Sandbox misconceptions?

[GoSlash27]

On 3/29/2016 at 2:58 PM, regex said:

Over the years here I've seen many people on the forums (unironically) claim that playing Sandbox mode precludes goals, planning, and efficiency.  Is it because having everything available reduces all your design problems to "MOAR BOOSTERS"?  Is it a lack of personal goals in the game?  Do you feel there is no impetus to explore concepts, techniques, and places without artificial signposts and point rewards?  Do you feel like personal restrictions aren't enough?  Do you feel the need for some sort of gated progression?

I generally have no problems building efficiently using personal restrictions and following a plan to meet a goal I've set when playing in Sandbox mode, and I'm curious why you feel otherwise?

I wouldn't say that sandbox "precludes" such things, but it definitely makes them more cumbersome. I *could* keep a list of which parts I am allowed to use, how large/ heavy my launchers are allowed to be, and how much money I am allowed to spend... but why would I want to do that when career mode does it for me?

I enjoy playing career mode because it is more challenging than sandbox. Once I have "beaten" career mode (unlocked everything and made it economically self- sustaining), I lose interest and start a new career. So in that sense, yes... I *do* feel like personal restrictions aren't enough and I prefer (not "need") a gated progression.

Best,
-Slashy

 

[Tw1]

Now I've had a chance to stop and read through this thread a bit more, I'm going to reply to a few things, and contribute some more. 

On 31/03/2016 at 0:54 AM, bonyetty said:

Like most, it seems, of the KSP pre career old timers I prefer sandbox

-Snip-

Career mode to me is a game mechanic that has been done many times before and this is the primary reason I predominantly play sandbox.

Exactly. My feels exactly. 

What first I loved about KSP was how authentic everything felt, how much effort went into making it seem like you were actually doing things with real spacecraft in real space. A lot of effort continues to go into this with the reformed aerodynamics, and new heat system. 

My expectations were high. Career mode was expected to bring the non-flightsim aspects of the game to life in much the same way. We'd seen what was possible through mods like mapsat and graphotron.

The tacked on point scoring system of science sorely disappointed.

On 30/03/2016 at 10:51 AM, DoToH said:

Man, I want to play that career.

Me too! 

Add some value to maintaining and operating science stations and bases, maybe a simple, easy life support mechanism (tied to ISRU) for an ongoing maintenance need, make tourism stations and bases a thing, and tie tourist contracts to that, then add to planets something to explore, science zones which blur into each other and overlap, with some random variation per save, and reasons to stay on the surface and explore... 

That would be a perfect game.

On 31/03/2016 at 6:44 AM, JohnnyPanzer said:

I very much believe that choosing sandbox or career (no matter the game) gameplay often boils down to a fundamentally different view on what makes a game a game.

I'm one of those people who gets no pleasure out of winning or beating challenges. 

Another reason I enjoy sandboxing so much is because I tend to roleplay all my games, regardless of them being roleplaying games or not.  

Exactly. I'm here for the experience. Not the points. I like games where you're telling a story to yourself. (Sometimes, such stories get shared as fanfiction.) If I want points counting, I could play candy crush. 

On 30/03/2016 at 1:14 AM, HebaruSan said:

-Snip (a point about how real life space administrators jobs would be pretty stressful)-

I don't think the bureaucratic aspects are what anyone's really asking for though. All the bookkeeping, generating of porkchop plots, taking stock of parts, investigating public opinion,  filing payments, etc, should be automated by the computer. It then can report back to you with  a graph or spreadsheet or two, to make it clear where your space program is failing, and where you're doing well. This sort of thing would be a much better indicator of progress and success to me than collecting points and ticking of contracts. 

The external politics can be abstracted away. Some people out there, some nebulous group of "sponsors" (Could be Government, or corporate, or crowd source, whatever you imagine,) could be funding you based on what you return in terms of science, or tourism, or even just for the coolness of it all.  Maybe you could get a bit more specific, with something like strategies being used to court more specific  sponsors. It would be a lot like contracts, except the other way around.

The focus should stay on doing space stuff though, with the player playing roles of mission planner, engineer, pilot/navigator, and astronaut. 

On 29/03/2016 at 10:41 AM, DoToH said:

Once we are used to play wiith our own goals and restrictions, they have more sense than career mode. And they fit better to our playstyle.  Thats why many of us don't like the career mode. Our self impossed rules have more sense to us.

