Quality of Life Improvements for Contracts

[WanderingKid]

Couldn't seem to find a thread about this, but there's a number of quality of life improvements I'd love to see made to the contracts interface.

1) Filters

I'd like to be able to simply filter out certain contracts. Just have them not even accepted by the administration team for review by Gene.

Examples:

Anything regarding being in Kerbin Atmosphere.

Anything under 75k in Funds.

Anything in Duna SOI.

(More complex) Any parts test outside Kerbin LKO worth less than 100k in Funds.

2) Sorting/Grouping

It'd be great if I could simply sort the contracts. Say, group all satellite contracts together, or everything in Duna SOI together. Would save me a lot of random scrolling around when I'm trying to figure out what to group up together for a mission profile.

Even grouping under a header in the lists would be helpful, though that's the next step after sorting.

3) Permanent Decline

It'd be nice if there was a third option to permanently decline a mission type. I am never going to test some of these parts, ever, I'm not rescuing Kerbals anymore in Kerbin SOI, and I really have no intention on sending a manned mission back to Mun to plant a flag.

A permanent declination of these types of contracts (Ex: No more MK16 parachute tests in Kerbin Atmo) would be just lovely. It would remove my need to continuously decline the same mission which repeatedly pops up (Save kerbal, no. Save kerbal, no. Save Kerbal, no. Test Mk16 parachute, No. Save Kerbal, No. click click click click)

4) Explore contracts no longer take up 3* spaces.

Contracts appear to be limited at 15 in number, total. 4 1*, 4 2*, and 7 3*. Having Explore missions take up those slots seems counterproductive, especially when launch windows are part of the concern and you're trying to build up funds (read: 3* are your best choice) to send said mission.

5) Remove contracts that cost more than they pay/impossible contracts

This has been brought up elsewhere, but removing parts tests that return less than the part purchase seems an obvious no brainer removal. As does impossible contracts, like scans on Gilly that are too high.

6) Have contracts more in line with their * requests.

An example: I'm staring at a contract to test a Mk16 parachute in flight on Kerbin, and this particular game has been in solar orbit. This being a 1* contract I'd expect, but it's 2*s, coughs up a whopping 800 funds, and is simply not in line with what I'd expect at that level, considering right next to it is Minmus Temperature Scans.

The entire contract matrix would need to be reviewed for #6 though.

[AbacusWizard]

Sounds good to me. I like the contract system overall but it gets really tedious clicking "no, I don't want that contract; show me another" over and over and over again. It would also be nice if there were a "decline all currently displayed contracts and refresh the list" button.

[nholzric]

Contracts, particularly parts testing, are good ways to earn science. I know there's a thread concerned about science from contracts swamping science from experiments - not something I'm concerned about but a reasonable discussion to have - but just because a contract doesn't pay back as many funds as it costs doesn't automatically make it worthless.

I had a contract to put up a 10 person space station with a lab around Kerbin for ~60k funds. Maybe someone could do that for less funds, but I couldn't. I took the contract anyway because I wanted a station in Kerbin orbit (plus whatever science it was worth).

Sorting and filtering would be great features though. I think those two features would also reduce the need for "permanent decline" and without being so permanent.

[regex]

All of these suggestions are awesome. Additionally, I would suggest creating contracts per celestial body and having each celestial body comprise a "tab" of contracts for easy filtering. "Hrm... What's available for Duna today?" would be a much better way to play this game.

[dryer_lint]

1) Filters

Yes, please. I NEVER do in-flight contracts, they're just annoying.

2) Sorting/Grouping

Sounds good.

3) Permanent Decline

Isn't this part of filters?

4) Explore contracts no longer take up 3* spaces.

Not sure if I understand what you're trying to say, but it sounds good to me.

5) Remove contracts that cost more than they pay/impossible contracts

Yes. Just yes

6) Have contracts more in line with their * requests.

I agree- the "prestige" makes zero sense sometimes.