Sign in to follow this  
Col_Jessep

Upgrading the Space Center with Reputation. Good idea?

Reputation for Space Center Upgrades?  

6 members have voted

  1. 1. Reputation for Space Center Upgrades?

    • Good idea.
      1
    • I like how it is now.
      0
    • I'm undecided.
      0
    • Cats should rule Kerbin!
      5


Recommended Posts

I was playing career (shocker, I know...) on hard and it felt really grindy. Paying for the rockets is easy but upgrading the Space Center takes forever.

So I set the money gain to 200%. Now every challenge to build small and cheap rockets is gone. I want my cake and eat it! :P

What if we would pay for the Space Center upgrades with reputation?

We could still have the challenge to build very efficient rockets and small monetary payouts without turning the building upgrades into a huge grind. It would even be kinda realistic. When a space program is doing well it would be easy to use its good reputation to get funds for a new building. It would make reputation useful and more than a theoretical currency.

Please share your thoughts and opinions. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Half and half maybe? For example, instead of paying 6 million kreds for a Level 3 R&D, it may cost 3 million kreds and 400 reputation.

Reputation is useless as it is now, except for strategy trading.

There is the fundraising strategy, that's true, but IMO it doesn't yield enough cash for reputation even at high commitment rate.

And cats WILL rule Kerbin, that's painfully obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Half and half maybe? For example, instead of paying 6 million kreds for a Level 3 R&D, it may cost 3 million kreds and 400 reputation.

Reputation is useless as it is now, except for strategy trading.

There is the fundraising strategy, that's true, but IMO it doesn't yield enough cash for reputation even at high commitment rate.

And cats WILL rule Kerbin, that's painfully obvious.

wait, I was under the impression that certain mission types only became available at certain levels of reputation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say having a crazy high reputation could earn you discounts in almost everything that costs money, but not BE money. You shouldn't be able to spend reputation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I say having a crazy high reputation could earn you discounts in almost everything that costs money, but not BE money. You shouldn't be able to spend reputation.

Well, you can already turn rep into money and even go negative by doing so I believe. (Haven't used it yet.)

PS: I see cats are very popular... =3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What difference either it money or reputation if player gets both of them at the same time, doing same things? Or it's done under impression that with reputation it would be easier... But it depends not on currency, but on price.

I'd even agree with deleting science and reputation from the game in it's current state and game won't lose anything, if experiments would bring money instead of science as well as researches were made for money.

Edited by ddenis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though I agree it would be odd to spend rep like money I also think it's a good idea. Rep doesn't do much at the moment and personally I only collect it to eventually convert it into science or cash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What difference either it money or reputation if player gets both of them at the same time, doing same things? Or it's done under impression that with reputation it would be easier... But it depends not on currency, but on price.

My idea was to make building rockets harder (or easier for new players) without adding grind to upgrading your space center facilities. Atm, if you want to upgrade R&D to make use of docking ports you will need over a million kerb bucks. That's the equivalent of 90 satellite missions on hard. If you fly missions to the moons it's slightly better but still very grindy.

I don't think it's unreasonable if players want docking ports, proper ladders and larger solar panels before they go interplanetary. And it would certainly be nice to have kerbals with EVA capability and some navigation support like conics. The only way to get those things atm is:

a) to grind missions for many, many hours;

B) to cheese money by leaving satellites in orbit or stranding a kerbal on flag-planting duty.

Both are less than ideal options.

Moving building upgrades to reputation means you can customize how much grind you want for building upgrades without interference for the rocket building part. You can have money pay-out at 50% and reputation at 200%. This forces you to build economic space ships but allows you to research all the quality of life stuff like conics, docking ports and RAM jets in a reasonable amount of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My idea was to make building rockets harder (or easier for new players) without adding grind to upgrading your space center facilities. Atm, if you want to upgrade R&D to make use of docking ports you will need over a million kerb bucks. That's the equivalent of 90 satellite missions on hard. If you fly missions to the moons it's slightly better but still very grindy.

What do you have contract rewards set at? My average Sat mission runs ~100k if you include advances, on hard, around Kerbin, and cost ~8k per launch. Same launcher can do Mun/Minmus at 120-150k a piece too. Usually can get a few missions complete off the same launch.

I'm not understanding why you're finding it taking so many satellites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the admin building gets balanced you would just do rep for funds, and buildings are just too darned costly. This sounds more like a bandaid fix for a long term problem.

I think also that it's simply a mistake for default hard to change building prices at all. The current

60% contract funds 60% science 200% building costs

is probably more "hard but fun" as

20% contract funds 60% science 50% building cost.

Which kind of implies buildings just cost too much period on any difficulty... I think anyone who plays on hard says that rocket cost is negligible.

Edited by Greep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My idea was to make building rockets harder (or easier for new players) without adding grind to upgrading your space center facilities. Atm, if you want to upgrade R&D to make use of docking ports you will need over a million kerb bucks. That's the equivalent of 90 satellite missions on hard. If you fly missions to the moons it's slightly better but still very grindy.

I don't think it's unreasonable if players want docking ports, proper ladders and larger solar panels before they go interplanetary. And it would certainly be nice to have kerbals with EVA capability and some navigation support like conics. The only way to get those things atm is:

a) to grind missions for many, many hours;

B) to cheese money by leaving satellites in orbit or stranding a kerbal on flag-planting duty.

Both are less than ideal options.

Moving building upgrades to reputation means you can customize how much grind you want for building upgrades without interference for the rocket building part. You can have money pay-out at 50% and reputation at 200%. This forces you to build economic space ships but allows you to research all the quality of life stuff like conics, docking ports and RAM jets in a reasonable amount of time.

What if instead of upgrading buildings for reputation a separate settings for building prices would be added? Isn't it better solution for "not grinding"?

Because changing one currency on another, which you would also have to grind - isn't a good solution.

And your solution to set "money pay-out at 50% and reputation at 200%" is a way of adding separate settings for building prices, but done in a bad way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you have contract rewards set at? My average Sat mission runs ~100k if you include advances, on hard, around Kerbin, and cost ~8k per launch. Same launcher can do Mun/Minmus at 120-150k a piece too. Usually can get a few missions complete off the same launch.
Hard and a satellite contract has a payout of 13k or was it "science around Kerbin"? I didn't really look into it after I noticed how much building upgrade costs. If I have to repeat a mission several times for small progress that's grind to me. I play KSP to relax, not to have a second job. I want to land on Tylo and fly a spaceplane to Laythe, not hang out in Kerbin SOI for kerb bucks. ;P
What if instead of upgrading buildings for reputation a separate settings for building prices would be added? Isn't it better solution for "not grinding"?

Because changing one currency on another, which you would also have to grind - isn't a good solution.

And your solution to set "money pay-out at 50% and reputation at 200%" is a way of adding separate settings for building prices, but done in a bad way.

Whatever removes the grind works for me. Right now "hard" is just as easy as - "normal", it just takes longer and makes the game boring. It's not challenging in any way, just repetitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this