Repurpose Pilots as Commanders

[More Boosters]

I initially mentioned this in the thread for making pilots useful past early career but I believe the changes suggested are radical enough to merit their own discussion.

My suggestion is to repurpose Pilots as Commanders. I always saw the pilot role as more of a team leader role with the most daring and adventurous Kerbals taking the job. They train the nuggets and inspire even the most experienced colleagues. They could have the following effects I guess (on top of what they already get). (cumulative)

Level 0: --- (default Level 0 pilot skills only)

Level 1: The entire crew gets 100% more XP. (so 200%) This effect doesn't stack across multiple commanders and the one with the higher level is picked instead.

Level 2: The commander wears a bulkier EVA suit with even more fuel, stronger thrusters and stronger lights. This suit has a communotron 18 (or whatever that first one is) installed, which can transfer EVA reports right away from the field. The suit also has limited electric charge that needs to be replenished (automatically or via refueling if Squad changes it so) at the vehicle.

Level 3: The entire crew gets 100% more XP. (so 300%)

Level 4: The entire crew becomes 50% better at their tasks. Scientists process data more quickly and engineers make ISRU go even faster.

Level 5: The entire crew gets 100% more EXP. (so 400%)

Having these AND pilot abilities would not give them too much utility in my opinion, as node holds are easy to buy from various probe cores or the avionics gizmo.

Oh, and I'm not sure if the XP bonuses should apply to themselves, so a bit torn there.

Discuss.

Edited November 8, 2015 by More Boosters

[passinglurker]

the idea of the pilots granting a boon to their fellow kerbal is good and worth investigating, but the finer details of your idea are honestly not very good it feels like there hasn't been a lot of thought put into this and most of it is filler about magically granting more EVA fuel for some reason...

[Coyote27]

Why not have Commanders as a fourth profession (and maybe make Valentina one)? I think that'd be better. Pilots are still useful even if they're not as useful as you want them to be right now. Commanders as a fourth profession would also be useful, but take nothing away from anyone else.

[More Boosters]

the idea of the pilots granting a boon to their fellow kerbal is good and worth investigating, but the finer details of your idea are honestly not very good it feels like there hasn't been a lot of thought put into this and most of it is filler about magically granting more EVA fuel for some reason...

Well ironically I don't think enough thought went to this bit of criticism. Why exactly do you think so? The EVA fuel thing is indeed kinda magic but that's only supposed to reinforce their role as field leaders. It's also not "most of it", only two levels have more EVA fuel alongside the XP bit which I don't think is insignificant enough to be considered filler. Any other parts you have an issue with?

Why not have Commanders as a fourth profession (and maybe make Valentina one)? I think that'd be better. Pilots are still useful even if they're not as useful as you want them to be right now. Commanders as a fourth profession would also be useful, but take nothing away from anyone else.

Well, these commanders are to retain the pilot abilities, and yes, pilots are not useful one bit. There are far too many substitutes for them and they're usually a waste of a seat.

[TMS]

The whole XP implementation was originally based around the idea that additional XP gave magical bonuses to ISP and other fantastical nonsense. The community generally (and rightfully) shot down that idea to pieces. Thus, it's likely that extra EVA capacity would make no intuitive sense.

However, the idea of a player class that gives bonuses to other classes is a staple of RPG. It's a reasonable idea, even if it wouldn't have much active use in an eventual multiplayer game. The problem is that KSPs implementation of classes and bonuses is pretty lacklustre and, regrettably, based around the removal or hobbling of existing features, rather than the addition of new ones. It's difficult to see how a Commander class could really benefit other classes as they currently exist, other than an XP boost.

[More Boosters]

The whole XP implementation was originally based around the idea that additional XP gave magical bonuses to ISP and other fantastical nonsense. The community generally (and rightfully) shot down that idea to pieces. Thus, it's likely that extra EVA capacity would make no intuitive sense.

However, the idea of a player class that gives bonuses to other classes is a staple of RPG. It's a reasonable idea, even if it wouldn't have much active use in an eventual multiplayer game. The problem is that KSPs implementation of classes and bonuses is pretty lacklustre and, regrettably, based around the removal or hobbling of existing features, rather than the addition of new ones. It's difficult to see how a Commander class could really benefit other classes as they currently exist, other than an XP boost.

Well, the XP boost on its own would be significant enough. Training rookies more quickly late game is surely valuable to have. But yeah I'll admit to being hard pressed to find something on top of that to buff teammates, hence EVA fuel.

