Jump to content

Craft Construction Time


Recommended Posts

@Master39 i have said all I can about why its bad. We are clearly not going to agree. I refuse categorically to play or buy a game that will FORCE a construction time on me when that was never in the spirit of the game. Its why it was a mod in the first place. You enjoy it and thats great! Do not force it on me. What you fail to understand is: it is 100% pointless to implement if it is skippable by any means. All you do at that point is: add a feature that is contentious at best and adds a layer of complexity that is not universally wanted and is a great place for technical debt to muck things up.

whats my point? There are 2 camps. One camp enjoys it. The other does not. Is it worth dividing and frankly alienating a portion of buyers over a feature that frankly becomes useless and wasteful if time warp skipping lets you bypass it? The answer is no. No it is not. I will say it again. It does not and never ever should be a feature beyond a mod. 
 

I feel like my points on why it shouldnt be a thing are being ignored or waved off. I dont appreciate it. I am happy you enjoy that mod. I find it useless.

 

@Lord Aurelius Time itself is a resource

It absolutely is. One I will not waste on construction time. As i said to master39 some enjoy that sorta thing. It seems he does as (i think at least, correct if wrong) you do too. I just feel it must remain a mod only is all.

 

085107072020

 

edited to add the 2nd tag at 085507072020

Edited by AlamoVampire
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

What you fail to understand is: it is 100% pointless to implement if it is skippable by any means

No it's not.

If it was pointless with time-warp there would be no argument as there would be not point in being against it.

If it changes the way you play and the games rewards you (ex: new designs take a lot more time to build, standard rockets get a discount and so on) it can have a place in the gameplay, if otherwise then it would be pointless.

But since the very first management games construction time has always been a possible gameplay element to balance things out.

I'm not saying I enjoy construction time on its own, I'm saying that it can be an element of a bigger gameplay system, even with the possibility of time-warp.

 

As everyone here I've not tried this new "progression" mode they're designing so I have no clue if having construction time or not having money would improve that specific replay system.

I'm simply not going to blindly say "with that feature I will not give the game a chance" because I've played enough management games to understand that concept like money, time or resources are different between games.

 

As always no realism for realism's sake but anything is welcome if it somehow improves the gameplay.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Master39 i have said all I can about why its bad. We are clearly not going to agree. I refuse categorically to play or buy a game that will FORCE a construction time on me when that was never in the spirit of the game. Its why it was a mod in the first place. You enjoy it and thats great! Do not force it on me. What you fail to understand is: it is 100% pointless to implement if it is skippable by any means. All you do at that point is: add a feature that is contentious at best and adds a layer of complexity that is not universally wanted and is a great place for technical debt to muck things up.

whats my point? There are 2 camps. One camp enjoys it. The other does not. Is it worth dividing and frankly alienating a portion of buyers over a feature that frankly becomes useless and wasteful if time warp skipping lets you bypass it? The answer is no. No it is not. I will say it again. It does not and never ever should be a feature beyond a mod. 
 

I feel like my points on why it shouldnt be a thing are being ignored or waved off. I dont appreciate it. I am happy you enjoy that mod. I find it useless.

 

@Lord Aurelius Time itself is a resource

It absolutely is. One I will not waste on construction time. As i said to master39 some enjoy that sorta thing. It seems he does as (i think at least, correct if wrong) you do too. I just feel it must remain a mod only is all.

 

085107072020

 

edited to add the 2nd tag at 085507072020

You seem to be confusing RL player time vs in-game time. When I refer to construction time, I'm not referring to the awful mobile-inspired countdown timers where you have to watch the timer tick down until your rocket is ready. I'm referring to it as something where you see you have a launch window a year out. You have multiple missions you would like to send, but not enough time to build all of them so you need to be smart about your use of that time. You design your vehicles and payloads (while the game is paused) and while designing the game tells you how long it will take to construct so you adjust your design accordingly. When you're done designing, you click "warp to completion" and poof, it's done. But that feature wasn't skippable because it utilized the in-game time resource, and all the planets/craft/etc continued to operate in the background.

I disagree that construction time should be restricted to mods. KSP has long advertised itself as a space program tycoon, and without time management elements the game is sorely lacking on this front.

In terms of skippable features being a waste of time to implement, I disagree. Different people like different aspects of the game. Since we have sandbox, career is 100% pointless and skippable if you're just wanting to launch rockets, but it's still there and a lot of players want it because it provides a challenge and sense of progression that sandbox simply doesn't. You also seem to still be assuming that players will be FORCED to use this system. To be honest, I would consider this to be a faulty assumption. All the new difficulty systems in KSP1 (reentry heating, comm networks, etc) have been OPTIONAL, the devs have NOT forced any new features on players and are very aware that there's a significant chunk of the playerbase that doesn't care about the management/planning side of the game and just wants to build and launch rockets (which is perfectly fine, different people play the same game for different reasons).