Looking through the thread, seems to me that the fans of the current career mode like that it gives goals, a sense of achievement, and limitations which push them into clever engineering solutions, and limit them into a natural progression from first rockets to space colonies. 

Most of us non-fans of career want these too. We just find the way the current career works to be arbitrary, immersion breaking, and inadequate. 

When we say career is "limiting", it's not about how we can't just build to our heart's content, and fly wherever, (Though a sandbox mode should always be there for that purpose,) It's about how much it limits the direction we can take our space programs. In current career mode, you get told what to do. "Move 3 kerbals here, click on this part there, briefly place a satellite there,". We don't want to be told what to do, we want  rules, and data which we can use to weigh up strategies, and set out our own paths.     

They can fine tune the features all they like, but the fundamentals will still be broken.  My hope is for an eventual KSP 1&1/2, "Serous space program", where they use the many excellent systems they've built so far to create a new "Serous mode". A remix of career along the lines of what we're talking about here. 

Plus, a career mode based around sustaining an economic, productive space program could avoid the running out of things to do problem which the current "unlock the parts, grind the 'science' , complete the KSC" one now has.

Edited April 2, 2016 by Tw1

[regex]

 

2 hours ago, GoSlash27 said:

I enjoy playing career mode because it is more challenging than sandbox. Once I have "beaten" career mode (unlocked everything and made it economically self- sustaining), I lose interest and start a new career. So in that sense, yes... I *do* feel like personal restrictions aren't enough and I prefer (not "need") a gated progression.

Well, in a sense you do "need" the gated progression because it keeps you interested in the game, right?  That's not a bad thing; it's a mechanic that you find engaging.

[Gojira1000]

I like me some progression mechanics - they work for me and are enjoyable, so I'm pretty much career-only, outside having a sandbox game save for testing/doing YouTube things

[regex]

2 hours ago, Tw1 said:

They can fine tune the features all they like, but the fundamentals will still be broken.  My hope is for an eventual KSP 1&1/2, "Serous space program", where they use the many excellent systems they've built so far to create a new "Serous mode". A remix of career along the lines of what we're talking about here.

Unfortunately I believe we're going to have to use mods to do it since Squad have pretty much saddled themselves with a sidequest system.  KSP will never be a "light management sim" because the mechanic will always focus on grinding/accumulating fat lucre, not on managing limited resources.

Fortunately, those mods seem to be in the works.  I have high hopes for BROKE.

Is it ... April Fools?  Is that why we're now in the Lounge?  I hope so, this is very much a thread about KSP in general...

E: ahahaha!  They got me, I actually reported my OP...  Sneaky mods...

Edited April 1, 2016 by regex

[monstah]

Yeah, I just created myself a "Louge" topic here...

Anyway, I do play "Career" more often than Sandbox, but I agree with all shortcomings pointed in here. Like 5th Horseman, tho, I like to have some framework that feels like a "game" to play a game. I I'm an oldtimer, too, and I loved sandbox when it was the only mode available, but now I play it more as a concept planning tool than as a game in itself.

I'd love to play the career proposed by Regex and others, here. KCT and USI-LS, on their own, already add A WHOLE LOT to the experience. I didn't install Strategia, but it did seem interesting. BROKE, whick one is that?

[steve_v]

34 minutes ago, regex said:

Squad have pretty much saddled themselves with a sidequest system.

Bah, here I was thinking about how to explain the problems I see with career mode, and you go and sum it up in a one-liner.

Edited April 1, 2016 by steve_v

[regex]

6 minutes ago, monstah said:

BROKE, whick one is that?

A @magico13 production:

 

[monstah]

What the hell, I just read your comment above mine and didn't realize your avatar had changed, thought it was a new user.

Thanks!

[GoSlash27]

On 3/30/2016 at 1:18 PM, regex said:

(EDIT: It should also be noted that contracts are pretty much the only way to gather massed funds quickly and thus I am saddled with them.  World's Firsts simply cannot sustain a space program, at least the way I play.)

*snip*

On 3/30/2016 at 1:18 PM, regex said:

I usually play Realism Overhaul

"Well, there's your problem."

Yeah, the stock contract system and "world's first" awards won't work and play well with R.O. If you're going pure stock, then it's a totally different story. In that situation, the "world's first" records are plenty to keep the program rolling, so there's no grinding involved and the contracts are no longer a side- quest system.

