Seeking ideas for a KSP Hardcore/Iron Man mode of sorts

[Ultimate Steve]

Hardcore or Iron Man aren't really the right words, but I don't really have a better word on hand.

I'm looking to create a rule set for a more challenging and rewarding KSP experience. Normal KSP career has gotten a bit stale for me. When things go right I rarely get a sense of accomplishment. When things go wrong it is more of an annoyance or a frustration that I have to spend the time staring at loading screens than it is an actual learning experience.

Additional background that you can skip:

Spoiler

 

Realism Overhaul and RP-1 kind of fixed it for me, but goes a bit far for my liking. Mostly because it takes forever to get anywhere, I've never gotten people to Mars before getting bored. There's so much of that glorious modpack I'll never see or do because I simply don't have the time or attention span required.

Increasing the stock difficulty settings don't do much either unless done in specific ways. Most of them just increase grindiness, without meaningfully changing the actual difficulty.

 

 

So basically, I'm taking suggestions from you, whether it be for mods or rules or added rules or whatnot, aimed at creating a more challenging, more rewarding KSP experience without adding a significant amount of grindiness or lag. In particular, I want:

• New things to play around with
• New places to explore (maybe)
• A distinct end goal because I have difficulty sticking with things for a long long time, but also the ability to play beyond it if I feel like it
• Restrictions to increase mission scale (like a minimum seat count per Kerbal on long missions or something, etc)
• Additional rules and restrictions in general
• A reason to have space stations?
• Maybe a milestone list I need to complete?
• Probably a tech tree revamp or restrictions creating the same effect
  • Aim to fix the "you can get all the tech without leaving the Kerbin system" problem while also:
    • Not making it a grind to get to orbit/The Mun (can happen with reduced science output)
    • Not making it a grind to go interplanetary
• Stuff that will make me more attached to and invested in my missions and Kerbals
• Rules to make funding/reputation more engaging and not just a meter you pay no attention to unless it is near zero
• Lose conditions - No real threat of failure in normal KSP, want to change that
• Whatever else you can think of

But while still keeping it relatively lightly modded and not very grindy.

I've already decided on a few basic rules, namely no reverts or quickloads except for glitches, no crew respawn, and every crewmember needs to be named after someone I know.

I'll probably pick and choose from what people send me, to try to make something I think I'll enjoy, but I'll also compile a list of everything (or at least everything compatible) for an extreme version.

[Cavscout74]

Do something like what I've been tinkering with:

- JNSQ system

- modified Tetrix Tech Tree

- TacLS

- Kerbal Launch Failure (or some other part failure mod)

- Build time: I use a spreadsheet to calculate build time based on cost with reductions for reputation and building upgrades, but KCT works as well

plus whatever part mods you want to include.   Hard career settings with part pressure & g-force limits turned on, signal required for control & plasma blackout on.  Adjust the money/science/rep rewards to taste.

 

The 2.7x rescale from JNSQ makes everything I'm used to wrong.  Think I have enough dV to reach orbit?  Think again.  Think I have plenty to get to/from Mun?  Wrong.   It has been a new learning experience.  Also, JNSQ makes reentry actually dangerous for a change.  Even Mun/Minmus returns, you're seeing >5000 m/s velocity as you enter the atmosphere.  All the planets have been reworked to some degree, plus a set of new ones to explore as well.

Granted it doesn't give a specific goal, but it does make the stock system feel new again.

EDIT:  I haven't tried 1.12, but JNSQ was still working fine in 1.10 & 1.11

Edited July 2, 2021 by Cavscout74

[Kerbart]

Don't timewarp past realtime. If you haven't played in a week, don't warp more than a week. If you oick up where you left yesterday, don't warp past 24h.

Even a Minmus return now has a lot on the line when you've invested at least a week into it.

[Beriev]

I personally am playing RSS with stock parts (no SMURFF), alongside KSP-IE,  EPL, KCT, and Civilian Population, which gives me a nice halfway stance between Kerbal difficulty and real-world difficulty. For the moment, I've decided to set a long-term goal of creating a self-sustaining colony on Proxima Centauri b. Maybe you could adapt one or some of these ideas into your playthrough.

However, although I've never played it, Kerbalism seems like a good idea, as the realistic spacecraft design (part failure, radiation, stress) may combine with kerbal scale to also create a similarly intermediate difficulty. Those recent grand tours on the Mission Reports subforum certainly make it look interesting enough that I think you should consider it.

Expanding on Kerbalism, if you are willing to downgrade to version 1.0.4, you might be able to get a Better Than Starting Manned save running again with some work, as it struck a really great balance between challenging and tedious.

[michal.don]

I have to agree with the JNSQ recommendation. It's based on the stock system, so it feels familiar, but rearranges the planets a bit and adds a couple of new ones. It's a bit upscaled, so the rockets look and feel more realistic. It's harder to get anywhere, but not as hard as in RP-1. In combination with a life support mod, it makes planning an interplanetary journey a complex undertaking, but still the "fun" amount of complex, at least for me  And the planet pack looks absolutely stunning! 

