Reputation - New game mechanic

[XrayLima]

After watching me play KSP for a short while and hearing some of my bigger "Ooops'"  my girlfriend has suggested a  rather brilliant addition to the contract game mechanics:

If Reputation is negative (or suitable level of negative) or if three failed launches/landings in a row - Your Kerbonauts go on strike.  No manned missions until fixed.  Jeb, Val, et al are visible in the VAB/SPH with placards protesting.  As she said, 'I wouldn't get in that spaceship, not sure they would either!"

 

Somehow this just makes me smile.

 

XrayLima

[Rocket In My Pocket]

Interesting!

Perhaps a bit harsh though?

Maybe if a given Kerbal is involved in a faulty rocket too many times that particular Kerbal goes on strike? Or if a Kerbal sees another Kerbal die personally, they can go on strike?

[Ser]

If we speak of space program, kerbals would more likely have a choice to get on that spaceship whatever it was or get the hell out and never get back to space, rather than protesting. It's not a girl's college after all to say "I won't fly because I'm afraid."

I think it's better to implement what you suggest as some CEO's ban for manned flights as a more consistent approach.

[XrayLima]

Possibly, but one Kerbal not turning up to work is absenteeism not a strike! 

That aside, that would work, perhaps at low negative reputation.  But once that drops further I think they would all walk out.  If the game then generated viable probe only missions to enable you to rebuild your reputation, that could lead to a more interesting career, particularly in Moderate or Hard difficulties.

Plus I really really want to see a Kerbal picket line, especially after what I've put them through.

[XrayLima]

@Ser - But I'm the CEO and frankly, their safety is not always paramount in my mind!  I'm a very poor employer frankly.

But maybe you are on to something, maybe the trigger for striking is a multiplier of Reputation and the inverse of their Courage attribute?!  That way, low courage Kerbals strike at low negative rep, but eventually if you keep messing up, the whole team is on strike!

 

Mix this with random equipment failures and this could get messy! 

[Ser]

14 minutes ago, XrayLima said:

Plus I really really want to see a Kerbal picket line, especially after what I've put them through.

So that would be more like kindergarten simulation, not an active military service called a space program. But I agree with you that low rep effects should be more tangible than they are now.

1 minute ago, XrayLima said:

But I'm the CEO and frankly, their safety is not always paramount in my mind!  I'm a very poor employer frankly.

Presidential, social.There are many instances above the CEO.

Edited April 9, 2018 by Ser

[Lego_Prodigy]

TBH that would encourage more unmanned flights really, so oh well if that gets added.

 

[Gargamel]

Problem is having the game determine what is a faulty rocket.    I can just say it was supposed to do that.    I've intentionally aborted launches just to test the LES's I've included.   And since I use Final Frontier, I do recover those missions, not revert, so I can giver credit to those poor guinea pigs test pilots. 

Some rockets are intended to go suborbital, and sometimes scarily.  My controlled precision landings for biome research are often neither controlled nor that precise, but they get there and count as a success. 

Kerbals don't have fear, since they are evolved from a hive mind organism, so being on a failed mission really doesn't bother them. 

[Dunbaratu]

There's two things to implement I think:

1 - Deaths cause a big hit to your Reputation score.  Right now I don't think they do.

2 - Low Reputation should affect this, without regard to how it got so low (i.e it's indirect - death causes low rep, then low rep causes unruly astronauts).

Instead of striking, a more varying version of the same idea would be having them demand hazard pay so that it costs extra to have them on a flight.  The amount of pay depends on their Stupidity to their Courage.   (make those stats actually mean something for once - if the rep is bad then only the stupid or courageous are willing to go up.  This would mesh well with other ideas for making these stats mean something - like having stupid astronauts earn XP slower.  Part of the punishment for low rep would be having to use stupider kerbals, who aren't as good at advancing).

 

[Gargamel]

19 hours ago, Steven Mading said:

There's two things to implement I think:

1 - Deaths cause a big hit to your Reputation score.  Right now I don't think they do.

2 - Low Reputation should affect this, without regard to how it got so low (i.e it's indirect - death causes low rep, then low rep causes unruly astronauts).

Instead of striking, a more varying version of the same idea would be having them demand hazard pay so that it costs extra to have them on a flight.  The amount of pay depends on their Stupidity to their Courage.   (make those stats actually mean something for once - if the rep is bad then only the stupid or courageous are willing to go up.  This would mesh well with other ideas for making these stats mean something - like having stupid astronauts earn XP slower.  Part of the punishment for low rep would be having to use stupider kerbals, who aren't as good at advancing).

 

As reputation decreases, the cost to hire a new kerbal should be reflective of their stupidity and courage.  A stupid and courageous kerbal should cost less to hire than a Smart and timid one.  Just apply this as a modifier to the base rate for each new hire.  As reputation increases, the difference between the two modifiers decreases, maybe even inverting at high rep. 

[Wjolcz]

I'd rather have reputation influence your periodical funding. It goes negative = no more funding. You have to work with what you have left and recover your reputation with that or run out of money and get the game over screen.