Is this cheating?

[OddFunction]

So I noticed that if you have 1 satellite in orbit around a planet or moon, you can just keep canceling contracts until you get a 'Collect data around X' contract, then you just go to tracking station -> satellite -> collect data -> send -> collect $ -> repeat.

On one hand of course the only space agency on the planet is going to recieve repeated requests for data, and on the otherhand it definitely feels like you aren't supposed to earn money this fast.

Does anybody else have a thought on this?

[Fel]

The problem with business sims is that they're designed such that the player will always win; lacking any real competition or motive for the contracts, you just can't go bankrupt without really trying.

*Of course, the KSP Community has issues with the word "cheating" so good luck ;p*

Edited May 15, 2015 by Fel

[TimePeriod]

So, if NASA got a bounch of $$$ for taking a few snapshots off something in space while their probe was en route to another destination would that be considered cheating?

No, that's sound busyness models.

[theend3r]

Yes, it is. Cheating yourself out of fun. Plus if you want money/science there are faster ways to get them.

[Joonatan1998]

I don't think it really is cheating, but I usually avoid mass rejecting contracts.

If there are none that I like, I may reject some, but rejecting them until you get the most exploitable ones just ruins the game.

I think some tiny cost for rejecting contracts could make the game more fun. (something like 1-2 reputation?)

[KatzOhki]

Kind of, but its well enough in-universe that it doesn't really feel like abuse unless you repeatedly reject contracts to get the ones you want. I don't think anyone cares if you do it, but you could also just adjust your in-game currency by editing the save file.

[godefroi]

Not cheating if the contract happens to come up. Cheating if you cancel contracts until it comes up.

[Alshain]

In a single player game, if you have to ask if it is cheating, it is not.

[PrivateFlip]

How does it makes you feel? Personally, I don't think it was intended to work in this matter, so I would go for for the word "exploit".

[Fel]

So, if NASA got a bounch of $$$ for taking a few snapshots off something in space while their probe was en route to another destination would that be considered cheating?

No, that's sound busyness models.

Of course it would... because only a fool would pay money for photos, especially if those photos are under the "Government Data" section of copyright which grants free use.

In a real space program, the experiments that someone may want to run CAN piggyback on a sat, but you cannot teleport the NEW equipment to the sat to run the new experiments. Also, under international copyright law, if NASA cannot sell data from equipment placed on a sat for the sole purpose of collecting data for one company to another; even if both companies are asking for different data.

It's a game, defend it as a game, but don't claim it is anything like reality.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Fel

[TimePeriod]

Of course it would... because only a fool would pay money for photos, especially if those photos are under the "Government Data" section of copyright which grants free use.

In a real space program, the experiments that someone may want to run CAN piggyback on a sat, but you cannot teleport the NEW equipment to the sat to run the new experiments. Also, under international copyright law, if NASA cannot sell data from equipment placed on a sat for the sole purpose of collecting data for one company to another; even if both companies are asking for the same data.

It's a game, defend it as a game, but don't claim it is anything like reality.

So satellite photo's are useless, as only a fool would pay for them?

So, what do all the major company's which utilize satellites to draw maps on earth pay for? It costs something to put the satellite in space, so people are going to have to pay for its use.

EVERYTHING put in orbit, uses by ANYONE charges for it.

- Satellite images.

- Infrared photo's

- HD footage.

All of this, is charged money for.

Edited May 15, 2015 by TimePeriod

[Motokid600]

I've been under the impression the entire time that if you rejected contracts you take a rep hit.

[spaceBrezel]

I don't feel like its cheating because there are several agencies offering similar contracts. Im just sending data again for them.

However i dont like repetitive gameplay, maybe more contracts should be unable to decline so you are forced to play the objective.

Maybe -1 reputation after declining or specific contracts are only available once for every single agency.

Im guilty of declining at least a 100 missions.

[Renegrade]

How does it makes you feel? Personally, I don't think it was intended to work in this matter, so I would go for for the word "exploit".

