Is Kerbal construction time worth it?

[Katieop3]

If I ever have to launch a rescue mission it would probably take 150 -  200 days for my rocket to be built, and I have kerbalism installed so I would have to worry about life support so I was wondering if kct is worth it.

[Jimmidii]

Depends entirely on you.

It's a different playstyle, you need to plan ahead to make sure rockets are ready for transfer windows, and because the cost of failure is greater, especially with life support mods installed, you need more reliable rockets and mission plans, with redundancy and contingency in place (Or really good life insurance and speeches).

Personally, it's not for me, but If that sounds like something you'd enjoy dealing with and overcoming, go ahead!

[Starman4308]

This is why I've gotten in the habits of:

Always testing unmanned first. Every manned craft has a probe core and antennae.

Having backup craft either fully constructed or already on-site.

Triple-checking my life support.

Putting some extra margin into my manned craft.

EDIT: And always having a tested LAS on the ascent vehicle, with a requisite pad abort test, launch abort test, reentry from LEO, and reentry from a lunar slingshot (if applicable), before I put a single Kerbal onboard.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Starman4308

[Katieop3]

1 hour ago, Jimmidii said:

Depends entirely on you.

It's a different playstyle, you need to plan ahead to make sure rockets are ready for transfer windows, and because the cost of failure is greater, especially with life support mods installed, you need more reliable rockets and mission plans, with redundancy and contingency in place (Or really good life insurance and speeches).

Personally, it's not for me, but If that sounds like something you'd enjoy dealing with and overcoming, go ahead!

I'm trying to get VERY realistic mods and I like the idea of trying to plan before

[Superfluous J]

22 minutes ago, Katieop3 said:

I'm trying to get VERY realistic mods and I like the idea of trying to plan before

Then you answered your own question with a "yes."

In real life, if you screw up you don't get a rescue mission. See: Apollo 13.

[AVaughan]

If you really want realistic mods then you should check out RP-0.  (KCT is strongly recommended when playing RP-0).

 

[Treveli]

As has been said, KCT adds to the challenge. And as for rescue missions, it has a hangar function that let's you build a craft and store it until you're ready to use it. Build a couple cheap interceptors, role them out when you need them.

[suicidejunkie]

Add KAC, and have multiple missions ongoing that are overbuilt for the job so they are capable of doing heroics in lieu of their main mission.  Leave junk lying around everywhere to make use of with KIS/KAS.

I've taken to leaving "portapotty" lifesupport stashes around the surface of Mun and Minmus, so that after crashing my Kerbals can take a breather, and hop from one stash to the next to make it back to base.

[Tyko]

I tried KCT for a while. The main thing I wanted was a way to move time forward. It's way too easy to sit on year 1/Day 1 and do your first 30 missions.

My final answer was to just set a recurring alarm for when I could launch again. I set it for every 15 days for early sounding rockets all the way up until I did my first orbital crewed mission. After that I switched it to 30 days. This isn't nearly as precise as KCT, but it's a lot simpler for my needs.

[MaxwellsDemon]

Personally, I looove KCT.  It makes me play in a way that feels more 'realistic'* to me... things aren't ready immediately, the building sequence matters, and research takes time as well as science points.  (I have forced myself to limit the upgrade points spendable on speed-of-research to each time I upgrade R and D... this slows it down to a level that's "just painful enough."   

 

_______________

*"realistic" in the sense of 'as realistic as a game with little green bug-eye aliens can be, of course'  

[suicidejunkie]

20 hours ago, MaxwellsDemon said:

Personally, I looove KCT.  It makes me play in a way that feels more 'realistic'* to me... things aren't ready immediately, the building sequence matters, and research takes time as well as science points.  (I have forced myself to limit the upgrade points spendable on speed-of-research to each time I upgrade R and D... this slows it down to a level that's "just painful enough."   

 

_______________

*"realistic" in the sense of 'as realistic as a game with little green bug-eye aliens can be, of course'  

I'm playtesting some KCT config options which make it use your idle scientists to do the research, and engineers for construction in case you're interested.

Getting more build rate and/or research speed is thus a matter of hiring and training and not assigning *everyone* to missions.  If you add a mod for Kerbal salaries then it would be worth firing them occasionally too.  I'm also considering using Pilots for affecting rollout time and for contributing a small amount of science points when you finish building a rocket since they've got time to test prototypes.

[theonegalen]

Just now, suicidejunkie said:

I'm playtesting some KCT config options which make it use your idle scientists to do the research, and engineers for construction in case you're interested.

Getting more build rate and/or research speed is thus a matter of hiring and training and not assigning *everyone* to missions.  If you add a mod for Kerbal salaries then it would be worth firing them occasionally too.  I'm also considering using Pilots for affecting rollout time and for contributing a small amount of science points when you finish building a rocket since they've got time to test prototypes.

I had no idea that was even an option! I love it.

IMHO, KCT is not only worth it, but essential if you want a realistic, higher-stress playthrough. And if you want even harder mode, add BARIS or UPFM on top. Reasonable part failures promotes testing and iterative design, and reusing designs.

[monstah]

30 minutes ago, suicidejunkie said:

I'm playtesting some KCT config options which make it use your idle scientists to do the research, and engineers for construction in case you're interested.

I'm interested! Granted, I don't play with the dev build, which means I haven't played with KCT ever since 1.1.3... but yes, please share them when they're complete!

 

Back on topic, I'm also one that thinks it adds adds a lot to the game. I also use Monthly Budgets, I think they work very well together.

[pandaman]

I haven't tried KCT 'yet", but really like the idea.  This to me is exactly the kind of thing that should be a 'toggleable' stock option.  Self discipline (or rather lack of it) aside it feels 'wrong' that i can launch so many ships in such qui

ck succession, even if i do 'pretend' that they aren't all using the same launchpad.

[monstah]

Another thing to note: the mod's settings are per-save! That is, in my opinion, and awesome feature that means you don't have to screw your ongoing campaign to try it out, you can play a bit on a secondary save and keep the first one intact.

[MaximumThrust]

On 2/27/2018 at 3:04 PM, theonegalen said:

I had no idea that was even an option! I love it.

IMHO, KCT is not only worth it, but essential if you want a realistic, higher-stress playthrough. And if you want even harder mode, add BARIS or UPFM on top. Reasonable part failures promotes testing and iterative design, and reusing designs.

I wish luck for your poor kerbals  

Just wondering, why not also include Kerbalism?

[theonegalen]

Kerbalism is just a little further than I want to go, plus it looks like it won't be actively developed going forward.

I use a combination of Kerbal Health and Snacks for Life Support / Radiation / Illness right now. Loving them so far. I don't mind killing the kerbals if it's something I do wrong, but if BARIS throws up an exploding engine on the Far Side of the Moon, I want to be able to put a rescue mission together. I never want to be in a situation where I'm just running out the clock on my crew's lives.