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I boot up the game and my vessel takes 5 in-game days to build! "What does this add to the gameplay?", I ask. Nothing at all, just a timer I'll come to despise.

So spacecraft should just teleport to their maneuver nodes instead of having to timewarp to them? Isn't watching that timer countdown to the maneuver pretty much the same thing?

Like I said in my earlier post, time management is a staple of management/tycoon games. That doesn't mean that the VAB launch button can't have an option to warp to vessel complete and then launch so the game experience is the same as it is now. Or that it even has to be a required game option, disabling these sorts of things is a perfect use case for sandbox and custom games.

Just now, shdwlrd said:

My question to all of you is: are you thinking that this construction timer will affect the crafts launching at the KSC too? 

Yes. KCT handles this very well IMHO where you can choose to upgrade your vehicle production lines in addition to the other VAB upgrades. IMHO it adds another layer of strategy to career (I guess it will be called adventure in KSP2) since if you think you might need to do a rescue/resupply you'll need to plan ahead and build the rockets ahead of time and have them ready to launch and can't just summon them out of thin air from funds instantly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:
46 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I boot up the game and my vessel takes 5 in-game days to build! "What does this add to the gameplay?", I ask. Nothing at all, just a timer I'll come to despise.

So spacecraft should just teleport to their maneuver nodes instead of having to timewarp to them? Isn't watching that timer countdown to the maneuver pretty much the same thing?

No, it's not the same thing, because time matters about as much as location when actively flying a vessel, but construction time doesn't serve anything.

Edited by Bej Kerman
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

I boot up the game and my vessel takes 5 in-game days to build! "What does this add to the gameplay?", I ask. Nothing at all, just a timer I'll come to despise.

I boot up my game running Kerbal Construction Time, and I want to get something big into orbit.  It's too big for my small fleet of re-usable SSTOs that are sitting at the ready.  So now I have to decide if I want to build another conventional rocket, use a recovered booster and build a new second stage, or continue working on my large SSTO (first one since beta).  For me, I like how it gives a purpose for building reusable craft.  So for me, it adds to the gameplay in career mode.  If I just want to muck about with no constraints, I can fire up Sandbox mode.

Should it be stock in adventure mode?  Seems like a good fit when thinking about colonies, but I have my doubts the devs will put it in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bej Kerman said:

No, it's not the same thing, because time matters about as much as location when actively flying a vessel, but construction time doesn't serve anything.

It does matter since other vessels and celestial bodies in the background will be moving during construction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There would be 0 reason to implement this and it would serve as an active reason not to get the game...

In RSS/RP-1 it exists along side a system where time costs money. Your astronauts, launch pads, etc cost a certain rate so making craft that take a long time will costs you more money. Putting this in stock would add nothing but anger to the overall user base

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:
16 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

No, it's not the same thing, because time matters about as much as location when actively flying a vessel, but construction time doesn't serve anything.

It does matter since other vessels and celestial bodies in the background will be moving during construction.

That matters much more in flight, but I would much rather just warp to my Duna transfer, glue my rockets together then launch instantly without a big useless timer.

5 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

There would be 0 reason to implement this and it would serve as an active reason not to get the game...

In RSS/RP-1 it exists along side a system where time costs money. Your astronauts, launch pads, etc cost a certain rate so making craft that take a long time will costs you more money. Putting this in stock would add nothing but anger to the overall user base

Precisely

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

There would be 0 reason to implement this and it would serve as an active reason not to get the game...

In RSS/RP-1 it exists along side a system where time costs money. Your astronauts, launch pads, etc cost a certain rate so making craft that take a long time will costs you more money. Putting this in stock would add nothing but anger to the overall user base

You guys are making the assumption that the only way to implement it would be a forced system with no way to disable it.

Sure, if something like KCT was added to KSP1 without any way to turn it off there would be a lot of anger. Same thing would have happened with CommNet when people suddenly lost contact with their probes.

However if it were added as a completely optional difficulty option (like was done with CommNet) then it's there for players who want it and can be properly integrated into the base game and can properly interact with and be balanced for other game systems.

9 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

That matters much more in flight, but I would much rather just warp to my Duna transfer, glue my rockets together then launch instantly without a big useless timer.

There's sometimes I just want to do that as well, and that's when you play without construction time enabled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Aurelius said:

You guys are making the assumption that the only way to implement it would be a forced system with no way to disable it.

