'Leadership Initiative' Strategy- does it work?

[FlyingPete]

I've been a fan of career mode since it was created. I like the ability to train up my Kerbals, manage costs and progress scientifically. However, I'm not so keen on having to launch yet another satellite or cart tourists around, just to be able to do the missions I want to do.

I've noticed that the latest update introduced the 'leadership initiative' strategy, which gives you increased science, funds and reputation rewards for milestone achievements and field science, in exchange for reduced payout on contracts. I'd see this as budget allocation from the Central Kerbin Government to the space program.

This seems good for an exploration-driven space program as there's then advantages to pushing out into the solar system, exploring strange new worlds, seeking out new science etc etc. If a convenient and well-paid contract comes up, obviously I'd take it for a bit of extra cash.The question is, does it work as intended?

[Streetwind]

I've never tried it, but as I've never had any problems with admnistrative strategies not working, I would be highly surprised if this one was buggy.

One thing to keep in mind though: reducing contract payout can have a much bigger effect than you think, because it reduces the total payout, not your profit margin. If The entire contract gives you 100k, and you spend 60k performing that mission, then your profit margin is 40k... but if you take a 20% funds payout reduction, then it reduces the initial 100k by 20%. So your profit margin is actually halved.

The result of this is that if you really commit deeply to this strategy, and/or maybe even combine it with increased difficulty settings that reduce your overall money income, you will run into cases where the contracts simply no longer pay you enough to make any profit at all. Some contract types can be done very cheaply with reusable spaceplanes, and you can make profit off of them at extremely low payouts, but others require a certain investment of money no matter what you try. Those will be the first to become unprofitable.

At least this works both ways - your increased payouts from milestones also scale with the total amounts, regardless of how much you invest into actually doing them. But just understand that you could possibly be surprised how quickly contracts cease to be an option altogether.

 

Edited December 15, 2015 by Streetwind

[Taki117]

For a strategy to "Work" you have to complete contracts.  It takes a percentage of the rewards for a contract (based on how much you pay into the strategy) and converts it to the appropriate reward (In this case it would take some of the funds for contracts and convert them into science and rep.  If this is a Mod Strategy (the KSP wiki shows nothing about "Leadership Initiative") then you might want to look at the thread of the mod that adds it.

[KerikBalm]

Not to answer the OP, but rather Taki117:

Its a new strategy in 1.05, and the wiki hasn't been updated.

If I recall, it reduces the contract payout, but increases the world's first and record payouts.

So basically this encourages you to set your own goals for what records you want to set, and to ignore contracts.

 

For my part, I use SSTOs exclusively for launching all payloads now, so I'm fairly certain I could make a profit on contracts with this thing in place... particularly now that I'm at a point where I don't really need to launch new vessels. I've pretty much got a fully developed space transport system that can take a kerbal anywhere in the kerbin system, fully reusable (exception: Eve need a new lander sent each time... haven't developed a Tylo lander yet, it may end up being disposable too... depending on what I find the resource distribution of tylo to be).... and with ISRU, my SSTOs can come back with more fuel than they started with.

Edited December 15, 2015 by KerikBalm

[BlkBltChemie]

13 hours ago, Streetwind said:

The result of this is that if you really commit deeply to this strategy, and/or maybe even combine it with increased difficulty settings that reduce your overall money income, you will run into cases where the contracts simply no longer pay you enough to make any profit at all.

 

This is a very good point.  I currently have Patents Licensing (science to funds) at 85% and Leadership Initiative at 60%.  I actually lose science when I complete a contract now.  Not a big deal since the tech tree is complete and I'm just exploring anyway at this point.  I'm really only able to profit on contracts (in terms of funds) because I have the Patents Licensing active.  So as Streetwind said, if you commit heavily to this, contracts can become burdensome and you really have to focus on the self-driven exploration.  (By the way, FlyingPete, I really liked your analogy of this strategy being an allocation to the space program for exploration!)

 

EDIT:  I also wanted to add that having Leadership Initiative active conflicts with Aggressive Negotiations - you can't have both active at the same time.

Edited December 16, 2015 by BlkBltChemie

[Geschosskopf]

13 hours ago, Streetwind said:

I've never tried it, but as I've never had any problems with admnistrative strategies not working, I would be highly surprised if this one was buggy.

One thing to keep in mind though: reducing contract payout can have a much bigger effect than you think, because it reduces the total payout, not your profit margin. If The entire contract gives you 100k, and you spend 60k performing that mission, then your profit margin is 40k... but if you take a 20% funds payout reduction, then it reduces the initial 100k by 20%. So your profit margin is actually halved.

The result of this is that if you really commit deeply to this strategy, and/or maybe even combine it with increased difficulty settings that reduce your overall money income, you will run into cases where the contracts simply no longer pay you enough to make any profit at all. Some contract types can be done very cheaply with reusable spaceplanes, and you can make profit off of them at extremely low payouts, but others require a certain investment of money no matter what you try. Those will be the first to become unprofitable.

At least this works both ways - your increased payouts from milestones also scale with the total amounts, regardless of how much you invest into actually doing them. But just understand that you could possibly be surprised how quickly contracts cease to be an option altogether.

I personally don't see this strategy as something you should pursue for very long.  It might be useful in certain situations early in the game but it's got severe limits on long-term viability.  There aren't many milestones in total, none of them are repeatable, and they don't pay as much as contracts (especially doing multiple contracts per mission) even when buffed by this strategy.  So if you keep doing this strategy very long, the continual need to go to new places to get income will soon exceed the limits of your technology and bank account.  Plus, eventually you'll run out of new places to go and thus sources of income.

So, if you use this strategy, do so only very early in the game then cancel it.  I can see this strategy working best if you're playing hard mode and can't afford to upgrade mission control with all your higher funding priorities.  Thus, you can't do many contracts anyway and are going to have trouble enough just getting to space, the route to which is paved with many distance, speed, and altitude milestones.  But once you get the essential parts of KSC upgraded and have adequate rocket parts to do Mun and Minmus landings, I think you should junk this strategy and focus on contracts, which is where the real and infinite source of money is, even close to home.