lazy... I have issues

Haha, that WOULD be lazy.

Adding "keep it under $xxxx" is an unnecessary complication because people will make it as cheaply as they can by default.

I'd recommend you do two categories: 16 Kerbals to Eve Orbit and Back and 16 Kerbals to Eve's Surface and Back.

Edited September 19, 2017 by sevenperforce

[mrhexed]

Just now, sevenperforce said:

Haha, that WOULD be lazy.

Adding "keep it under $xxxx" is an unnecessary complication because people will make it as cheaply as they can by default.

I'd recommend you do two categories: Cheapest 16 Kerbals to Eve Orbit and Cheapest 16 Kerbals to Eve's Surface and Back.

thanks!

[Human Person]

2 hours ago, mrhexed said:

at least 16 kerbal capacity

Now we're talking! Love it!

[mrhexed]

Just now, Physics Student said:

Now we're talking! Love it!

Thanks!

[sevenperforce]

One other suggestion, if I may -- you should allow people to start in orbit (either Kerbin orbit or Eve orbit) to lower the bar for entry.

[Laie]

While we're providing unsolicited advice... make demands regarding the altitude. You only need half as much rocket if you start on a mountaintop. Near sea level, give or take 200m already makes a quite noticable difference. Eve Rocks used to ask for "500m or less", in order to leave a sufficiently wide strip around the seas to land on.

And pray tell, what is an "op mod"?

[Helmetman]

@Laie I would also find it a interesting challenge to go to Eve's mountain top, land as many kerbals there as you can and go back to Kerbin.

This will limit the Eve goal to óne location (makes things easier me thinks) 
The only hassle is building something that can get to that specific location. You'd need to glide there or use a trajectory mod if this challenge is going to allow that.

Cloud mods obscure the location so it would be difficult to glide to if installed. Ofcourse one would use a new install for this... 

I only send a max of 3 Kerbals to Eve and back from surface level, and that was quite painfull to accomplish on a somewhat small design.

@sevenperforce I've only read those threads from a while back, but there was a "Eve Rocks" challenge a long time ago. 
These contesters had no problem going from Kerbin to Eve and back. So why is it necessary to lower any bars these days?
But 'if' your argument holds true then I have to agree with this. We don't want people running for the hills.

Edited September 20, 2017 by Helmetman

[sevenperforce]

8 minutes ago, Helmetman said:

 

@sevenperforce I've only read those threads from a while back, but there was a "Eve Rocks" challenge a long time ago. 
These contesters had no problem going from Kerbin to Eve and back. So why is it necessary to lower any bars these days?
But 'if' your argument holds true then I have to agree with this. We don't want people running for the hills.

It's not about making the challenge easier to complete; most of us can take 16 Kerbals to Eve and back without a problem. It's just a big time commitment. If people can use whatever launcher they want without worrying about cost, or simply start in LKO, it's a shorter time commitment and so you get more submissions.

Plus, if you're judging by total mission cost, someone could get a much lower overall cost by building a ginormous launch vehicle using tons and tons of cheap SRBs, while a lighter, more efficient launch vehicle would cost more. That cost difference would vastly overshadow the cost of the actual Eve mission package.

25 minutes ago, Laie said:

And pray tell, what is an "op mod"?

Yeah, I wondered that too. I can "mod" a nuclear saltwater engine for $5 that will take a hundred Kerbals from KSC to Eve and back twice on a single stage...if that's just a -300 point penalty I would still come out with 337,800 points.

[Helmetman]

@sevenperforce I get your point, it's a different challenge after all. I would still wonder if people would go for a modern Eve rocks challenge. Scoring on maximum amount of kerbals to Eve and back. I know it's simpler these days and without mission restrictions people could do quite a few things to pull it of. 
But I would still like a rebirth of that challenge if someone can come up with the proper rules for it. Personally I'm not against such a large scale undertaking myself. But if other people aren't then that definitely draws the line.

[herbal space program]

6 hours ago, Helmetman said:

 I would still wonder if people would go for a modern Eve rocks challenge. Scoring on maximum amount of kerbals to Eve and back. I know it's simpler these days and without mission restrictions people could do quite a few things to pull it of. But I would still like a rebirth of that challenge if someone can come up with the proper rules for it. Personally I'm not against such a large scale undertaking myself. But if other people aren't then that definitely draws the line.

As it happens I have a ship that can land on Eve and return, my first one, that I just built recently and never entered in anything, so I for one would play if there were a reasonably designed re-issue of this one. I don't think the rules have to be so complicated either. The ground rule is dirt simple: you have to launch something from LKO that can put at least one Kerbal on the surface of Eve and land them back on Kerbin, without cheating. Then there can be any number of leaderboards based on different ways to do it the best, e.g. lowest cost, launch mass, most Kerbals, fastest, etc. You could maybe even contact OP of Eve Rocks and ask them if you can reboot it with their badge and a blank leaderboard.

[Laie]

Oh boy, has it been three years already?

There was no scoring scheme on the Eve Rocks Challenge, hence no way of "winning" it. Some kind of competition evolved anyway: all entries had their mass & part count listed and there were shoutouts for noteworthy achievements. So people tried to outdo each other in some way or another just for the fun (or honor) of it: the mostest people, fewest parts, or being especially savvy about some aspect of the mission. However, to repeat: this was no formal competition. Making it to Eve and back was all that counted. Any reboot should follow that example.

The badge was Ziv's (he who was also doing the Ultimate Jool-5 challenge for years). I don't think he would object.

The OP basically got fed up -- looking at and verifing other people's rockets was fun at first, but after a few months it became work and eventually a tedious chore. The release of KSP 1.0 was a welcome opportunity to call it quits.

[Helmetman]

@Laie@herbal space programThis is probably why I won't issue a challenge myself because I'm probably going to be quite lax on the challenge management after a week or two when things get boring. It's at the very least fair I won't demand anyone else to do it for me(us) That said I'm hardly surprised other people wouldn't for similar reasons.
I kinda wished I had the spirit to say "yes" I'll take it over. Maybe I actually will and I change my mind
I'm also not sure if I (you) would have to take over the original Eve rocks badges. I think making my own or having some originality isn't a bad thing.