Money in Career Mode: Contracts Office

[UberFuber]

I guess that's what I'm concerned about. What defines a healthy, running space program? I think some of us feel it is being able to do things others ask of us. While others feel it is having their own successful missions. Both options are true success-wise, I'm just not sure how we could get the game to recognize the second option.

If the objectives are set by yourself, then won't it be essentially sandbox?

One possibility is that in Sandbox mode, instead of financial constraint, the game simply tracks how much "credit" you spent. The player then play it just as sandbox, and the game tells them how much credit they spent.

[Tw1]

The reason I didn't include satellite is that I don't want a mission to have a permanent effect on space. Parking a satellite would mean that space "debris" would start to pile up as you do more and more of those missions.

.

Ah. Makes sense, though I don't mind a somewhat busy Kerbin orbit. I'd find it more important that my self-scheduled missions aren't being disrupted by things the game wants me to do.

But perhaps, rather than launch a heap of junk into orbit, those type of missions could be more about maintaining the network and improving the network. But if it's already satisfactory, no one will want more.

That's one reason why I'd like the mission selector to work with your existing flights, as well as your achievements- it could make subtle distinctions like that.

Having a tier system seems a little simplistic- it's not like we will stop needing satellites after establishing bases on the Moon.

We would need more if they all died for some reason though.

Though I'm not sure about multiple planet Itineraries, especially if some are only flybys. That's a long time, and a lot of money to just look out the window. Landings, maybe.

If the objectives are set by yourself, then won't it be essentially sandbox?

.

In sandbox, you can launch 50, 1000ton mega ships and go anywhere you like. Rescue missions are free. No need to wait, and save up.

In career, we will think carefully what we do. That should be plenty of challenge.

Personally, I don't find collecting points, be they science or money, terribly motivating. It has no effect on me in the real world.

I like the experience of taking the little green guys out into the universe, and exploring in masterpiece space-things I made myself. I'd like both science and missions to enhance that, adding a tiny bit of story, but not enough to prevent my own imagination doing its thing.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Tw1

[Daveorock]

Here's a more fleshed out version for a scientific request system. I had this idea on my own and was about to make a new thread but found that is was being discussed here (and I still want to get this out there, I would be scorned for repeating ideas had I made a new thread). These are my thoughts of how something like this should go down:

Every once in a while (couple of days or a week), several experiments will be created/made available for the player to accept or decline, they would have scientific and/or monetary value for completion. The experiments are based off of pre-made entries, but with some randomness.

Examples:

Study on the growth of Kerbalis Arboris in microgravity

Kerbals: 3

Time: 1 year

Location: In space above Kerbin

Reward: 40 science and 100 credits

Study on the effects of space on aquabears

Kerbals: 1

Time: 4 days

Location: In space high above Kerbin

Reward: 15 science

Study on which way buttered bread lands on the Mun

Kerbals: 2

Time: 1 hour

Location: Surface of the Mun

Reward: 10 credits

Study on life, the universe, and everything

Kerbals: 42

Time: 10,000,000 years

Location: Deep space

Reward: 99999999 science

As you can see, they have different requirements, which can be varied randomly (a random value between two predefined limits). This could apply to Kerbals needed to conduct the experiment, the location, and reward. The experiments could even have more difficult versions after a prerequisite version is completed. An example being after the aquabear experiment is done, it can be done again but near the sun, with a slightly different prompt of, "Study on the effects of radiation on aquabears." Stuff like that could be randomly created for even more varied and numerous experiments. Here are some additional features:

-Experiments can be done in bulk on one vessel

-Can be transferred between vessels (so research outposts/space stations can have new stuff to do)

-Some need to be returned to Kerbin, others can be discarded/transmitted

-Some experiments could serve as prerequisites for discoveries (e.g.: an experiment on gasses in space would need to be conducted before the player could harvest said gasses from other planets, instead of unlocking the ability by doing completely unrelated scientific experiments *ahem*unlockingwingsfromsurfacesamples*ahem*)

-There could be many experiments available at once, and a sorting function could be implemented (if the player was going to Duna anyway, they could check for experiments that need to be done there)

-Once an experiment is complete, a small alert will pop up, similar to those seen when scientific data is received, possibly giving the result of the experiment for the player's satisfaction

-From the list of experiments, the player can choose any number of them to add to a temporary cache. Before launch, they can add certain experiments from that cache to an experiment hold or science lab, which is where they will be stored/conducted.

Here are some benefits I could think of:

-Players would have a use for long term space missions

-Space stations would have a use other than refueling and construction

-Players might decide to go places they otherwise wouldn't have (without incentive)

-Research stations would have a functional use (arctic research bases, anyone?)