I don't think JNSQ is compatible with 1.12 just yet, but I thinks it's more than worth it in the older versions as well, I think my current JNSQ build runs on 1.8.1.

If you decide to give it a go, let us know how you feel about it

Michal.don

[jimmymcgoochie]

Try a new solar system- JNSQ is good, but there are alternatives at stock scale with unique challenges- Grannus (the planets orbit the star very rapidly, also has a JNSQ compatible version), Whirligig (a really oblate planet with crushing gravity and no atmosphere, and higher escape velocity than Earth!), Galileo's planet pack (plenty of places to explore, plus it includes Grannus as a second star so you can use them both together), Beyond Home (very pretty and has some very interesting places to visit), and many more besides.

[Klapaucius]

I posted a topic several years ago asking what rules players imposed on themselves. It was quite interesting seeing the answers. A lot will probably not be relevant to you or stuff you already do, but perhaps it will be of some use:

 

I have not played a full career yet. I started and then killed Val and kind of felt a failure, but with the new update, it is on my to-do list.  So I may not have the best perspective, but here are a few thoughts anyway:

 

On 7/2/2021 at 12:54 PM, Ultimate Steve said:

• New things to play around with
• New places to explore (maybe)
• A distinct end goal because I have difficulty sticking with things for a long long time, but also the ability to play beyond it if I feel like it
• Restrictions to increase mission scale (like a minimum seat count per Kerbal on long missions or something, etc)
• Additional rules and restrictions in general
• A reason to have space stations?
• Maybe a milestone list I need to complete?
• Probably a tech tree revamp or restrictions creating the same effect
  • Aim to fix the "you can get all the tech without leaving the Kerbin system" problem while also:
    • Not making it a grind to get to orbit/The Mun (can happen with reduced science output)
    • Not making it a grind to go interplanetary
• Stuff that will make me more attached to and invested in my missions and Kerbals
• Rules to make funding/reputation more engaging and not just a meter you pay no attention to unless it is near zero
• Lose conditions - No real threat of failure in normal KSP, want to change that
• Whatever else you can think of

New things to play around with:

* I would look at how you can incorporate the Construction Mode from the Some Assembly Required update into your game.  

* Morale is important. Make sure you have a fireworks celebration after the completion of a big mission. 

 

Restrictions to increase mission scale:

Take a page from Civilization V.  Any outpost you build on a contract needs to be continually staffed and maintained.  It should also be upgraded and expanded over time or your residents become unhappy.

 

Additional Rules of Restrictions:

*Without going into mods, you can incorporate some basic life support. For example, decide that if a Kerbal is going on a mission for X amount of time, the Kerbal requires a certain amount of food. You can easily add storage modules. Perhaps each hitchhiker can hold enough food to support one Kerbal for one year (or two for six months) or something like that.  You'll have to determine a reasonable figure.  There is a mod for life support, but if you want to keep away from a lot of mods, this is a way to do it.

This also by definition gives you a loss condition. If you go over time in the mission without food, you are dead.

 

Distinct end goal: 

* Four established bases on Eve with space station support.

 

Stuff that will make me more attached to and invested in my missions and Kerbals

* Establish an experienced team in which multiple Kerbals have achievements.  And perhaps only allow those with specific accomplishments on harder missions.

The small mod Final Frontier is brilliant for this and for establishing individual identities based on accomplishments:

 

 

A Reason to have more space stations: There are a couple of ones I can think of:

*  Have a mission brief that states that all bases need to be supported by an orbiting station with an emergency backup lander.  

* Use stations as drop-off points for travel to other bodies rather than an entire ship/lander assembly, and possibly create an integrated network of transport.  I was thinking a bit about the "cycler" that Scott Manley discusses in this video on the film l"Stowaway" Skip to the 9  minute mark:

 

I hope a bit of this is useful. It was a good exercise for me as well to think about a few of these things as I go forward.

[camacju]

A possible restriction would be to disallow launches over 10,000 funds. This is always a fun challenge for me because it really limits what you're able to send up at once, but it's still permissive enough to go to almost any planet or moon and return in a single launch. The two exceptions are Eve landing and Jool deep dive (as far as I know). For those destinations or multi-destination landings (Jool 5, grand tour) you're basically required to do multiple launches, and similarly space stations become a lot more useful. The mobile science lab is possible to use, but again you'll have to launch several modules for it to actually get anywhere. Same with ISRU.

This doesn't make KSP much more grindy - you just have to design your rockets to be as cheap as possible. Science will probably be limited to thermometer, barometer, and goo canister - so you'll probably have to go interplanetary to finish the tech tree.

In a similar vein, you can start with an initial budget and disallow yourself from spending any more than that. You "win" if you achieve some set goal - you "lose" if you spend over that amount. I guess that's part of the mission builder from Making History but if you don't have the DLCs you can still set a spending cap. A good goal (but pretty standard) is planting a flag on every solid planetary surface.