Now... I'm not the type of guy to advocate getting a mod in most cases, but in this case I kinda have to. I don't see how the stock contract system could ever work with both stock *and* R.O.

Best,
-Slashy

 

 

[regex]

6 minutes ago, GoSlash27 said:

"Well, there's your problem."

Well played, sir.

[suicidejunkie]

On 3/31/2016 at 2:44 PM, JohnnyPanzer said:

As someone sitting on the other side of the fence, I actually agree. I very much believe that choosing sandbox or career (no matter the game) gameplay often boils down to a fundamentally different view on what makes a game a game.

I'm one of those people who gets no pleasure out of winning or beating challenges. I honestly have no interest in challenges just for the sake of being challenging. Sure, I can challenge my self during sandbox play, but it's never anything but a side effect of me doing whatever the hell I feel like doing, and that particular thing just happening to be hard to perform. But once I beat a challenge, I never go "Wooo! I made it!", instead I just go "Wow, that was fun in the end. Too bad it was so much work" and then I move on. This is also why I never play competitive games. I don't care enough about winning to really try, and if I do win something it wont merit more than a "meh" from me.

Another reason I enjoy sandboxing so much is because I tend to roleplay all my games, regardless of them being roleplaying games or not. This leads me to save scum a lot, since I want the "story" I'm writing in my head to move in a particular direction, and the less artificial challenges and restrictions, the less I have to re-load my games. A funny side effect of this is that roughly half the time I'll reload because I felt something went to smoothly. I wanted that Mün mission to be a bust, but somehow I managed to stick the landing in the very last moment, so now I have to reload and tell the story the "right way".

In short, structure and artificial limitations makes it harder for me to enjoy my games, and instead turns the game into something I enjoy about as much as I enjoy my actual job.

I find this interesting.  It all seemed very familiar, except for the differing conclusion regarding career vs sandbox.

I think it might be that lately I've just used career mode to generate rescuees, show a tech progression, and track a score in terms of kerbal XP and milestones.

 

I haven't had a need to explicitly force accidents to make things 'interesting' for the kerbals, since I've just been flying wild frontier space cowboy designs and eschewing probe cores (AIs are not allowed to be wired to something with reaction drives (anti-skynet pilot's union rule), and other than the Fantastic Four all crew are rescued from space).  Current lander tips over every time, except on minmus flats, but I haven't bothered to redesign it.  All mun landings are instead simply flown by engineers who can KAS it around into its own unique rescue ship, and Minmus is small enough to stand the ship back up as needed.

Space cowboy management + TAC + KAS keeps things lively enough for me (Only 5 dead kerbals despite at least 15 'incidents'), and even on hard, funding isn't an issue; rescues and milestones and stage recovery fund the whole program.

[The Optimist]

My favorite Kerbal is the RC-L01. He isn't very talkative, but he does his job really well and doesn't complain much.

[regex]

1 hour ago, The Optimist said:

My favorite Kerbal is the RC-L01. He isn't very talkative, but he does his job really well and doesn't complain much.

I like that guy too, solid and dependable.

[HorusKol]

On 01/04/2016 at 10:51 PM, Tw1 said:

When we say career is "limiting", it's not about how we can't just build to our heart's content, and fly wherever, (Though a sandbox mode should always be there for that purpose,) It's about how much it limits the direction we can take our space programs. In current career mode, you get told what to do. "Move 3 kerbals here, click on this part there, briefly place a satellite there,". We don't want to be told what to do, we want  rules, and data which we can use to weigh up strategies, and set out our own paths.     

But career doesn't force you to do any of that - it says "Move 3 kerbals, and get some funds and reputation for it" - it says "Click on this part there, and get some science for it".

There is always the choice not to to do all the contracts offered. In fact, many of the contracts can be avoided (cue arguments of "well, what's the point").
 

Granted - I do feel there is something missing from career mode - that's why I use RemoteTech, and get contract packs, and the like. Maybe there needs to be a fourth mode added - either rename the current career mode to "contracts" or something, and bring in a new "space programme" mode... but then, that could easily end up being a highly restrictive sequence of launches and tests and missions...

 

End of the day - there are many ways to play KSP - in fact, many ways to play each mode. The only wrong way to play KSP is to not have fun when doing so.

