Crowzone

Hehe I just finished converting something similar to a google docs spreadsheet.

Oh I know - I have crunched the numbers on several different mission plans ( I try to plan two or three missions ahead ) I never claimed your way was a Bad way at all

I didn\'t mean there was only ONE way to do it - there\'s plenty sure, but there is one clearly Best way to do it. I\'m also going to suggest that the game works better when you don\'t post your stuff to the forums - it allows people to take advantage of information they shouldn\'t have (ie know how other people accomplished missions) it is better when you just email your submission.

Bummer, then it seems there\'s really only ONE good option for turn one missions I mean, it would make sense to have a salvage value on it since it would make the decision about when to take salvage 1 more interesting. I asked because the unmanned pod has a salvage value, so it seemed like an oversight.

Question: Is it on purpose that command pods aren\'t salvageable? (Set to 0%) Seems that would be a likely salvagable object.

Will be playing - Reading up now.

I just had another thought regarding the costs of Tech Levels. What if, during a campaign, you made it such that once a tech level was purchased by someone - the next turn, the price of development for that tech level was halved, as were all tech levels below it. This would mean that it would allow newcomers an easier time 'catching up' to front runners, and so reduction of the payouts for earlier missions wouldn\'t hurt them as much. It also makes a sort of logical sense - in the real world, once someone develops or engineers a technology, many other companies have an easier time reproducing said technology on their own. A company trying to stay on the bleeding edge of technology would pay that price, and more conservative companies could reap the benefits of being behind a turn but paying somewhat less. If multiple companies bought a tech level the same turn they would all pay the original price, and would be considered simultaneous discoveries. This reduction in cost would happen EVERY time a new tech level was purchased: After Tech 1 is purchased, at 1000, it becomes only 500 from that turn on. Once Tech 2 is purchased at 2000, it becomes 1000, and Tech 1 is halved again (as it is even more trivial now) to 250 Then Tech 3 comes along at 4000, it becomes 2000, and Tech 2 is now 500, and Tech 1 becomes 125 (And so on and so forth) If you played it out this way, you could PROBABLY increase the original costs of some of the earlier tech levels, though I feel like the later tech levels are priced appropriately.

No, you have to buy the techs in order.. What you may not have discovered yet is that you CAN stage without decouplers by using your SRBs to intentionally overheat the one below it causing it to blow up - this is a trick that we all learned in the early campaign. IE - Put your capsule on top of a stack of 3 SRBs, and set stages for each SRB so they fire one at a time. Then as the first SRB is about to run out of fuel (You have to time it properly) activate the 2nd SRB which forces the first SRB to overheat and explode, effectively removing that dead weight.

I really enjoyed my run in this campaign but I\'m officially withdrawing until the next one. I agree with a lot of the assessments here - and feel that after my previous setback I\'ve fallen into a kind of middle ground with no hope of pulling out of. So one of you guys hurry up and land on the Mun and win this thing My number one concern / reason for withdrawing is the cost/reward ratio - This particular campaign is working alright, but the way that rewards are paid out encourage ultra slim, fly by the seat of your pants, craft, and though there is definite skill involved in that, it means that there is very little differentiation between players as everyone ends up settled into one or two design choices for most missions. This kind of uber efficiency has a place, but my own enjoyment comes more from building neat ships to get the jobs done, not necessarily the cheapest one. This became exaggerated rapidly in this campaign after tech 4 which allowed people to drop the one craft requirement (ZOx) which drove ship prices down both in the cost of the component AND in the reduced weight not having to have that component meant. Basically once a few players got Tech4 they could accomplish new missions at much cheaper costs than people still at tech 3, and therefore drive rewards down for new missions. My suggestion for pushing the campaign away from this always build the cheapest possible craft would be to make missions slightly more complicated. The ZOx requirement was a good idea and step in the correct direction, and should be added onto. For Example: Included for ALL missions - a 1.5x multiplier if the mission is a Campaign First Depreciation for repeat missions is factored at 1 - 0.n X Reward where n=number of times a company has repeated the mission (0 for first time) Fly to a minimum altitude of 70,000m (Reward 7500) - Include Multistage Design (Bonus 1000) - Detach some kind of atmospheric probe at apogee (Bonus 5000) - Return to Kerbin with a max G-Force experience of < 2.5 (Bonus 2500) By including Optional objectives the missions become more diverse, and could be included in such a way that it is very unlikely that some could be accomplished right away (Example above is the atmospheric probe bonus - at low tech ranges you may not have access to a probe, therefore this mission would be valuable to revisit later for the 5000 bonus) **Note: Numbers are arbitrary in this example. **Edit: Accidentally submitted before finished.

Dammit Alchemist! You ruined my plan! I figured everyone seemed to be skipping that mission so I intentionally tried to build an expensive craft to do it and thus give us a cash cow mission, and you had to come along and do it cheap.

Not relevant to this particular campaign, but I feel like the decoupler and especially the radial decoupler costs are a bit out of whack. For now, they\'re fine because we\'ve all been working with them, but it does seem to force some weird design choices.

Turn Submitted, I have more fun writing mini press releases then anything else

I see, didn\'t see the condemmed module on the part list for tech 4.

I\'m confused as to some part costs and whatnot - I don\'t think there has been any funny business, but I\'m not sure how DonLorenzo\'s craft could cost only 2575 last turn when the the two required parts, (ZOxygen main tank, and Command Pod) total to be 2500 alone? Did I miss something where it was decided those cost less or could be reused? If so a LOT of my ships would have price adjustments...

Submitted, sorry for lateness.