Some thoughts about colonization

[Codraroll]

I've mentioned this off-topic in so many threads now that I might as well make a new one, where it is actually on topic:

Basically, I'd like for the game to allow and encourage permanent settlements beyond Kerbin, with a functionality like the existing Kerbal Space Center. That is, bases that can be the start or end-point of a journey, where ships can be designed, crewed and launched, possibly also recovered. Establishing and upgrading these bases would be a major objective of gameplay, a motivational boost to help people take on the interplanetary hurdle, as well as a way to expand gameplay once interplanetary flight has been mastered.

 

Before suggesting a "how" of colonization, I'd like to elaborate on "why". While there are many legit and feasible ways to approach this issue, in order to find a viable solution the issue itself must be accurately described.

So, anyway. It has been established that most KSP players rarely, if ever, leave Kerbin and its moons, for a myriad of reasons. I think the three main ones are the high initial difficulty treshold, the psychological factor, and convenience. Some even whisper that this was the reason why trans-Joolian planets were never implemented: so few people even go beyond Duna that the new content would only benefit a tiny fraction of players.

Even after you've mastered landing on and returning from the Mun and Minmus, you have little idea of how to approach interplanetary transfers. You also need an unknown amount of fuel to go there, even more so if you plan on returning, and every attempt requires upwards of a solid hour of play time.

Then the psychology: Kerbin is home, if you can make it back to Kerbin you're safe, but there's a large and empty solar system out there, no rescue or return, all civilization is and will remain behind you. Going to the Mun and Minmus is fine, you can look back home right over your shoulder. But when Kerbin ceases to be even a speck in the distance, you don't know how far your fuel will get you, or whether the craft design is up for the task ahead, you truly feel far from the safety and comfort of home, and wonder if you'll ever find your way back. Besides, the game feels like it's giving you things to do, contracts to fulfill, all the time. At the start of the game, you do several missions and make immense progress over the span of a day. When timewarping your way to Minmus and back, you might skip a few weeks. Very little will have elapsed in that time. Going to Duna easily requires a year just to get the planets aligned, half a year of travel time, another year on Duna while the planets align again, and another half-year to return. While you know nothing will ever have changed on Kerbin, you still feel like you're being away for too long, that your in-game time could be better spent progressing your space program further.

Even when you overcome your fear and eventually master interplanetary travel, there's also the convenience factor: No matter how far you progress in the game, every flight will start off the KSC launchpad and runway, fighting your way out of Kerbin's atmosphere and gravity well. If your craft has a slight design issue that needs to be corrected, you're back to square one. For more complex journeys, you might even need to go through a multi-launch orbital assembly and fuelling process. Getting anywhere truly takes time.

 

And what lies at the other end of this scary, time-consuming process of interplanetary travel? Basically the same as the Mun, in most cases. It's true that in KSP, the journey matters more than the destination, but the destinations still have very little going for them. Land on the flattest piece of ground you can find, let your Kerbals stretch their legs with an EVA, plant a flag, maybe climb a hill, and then leave them there or begin the return journey. You can return with your ship full of Science and your head full of that tingling sense of achievement, but in terms of gameplay, you haven't really done much. Nothing will have changed. You could get the same Science while grinding the biomes of the Mun or Minmus. The planets look different from orbit, you can take some cinematic shots of certain pretty locations or visit some anomalies, but on the ground there's precious little to do, and few reasons to go.

 

Enter extraplanetary bases.

 

If your journey into the great yonder had a purpose beyond pure exploration, a reward to look forward to, and a permanent effect on gameplay, I believe more players would bother with the interplanetary trips, and do a lot more of them. It would encourage exploration of the other planets, since it would no longer require hours of preparation before your "fun craft" could make it to the "fun place". Late-game would have more diversity, since not every craft would need to be hauled out of Kerbin's gravity well. Why not launch from Minmus, where gravity is lower and air resistance non-existent? Establish a Dres base for your missions to Jool. Build a base on Moho, to make use of its short year and subsequently many launch windows. This could also be used for some fun one-way freight contracts: Move rocks from your Moho base to the one on Tylo. Tourists from the Mun to Duna.

The old-fashioned explorer could keep using Kerbin as a base for all operations. At the onset of the game, you would only start from Kerbin anyway, but later expand out to bless the whole solar system with Kerbalkind. The long-term purpose of your space program would be to establish Kerbals as a multi-planetary species, if only by way of small bases on the surface of various planets and moons.

As a small bonus: learning to fly between bases on the Mun and Minmus would provide some practise for flying between planets.