[passinglurker]

Well ironically I don't think enough thought went to this bit of criticism. Why exactly do you think so? The EVA fuel thing is indeed kinda magic but that's only supposed to reinforce their role as field leaders. It's also not "most of it", only two levels have more EVA fuel alongside the XP bit which I don't think is insignificant enough to be considered filler. Any other parts you have an issue with?

The weight of showing one's work falls on the suggester not the critic similarly I take issue with your poll and it's "well I don't see you coming up with any better idea's" attitude. I'll come up with a counterproposal when I'm good and ready but what I do then doesn't change that your own detailed proposal won't fly now. In the mean time the EVA matter should be dropped entirely it'll never get past the realism kids.

[More Boosters]

The weight of showing one's work falls on the suggester not the critic similarly I take issue with your poll and it's "well I don't see you coming up with any better idea's" attitude. I'll come up with a counterproposal when I'm good and ready but what I do then doesn't change that your own detailed proposal won't fly now. In the mean time the EVA matter should be dropped entirely it'll never get past the realism kids.

I didn't ask you to come up with a better idea. I asked you why exactly you felt the proposal fell short, which you did not explain. How exactly does the poll convey that attitude? There's an option for just saying yes and another for coming up with a better idea. I'd see your point if all the options that don't accept it right away demanded a better idea, but that simply isn't the case and you can simply say that you don't like it at all. And I suppose they could get visually different suits clearly holding more EVA fuel? I mean how do the "realism kids" cope with the fact that it is infinite in the first place?

But yeah, the only part I'm unsure about is the EVA fuel bit, so that does require more thinking.

[Snark]

I have to say that I'm really not a fan of the more-EVA-fuel idea. Kerbal EVA packs are already ridiculously overpowered. A kerbal standing on Minmus can go home without a ship. In a year and a half of playing a lot of KSP and trying every permutation I can think of, I've never once had a situation where I ran out of EVA fuel (except in the specific cases where I was deliberately pushing the envelope to see what sort of ludicrous feats the EVA would allow). So extending the EVA limits doesn't seem like a win to me.

The XP idea is interesting, but I think it imbalances things too much. XP are hard-won by going to new places, which is the central challenge in KSP, so handing out bonuses seems to me to cheapen the experience (no pun intended).

That said, having a commander role as support for crewmates does feel appealing. What if, instead of giving an XP bonus as the OP described, the pilots get a commander functionality like this:

When a pilot is present, any crew members who are lower level than the pilot have their effective level raised to the pilot's. This is just a temporary buff, there's no actual experience there, and it lasts only as long as they and the pilot are crewmates. The UI could indicate the powerup by showing the buffed crew members with the usual gold stars for their "real" level, plus dim gray stars for the extra.

(Perhaps the powerup would extend for some small radius from the pilot... would seem silly if an engineer goes EVA to repack a chute and can't do it because he lost the powerup the moment he stepped outside.)

This gives players a reason to send a pilot along whenever they go somewhere new, but it doesn't spoil game balance by allowing players to get to higher levels without actually visiting lots of places.

Thoughts?

[More Boosters]

I have to say that I'm really not a fan of the more-EVA-fuel idea. Kerbal EVA packs are already ridiculously overpowered. A kerbal standing on Minmus can go home without a ship. In a year and a half of playing a lot of KSP and trying every permutation I can think of, I've never once had a situation where I ran out of EVA fuel (except in the specific cases where I was deliberately pushing the envelope to see what sort of ludicrous feats the EVA would allow). So extending the EVA limits doesn't seem like a win to me.

The XP idea is interesting, but I think it imbalances things too much. XP are hard-won by going to new places, which is the central challenge in KSP, so handing out bonuses seems to me to cheapen the experience (no pun intended).

That said, having a commander role as support for crewmates does feel appealing. What if, instead of giving an XP bonus as the OP described, the pilots get a commander functionality like this:

When a pilot is present, any crew members who are lower level than the pilot have their effective level raised to the pilot's. This is just a temporary buff, there's no actual experience there, and it lasts only as long as they and the pilot are crewmates. The UI could indicate the powerup by showing the buffed crew members with the usual gold stars for their "real" level, plus dim gray stars for the extra.

(Perhaps the powerup would extend for some small radius from the pilot... would seem silly if an engineer goes EVA to repack a chute and can't do it because he lost the powerup the moment he stepped outside.)

This gives players a reason to send a pilot along whenever they go somewhere new, but it doesn't spoil game balance by allowing players to get to higher levels without actually visiting lots of places.

