Here's Your First Look at Kerbal Space Program: First Contract

[Apollyon]

One thing is for sure though, our orbital parking spots are gonna get CROWDED.

Why? I thought they would be less crowded since ships now = Money so ppl will want to bring them home for recovery unless they're doing something meaningful.

[Kamuchi]

[Kerano]

While we're waiting for further news on 0.24, I figured I'd analyse the recovery costs displayed in the video.

Command Pod Mk1: part value 470.40 + monopropellant value 12.00 = maximum recovery value 482.40, divide by original cost 600.00 = 80.40% efficient recovery (with no RCS use)

FL-T200 Fuel Tank: part value 266.56 + liquid fuel value 72.00 + oxidizer value 19.80 = maximum recovery value 358.36, divide by original cost 425.00 = 84.32% efficient recovery (with full tank)

Mk16 Parachute: maximum recovery value 337.60, divide by original cost 422.00 = 80.00% efficient recovery

So fuel tanks are actually about 84% efficient to recover when full, while command pods and parachutes are closer to 80% efficient. Of course if you're bringing back a full fuel tank it means you overengineered the rocket and spent more fuel than you needed to accomplish the mission, so I guess it balances out.

I realize these values might change again before we get access to 0.24, but I thought they were interesting anyway.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Kerano

[boxley]

So it appears part recovery returns 80% of Funds.

ooh, good, I was gonna be annoyed if it was like 50 or 20% returns, I kinda want sstos to be useful :U

[cpast]

While we're waiting for further news on 0.24, I figured I'd analyse the recovery costs displayed in the video.

-snip-

The better way to think of it: 80% recovery of all parts, 100% of all resources. Fuel tank cost is the cost of the part plus the cost of the fuel; the VAB shows wet cost, and you recover 80% of the dry cost.

[Kerano]

The better way to think of it: 80% recovery of all parts, 100% of all resources. Fuel tank cost is the cost of the part plus the cost of the fuel; the VAB shows wet cost, and you recover 80% of the dry cost.

That makes a certain amount more sense, yeah.

So I presume if you add a dry FL-T200 fuel tank to a rocket design (for whatever reason), it'll only cost 333.20.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Kerano

[goduranus]

I don't like having the mission achievement buttons alongside the Resources Button.

When flying, Resources is much more important for checking on fuel and intake air and stuff, and so it should have a bigger and more obvious button.

Also, the achievement popup takes away from the purity and immersion of the flying experience, why not just have it be counted at the end of the mission like science? Perhaps you can right click on a certain module(antenna?) to be informed of the status of current achievements, like check on science is now.

Also, I hope landing at runway or launch pad would give a better recovery percentage than at the rest of the KSC? which then again should be better than landing in the wilderness. Gives players more incentives for precision landings.

Edited July 14, 2014 by goduranus

[DevL]

Am I the only one freaking out over the mention that 0.24 is on 64Bit!?

I would be if it was for Mac. Here's hoping the Mac 64 bit build can be sneaked out as a 0.24.1 rather than a part of 0.25 (or, the horror, later or never).

[Monger]

Also, the achievement popup takes away from the purity and immersion of the flying experience, why not just have it be counted at the end of the mission like science? Perhaps you can right click on a certain module(antenna?) to be informed of the status of current achievements, like check on science is now.

I utterly and completely disagree. After all, you can take on multiple contracts, and depending on how complex they get each of them might only get a small window of opportunity. I think it would be very annoying if you only find out that you missed something after you have landed.

Early feedback also makes the game more compelling for beginners. Getting the message that you finally achieved orbit after the 40th try will feel greatly satisfying for many players.

[KerbMav]

Money is going to completely change the way people launch their spacecraft and attempt interplanetary missions.

People are going to be MUCH more careful with rocket designs, will be forced to plan missions within reason AND be generally worried about every staged piece on their rockets.

I'm willing to bet most people are going to adopt SpaceX recoverable rocket designs for their spacecraft, not the skylon equivalent winged design. I personally find SSTO rockets that land vertically to be far more effective and cheap than winged SSTO's.

My space stations might become real shipyards that way, as well as "bus stops" to return crew and science to Kerbin without throwing away every bit of a ship. It might be the end of landing+return-stage landers though.

I expect myself to - instead of building all new interplanetary ships - build more modular and replace e.g. the science module of a ship/lander with an upgraded (more sensors/experiments) one, adding a more efficient drive section (engine), reusing a parked Mun lander to go to Minmus or even put it on top of a Duna lander and bolt it to a bigger ship.

KAS will help a lot here, especially if I should ever get a space plane to actually work.