-A method for making credits that makes sense (if other companies were paying for the experiment to be done)

-A reason (before life support is implemented) to restock and visit space stations

-A new varied and interesting function of the game

All in all, I think it's a really promising idea that should at least be given some thought by the devs. There could be hundreds of basic entries that can be randomly modified to give thousands of different experiments (and spread out would last a long time), which would add a great new mechanic, not to mention that this sort of stuff happens irl (or will in the near future).

[Tw1]

Here's a more fleshed out version for a scientific request system. I had this idea on my own and was about to make a new thread but found that is was being discussed here (and I still want to get this out there, I would be scorned for repeating ideas had I made a new thread). These are my thoughts of how something like this should go down:

Every once in a while (couple of days or a week), several experiments will be created/made available for the player to accept or decline, they would have scientific and/or monetary value for completion. The experiments are based off of pre-made entries, but with some randomness.

Welcome to the KSP player forums!

I really like the ideas for stations. I take your described missions are only examples, as the values seems a little of.

I like the idea that they need to be in certain orbits, but all time based things are vulnerable to Time Warp Exploitation. I have an alternate idea, more on this further down.

I'd like to add that a station could require certain parts, as well as certain numbers of kerbals- you can't just stick a stack of hitchhiker pods in orbit, call that a 16 kerman station.

That way, simple experiments, like survival in space could be done with small craft, gemini style. (This wouldn't need an orbit requirement, you could do the tests while on the way to Mun for the first time. But you'd have a better funded Mun mission if you did them before hand.)

Then, as you decide to build bigger, different tasks could become available- longer term research and experiments.

I'd like to see the missions linked to each station, or base. The stations and bases could be listed in the contracts screen somewhere, and tasks available for that station could show up when you click.

This way, you'd get the missions after the station or base was build, rewarding you for taking initiative, rather than following orders.

This could encourage people to experiment with stations in various orbits, etc, to see what they can do.

Personally, I favour funding being allocated to you over a certain level of time, and rising and falling with your programs reputation, with some things that can all smaller cash injections. Long term research could be a way to boost your reputation, and therefore your base funding levels. This would not diminish over time- encouraging you to maintain them.

There would have to be limits on what you could earn by spamming a certain place with stations, but I don't think they should be too harsh. Stations do cost money to put up, effort to build, and there may be life support requirements in the future. Having almost identical stations could be penalised. Perhaps the amount of missions per orbital zone is limited, or there is a cap to the reputation you can gain by doing studies in a certain region.

That said, I don't think there is anything wrong with making lots of stations or bases, if that's what you want to do. In fact, I think it's a great idea to make them an important part of the game. Kudos to you!

I do home the Devs are taking note of these forms lately. Lots of interesting discussion re science and career.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Tw1

[boomerdog2000]

One thing I'm concerned about with time based funding is, since there's no construction time for rockets in ksp, many things can be launched and built very quickly. I managed to assemble a 5 piece station in Kerbin orbit and launch the first piece of my interplanetary ship in the course of less than a kerbal day. This makes me worry that most yearly/time based budgets would just be using it up in a few missions then time-warping until your next cash injection.

[Tw1]

One thing I'm concerned about with time based funding is, since there's no construction time for rockets in ksp, many things can be launched and built very quickly. I managed to assemble a 5 piece station in Kerbin orbit and launch the first piece of my interplanetary ship in the course of less than a kerbal day. This makes me worry that most yearly/time based budgets would just be using it up in a few missions then time-warping until your next cash injection.

It's true. We'd have to plan carefully.

Maybe monthy could work better than yearly, then the gap won't be so great. It might not be that bad a thing, as you'd move between windows a little faster. I often feel odd warping ages, when my kerbals could be doing stuff, but maybe that's justified, if they're saving their kerb-penies.

Though there would have to be limits to prevent you timewarping to build up unreasonable amounts. Perhaps there is a limit to the amount of funds your sponsors(Deliberately vague) will let you build up at a time, not giving you more until that has been used.

Alternately, your sponsors could loose interest after large periods without activity.

"Suspected corruption at KSC"

The longer, the harder it will be to regain their support.

Though a little timewarping to save for a huge build shouldn't be too bad.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Tw1

[knoss]

what if there is a mission planner built in

you have options to tick and slider bars

so many tons in orbit

landed on a body

retrieve objects...

bring samples ( maybe you have to bring them back to ksp and not research them carrying them maybe have them weigh something. when you carry them back like bring back 1ton of moon rocks for museums of kerban so lil kerbals can have it, or add a lil story like the first kerbal or emperor kerbals wants real moon stone status symbol or some kerbal billionaire wants to give his wife an anniversary present and locate rare stone ( just bring back a lot of stone and it can have the materiel inside.

or you need gas sample form a gas giant (new experiments in air fresheners) thos suits get stinky

so many funny possibility if you read the part descriptions will have to keep in mind humor and lunacrist reasons behind things

[DonLorenzo]

In a forum campaign I did ages ago I had two flavours of 'missions'.

