Tech for funds and experiments for rep?

[Wjolcz]

So I saw this and now that 1.2 is out I'm looking for a mod that let's me research tech tree nodes for money and get reputation for preforming science experiments (which then I would be able to turn into cash). Basically career mode without science points. Is there a mod that does this, or maybe someone is working on it but it hasn't been fully released yet?

I can help balancing it if anyone is interested in creating this. Make it happen and I will never again rant about career mode. That's all I need.

Edited October 15, 2016 by Veeltch

[Wjolcz]

Ok, so maybe a modlet that makes the experiments' output reputation? Does anyone know how to create such thing? I see that nobody has done it before so it's either hardcoded or nobody felt a need for such a mod?

Edited October 20, 2016 by Veeltch

[StahnAileron]

I think anyone that wants a different (better?) career experience us just clamoring for fundamental changes to the stock career system and gameplay mechanics rather than a mod that attempts to finesse and workaround the current system.

Disclosure: I'm one of that ones that believes KSP sucks as a game and needs an overhaul in the career system (progression, mechanics, etc.) Reviews praised the "game" and it got pretty nice scores, but for the reviewers, I think it was first impression shock and awe (I doubt many of them played the game before hand nor played it more than needed to do a review, never mind extensive gameplay testing.) I was entranced by KSP at first, but that feeling fades quickly once you start seeing its inherent limitations and/or get decent at it core attraction (Orbital Mechanics Simulation.) I personally think KSP review score were more, "Holy crap! This is so atypical from the usual!" rather than, "This is truly awesome and great!" I can't blame the reviewers due to time constraints and whatnot. As I usually say, great sim, lousy game.

[Streetwind]

3 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Ok, so maybe a modlet that makes the experiments' output reputation? Does anyone know how to create such thing? I see that nobody has done it before so it's either hardcoded or nobody felt a need for such a mod?

That's actually the one thing that doesn't require a mod. Stock KSP can easily do it. Cheat yourself a level 3 admin building - it's not like you actually used or upgraded it otherwise anyway - as well as the necessary activation cost, and activate the science-into-reputation strategy at 100%. Done! The great part is that this catches all science points, including those from the MPL, from contracts and from World First achievements, not just those from experiments.

...On second thought, actually, you can also do unlock-science-with-money in stock. Namely, you activate the difficulty option to make part unlocks cost money. Then, you press that one cheat menu button (if it still exists in the new 1.2 menu) that instantly unlocks the entire tech tree. Finally, make it a rule for yourself that you can only access a new tech node when all parts from at least one parent node have been unlocked. Done!

Okay, maybe it's not terribly elegant (*cough*), but it is possible to play that way. And maybe you need to do some Module Managering to tweak part unlock costs so that they are properly balanced for sensible progression. At its simplest, such a patch would simply target all parts and apply a multiplier of your choosing. That should only be like, four lines. Two of which are a single curly bracket each.

Then all you need is a way to exchange reputation for money. Conveniently, the Admin building can also do this, via the Bailout strategy (which is not actually a strategy but rather a repeatable instant-use effect). You can even tweak the parameters of that thing via Module Manager, too.

 

2 hours ago, StahnAileron said:

Disclosure: I'm one of that ones that believes KSP sucks as a game and needs an overhaul in the career system (progression, mechanics, etc.) Reviews praised the "game" and it got pretty nice scores, but for the reviewers, I think it was first impression shock and awe (I doubt many of them played the game before hand nor played it more than needed to do a review, never mind extensive gameplay testing.) I was entranced by KSP at first, but that feeling fades quickly once you start seeing its inherent limitations and/or get decent at it core attraction (Orbital Mechanics Simulation.) I personally think KSP review score were more, "Holy crap! This is so atypical from the usual!" rather than, "This is truly awesome and great!" I can't blame the reviewers due to time constraints and whatnot. As I usually say, great sim, lousy game.

Oh come on now, Stahn. That's selling the game super short. Do you even remember why you were entranced by KSP at first? What you felt when you landed your first spacecraft on the Mun?

I think PC Gamer put it best in their opinion piece that contrasted the experience of playing No Man's Sky to that of playing KSP: "When I completed my first successful Mun landing, I felt like I had conquered not the millions of miles in between, but my own expectations of what I thought I could achieve."

I think that's the most salient point I've ever seen anyone make about KSP, or even gaming in general. Beating the most difficult boss/level/challenge feels so good not because you guided a little electronic figure to some place, but because in doing so, you also beat yourself. You surprised yourself. You became more than you thought you could be. That's the essence behind the feeling that KSP's first Mun landing gives you, or the first time you beat Anno 1404's last campaign mission, or the first time you get poor little Ori out of the Ginso tree. (And it's also why MMOs are grindy and must rely on item reward spam to keep you interested - because most of the content in no way requires you to exceed, or even just exert, yourself.)

However, the second time you land on the Mun, you already know you did it before. The third time, you know you did it twice before. And so on. The task no longer challenges you to exceed your own limits. And therefore you don't get that same feeling anymore. That is why many a veteran becomes disappointed, and begins to examine the game for flaws. It clearly must be those flaws that make the game no longer fun; it must be that you just didn't notice them the first time, but clearly they must be there, or else it would still be...!

No, they must not. That is a self-delusion. There can be faults, of course, but even the most flawlessly crafted game will still only give you that amazing feeling once, for one particular challenge. This is not a fault with the game, that is an intrinsic property. And looking for flaws can end up being merely the act of finding a scapegoat for your disappointment. The game that made you feel this way is not secretly bad when you look more closely... it is a fantastic game, and everything it made you feel is real. It just spent its ammunition. It already performed its job, and marvelously so. It can still continue to entertain you, if there is replay value present, or further challenges to be beaten; just don't expect it to repeat the first time in all its glory. That's an expectation nothing and nobody can ever fulfill.