Thoughts?

It's practically the same thing. The difference is that my version makes the commander a trainer who would eventually be done with a set of nuggets and move on to the rest, while your version simply suggests that we keep one Level 5 pilot around at each flight (same thing). XP as it is isn't "hard earned", it's a grind and you'll have to go through it anyway at first with the pilot. This would only make it faster, not instant unlike your proposal. It also doesn't make intuitive sense to me as knowledge is accumulated through human experience and then passed on; if everyone had to start from scratch we would not be half as advanced as we are right now. So while it is interesting, are you sure your way doesn't cheapen the XP mechanic just as much?

And well since everyone seems to be against the EVA fuel thing I guess I'll just remove it. Perhaps Squad will balance that one day (maybe make the fuel not infinite?). What do you guys think about the commander's special EVA suit though?

Edited November 8, 2015 by More Boosters

[Pthigrivi]

Yeah man I really like the premise, though the bonuses are probably a little high. I could see 25%, 50%, 100% and 200% total boost for each level respectively.

[Snark]

It's practically the same thing. The difference is that my version makes the commander a trainer who would eventually be done with a set of nuggets and move on to the rest, while your version simply suggests that we keep one Level 5 pilot around at each flight (same thing).

A few thoughts around that:

Discoverability issues: Both my own experience playing KSP, and long observation of folks' posts in the "Gameplay Questions" forum, show that KSP is full of interesting, important stuff that it's very easy for a player to just completely miss. I was playing for over a year before I found out about the magic proportional RCS thrust in fine control mode, for example. Heck, I found out about the "F" key in the VAB editor just the other day. If a commander adds experience to the other kerbals while there, and then that experience lasts afterwards: it seems like it would be an easy thing for players to miss. How do they know that that's happening? (Since kerbals don't get their XP until they return home to Kerbin.) When they do get the XP, how do they know that something unusual happened? And what about the sense of regret when you get back and then later find out that "gosh, I should have sent a commander along, I would have gotten all this additional XP"?

Having an insta-buff that works while the commander is there means that you get the benefit whether you're aware of the feature or not. The fact that the extra experience levels show up graphically in the crew display gives you a visual cue that something's going on. It's a very simple mechanic and easy to understand.

Also: Everything about KSP professions thus far is pretty much "instant gratification": having a kerbal with a particular profession at a particular level gets you something right now. This applies to pilot SAS skill; scientist research rate in labs and experiment-reset ability; engineer mining rate and ability to fix things. Having an insta-buff for commanders seems to fit in well with that. "If I look at my crew right now, I can see what they can do right now." An XP boost means a delayed gratification: no benefit at all until you get back to Kerbin. Any maybe even longer than that, if it means that this mission didn't actually generate enough XP to give the crew members a level, even with the boost.

It also seems complicated to figure out and to explain to the player. Does the commander's XP boost apply to himself? If so, it makes easy-mode, too easy to get to high levels cheaply. But if it applies to other kerbals and not himself, does that mean that the commander can boost people to higher levels than himself? That seems wrong. But if you start adding rules to prevent that from happening, now you end up with a complex situation that requires paragraphs to explain to people.

And it also makes it so that kerbals get more experience from the same locations. You can get to level N by visiting fewer locations than you can in the current game. That's why I consider it unbalancing.

If you think XP is a "grind" and the game should be adjusted to make it easier for kerbals to get to higher levels, then that's a valid point-- but I think that's a different topic; would be better addressed by a rebalancing of XP-versus-level-versus-places-visited overall, rather than something specific to commander ability.

XP as it is isn't "hard earned", it's a grind and you'll have to go through it anyway at first with the pilot. This would only make it faster, not instant unlike your proposal.

But my proposal is "XP-level neutral"; it's not rebalancing the game. You still have to go to the same places to get to level N with my proposed solution as without it. If you want to rebalance the game, fine, but I think it's best to keep the topics separate.

And I think instant is pretty important for players not to get confused. "If I do X then thing Y happens right away" is easy to notice and understand. "I do X, and at some much later time Y happens" is much less obvious and it's easy for people not to realize that the two are tied together.

It also doesn't make intuitive sense to me as knowledge is accumulated through human experience and then passed on

Well, we're not talking reality here, we're talking gameplay. In reality, the fact that there's a good commander on board doesn't make me a smarter or experienced engineer or scientist, in any way. That applies to either solution.

So while it is interesting, are you sure your way doesn't cheapen the XP mechanic just as much?