I wouldn't call it an exploit. The payout is "small" (in KSP terms; I would have personally made it a lot smaller. The contracts vomit money on you like it's toxic waste and bad to have or some crap), it's limited to one per destination, and it's really trivial to do it 'properly' with a combined mission (ex - do a 'plant flag' and 'transmit data' set for a Mun landing together, etc), and there's a crapton of missions you can do with significantly higher payouts-per-time ratios.

(Personally, I would have designed contracts and funding entirely differently, involving expenses and monthly budgets and things..)

[SmallFatFetus]

If someone says "Yo NASA, if you point New Horizons at _____ on pluto and snap a pic for me i'll pay you some good $$$," that's not cheating is it? If the contract just pops up that's fine, but if you're cycling through looking for them, then you're exploiting the game.

[Fel]

So satellite photo's are useless, as only a fool would pay for them?

So, what do all the major company's which utilize satellites to draw maps on earth pay for? It costs something to put the satellite in space, so people are going to have to pay for its use.

EVERYTHING put in orbit, uses by ANYONE charges for it.

- Satellite images.

- Infrared photo's

- HD footage.

All of this, is charged money for.

Don't debate what is presented, only push new data to coverup the weakness of your argument.

"Government Data" is akin to "public domain." If NASA launches a sat with the intent of taking photos, those photos are FREE to USE regardless of commercial venture. (Now, NASA can charge distribution costs, as this data can range in the terrabytes worth; but they cannot restrict other people from using or distributing the data.)

This is copyright law.

NOW if a company puts an "experiment" (aka, a camera) on a sat, then the data from that experiment belongs to that company. NASA only LAUNCHED the Sat, but has no monetary gain, or ability to control, the data gained from the "experiment" (again, photos).

[TimePeriod]

Don't debate what is presented, only push new data to coverup the weakness of your argument.

"Government Data" is akin to "public domain." If NASA launches a sat with the intent of taking photos, those photos are FREE to USE regardless of commercial venture. (Now, NASA can charge distribution costs, as this data can range in the terrabytes worth; but they cannot restrict other people from using or distributing the data.)

This is copyright law.

NOW if a company puts an "experiment" (aka, a camera) on a sat, then the data from that experiment belongs to that company. NASA only LAUNCHED the Sat, but has no monetary gain, or ability to control, the data gained from the "experiment" (again, photos).

"Distribution costs" is the same as charging money for it.

Power company's charge more money for fee's and distribution rather then the power itself.

So does the banking sector, charging fee's for safekeeping your values, money transfers, cash withdrawls.

And your lawyers, they also charge money for starting a lawsuit.

Regardless how you choose to view it, regardless how much legal crap you throw in my face, no matter how much right you may be, it will not prevent NASA or anyone from making money off space photo's of any kind. No amount of internet arguments is going to prevent that. Where there is money to be made, money will be made.

(I'm only arguing because I'm waiting for my plane to finish its Kerbin-fly around)

Edited May 15, 2015 by TimePeriod

[Jonboy]

Not cheating. Just exploiting an obvious flaw in Squad's whole contract system.

[Fel]

"Distribution costs" is the same as charging money for it.

Power company's charge more money for fee's and distribution rather then the power itself.

So does the banking sector, charging fee's for safekeeping your values, money transfers, cash withdrawls.

And your lawyers, they also charge money for starting a lawsuit.

Regardless how you choose to view it, regardless how much legal crap you throw in my face, no matter how much right you may be, it will not prevent NASA or anyone from making money off space photo's of any kind. No amount of internet arguments is going to prevent that. Where there is money to be made, money will be made.

(I'm only arguing because I'm waiting for my plane to finish its Kerbin-fly around)

So, what you're saying is "I don't care or understand the law, thus am fighting to defend a major fault"

It doesn't matter how many words you throw at me, your argument isn't sound; distribution costs are minor and you CAN bring someone to court if they become major (it is "akin to public domain").