As such, don't call KSP a game that tricks people to like it with some cheap illusions and/or unusual elements despite being crap under the hood. And don't call out reviewers for falling for it. They didn't fall for anything. They reviewed precisely the thing the game sets out to do. They allowed themselves to be challenged, and overcame the challenge, overcoming themselves in the process. And then they write about how that feels like. And anyone who buys the game on their recommendation will experience the same, because they, too, will be challenged and must overcome themselves. The reviews are absolutely valid.

Of course, they say that the biggest critics of something are those who care for it the most... I can see where you're coming from. You genuinely wish that KSP was even better, because you do like the game, and you want to see it grow. And the game does have room for improvement, too. Just don't let that make you forget what made you love the game in the first place. Because that truly would be a shame.

 

(Sorry for the jaunt off topic.)

Edited October 20, 2016 by Streetwind

[Blaarkies]

27 minutes ago, Streetwind said:

(Sorry for the jaunt off topic.)

...that was the most moving wall of text i have ever read! 

I remember the first 3 months of KSP, i did not even run another game, not once, not even by accident...and there was never enough time to play KSP, daydreaming would be overtaken with hypothetical missions plans to Jool, or detailed crazy ideas about a new rocket designs...thanks for reminding us

Edited October 20, 2016 by Blaarkies

[StahnAileron]

Right, I kinda forgot to mention the Strategies. I wound up ignoring them in the long run though. (I dunno why, but in my heavily modded 1.0.5 install, the strategies didn't seem to work right. The amount of money I was getting was not reflecting what I should've been getting with 100% Science-to-Money conversion, especially with the science multiplier I was using.) Strategies were one aspect of gameplay that made little sense unless you went in 100% (lower investment conversion rates sucked). So I kinda ignore the Admin Building. I guess with 1.2 I'll have to check and see if Strategies actually work right for me once all the mods I use update. (I had several issues with that install. I never bothered reporting them since I was playing 1.0.5 well past 1.1's release and it was a very heavily modded install. Got lazy with troubleshooting unless it was game-breaking and I had no workaround.)

@Streetwind I didn't mean to imply that the reviews were incorrect or that KSP attempts to trick people. It's more that KSP, IMO, lacks gameplay mechanics with longevity and sense . KSP's sim aspects still entrances me. I still find myself coming back now and then to engineer a new vessel just to see if it would work or make sense. It's just whenever I look at it as a game rather than a pure sim that it feels very lacking. (At least in stock, without a lot of gameplay-based mods installed.) Of course, I'm also a little jaded from the brokenness of KSP up until 1.2 (well, so far), but that's something else. I (still) love KSP, just not as a "game" by typical definitions.

1 minute ago, Blaarkies said:

...that was the most moving wall of text i have ever read! 

Just to be an idiot, I'll take partial credit by inspiring him to write that

Anyway, guess I (we?) should leave that topic alone now and leave the thread to address the OP's thoughts rather than derailing this anymore.

[Streetwind]

Yeah, the strategies, uhm, could use some work. But that makes it all the more amusing when you can completely misappropriate them to do something unexpected, such as crazy resource reshuffling schemes like this one

[Wjolcz]

10 hours ago, Streetwind said:

No, they must not. That is a self-delusion. There can be faults, of course, but even the most flawlessly crafted game will still only give you that amazing feeling once, for one particular challenge. This is not a fault with the game, that is an intrinsic property. And looking for flaws can end up being merely the act of finding a scapegoat for your disappointment. The game that made you feel this way is not secretly bad when you look more closely... it is a fantastic game, and everything it made you feel is real. It just spent its ammunition. It already performed its job, and marvelously so. It can still continue to entertain you, if there is replay value present, or further challenges to be beaten; just don't expect it to repeat the first time in all its glory. That's an expectation nothing and nobody can ever fulfill.

The only problem is there are people who's lost their virginity with the Mun a long time ago when career was still just a dream. It's a great sim(-ish) game, but the replayablity is close to zero once you've been there, done that.

10 hours ago, Streetwind said:

Of course, they say that the biggest critics of something are those who care for it the most... I can see where you're coming from. You genuinely wish that KSP was even better, because you do like the game, and you want to see it grow. And the game does have room for improvement, too. Just don't let that make you forget what made you love the game in the first place. Because that truly would be a shame.

As much as this is true and the first Mun landing (and other firsts of course) made me love the game, that's not everything. A good game should be enjoyed each time it's restarted instead of being a one-time pretty firework. You launch it once, see the pretty stuff for the first and the last time, and there's not much left.

9 hours ago, StahnAileron said:

@Streetwind I didn't mean to imply that the reviews were incorrect or that KSP attempts to trick people. It's more that KSP, IMO, lacks gameplay mechanics with longevity and sense . KSP's sim aspects still entrances me. I still find myself coming back now and then to engineer a new vessel just to see if it would work or make sense. It's just whenever I look at it as a game rather than a pure sim that it feels very lacking. (At least in stock, without a lot of gameplay-based mods installed.) Of course, I'm also a little jaded from the brokenness of KSP up until 1.2 (well, so far), but that's something else. I (still) love KSP, just not as a "game" by typical definitions

Same here.

And about the bit about derailing the thread (because I can't quote it for some od reason): I think all that's been said here is pretty relevant. The career/science aspect of the game definitely could be better. Otherwise I wouldn't ask about all this.

Edited October 20, 2016 by Veeltch