[SorryDave]

Sandbox mode was the only one available when I started and I played it a lot. I only played the career mods a little to try the releases as they evolved. Things are different for me now.

I now play sandbox mode to try new designs or occasional missions. The saves are often deleted after.

My longest games are career mode because I like having a history of development. The games end up being my longest games where I do all my role playing.

[tater]

It would be cool to have a configurable sandbox mode, I suppose. You could turn elements of "career" or "science" on and off, perhaps in a fine-grained way. It's entirely outside the current scope of game (and I've gotten so much value for dollar out of KSP I'd happily pay for an add-on), but I'd love to see AI added---both as kerbals who can do stuff autonomously (even just as eye-candy to have them work on stations, or do EVAs just to add "life"), and possible AI agencies (i.e.: the ability to do a "space race" kind of mode).

[Jetski]

On 3/29/2016 at 5:02 PM, Randazzo said:

The first game of KSP I ever loaded up was in Sandbox, and I was hopelessly lost. So, I went to career mode. It provided at least some guidance and part progression. Sandbox has felt hollow to me ever since.

The basic difference in my perception is that Career mode feels like better tools are being earned, versus Sandbox where everything is just handed to you.

There's some psychological stuff there, I'm sure.

This^^

[Tw1]

7 hours ago, Jetski said:

This^^

True, despite the problems it presents, the tech tree does work ok as a beginner mode. 

When I first started KSP, Stuff was harder. We had a lot less informative mods, SAS could only lock your ship's orientation, (and needed to be turned off if you wanted to steer),  and parts where so wobbly, building a successful launch vehicle required clever structural engineering. There are new challenges, with aerodynamics and heat management, but IDK.

I recall feeling like I "earned it" when greater skill made it possible to lift bigger and bigger things into the sky. Maybe that's not the same for new guys nowdays? 

Even as you play past the tech tree, don't you find you keep coming up with better, and more useful spacecraft designs? That's technological evolution for real.

Personally, I find tracking through screenshots a decent way to track the history. 

10 hours ago, tater said:

It would be cool to have a configurable sandbox mode, I suppose. You could turn elements of "career" or "science" on and off. 

Yeah, and unless stuff's changed, it should be possible. Some features of career could be added and removed by clever save editing.  If it was more of a pick and choose thing rather than discrete modes, that could be cool. 

Tricky because features interact, could make balancing tricky, but maybe self- tuning with difficulty setting is just the price you must pay for full customisation. 

 

On 01/04/2016 at 1:26 AM, regex said:

Unfortunately I believe we're going to have to use mods to do it since Squad have pretty much saddled themselves with a sidequest system.  

But maybe if they pitched it as a whole new mode, aimed at the serious roleplayer, rather than a big backdown on what they've been doing so far... Maybe? Hope? Optimism? 

TBH, I think you're probably right, Squad making this mode is not something I consider very likely to happen. 

13 hours ago, HorusKol said:

But career doesn't force you to do any of that - it says "Move 3 kerbals, and get some funds and reputation for it" - it says "Click on this part there, and get some science for it".

There is always the choice not to to do all the contracts offered. In fact, many of the contracts can be avoided (cue arguments of "well, what's the point").

True, but  it's not so much about picking and choosing, I want the onus to asses and plan be on me. I want reasons to do such things beyond being told, and being paid. 

Contracts are currently the only way that many activities a space program does are included in the game. 

With a contract, some external group has spotted an opportunity, or seen a need, and presumably will get some benefits from when the work is complete. 

You just get a payout for working towards some else's ends. It makes you a service provider like Space X, rather than an exploration leader like NASA..

Apart from remembering if you've collected the science points from some area, there's not really anything you can use to make informed plans of your own. 

Yeah, you can be smart, and maybe adapt a ship to do some task you want to do as well as fulfil a contract, but it should be the other way around. Your own plans should be what the game is assessing, not your ability to follow orders.

Collaboration and helping out other organisations is a realistic thing for space programs to do. Universities and scientific organisations do request experiments and contribute instruments in real life space projects. But the player should get the chance to be involved in the exploration too, more than just being the implementation guy. 

It's getting better, with things like the coming need for communication networks, but we'll see. That, like the insta-scans for resources may end up feeling like just another means to an end, rather than goal of its own, and presumably won't be ongoing like contracts are.