Sure, if something like KCT was added to KSP1 without any way to turn it off there would be a lot of anger. Same thing would have happened with CommNet when people suddenly lost contact with their probes.

However if it were added as a completely optional difficulty option (like was done with CommNet) then it's there for players who want it and can be properly integrated into the base game and can properly interact with and be balanced for other game systems.

There's sometimes I just want to do that as well, and that's when you play without construction time enabled.

So you are going to enable a feature that makes you wait and turn it off when it's inconvenient. I can understand that... Just there never a point where forcing a player to wait longer is convenient..

 

Seriously, what would this feature add to the gameplay other than an extra hurdle to flying your rocket?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Aurelius said:

Many of those same arguments against time warp for construction are equally valid for launch windows.

Except for the fact that launch windows are a result of the setup of the game universe (and our universe), not an imposed rule written by a programmer.

That is a fundamental difference between the two that can not be ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

So you are going to enable a feature that makes you wait and turn it off when it's inconvenient. I can understand that... Just there never a point where forcing a player to wait longer is convenient..

 

Seriously, what would this feature add to the gameplay other than an extra hurdle to flying your rocket?

Read some of my earlier posts. The added gameplay is time management to improve the space program management side of the game (time management is a staple of management games). This isn't a timer intended to waste your time like so many bad mobile games have. This is intended to make game time a valuable resource when building rockets. When you design your rocket, the game calculates how long it will take to build based on your manufacturing capability. Then when you want to launch, you click build and have the option to either auto timewarp to when it's ready or start construction so you can go manage other craft. This would also make reusable SSTOs much more valuable since they could be turned around quickly, since KSP really doesn't have the mechanics to explain why people are so interested in them IRL.

I know some people just want to fly rockets and couldn't care less about managing a space program, but for those who do enjoy the tycoon/management side IRL time management with rocket lead times and launch windows is a huge consideration that KSP doesn't even touch on and I would like to see that addressed in KSP2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mattinoz said:

At the very least time should continue while in the VAB

I would be interested in a game mode or mod that allowed time to pass while in the VAB, perhaps even pass very quickly each time you attach a new part. This would need to be coupled with a ROCK SOLID Alarm Clock implementation that could find SOI changes on craft on rails and warn the player about them.

I'm not sure I'd like it or even use it much, but I'd like to try it to find out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Superfluous J said:

Except for the fact that launch windows are a result of the setup of the game universe (and our universe), not an imposed rule written by a programmer.

That is a fundamental difference between the two that can not be ignored.

Our universe (at least with current tech) clearly shows that you can't poof rockets into existence on the launch pad instantly. Quite the opposite, building rockets and preparing them for launch is very difficult and time-consuming and planning for it and designing reliable multipurpose launchers is a huge part of space programs. Sure, there's not a hard physics equation on how long a rocket takes to build, but RL shows that it most definitely can't be done instantly, and making it happen is much more of a convenient arbitrary rule that saying it takes some amount of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord Aurelius said:

Read some of my earlier posts. The added gameplay is time management to improve the space program management side of the game (time management is a staple of management games). This isn't a timer intended to waste your time like so many bad mobile games have. This is intended to make game time a valuable resource when building rockets. When you design your rocket, the game calculates how long it will take to build based on your manufacturing capability. Then when you want to launch, you click build and have the option to either auto timewarp to when it's ready or start construction so you can go manage other craft. This would also make reusable SSTOs much more valuable since they could be turned around quickly, since KSP really doesn't have the mechanics to explain why people are so interested in them IRL.

I know some people just want to fly rockets and couldn't care less about managing a space program, but for those who do enjoy the tycoon/management side IRL time management with rocket lead times and launch windows is a huge consideration that KSP doesn't even touch on and I would like to see that addressed in KSP2.

Adding "Time-management" in a game where you can just fast forward without consequence?... Of what use is that? What value does time have? Probes dont fail after x amount of time, kerbals have yet to have a maximum time to be allowed in space... waiting in this game has no downside. We can play a game and fast forward 10,000 years and it wont matter.. So please explain the value of the time you intend for us to care enough for to manage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Adding "Time-management" in a game where you can just fast forward without consequence?... Of what use is that? What value does time have? Probes dont fail after x amount of time, kerbals have yet to have a maximum time to be allowed in space... waiting in this game has no downside. We can play a game and fast forward 10,000 years and it wont matter.. So please explain the value of the time you intend for us to care enough for to manage.

Yes what is the max time you want us to care is a great question

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Adding "Time-management" in a game where you can just fast forward without consequence?... Of what use is that? What value does time have? Probes dont fail after x amount of time, kerbals have yet to have a maximum time to be allowed in space... waiting in this game has no downside. We can play a game and fast forward 10,000 years and it wont matter.. So please explain the value of the time you intend for us to care enough for to manage.