 

Now onto the "how": I think this post would be too wishlist-y if I just went too deep into details, so I'll try to be brief:

• I'm torn on whether "permanent settlement à la KSC in predetermined locations" or "hand-built bases à la space stations anywhere you wish" would be the best approach to colonization. The latter approach is much more hands-on and the smallest deviation from the current system, but the management of crew, contracts and vehicle design would be problematic.
• Building a gigantic rocket à la Saturn V shouldn't be as cheap and easy (or even doable?) on off-planet bases as it is on Kerbin - at least not initially. There should be a trade-off between convenience and price, so as not to make the KSC completely obsolete.
• Establishing a base should be a more complex matter than landing one craft the first time you visit a planet. Some data should at least be brought back to Kerbin (or other bases?) from the site before a base could be built. On the other hand, forcing the player to wait out several conventional missions before being able to establish a permanent base might feel too restrictive.
• Every base should have a convenient and easy way to access the Tracking Station, Mission Control, R&D, Administrations and possibly the Astronaut Complex. In most cases, these buildings would perfectly mirror the ones on Kerbin in functionality, if not in visuals.
• Upgrading bases to allow construction of larger ships, cheaper fuel, better landing zones(?)/increasing the "recover vessel" radius(???) etc., should be possible. Upgrades would either be Funds-based like the KSC, or done by hauling more/better modules from Kerbin to the relevant base.

 

Lastly, I guess a little disclaimer is in its place: I know that the game currently only allows for one Space Center, and that recovery of vessels is only possible on Kerbin. I think Kerbal Constructs gets around this by some loophole, and that making a "proper" second KSC would be much more difficult - even for the developers - as things currently stand. I'm also aware of Extraplanetary Launchpads, which, even though it is a long step in the right direction, doesn't quite provide what I'm looking for.

I'm also aware that this would be a fundamental and very complex addition to the game. It would have an impact on most people's play style, so its implementation ought to be the subject of a lot of debate.This thread is not meant to be a wishlist, but also to hear what other people think. Am I overlooking some important points? Does it clash with the intended gameplay of KSP? Are there any additions or alternatives that should be considered? Is this a wild pipe dream nobody asked for? I'l really like to hear other people's viewpoints on this.

[hms_warrior]

I like the idea...here is how i would do it (just my personal idea, opinion. Take it, ignore it, whatever pleases you :-) ) :

You get to build your bases in steps:

General workflow:

-There are Parts (heavy, big) you need to have on a vessel together with a container-part with X amount of supplies. This ship needs to be landed on a planet/moon. If you fullfill these conditions you get a button where your recovery button normaly would be: build base.

- Your Vessel get removed

- depending on the parts you had on the vessel, a new base-building is build.

 

Possible Buildings:

- ISRU (step one) Parts needed: something like mining equipment, smelters, 3D Printers. Creates a "mining rig" this does nothing by itself, but every next building needs to be created inside X meters of this. look: some drills, huge tanks, squad buildings packed together. Some solarcells.

- Landing Pad (needs ISRU): Parts needed: no idea. Maybe a bulldozer?^^ Radar equipment?. Once build, if you land a vessel on the pad, you get a button "refill". Refills all fuel, oxider, monoprop, electricity.

- Crew complex (needs ISRU): parts needed: Enviroment control. some other stuff. Once build, if you click recover on a vessel/eva'ed Kerbal all Crew get transfered into this building. XP are rewarded and Science recovered. Extra crew rooster tab for each of these buildings: clicking on Kerbal will eva him next to building entrance.

Level two:

-  Construction building (requires ISRU, landing Pad) : allows you to launch constructed ships from the Lading Pad instead of KSC Landing Pad. Costs increase (depending on distance...mun is cheaper than duna) If you have a crew Complex, you can put crew in it. Allows you to recover Stuff for credits when in range.

 

Because you can't transfer crew between the outposts you will be forced to do some KSC-to-base flights wich, together with the increased build costs, will prevent bases to become your new "one solution for everything", but they will hopefully add some extra options to your gameplay.

Well just my 2 cents ^^

Edited October 13, 2016 by hms_warrior

[Chabadarl]

I would like to see it as a contract campaign...Every contract allows you to move on to a more difficult task to unlock the properties of your base. 

As a matter of fact, it's just that I would love to see more contract campaigns. 

[Hesp]

3 hours ago, hms_warrior said:

- ISRU (step one) Parts needed: something like mining equipment, smelters, 3D Printers. Creates a "mining rig" this does nothing by itself, but every next building needs to be created inside X meters of this. look: some drills, huge tanks, squad buildings packed together. Some solarcells.

- Landing Pad (needs ISRU): Parts needed: no idea. Maybe a bulldozer?^^ Radar equipment?. Once build, if you land a vessel on the pad, you get a button "refill". Refills all fuel, oxider, monoprop, electricity.

- Crew complex (needs ISRU): parts needed: Enviroment control. some other stuff. Once build, if you click recover on a vessel/eva'ed Kerbal all Crew get transfered into this building. XP are rewarded and Science recovered. Extra crew rooster tab for each of these buildings: clicking on Kerbal will eva him next to building entrance.

Level two:

-  Construction building (requires ISRU, landing Pad) : allows you to launch constructed ships from the Lading Pad instead of KSC Landing Pad. Costs increase (depending on distance...mun is cheaper than duna) If you have a crew Complex, you can put crew in it. Allows you to recover Stuff for credits when in range.

 

I like this approach, but since money in the late game is not an issue unless playing "hard" or unefficiently, for parts/ships built on bases I would add more complex requirements. 

i.e: part cost increases exponentially with size + you need ore and a lot of energy to 3D print the parts (weight based formula?)

