Best Admin Strategy

[randomredneck]

Pretty simple question. All the stuff I find on this is like 3 or 4 years old. Not sure I can trust that stuff. And I don't really know how these things works.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Most of the strategies involve trading one resource for another, like funds for science or rep for funds, etc...

I wouldn't say there really is a best one, it's more about what you need at the moment/what you have a lot of.

So, in the early career perhaps we would say that we are short on funds and could use more but don't really care so much about rep. We would take a strategy that takes rep gains and converts them to funds like "Fundraising Campaign". Later on down the road perhaps we feel we aren't unlocking new parts fast enough, but now we have loads of money, so we take "Outsourced R+D" to trade funds gained for science. The "best" strategy may change as you play, and will vary greatly depending on your playstyle.

If you feel everything is going well, and you don't have too much or too little of any one resource, you probably don't need any strategy activated for the time being. This is also a perfectly valid play-style.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Rocket In My Pocket

[GoSlash27]

I suppose it really depends on how you play, but I personally don't use any admin strategies. I Don't bother upgrading the offices, either.

Best,
-Slashy
 

[randomredneck]

1 hour ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Most of the strategies involve trading one resource for another, like funds for science or rep for funds, etc...

I wouldn't say there really is a best one, it's more about what you need at the moment/what you have a lot of.

So, in the early career perhaps we would say that we are short on funds and could use more but don't really care so much about rep. We would take a strategy that takes rep gains and converts them to funds like "Fundraising Campaign". Later on down the road perhaps we feel we aren't unlocking new parts fast enough, but now we have loads of money, so we take "Outsourced R+D" to trade funds gained for science. The "best" strategy may change as you play, and will vary greatly depending on your playstyle.

If you feel everything is going well, and you don't have too much or too little of any one resource, you probably don't need any strategy activated for the time being. This is also a perfectly valid play-style.

 

1 hour ago, GoSlash27 said:

I suppose it really depends on how you play, but I personally don't use any admin strategies. I Don't bother upgrading the offices, either.

Best,
-Slashy
 

Okay, so I don't NEED to use them. Good to know. Thanks.

[Aegolius13]

This will probably not sound very helpful, but I would only use strategies if you have a surplus of one resource, and really need another resource.  The startup fees and conversion rates are bad enough that it's not really worth it if you're still trying to accumulate all the resources.  For example, I tend to really want science points, until I max out the tech tree, at which point science becomes useless.  So if you have extra funds you're not using early game, it might not hurt to do the one that converts money into science.  I just started doing my first ever strategy, in a modded game where I have a bunch of extra tech to research, but had contract rewards high enough that I have surplus income.  Alternatively, late game, you will likely have all the science and money you'll ever need, so it might not hurt to put those into reputation.  

I have not played around a lot with the one that gives you science bonuses for milestones and penalties for regular research, but I guess that makes sense if your playstyle gravitates toward checking out new celestial bodies, rather than grindy science collection. 

 

[Wcmille]

In my current career game, once I'd almost finished the tech tree (only leaving a couple of techs I don't use much), I did:

Science=>Money at 50%.

Once I got enough science to finish the tree, I was pretty good on money, so I'm switching to:

Science => Reputation at 100% and
Money => Reputation at 50%.

[randomredneck]

57 minutes ago, Aegolius13 said:

This will probably not sound very helpful, but I would only use strategies if you have a surplus of one resource, and really need another resource.  The startup fees and conversion rates are bad enough that it's not really worth it if you're still trying to accumulate all the resources.  For example, I tend to really want science points, until I max out the tech tree, at which point science becomes useless.  So if you have extra funds you're not using early game, it might not hurt to do the one that converts money into science.  I just started doing my first ever strategy, in a modded game where I have a bunch of extra tech to research, but had contract rewards high enough that I have surplus income.  Alternatively, late game, you will likely have all the science and money you'll ever need, so it might not hurt to put those into reputation.  

I have not played around a lot with the one that gives you science bonuses for milestones and penalties for regular research, but I guess that makes sense if your playstyle gravitates toward checking out new celestial bodies, rather than grindy science collection. 

 

That is an issue I always run into. I either run out of funds to make any decent rockets, or I plateau my useful science experiments. Science more often than funds. Once I get space tourist contracts, money comes easy.

Edited November 21, 2017 by randomredneck

[Plusck]

I've tried a few strategies. My overall take on it is: it's broken...

"Leadership initiative" sounds good and should be good for early-to-mid career if you know what you're doing (i.e. can launch cheaply and successfully)... but it doesn't pay out much at all and can end up costing more than it's worth. I've ended up getting negative rep on completing a significant contract with it activated in KSP 1.2 (return from Moho), and I don't trust it to be fixed in the latest version.

On a new career run-through I tried to combine strategies to maximise science and rep... but I couldn't even put two 40% strategies together because it would "exceed 100%"? Wat? The percentage calculations are therefore broken if 2x 40% magically exceeds 100%... (this is with medium difficulty, so maybe the "medium" multiplier changed the result, but that still means the calculations are broken).

So my final take from it is: yes, once you've completed the tech tree, you might as well convert all science to rep and funds. Not that you need much extra funds by then but it's nice to feel Musk-ish.

I've tried to make it work for me, but it hasn't been really useful yet. The idea is good, but it still needs work to give it a purpose, especially in early career when you really want a fund or science boost (but can't because it costs too much to implement).

[Spricigo]

3 hours ago, Plusck said:

I've tried a few strategies. My overall take on it is: it's broken...

Pretty close to a consensus. Few other reasons why people reach that conclusion:

-You set a strategy with x% commitment. Later you want to change the commitment, but the only way to make that adjustment is to terminate the strategy and recreate at the desired new value.

-the whole idea of an entry cost means you need to stockpile quite a bit of resources before setup a strategy.

-the strategy repertoire seems quite limited, even incomplete (e.g. no option to instantly conversion of science to reputation. No strategy dealing with kerbal experience)

 

[fourfa]

My favorite use for this building: install the mod Stategia which replaces the entire mechanic. But not until having a solid playthrough in stock (IMO) as it really changes the feel of the game. In stock I agree the best strategy is to ignore the strategies. 

Edited November 22, 2017 by fourfa