Search the Community

Pay to Play (or get ready for the consequences) Download from Github or via CKAN Tested on KSP 1.8.1, 1.9.1, 1.10.1 and 1.11.1 Dependency - Module Manager HARD RECOMMENDATION FOR KSP 1.11+ - KSP Recall Recommendation - KCT 1.4.8.0+ (14 Jul 2020) Compatible with: Kerbalism (kerbalism's engine reliability is removed) Procedural Parts (SRBs) EngineIgnitor (ignitions number is handled by P2P) ReStock+, SETI-Rebalance and SETI-ProbeParts (configs for engines, including proc. HRB), Bluedog DB, Tantares/LV, Knes, Coatl. Licence - MIT What is this? This is a brand new mod to make you pay for reusing vehicles above just refueling them. Had a ride on your "Falcon" or SSTO? - Pay for the maintenance or the next flight will likely have a bad outcome. The changing cost of the engines also causes maintenance take time in case of using KCT - what a nice interaction. The gameplay 1. Add an engine provided with an EngineDecay MODULE to your craft 2. Choose rated burn duration and number of ignitions (if the engine needs them) 3. Start the flight 4. Your engines stop working if they fail or run out of ignitions. There is a 1% chance that the engine fails before it has been burnt for the "rated time". For more detail see a .docx in GameData/PayToPlay folder 5. Recover the craft. If you do not have KCT/use normal recovery, you get no recovery funds for the the engines that have been running (cmon, use KCT xD) 6. KCT recovery only! Press "maintenance" button while editing the craft to have your engine repaired (changing ignitions number, rated duration or some of the procedural SRB stats will make the engine repaired too) 7. You get NO refunds for used engines since 1.4.0. Why? Features Engines fail if they run for too long Engines have limited ignitions "Rated burn time" and number of ignitions can be configured while editing a vessel These tweaks increase engine's cost and mass Ignitions have configurable chances to be wasted and to cause a failure Configurable chanse of engine destruction on failure Speical treatment for SRBs (failures only on ignitions), see how to turn it on [here](https://github.com/DarthPointer/PayToPlay/wiki/What-do-those-numbers-in-the-configs-mean%3F#srbs-and-other-engines-with-no-failures-while-burning) or provided configs Ignition failure, failure on ignition and destruction on failure probability depend on reliability progress Procedural S/HRBs have separate reliability progress for "models". In order to gain usage experience on further recovery, press "Set as a New Model" button (if it is present) Configurable thrust and diameter margins for procedural S/HRB "models" Recovered engines improve "reliability", reducing early failure chance It makes sense to have 4-6 burn tests before using a recently developed engine Configurable oncoming failure warnings and switchable autoshutdown on warning Replace-or-Maintenance system Some sort of engine stats configuration Sibling Reliability Progress Yet a bit of words The mod is extremelly new (started on Apr 20, 2020). Get ready to report bugs and suggest features. Only stock, MH, SETI engines and ProceduralParts SRBs are provided with configs. Use your brain and hands to write copypaste the configs for all the other engines. Examples can be found in GameData/PayToPlay/Support/Stock. A lot of thanks to kerbalism's contributors as their open source has been the documentation for me! Mod logo by @Avira Latest Version Changes v1.5.6.4 Fixed: Excessive optimization was causing bugs and NREs when placing symmetrized engine parts. Previous Versions Changelog

Hi, Ive seen this concept discussed in other forums, mods and stock alike, but it always seems to be buried pages deep and then over shadowed by whatever other topics have evolved by that point. Forgive me if I am resurrecting an idea that has already been discussed, dismissed, or for which a solution already exists. I like games with logistics management aspects. Games where you need to carefully collect or manage resources to unlock new capabilities. The addition of Funds and Science to career mode are a great start but as has been discussed in many forums only really limiting early game. Once I can start science spamming Minmus or leaving probes hanging in orbit to collect those 'perform x at y' contracts I dont have to worry about either again. That makes me sad. And yes I know I could exercise self restraint and just not do those cheaty/spammy things but if that was the way I was going to live Id be 30lbs lighter and not playing games in the first place. Im imagining a solution where those techniques some people call 'cheaty' get turned into actions called 'necessary'. Science is already covered by tech tree mods and science unlock scaling and I cant think of any better ways to handle that. Im proposing a solution for Funds, a user scalable, periodic funds deduction that is modeled as the operating cost for running a space program. If I had the knowledge or the skill to make a mod for KSP I would do it like this: (default values or rationalization) -Period fund deduction calculated from factors below (monthly) -Cost of KSC buildings and levels (balanced against running out of money after 1 month in the game not doing anything and then scaling by each building level so a maxed out centre costs enough that you have to run a few lucrative contracts per year to maintain) -Cost of kerbals (10% of hiring cost * lv with some additional costs for kerbals on missions) -Cost of active vehicles (10% launch cost with some additional cost for distance from kerbin) This would force me, and other(s) who think(s) like me, to not rely on warping for science in the MPL, carefully consider the benefit of leaving probes throughout the system to cash in on random perform x in orbit of y contracts and generally taking mission cost and payback into consideration. I am fully aware this may not be everyones cup of tea. I can imagine very few people would enjoy coming back from a 7 year long mission to find out the space centre has been repossessed by KerbBank and turned into a housing complex. But that is the beauty of a mod solution, especially one that is user scalable. Your Thoughts?