That would lead also to improved/innovative ship designs, instead of just going BIGGER.

[Codraroll]

As I said in the OP, I'm not sure which way would be the best approach to off-Kerbin bases. I initially believed that KSC-like "structure cities" would be the best, but later I realized that putting together your own base from modules may be the most faithful and "KSP-like" way to do it.

Anyway, before that realization, I thought I had figured out a pretty good way to construct a "quest" for building your own base. It is rather similar to what @hms_warrior wrote above, but I might as well write it down here anyway:

• First step (contract, or achievement, in case a contract isn't accepted): Explore (body), a contract already implemented in the game. Know what, to avoid writing (body) all the time, I'm just going to use the Mun for the remainder of the example. So your first task would be to flyby and land on the Mun.
• Second step: After data is initially retreived from the Mun, and the M700 Survey Scanner is unlocked, you can be tasked to scan the Mun for possible sites for a new base. You put a scanner in a polar orbit, and watch as markers appear on your map, similar to those "Temperature scan at site ABC" contract markers that already exist. The markers would denote locations where game devs/mod devs have already prepared the ground for a base. For technical reasons, I believe it would be simpler to keep the bases in pre-determined locations than allowing players to choose wildly.
• Third step: Go to any one of the potential sites and place a beacon (functionally identical to a flag, but only one is available at all times - it will despawn from every Kerbal's inventory once one is placed). The site will be marked with a marker on the map, as well as the yellow "You are now entering/leaving area ____" message known from area-specific contracts. You will also be tasked to retrieve surface samples from the site.
• Fourth step: Once the beacon is placed, a new part appears in the VAB. This is a large, heavy container simply marked "base supplies". It is "greyed out" similar to parts from part test contracts, meaning you won't be able to create it unless a beacon is placed on a site. Bring it to the chosen site in any way you wish. I'd imagine it to be at least as big and heavy as a full 2.5 m Orange Tank, and cost a whole lot of Funds.
• Fifth step: Once the base supplies container is safely placed in your chosen site, a button appears where the "recover vessel" button is on Kerbin. It says something like "Build base". Press it, and your vessel is despawned. A rudimentary base, like the Tier 1 KSC, appears in its place. The cost of any remaining parts of your craft is refunded, possibly with interest, and eventual pilots would be placed in that base's Astronaut Complex.

 

This approach would require players to first visit the planets conventionally, and return data to Kerbin before a base can even begin to be built. It's not completely waterproof, but it would expand on the existing exploration/travel mechanics rather than replacing them. Bases aim to provide incentives and convenience for revisiting planets, but the first trip needs to be done conventionally.

As for upgrading the base, I'm not sure if it should be done by hauling further supplies to it, or if it could be done with Funds like the KSC. The problem with the former approach is that the base itself would have the capability of spawning parts, meaning that a base would be able to expand itself. This isn't a problem, strictly speaking, since extraplanetary bases should always aim for self-sufficiency, but it would feel a little weird in terms of gameplay. If so, it would feel a lot more convenient to do it through the ol' "Funds sink" method, charging an eye and a limb for upgrades. You have no problem with money late-game in KSP anyway, so one might as well add some really expensive investments. Think upgrading your VAB to Tier 3 is expensive? A similar upgrade on Vall or Eeloo would easily cost ten times as much. Even a late-game player wouldn't be able to fly around making bases willy-nilly. An alternative would be to require that all base supplies containers are made on and shipped from Kerbin, in which case you would be unable to use your existing bases as "stepping stones" to make bases on far-off planets.

 

An aspect I'm still uncertain of: How would you initiate the process of building a base? Would it be through a contract? Should beacons and base supplies containers always be available, so you'd be free to fill out every spot for a base whenever you want (and have the cash)? Should there be a button in the Administrations Building, where you have to declare/submit an application that you're building a new extraplanetary base?

 

For the record, I'd also like for there to be other potential base sites on Kerbin itself.

 

Ideally, and for it to be realistic, the feature would have to require as little re-coding of the game as possible. It should play well with existing features, and ideally not require new ones to be made. Okay, the ability to insert more space centers would be a pretty drastic modification, but I'd rather not be reliant on secondary new features and modifications.

 

Any thoughts on these mad rambles?

[DragonsForce]

I really like this idea. My initial thought was to use two new resources, "Citizens" and "Materials", to construct bases (spawning pregenerated structures). City-type bases would spawn more "Citizens" which could either be used for further bases / baseupgrades or be recruited as Kerbonauts, Station-type bases would essencially provide the benefits of an of-Kerbin KSC. Both structures would be upgradable. "Citizens" could only be aquired at Kerbin or City-bases, whilst "Materials" could be refined from ore or bought on Kerbin or at bases. Building vessels of-Kerbin would require "Materials", Kerbonauts would have to be hired there (from "Citizens") or be transported there from other bases or Kerbin.

However, I now think that both methodes previousley proposed would better fit the stock game and be easier to implement, without having any big downsides as compared to my idea.

This would most certainly be a lot of developement work and would change gameplay at a level comparable to the introductions of science- and careermode. But in my eyes, it would also add A LOT to the game, and I'd definetley pay for it if necessary