[BudgetHedgehog]

Also, I hope landing at runway or launch pad would give a better recovery percentage than at the rest of the KSC? which then again should be better than landing in the wilderness. Gives players more incentives for precision landings.

I hope not - that will make it uneconomical to explore Kerbins biomes (the poles, desert, badnlands etc). However, I would like runway landings to be recognised in-game somehow..

I do also disagree with your other points - if you need to see Resources in a hurry, you don't need to see the contracts. Or just keep the resources tab open and flit to the contracts tab as needed. Having a different size ans style button would look extremely weird and, I guarantee you, generate more complaints - "the UI should be standardised!" tec.

[KerbMav]

However, I would like runway landings to be recognised in-game somehow..

Reputation rewards? (KSS Lollipop landed safely in the desert/returned successfully to KSC)

[pxi]

Looking forward to the new release, it's looking good!

Also, if the throttle setting is the worst we can complain about in the new update, we're probably not in such a bad position. FWIW if it were up to me, I'd make the throttle setting a per-craft setting in the VAB. That might be more useful to us in the long run.

[Moss]

I hope not - that will make it uneconomical to explore Kerbins biomes

But IRL it's probably uneconomical to send a plane to explore the north pole and then recover it with a crane rather than just fly the thing back.

[BudgetHedgehog]

But IRL it's probably uneconomical to send a plane to explore the north pole and then recover it with a crane rather than just fly the thing back.

And IRL, planes were invented before rocket command pods. But that's not what you're given to start with in KSP so unless you plan on not exploring Kerbin until you have unlocked enough parts to make a long-haul plane, then yes, I hope recovery refund doesn't change with distance (or if it does, far away should be the default recovery amount and KSC/runway landings should be a bonus, not penalise far away landings and keep KSC/runway landings default refund amount).

[Jean Deaux]

This week... I've got a good feeling about this week. This is a great week for an update! Do you feel it too?

[blizzy78]

Just about every week is a great week for an update. That doesn't mean it will happen.

[Guest]

And IRL, planes were invented before rocket command pods. But that's not what you're given to start with in KSP so unless you plan on not exploring Kerbin until you have unlocked enough parts to make a long-haul plane, then yes, I hope recovery refund doesn't change with distance (or if it does, far away should be the default recovery amount and KSC/runway landings should be a bonus, not penalise far away landings and keep KSC/runway landings default refund amount).

A game mechanic for the free exploration of Kerbin already exists. It's called "sandbox". "Career" mode suggests keeping score over the long term. I would very much like to see a system that rewards the careful planning of missions to reduce costs. One of those costs being the cost associated with vessel recovery. There are many factors that could be taken into account, like distance from the launchpad or runway, as well as the biome type. I would think that recovering a rocket from a dessert[i meant desert, not apple pie] would be cheaper than recovering from a swamp or one of the poles.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Otis

[BudgetHedgehog]

I would think that recovering a rocket from a dessert would be cheaper than recovering from a swamp or one of the poles.

So.. Minmus?

Or, "Hooray, we've landed in the pudding again!"

Sorry, just joshing. I'll address your other points later.

[Guest]

I don't understand the question about Minmus. I don't think you can hit the recover button from Minmus. Anyway, I hope you see where I'm going with this. I don't want to see recovery costs so high that it makes career mode impossible, just a little added incentive to pay attention to where you are landing when returning from bodies other than Kerbin. Also, landing on target on bodies with atmospheres is very difficult. It would be nice to get a reward for successfully landing on a predetermined target.

[Red Iron Crown]

I don't understand the question about Minmus.

It's a joke, he's poking a bit of fun at your misspelling of "desert" as "dessert", and Minmus is supposedly made of ice cream.

Of course, like any joke it gets less funny when explained.

[KerbMav]

I don't understand the question about Minmus.

You wrote "dessert" instead of "desert".

[Guest]

Oh yeah, the Minmus ice cream thing flew right over my head.

[softweir]

Also, the achievement popup takes away from the purity and immersion of the flying experience, why not just have it be counted at the end of the mission like science? Perhaps you can right click on a certain module(antenna?) to be informed of the status of current achievements, like check on science is now.

That *is* an issue, albeit a small one. I'll be roleplaying it as "phone home, report our activities and get confirmation that our business partners will be paying up!

With a game like KSP immediacy is important. Nothing causes ragequit so well as a player designing, building and flying for an hour and only on return discovering that somewhere along the line he left out a crucial step and isn't getting paid the full amount! Imagine you landed a probe, but forgot to unfurl the comms antennae? Not fun.

[WeirdCulture]

Imagine you landed a probe, but forgot to unfurl the comms antennae? Not fun.

Space is a hard business