Edited April 3, 2016 by Tw1

[HorusKol]

21 hours ago, Tw1 said:

True, but  it's not so much about picking and choosing, I want the onus to asses and plan be on me. I want reasons to do such things beyond being told, and being paid. 

Contracts are currently the only way that many activities a space program does are included in the game. 

With a contract, some external group has spotted an opportunity, or seen a need, and presumably will get some benefits from when the work is complete. 

You just get a payout for working towards some else's ends. It makes you a service provider like Space X, rather than an exploration leader like NASA..

...

Collaboration and helping out other organisations is a realistic thing for space programs to do. Universities and scientific organisations do request experiments and contribute instruments in real life space projects. But the player should get the chance to be involved in the exploration too, more than just being the implementation guy. 

It's getting better, with things like the coming need for communication networks, but we'll see. That, like the insta-scans for resources may end up feeling like just another means to an end, rather than goal of its own, and presumably won't be ongoing like contracts are.

From my view - NASA isn't much of a leader... especially not these days. It has always been subject to the direction of the government, and has been reliant on contracts with the Army, Air Force and Navy, as well as private contracts, to bolster it's public funding. Even with things like Voyager and Pioneer - a lot of those projects had a huge amount of input from outside NASA proper.

That said, you can play the career game how you say - for example, I have my own progression I want to follow - and I pick the contracts that support that, so I am setting my own agenda. I do use Remote Tech and ScanSat, and the contract packs - I just figure that contracts for setting up communications networks are more like the guvmint providing funds to advance the space program rather than a private contract.

I've not read much about the stock inclusion of communication networks or scans - I'm not sure how they will differ from the mods, but I like these mods and their restrictions/caveats/behaviours.

[samstarman5]

On 4/2/2016 at 11:16 AM, tater said:

It would be cool to have a configurable sandbox mode, I suppose. You could turn elements of "career" or "science" on and off, perhaps in a fine-grained way. It's entirely outside the current scope of game (and I've gotten so much value for dollar out of KSP I'd happily pay for an add-on), but I'd love to see AI added---both as kerbals who can do stuff autonomously (even just as eye-candy to have them work on stations, or do EVAs just to add "life"), and possible AI agencies (i.e.: the ability to do a "space race" kind of mode).

You may want to tinker with the custom settings for Science and Career modes more. You can actually start off with all the science you need to unlock everything, and make your space program entirely about funds.  I enjoy running a space program run by deficit spending, where the nation's budget is spent on the space program like the US's budget is spent on its military's.  True, I could do that by just playing Science mode, but with this I still leave a bit of a chance that with enough 'oopsies' and 'uh-ohs,' I could face some serious challenges and have to trim a few things from a rocket just to try to get a decent payday in order to continue.

It also allows me the opportunities to perform some missions independent from contracts that I would like to perform.  Such as the other day I suddenly got the burning desire to tinker with the Juno jet engine and see what it could do.  While I did use it to achieve a couple of test contracts, I decided to build a craft with Junos and took it on an intercontinental flight. There wasn't even any science reward to be had because of previous landings in the destination area, but it was still an enjoyable experience.  Part of my point here is I don't see Career Mode being all that binding or singular in nature.  It comes with a lot of flexibility to make it more to your style, and there really is no one way to act upon it.  And it really has gotten a lot of love from Squad from its inception, as when it was originally introduced it really was a lemon.  But the improvements and additions to it really flesh it out to be a fun mode of play.  Although, I will still hop over to a Sandbox save I have and tinker a bit there now and then.  Sometimes you just want to stretch yourself and try some really wacky ideas.  I will confess to being quite the fan of Danny2462.

Anyway, as to the latter bit of your post, Squad has stated there is zero plan for NPC space agencies, and so far that is likely to remain so. But there was also zero plan for aeroflight once upon a time, and that got changed. It really is a matter of what the game and engine is capable of doing, and that is getting a big upgrade here shortly.  While I am not all for NPC space agencies(but I am also not totally against them), I am rather for building self-sustaining bases on the Mun and maybe Duna to launch missions from, at least late in the career game(or, of course, at your leisure with sandbox).  I would quite enjoy the opportunity to launch a mission from the Mun and use Kerbin's gravity well to kick it off towards another planet, as opposed to having to always fight with Kerbin's gravity well in order to get anywhere.  I know there are mods for that(Duna Space Program I believe is the name of one), but with mining now being a stock feature, I feel there is more to look forward to with the stock game. And setting up other launch complexes seems to be a very possible next step.