I would say not. Under my proposal,

• To get to level N, you still have to visit the same number of planets as before. That's pretty important. "Get to Duna for the first time" is a hard achievement that a player should be proud of. If it takes a mission to Duna to get to level N, then I don't like the idea of adding a feature that makes it possible to get to level N without going to Duna. It takes away the player's sense of accomplishment.
  
• On the other hand: if I can successfully send a mission with these kerbals to Duna, it's just an administrative detail that I didn't send those kerbals instead. I don't think I'm giving up anything significant by letting the kerbal that went share that with others.
  
• Also, consider how/why someone would make use of this feature. On what sort of mission would I be sending a high-level commander with a crew of rookies where it really matters what level they are? Probably an interplanetary mission where I'm exploring planets. And if I do that very much, pretty soon the crewmates will rack up the experience on their own, so they'll get "real" levels on their return.
  

Basically, what I'd like to see is a feature that is dead-simple to use, has minimal discovery issues, doesn't hand out any freebies to make the game easier to play than it is now, but does take out some administrative scut-work that doesn't significantly add to the challenge of the game. I'm fine if that's not the particular option that I suggested ...am just interested in hearing other folks' ideas.

And well since everyone seems to be against the EVA fuel thing I guess I'll just remove it. Perhaps Squad will balance that one day (maybe make the fuel not infinite?). What do you guys think about the commander's special EVA suit though?

The overpowered EVA suits have long bugged me, and I'd be against anything that makes anybody's EVA better.

And also... I never use even a third of the EVA fuel that's already there, so that adding more to the commander would be a non-event for me. It's already possible for a kerbal in munar orbit (or on the surface of Minmus!) to go home without a ship, which is ridiculous; I don't want to enable going to Duna in a suit.

So I'd vote no to EVA.

That said, having a cool-looking suit for commanders would be neat , but there's already another feature suggestion discussing profession- and level-specific suits.

[More Boosters]

Yeah man I really like the premise, though the bonuses are probably a little high. I could see 25%, 50%, 100% and 200% total boost for each level respectively.

Well, wanted to keep them integers.

@Snark

That is... Quite detailed. I'll think over my response.

[Snark]

@Snark

That is... Quite detailed. I'll think over my response.

lol... yeah, sorry about that, I do have a tendency to throw out "walls of text."

In any case, it's all good-- you raise good points and I'm not trying to dismiss them, just presenting an alternate viewpoint.

Kudos for coming up with the idea of "pilots provide some sort of buff to crewmates", which is an original thought that I didn't see anyone else suggest in the lengthy how-can-we-make-pilots-useful thread that led here. That's a really useful idea that could lead to all sorts of interesting possibilities, regardless of how the details work out.

So far, all the suggestions I've seen boil down to basically three things I've seen that I like (these aren't necessarily mutually exclusive):

1. pilots are the only kerbals that can remote-control probe cores (my initial suggestion on the aforementioned thread)

2. high skill levels for all classes give "sneak peeks" at higher-building-level functionality (e.g. high-level pilot can enable patched conics before you've upgraded the tracking station). This was proposed by someone in the thread, I love this idea.

3. Your idea for "pilots can buff crewmates somehow." The devil is in the details and the "somehow" needs to be worked out, but it's a great idea.

[passinglurker]

2. high skill levels for all classes give "sneak peeks" at higher-building-level functionality (e.g. high-level pilot can enable patched conics before you've upgraded the tracking station). This was proposed by someone in the thread, I love this idea.

I should point out in the case of patched conics the upper limit of what is practical is lvl2 otherwise getting far enough out to level up without them is easier said than done.

[More Boosters]

lol... yeah, sorry about that, I do have a tendency to throw out "walls of text."

In any case, it's all good-- you raise good points and I'm not trying to dismiss them, just presenting an alternate viewpoint.

That's all good, appreciate you putting thought and time into my idea.

-snip-

I hope this doesn't sound lazy but I'm... sold. See the problem is I've been using the Field Experience mod since forever and I didn't think about how my version would work out for all-stock players who have to wait until mission completion for this to work out. There's also the dilemma of do we give the commander super fast XP gain or do we make him fall behind the peers he is inspiring, and you do have a point in that after a nice little field trip with the commander, greenhorns will pick up on his experience just the same while not making complete fools out of themselves (I'm looking at you, engineers who can't repair rover wheels) during the trip.