One were straight up missions, achieve objective and get paid. The general challenge being to build a rocket that's (significantly) cheaper than the posted reward.

The second flavour was 'contracts', these took many forms but the crux was that you didn't pay for the rocket and the reward was relatively small (after all, no rocket costs). The idea was that you were contracting out your expertise, not facilities and rocket building.

I still like that setup. It allows for the objective based and cash restrained gameplay many like, while also incorporating design freedom in the form of contracts (no rocket costs!) whilst simultaneously allowing a player to earn money whilst broke.

[Algiark]

There's already something on that

I think Squad should avoid trying to 'earn' money directly as this will lead to grinding and 'gaming' the system.

I think they should, alongside 'Science', add a 'prestige' total. Unlike Science, prestige is not directly spent; but it can go up and down.

While Science gives you points for... doing science, prestige could be earned by achievements. The level of 'prestige' you have directly affects the amount of money you can spend per mission (a running total can be kept, but running one expensive emission would not affect another, cheaper mission in terms of a zero-sum total).

So to increase your budget-per-mission, you can do things like:

• Go above the atmosphere +1,000
  
• Take interesting screenshot/'photo' +1,000
  
• Go to orbit +10,000
  
• Go to orbit around the Mun +20,000
  
• Land something intact on the Mun +100,000
  
• Land Kerbals on the Mun +1,000,000
  
• Other Planets +3,000,000
  

etc.

You can lose prestige, and thus get lower funding, by things like:

• Destroy a craft with no science return -20,000
  
• Kill a Kerbal -100,000
  
• Damage a KSC facility -100,000
  

What this does is:

• Reward you for incrementally achieving milestones, rather than getting a load of science by just blasting something into solar orbit and transmitting it back at different stages to get lots of science.
  
• Prevent grinding, so that you don't get people having to run missions again and again to save up for a big interplanetary mission
  
• Accurately reflect a government/species-sponsored funding paradigm which is not profit-focused.
  
• Give a reason to bother going to Dres, etc. once you'd maxed out all the science with 2 or 3 planets.
  
• Give an opportunity for collecting achievements and screenshots/photos in a 'gallery' to help personalise the game for each player.
  

The other factor apart from vehicle construction is astronauts, which don't do much yet. I'd like to see, alongside courage and bravery, two more attributes: Science and Prestige.

A percentage of science earned by a Kerbal on a mission is added to his total; he gets some of the science for ship-wide experiments, and all of the science from his EVA reports and soil samples and other future EVA experiments. After a (relatively low) amount of science, the Kerbal can be assigned a 'Mission Science Specialist' role; this means that the Kerbal will be a specialist scientist who gets ALL of the science from a mission; that is, if Jeb and Bill go up, and Bill is set as a specialist, he gets all the science points. This makes Bill more valuable more quickly, and gives you a reason both to send him into space and to keep him alive.

Having earned that science, Bill now needs something to do with it, otherwise it's just an arbitrary number like Courage and Stupidity. Well, one issue we have at the moment is that there are not many science experiments, and as such they are all a bit overpowered to make up for it. Having a Kerbal with a high Science score on board should unlock 'new' experiments on the same science equipment parts. That is, with just Jeb on board, there would only be one right-click option for science; with Dr. Bill on board, there could be lots. This means we can earn more from science, but also means that science experiments can start off worth a bit less; at the moment it's possible to max out the research tree within a few hours of playing. This would make it harder to do that, and give Dr. Bill value and purpose. An alternative, if that's too difficult to code, is to just simply make the same experiments worth more when run with a better scientist on board.

What about poor Jeb, non-specialist? Well, astronauts should also get a percentage of the prestige points towards their score. Completed a docking? +1000 prestige for Bill and Jeb. Now we can set Jeb as our Mission Commander, since Bill already has his role. All of the prestige points will now go to Jeb; earned in the usual way. Again, Jeb becomes more valuable and gives us a reason to send him up and to bring him back safely. Jeb can also earn some individual Prestige points like Dr. Bill can: prestige for time spent in EVA, prestige for fixing parachutes, landing gear and solar panels; prestige for planting a flag, etc.

What can we do with Jeb's prestige points? Well, what does having an expert pilot do? Makes it easier to fly the craft. Some ideas for this are things like better indicators: radar altitude, docking alignment indicators, landing prediction indicators, perhaps setting hard limits on things like fuel level (so we don't accidentally burn away the fuel we need for re-entry while trying to dock), or even functions that currently are the preserve of MechJeb like hovering or rendezvous maneuver-node calculating (this will make it both easier, if a player is very good at everything *except* hovering, so they get punished less for that; and harder: rather than just installing MechJeb, people can work towards getting these functions in a way that suits the game).