[Van Disaster]

I've still never got more than a few nodes into the science tree before I've got bored & gone back to planning epic missions in sandbox - it's never appealed to me once since it arrived, although I guess I'd already run several sandbox games by the time it turned up & thought "what is this strange pointless restriction on my time". Originally it seemed to be a tutorial leading you into spaceflight, but now career seems to be an overly complicated version of that tutorial.

These days I mainly make aircraft though, given the continuing lack of things to keep you there once you actually get somewhere else. And I still can't build my giant airbase on Laythe if I don't start the game there ( admittedly that is partly my fault for not writing the mod to let me do it, still... )

[KerikBalm]

I switched to career mode when it came out, and now I've "finished" career mode in the sense that all the tech is unlocked, all facilities upgrades, and I have over 12 million spare funds.

I play it as sandbox now, somewhat like a city or empire building game, I'm just establishing bases/colonies over the solar system (added OPM, haven't launched to anything past jool yet though). Getting stuff to orbit is really cheap with my standard SSTO designs, but I'm often spending more funds on SSTO rockets because they are faster. I'll agree somewhat with regex here about stock cartoon sizes... its far too easy to get into orbit.... the tonnage of stuff I can throw into orbit via SSTO is rather ridiculous. I find the stock ISRU has taken a lot of the challenge out too... or maybe it has taken the tedium out of sending refueling missions... before I had ISRU, I was using turboramjets to ssto fuel tankers to orbit to resupply my Mun fuel depot (only did that mission twice, thankfully)... but the end result is that I've now got about 500 tons of stuff in Duna orbit... My main "duna station", with all craft currently docked with it clocks in at over 330 tons...

My main limitation now is simply crew... I had to hire more crew and do a training mission, just because all my crew were occupied. I train all crew to lvl 3 (mun, minmus flags, short jaunt outside of kerbin's SOI)... 3 went to Moho and are returning (+1 from a rescue mission from moho orbit. Thankfully, they will be back soon-ish), 3 are on their way to Eve (will pick up one from a rescue mission around gilly), 6 are at Duna awaiting a return window, and another 6 are on their way to Jool...

I'll have no suitable crew around, or will need to spend millions, when the Sarnus/Urlum/Nedion/Plock windows open up... and those transfer times are so long... I probably won't return those crew in this save/ that is their last mission. The crew hiring and training is now the most tedious part for me... Doing the same mun-minmus-solar orbit mission over and over to have a competent crew to send on interplanetary missions is tedious. I need more rescue contracts - picking someone up from moho orbit is a free lvl 3 kerbal. Picking someone up from Gilly orbit (they can eva down to plant a flag very easily)... means 15XP for gilly, 7.5 for eve orbit, 6 for solar orbit, 2 for kerbin orbit... one trip to Mun and they are lvl 4... still it takes years for them to get back.

I still do a fair amount of playing around in snadbox too, especially with HyperEdit... and other mods

Duna with oceans and an oxygen rich somewhat thicker atmosphere? yes please!

1 way  to tekto? why not?

 

Testing a cargoplane that can load/unload rovers, making a "ssto module" rover

(*Laythe only SSTO.. can't do it on kerbin, forgot to upload pics of it making orbit on laythe, but it did)

Career mode doesn't direct one to do any of that...

[mrclucks]

I have been playing for about a year now but I am still learning some of the intermediate and alot of the advance tips and tricks.  Sandbox is typically where I will test out my new knowledge and skills and is also where I'll build up something or another.  If I install remote tech, then I'll build up the kerbin system and then go interplanetary before sending all my kerbals to remote locations.  Sometimes I just start making mini bases and adjusting with ore refineries, or space planes.  

Then there is career.  I usually start with Max science, minimize fundsrisk and double funds rewards. Then I'll do a few missions to get a landing and return on both minmus and the mun(usually the same mission) so I can get some decent science.  I like the whole unlocking the tech tree as well as some of the contracts that come through but I'm not a fan of having to worry much about funds.  I tend to play semi efficient and semi brute force, which is why I build with about 50% more dv in each stage at least.

 

No one should give hate to any of the modes because every one has their own play style and skill level which challenges people at different levels

[Mastikator]

One benefit of Career and Science Career is that it gives you an in-game tangible reason to actually visit Dres at least once.