No "INTERNET ARGUMENT" is going to change that you're wrong either ;p

[Slam_Jones]

Peronally, I always thought that the "Gather science from X location" should be replaced with "Gather NEW science from X location." If there's no new science to be done at X location (given your current tech), then those contracts should NOT pop up. Basically, you only get those contracts when there is actual science to gather.

This would stop contract spam of this variety (theoretically) and would also help to point you to places you haven't gathered all the sceince from yet (oh, it's giving me a contract to get new science from Munar orbit: I must have missed something there)

To answer the question, though: Compared to opening your debug menu and auto-completing them (a tactic I may or may not have used in the past >.> ) it's not cheating at all. Definitely funded a lot of missions that way.

Edited May 15, 2015 by Slam_Jones

[Caelib]

If it feels like cheating to you, then it is. IMO, you are definitely manipulating the "system" because the contracts seem like they are designed with new craft in mind in terms of the reward for science/funds/reputation.

That being said, you should play KSP the way that makes you the most happy. The difficulty sliders are there to adapt the game to meet your level of ease/difficulty with any given area. If you're playing a mini-game with the contract system, then it might suit you better to use higher yields if the game feels too grindy and you feel the need to constantly be declining contracts to work-the-system.

[zarakon]

In a single player game, if you have to ask if it is cheating, it is not.

Or is it the other way around? If it feels like you're cheating, then you are

[RocketPilot573]

NOT cheating! This is literally the only way my career gets money... Literally... All other contracts are either dumb or not profitable. Sure, this may be cheating on "easy" mode, but once you turn the sliders down there is no other way of getting a profit.

[TimePeriod]

Peronally, I always thought that the "Gather science from X location" should be replaced with "Gather NEW science from X location." If there's no new science to be done at X location (given your current tech), then those contracts should NOT pop up. Basically, you only get those contracts when there is actual science to gather.

This would stop contract spam of this variety (theoretically) and would also help to point you to places you haven't gathered all the sceince from yet (oh, it's giving me a contract to get new science from Munar orbit: I must have missed something there)

Combined with some kind of map feature, (display what zones has not been explored) would make it a pretty decent feature.

[AbacusWizard]

I'm very fond of a system that allows repeated use of a craft to fulfill contracts, because it encourages building infrastructure. (One of my proudest achievements in version 0.25 was the Wayfarer Program--a small ion-drive science satellite in orbit around EVERY celestial body in the game.)

That being said, the very fact that repeatedly clicking the big red X on the list of available contracts is possible, let alone advantageous, is a big problem. In the current system, the player can (eventually) get any contract desired, but the interface makes it tedious to do so.

If we are "supposed to" be able to get any contract we want, then the interface ought to include, for instance, a "reject all these contracts and bring up a whole new list" button, or a "search for (i.e. generate) specific types of contracts" button, or a "give me only these types of contracts from now on" button.

If we are "supposed to" have access only to the contracts the RNG decides to give us, then there should be some sort of penalty for rejecting contracts, or an incentive for taking contracts unlike the ones we've already done.

IDEA #1: Instead of new contracts being generated when the player rejects (or completes) an existing one, new contracts are generated at semi-regular intervals as time passes. Old contracts that have not been accepted remain in the queue of available contracts, and after a while maybe some of them disappear (the deadline expired, or a hypothetical rival space agency did the job)... OR maybe the reward increases (the customer gets desperate and makes a better offer). Contracts that have been waiting for a long time pay more (maybe), so there is incentive to pick up old contracts that you've been dodging for a while, but there's also a possibility that the customer will give up, so it's not worth the risk to just fast-forward until the pay goes up.

IDEA #2: Diminishing returns. The first contract of a certain type pays a lot, the next of the same type pays a little less, then a little less, and so on. This way a player can't make much money in the long run by repeating the same mission over and over and over again, and would have to diversify and try a variety of contracts. Of course there are only so many types of contracts available, so if the player avoids a certain "played out" contract type for a long time, it should gradually "refresh" and start paying reasonable amounts again.