I believe this system would deal with budgets in a way that keeps the game fun, and give astronauts a purpose beyond planting flags.

[UberFuber]

Alternately, your sponsors could loose interest after large periods without activity.

"Suspected corruption at KSC"

The longer, the harder it will be to regain their support.

Though a little timewarping to save for a huge build shouldn't be too bad.

Although how would you "define" activity? And won't the requirement for what counts as activity be essentially the most basic form of missions/contracts?

Edited November 10, 2013 by UberFuber

[Tw1]

And won't the requirement for what counts as activity be essentially the most basic form of missions/contracts?

Yep. Activity = Landings, launches, science and doing contracts? If the lack of activity = no more funds, how much each of these interested your sponsors would have to be carefully balanced.

[UberFuber]

Yep. Activity = Landings, launches, science and doing contracts? If the lack of activity = no more funds, how much each of these interested your sponsors would have to be carefully balanced.

Hm... a thought on how this can be achieved.

Basically, in addition to the contracts/missions you get funding from another agency.

The Esoteric Astronomical Research Society

"... abberviated TEARS, because we're easily driven to tears of awe!"

Instead of a set of missions, the Esoteric Astronomical Research Society provides a constant funding based on your reputation with them.

Reputation are "earned" by visiting, achieving orbit around, and landing on Celestial bodies with your spacecraft. Each control module can only complete each combination of Celestial body and their associated activity once per launch (so if a control module "achieved orbit" around Kerbin, you use that command module to "achieve orbit" around Kerbin again).

Every combination of Celestial body and their mission "profile" has a fixed, maximum amount of reputation that player can earn. The amount of reputation depends on the Celestial body (more difficult/delta V to get to, more reputation) and the activity in question (landing > orbiting > visiting). Reputation are earned in 2 chunks, one for fulfilling the activity, the other chunk for recovering the spacecraft after fulfilling the activity. The reputation earned will slowly decay over time and be refunded back into the pool.

Might be better to describe it with an example.

Achieving orbit around Duna has the max of 50 reputation available, 20 for the activity and 30 for recovering.

When a spaceship completes 1 complete orbit around Duna, player is awarded 20 reputation. The reputation available for the activity of achieving orbit around Duna is now 0. So if you have a second spacecraft right after that achieve orbit, it will receive no reputation, however, the second spacecraft can still earn the 30 for recovering after achieving orbit if the first spacecraft does not return to Kerbin and the second spacecraft does.

After some time, the reputation earned from achieving orbit activity has decayed to 5. The 15 reputations lost are returned back into the achieving orbit around Duna activity's reputation pool. So, once player achieve orbit around Duna again, the player will earn those 15 reputations back.

UI wise, the player will get access to a new building for "The Esoteric Astronomical Research Society". In side you'll get access to the map of the Kerbol system. Selecting on a celestial body gets you a list of activities on the body and the "Interest" a society has on said activity for that body. Interest is essentially how much reputation a celestial body has left for player to earn.

For example, selecting Eve might gets you the following list.

Not Interested (<20% reputation available) in a visit to Eve.

Somewhat interested (20~40% reputation available) in a returned vehicle that has visited Eve.

Interested (40~60% reputation available) in achieving orbit around Eve.

Very Interested (60~80% reputation available) in a returned vehicle that has achieved orbit around Eve.

Really Interested (80%~100% reputation available) in landing on Eve.

Really Interested in a returned vehicle that has landed on Eve.

Really Interested in a returned Kerbalnaut that has landed on Eve.

Possible Variation

Instead of player extracting ALL the reputation from the available pool in one go, the amount could be reduced to something like 50%, so that multiple missions to the same system would still be beneficial, albeit with diminishing return.

So how do player get funding out of reputation?

My thought is that each month, player get a funding proportional to the amount of reputation they have. So something like Reputation * 10,000 credits. At the same times, 10% of the player's reputation (round up) is "deducted" and returned back to the pool (assigned at random to celestial body/activity pools that are not full yet).

Basically, the idea hopes to accomplish the following.

1. Provide a baseline income for player just by launching and doing typical stuffs in space.

2. The reputation decay stops timewarp abuse.

3. The monthly income scaled with reputation also discourage timewarp, since its in player's interest to keep their reputation up to get the maximum amount of credit per month.

4. Discourages player from repeating the same mission over and over again in very short period of time. In short, you can't get infinite reputation by repeating the same mission.

Edited November 13, 2013 by UberFuber

[UberFuber]

New idea for missions.

Asteroid/UFO Capture

At random time, a object with a random orbital parameter will spawn. The object may be an asteroid (would require a way for player to "dock" with it so they can effect its trajectory) or a strange spaceship part with one or more docking ports attached to it. The mission will request for player to capture the asteroid/UFO and return it to Kerbin (deorbit it into atmosphere).