It doesn't if you only launch one mission at a time.  I typically have a bunch of missions going on.  I like to do orbital construction, so I have to plan ahead for this sort of thing.  I get that it's not for everyone, but you should get that it's of value to some people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Adding "Time-management" in a game where you can just fast forward without consequence?... Of what use is that? What value does time have? Probes dont fail after x amount of time, kerbals have yet to have a maximum time to be allowed in space... waiting in this game has no downside. We can play a game and fast forward 10,000 years and it wont matter.. So please explain the value of the time you intend for us to care enough for to manage.

Transfer and rendezvous windows, and contract time requirements already provide this. Life support (which has already pretty much been confirmed for KSP2, which is what we're talking about since this is the KSP2 section of the forum) provides even more incentive. I also wouldn't mind part degradation over time as an option to prevent RTGs from being the ultimate power source.

Edited by Lord Aurelius
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:

Transfer and rendezvous windows

Just fast forward to the next one... no down side

12 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:

contract time requirements already provide this.

only accept contracts for missions that are currently ready to deploy

12 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:

Life support (which has already pretty much been confirmed for KSP2, which is what we're talking about since this is the KSP2 section of the forum) provides even more incentive.

No it hasn't... We will need specific buildings to increase the population of a colony, that is all that is confirmed. There has been no mention of life support for active vessels and no greater complication implied than simply having a requisite building to increase the population of a colony. In other words, you need a greenhouse attached to your colony but no mention of tracking its food output/consumption.

12 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:

I also wouldn't mind part degradation over time as an option.

Hasn't even been humored as being included.

 

You seem to not only want KCT but a whole package of features along side it which is outside the scope of the original question posed by this thread for which my prior responses were intended. That said though, I have no desire to push an RP-1 esque campaign on the general public as stock and think it would be a poor decision by the creators who are trying to broaden the appeal of KSP where these suggestions would narrow its appeal.

Edited by mcwaffles2003
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lord Aurelius said:

Our universe (at least with current tech) clearly shows that you can't poof rockets into existence on the launch pad instantly. Quite the opposite, building rockets and preparing them for launch is very difficult and time-consuming and planning for it and designing reliable multipurpose launchers is a huge part of space programs. Sure, there's not a hard physics equation on how long a rocket takes to build, but RL shows that it most definitely can't be done instantly, and making it happen is much more of a convenient arbitrary rule that saying it takes some amount of time.

let me put it another way, You have to go out of your way (and frankly I don't see how to do it easily) to make the current time warp not necessary. That's what I mean by inherent to THEIR (the Kerbal's) universe. That's why it's different.

One is takes work to REMOVE. The other takes work to IMPLEMENT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mcwaffles2003 said:

Just fast forward to the next one... no down side

only accept contracts for missions that are currently ready to deploy

No it hasn't... We will need specific buildings to increase the population of a colony, that is all that is confirmed. There has been no mention of life support for active vessels and no greater complication implied that simply having a requisite building to increase the population of a colony. In other words, you need a greenhouse attached to you colony but no mention of tracking its food output/consumption.

Hasn't even been humored as being included.

 

You seem to not only want KCT but a whole package of features along side it which is outside the scope of the original question posed by this thread for which my prior responses were intended. That said though, I have no desire to push an RP-1 esque campaign on the general public as stock and think it would be a poor decision by the creators who are trying to broaden the appeal of KSP where these suggestions would narrow its appeal.

I guess it depends on what direction the devs want to take the game. If KSP2 is going to move away from being a tycoon/management game and focus on just being a rocket building and flying simulator then you may be right that this system is overly complex and doesn't really add anything. However if the devs want to improve the management aspect of the game then time management is a huge aspect of this type of gameplay and needs to have a full suite of construction time and related features to properly flesh it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

Adding "Time-management" in a game where you can just fast forward without consequence?... Of what use is that?

Read my previous posts, I used KTC in 2 careers and I was using time-warp all the time, it doesn't need to block the time-warp to be relevant.

Since supply lines and life support being "lite" (I'm reading this as "non lethal") are confirmed a construction time feature would not punish people not caring about it and just skipping to launch but it would reward people for optimizing their space programs with standardized launchers and/or reusable tech.

 

I'm thinking right now that we'll have at least a form of construction time: extraplanetary launchpads needing resources.

So a system for construction queues, delayed launches, build craft storing, modifying and recovery should already be in the game, alongside a way to "simulate" launching a new design without committing the time/resources required for an actual build.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...