There are a few details that need ironing out, namely in that who exactly is a part of the mission? Will he cast a radius in which rookies get their temporary level-up? Will he be able to command from inside/outside the ship and affect kerbals inside/outside just the same? I guess once you're sure on how you'd have this work out I could edit my OP to reflect that, it really does seem better the more I think about it. What would you replace level 4 with though? Unless we want that buff to stack further? I mean, sharing his level out already does have a similar effect and Level 4 is just a raw buff here.

And the big bulky EVA suit thing was mostly inspired by, oh you know, Gravity and The Martian; I wanted a visual identifier for the commander. I do personally think that EVA suits should come with a limited supply of electric charge and their fuel requiring physical refills, but that may be too much of a change just to accommodate my commander suit idea. I guess if those happened, then this would be in a good spot. Makes sense to me that the commander would get the best gizmo.

Edit for ninja:

I should point out in the case of patched conics the upper limit of what is practical is lvl2 otherwise getting far enough out to level up without them is easier said than done.

Good point. It's fairly easy to get there outside of those "I must spam science from Kerbin space until my eyes bleed" kind of "difficulty" settings anyway. Also, once you have those upgrades that's gone and done. Even scientists can produce science and sell it via those admin protocols.

Edited November 8, 2015 by More Boosters

[Sanic]

Yeah man I really like the premise, though the bonuses are probably a little high. I could see 25%, 50%, 100% and 200% total boost for each level respectively.

I totally agree.

[panzer1b]

Commanders, i like the idea, but leave pilots as is, add new class.

While we are at it, can we get admirals, captains, vehicle operators, gun crews, and a few foot soldiers?

Then i can have actually relistic kerbals to crew everything from capital ships to tanks to just run around with rifles

[KrazyKrl]

My 2 cents:

• 1 Star+ Commanders: Can "Field Promote" other Kerbals within 3m(EVA), or in-craft, up to the commander's star level. I.e. subordinate Kerbals do not need to return to Kerbin to "star up", but they must still gather EXP. (Commander must obviously return to Kerbin first. Commanders may not promote other mission commanders.)
  
• 2 Star Commanders: Grants all abilities otherwise granted from building upgrades to themself and any Kerbal within 3m(EVA)/in-craft. Patched Conics, Maneuver nodes, EVA, Flags, etc.
  
• 3 Star+ Commanders: Temporary ranking of Kerbals within 3m(EVA)/in-craft. Applies (Commanderlevel - 2) abilities to all Kerbals in range. Does not increase stuff like ISRU/Lab efficency. Only adds abilities like repack chutes/repair wheels if Kerbal is not high enough.
  
• 4 Star Commanders: Equipped with short-range radio. Maybe something like 5km. Also acts as a radio relay with range of 5km for any Kerbals/devices within 3m/in-craft.
  
• 5 Star Commanders: (Ideas?) I'm at a loss to what would be a good (and not broken) reward for 5 stars. Maybe Trajectories?

IMHO, piloting abilities like radial hold/prograde hold should be tied to the star of any Kerbal. Even engineers go to space. Maybe 0 star Kerbals have no "SAS", 1 stars have stab/pro/retro, 2 stars have everything.

Edited November 9, 2015 by KrazyKrl

[Pthigrivi]

Well, wanted to keep them integers.

Oh its intuitive, but the effect will be compounding. If the numbers are too high and you have pilots leveling pilots you could quickly end up with an easily abused mechanic.

[More Boosters]

Oh its intuitive, but the effect will be compounding. If the numbers are too high and you have pilots leveling pilots you could quickly end up with an easily abused mechanic.

Well I'm considering to switch to the mechanic Snark described above. That one seems to be a better idea.

[Pthigrivi]

Oh sorry man I didn't see your response. Yaaah... hm. Maybe I prefer your version? With an important caveat: I really think Kerbals should just automatically level up in flight. The whole return-to-kerbin requirement is a bit of a drag and hinders multi-world missions. For instance you could send a kerbal on a Jool 5 and they'd stay level 0 until they came home. That seems intuitively wrong, and I think encourages missions as one-offs and doesn't allow for more complicated missions. Its also a contributor to leveling grind. I haven't even noticed if this has been fixed but especially annoying was that you only actually received credit for the farthest you went on a mission--like if you left kerbin and landed on the Mun you'd get experience for landing, but not for reaching orbit or for orbiting the moon first, which means you'd have been better off sending that kerbal on 3 tedious repeat missions rather than one ambitious one.

If it were the case that kerbals leveled as they go, as I think they should, then your version would offer a lasting and important advantage that would also feel immediate and understandable.