Disallow retrograde 'synchronous' orbit contracts

[Allocthonous]

I've gotten several contracts for satellite launches that claim to be in a synchronous orbit, but with a retrograde inclination. That is not a synchronous orbit, by definition. I would like to see a sanity check added to contracts so that this does not happen, or at least so that the orbits are correctly named.

I know it's a minor quibble, but this is really bugging me.

[Superfluous J]

Actually geosynchronous, as opposed to geostationary, can be retrograde. The only stipulation in the former is that the satellite be over the same spot at the same time of day each day.

[Wjolcz]

It makes wish we had some sort of filters for the missions. Either that or an actual in-game mission designer. I'm sick of weeding out the contracts I really dislike and don't want to do. And there are lots of them.

[Tex_NL]

@Veeltch I've got a small suggestion to ease your pain.
Go into ../GameData/Squad/Contracts/ and open Contracts.cfg.
Look for the line that says AverageAvailableContracts = 10 (it's pretty close to the top) and increase to a higher number.
Now there will be more contracts available at any time making the interesting contracts appear more often.

Edited October 15, 2016 by Tex_NL

[klgraham1013]

5 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Either that or an actual in-game mission designer.

Yep.  I've wanted this since contracts were introduced.

[Wjolcz]

1 hour ago, Tex_NL said:

@Veeltch I've got a small suggestion to ease your pain.
Go into ../GameData/Squad/Contracts/ and open Contracts.cfg.
Look for the line that says AverageAvailableContracts = 10 (it's pretty close to the top) and increase to a higher number.
Now there will be more contracts available at any time making the interesting contracts appear more often.

Oh, that's cool and useful. Thanks a ton.

[John Cochran]

11 hours ago, Allocthonous said:

I've gotten several contracts for satellite launches that claim to be in a synchronous orbit, but with a retrograde inclination. That is not a synchronous orbit, by definition. I would like to see a sanity check added to contracts so that this does not happen, or at least so that the orbits are correctly named.

I know it's a minor quibble, but this is really bugging me.

Actually, there was a plan some years back by the military about "How can we destroy all the Geosynchronous satellites quickly in case of war?" Their solution was surprisingly easy and quite scary. Launch a missile that goes to the moon and does a free return to a retrograde geosynchronous orbit (same orbital path as the rest of the geosynchronous satellites, but retrograde obviously). Once in that orbit, disperse its payload... Which would simply be a bunch of sand. None of the satellites would be likely to survive being sandblasted at twice orbit speed every 12 hours. The surprising thing was because of using a free return trajectory from the moon, the deltaV cost of such a mission was a lot lower than attempting to enter a retrograde Geosynchronous orbit directly. Another scary part is that such a launch would look like a regular scientific mission to the moon and the free return would be very likely not detected until satellites in geosync started to be destroyed. And by then, it's too late.

 

Edited October 15, 2016 by John Cochran
Spelling and grammar corrections.

[Alshain]

3 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Oh, that's cool and useful. Thanks a ton.

You can also force out the contract types you don't like right away.  If you open the persistence file you should find the following group.

		WEIGHTS
		{
			TourismContract = 30
			SurveyContract = 30
			StationContract = 30
			SatelliteContract = 30
			ISRUContract = 30
			ExplorationContract = 30
			BaseContract = 30
			ARMContract = 30
			RecoverAsset = 30
			PlantFlag = 30
			PartTest = 30
			GrandTour = 30
			CollectScience = 30
			Eeloo = 30
			Dres = 30
			Pol = 30
			Gilly = 30
			Tylo = 30
			Bop = 30
			Vall = 30
			Laythe = 30
			Jool = 30
			Ike = 30
			Duna = 30
			Eve = 30
			Moho = 30
			Minmus = 30
			Mun = 30
			Kerbin = 30
			Sun = 30
		}

As you can see they default to 30.  Accepting/Completing, and Declining contracts will affect these values slowly in both direction as it tries to 'learn' what you like to do.  If you know for a fact you never want to see a specific planet or contract type, set it to 0 and save the file, you will almost never see it again.

[Tex_NL]

3 minutes ago, Alshain said:

Accepting/Completing, and Declining contracts will affect these values slowly in both direction

Accepting, completing and declining aren't the only factors that affecting these values. NOT accepting a contract and letting it expire also reduces it.
In my current career I have yet to fail or decline a contract. Still several contract types have been reduced to 10.

[Technical Ben]

I'm still seeing quite a few where I'm just "the physics in ksp won't let me hit that speed/hight/power at this time" requests. Sadly, I find out after accepting it and trying (with min/maxed craft).

[Alshain]

42 minutes ago, Tex_NL said:

Accepting, completing and declining aren't the only factors that affecting these values. NOT accepting a contract and letting it expire also reduces it.
In my current career I have yet to fail or decline a contract. Still several contract types have been reduced to 10.

Yes, I believe that was a last minute change Arsonide made in pre-release.

[Gaarst]

1 hour ago, Technical Ben said:

"the physics in ksp won't let me hit that speed/hight/power at this time"

Nonsense.

[Technical Ben]

Oh, infinite money/sandbox I could with 30 part limit and little fleas to do the job, I doubt I'll hit 500m/s under 5000m. Care to try?

[Gaarst]

1 hour ago, Technical Ben said:

Oh, infinite money/sandbox I could with 30 part limit and little fleas to do the job, I doubt I'll hit 500m/s under 5000m. Care to try?

I literally launched KSP, started a new career save, stacked 4 Fleas under a command pod, did a bit of hotstaging, and beat 1000m/s under 2500m.

Spoiler

 

[Technical Ben]

Hmmm. I seriously underestimated the rebalance of the soups and aero... (was 3,2,1 staging fleas and not hitting the speed... oh and SIDEWAYS of cause, never thought of that... Ok, my excuse is I was feeling ill yesterday. Forgives? )

[John Cochran]

17 hours ago, Technical Ben said:

Oh, infinite money/sandbox I could with 30 part limit and little fleas to do the job, I doubt I'll hit 500m/s under 5000m. Care to try?

I had a contract to haul something with a speed of about 1500m/s under 5000m of altitude. I tried a few times going horizontal with insanely large boosters and wasn't able to hit the target speed before running out of fuel, then hit upon the solution. I instead went vertical to about 40 km to 50 km and let the rocket come back down vertically. Before I hit the target altitude range, I then lit the final stage...