IronMan mode/difficulty

[Unfawkable]

I first encountered this in XCOM: Enemy Unknown, and I loved the mode. It's for the folk who like their games even more challenging and unforgiving.

Basically it takes away your control of game saving, you can no longer save manually, you have only one save file which is saved automatically at intervals, ESPECIALLY when something bad happens. This way you can't undo your mistakes, you have to live with them (Like in real life, duh). So no saving before a difficult orbital maneuver or a landing, no reverting a failed launch because you forgot to release the clamps on time, no nothing. You screw up, you pay the price.

Now if implemented in career mode, this limitation wouldn't mean much if you could actually not have a game-over, and to have that a game also must have victory conditions, which career mode doesn't have yet, but it could some day, such as full technological advancement, exploring every celestial body, or completing a number of preset missions each more difficult than the previous. Game over conditions could be to loose too many Kerbals (stranding them for prolonged periods also counts), not completing missions on time, or simply not getting anywhere with your program (earning less than 10 science points over the span of 5 years for instance).

All of this could be optional, you could select your own loosing and winning conditions, or have none at all (at which point you might as well play sandbox, but hey, whatever rocks your boat)

[regex]

I don't know if this is really needed since a lot of this you can manage yourself. For the moment you can turn on permadeath and turn off revert in your career mode save file, and then unbind your quicksave hotkey. We'll probably see checkboxes for those items at some point because they're actually options in the files. Having stock life support and reentry damage effects will help increase the difficulty somewhat (although LS is just another resource to manage, it's not actually difficult).

As far as "victory" conditions in career mode I suspect that will never actually be a thing because KSP is a sandbox sort of game. Losing conditions, on the other hand, would be pretty cool. You get fired from your position as head of the Kerbal Space Program because too many Kerbals died, you don't have enough money to do a launch, that sort of thing.

[Unfawkable]

The file editing is true, and so is unbinding the quick-save button for "selfcontrol", but you still have revert to launch button upon smashing the craft, and without the manual quicksave, the autosave doesn't save often enough for Ironman mode to work. Making it save after an important event (Entering an atmosphere, leaving it, something explodes, etc) would make it just fine.

Well, you can't actually appreciate a game being able to have game-over without it having a final goal at the same time, but I guess it could work without one as well. Prevents you from fully clowning around in career mode.

[regex]

but you still have revert to launch button upon smashing the craft

Incorrect, you can disable that in the save file.

Well, you can't actually appreciate a game being able to have game-over without it having a final goal at the same time, but I guess it could work without one as well.

Plenty of people can appreciate a game without a winning condition, especially if it has failure conditions. Why do you think people play stuff like Dwarf Fortress or Minecraft on hardcore mode. As for a "final" goal, make your own; that's the whole point of a sandbox game. Having a failure condition is much more interesting, especially when you get down to the line and keep managing to send up ship after ship, where every launch could be your last. Now that's exciting gameplay.

[Unfawkable]

You've made valid points sir, I yield

Still, I'd like to have options whether to have winning conditions, so you can literally make your own, but I guess the difference is minor.

[Specialist290]

If it can be toggled by editing the save file, then it should be possible for the developers to make it an option in the Preferences, which I think is what Unfawkable might be asking for. It would, at the very least, mean fewer hoops for the player to jump through.

[Dunbaratu]

The problem, in general, with perma-death in any computer game is that before it's fair to implement it, you must be in a situation where you can be 100% certain that any and all bad effects that occur are bad effects that are meant to occur. Because bugs exist, you can almost never be in this situation. If your space station blows up because you piloted poorly and ran into it, fair game. But if your space station blows up because of the Space Kraken bug and then you are not allowed to undo this because its perma-death, Then the game is, effectively, cheating against you.

And anyone who thinks it's possible for the situation to exist in which the last bug has been found and removed is someone who clearly doesn't know a thing about software. Every programmer who has ever said "I know with certainty that my software has no bugs" is a liar. The truthful honest version of that statement is "I am unable to find whatever bugs might still remain in my software."

[regex]

If it can be toggled by editing the save file, then it should be possible for the developers to make it an option in the Preferences, which I think is what Unfawkable might be asking for. It would, at the very least, mean fewer hoops for the player to jump through.

Yes, I mentioned that in my first post. I think Unfawkable's idea is pretty cool, but I also think that the devs are already thinking along the lines of having a customizable difficulty at some point; disabling quicksave/load will probably be one of the things to add. I don't know about the autosaving frequency thing, that might also be a setting in a config file somewhere, but he asks for it at certain key events. I don't know if that would mess up a landing due to lag or something... I haven't noticed lag on autosave.

[Sirrobert]

Well, you can't actually appreciate a game being able to have game-over without it having a final goal at the same time, but I guess it could work without one as well. Prevents you from fully clowning around in career mode.

MMO's don't have victory, but you sure as hell can fail at them

[Unfawkable]

The problem, in general, with perma-death in any computer game is that before it's fair to implement it, you must be in a situation where you can be 100% certain that any and all bad effects that occur are bad effects that are meant to occur. Because bugs exist, you can almost never be in this situation. If your space station blows up because you piloted poorly and ran into it, fair game. But if your space station blows up because of the Space Kraken bug and then you are not allowed to undo this because its perma-death, Then the game is, effectively, cheating against you.

And anyone who thinks it's possible for the situation to exist in which the last bug has been found and removed is someone who clearly doesn't know a thing about software. Every programmer who has ever said "I know with certainty that my software has no bugs" is a liar. The truthful honest version of that statement is "I am unable to find whatever bugs might still remain in my software."

Oh, I know it might be too early for an implementation of such a thing before gamebreaking bugs are squished. A few cheating bugs happened to me in XCOM as well that made me rage. I just haven't encountered the feature anywhere else, and wanted to suggest it in case the devs didn't plan it, but naturally it should be implemented when 1.00 arrives.

[Unfawkable]

Yes, I mentioned that in my first post. I think Unfawkable's idea is pretty cool, but I also think that the devs are already thinking along the lines of having a customizable difficulty at some point; disabling quicksave/load will probably be one of the things to add. I don't know about the autosaving frequency thing, that might also be a setting in a config file somewhere, but he asks for it at certain key events. I don't know if that would mess up a landing due to lag or something... I haven't noticed lag on autosave.

Yeah, me neither, but I have a mid-high end computer, lower comps might have difficulty with this unfortunately.

[Ghost13]

There is a too many bugs in the game to have permadeath mode right now, (kraken, docking port failure, spinning bug, hell bug and many other) also if we have permadeath than we need flight assesment system of some sort that will warn you if you a heading to catastrofical failure in your craft design. Like lack of solar panels, engine without any fuel, or stage connected without decouples e.t.c

[Unfawkable]

There is a too many bugs in the game to have permadeath mode right now, (kraken, docking port failure, spinning bug, hell bug and many other) also if we have permadeath than we need flight assesment system of some sort that will warn you if you a heading to catastrofical failure in your craft design. Like lack of solar panels, engine without any fuel, or stage connected without decouples e.t.c

Well the entire point of perma death would be to NOT have any warnings, to know that your play can have consequences, and to thus play and design more carefully.

[Dunbaratu]

Well the entire point of perma death would be to NOT have any warnings, to know that your play can have consequences, and to thus play and design more carefully.

So how does the player design cause KSP bugs again?

[Unfawkable]

So how does the player design cause KSP bugs again?

OK, as stated, it's not for the early phases. But presumably 1.00 will have as rare and few bugs as possible so it overally won't have a great effect on this.

[Camacha]

Plenty of people can appreciate a game without a winning condition, especially if it has failure conditions. Why do you think people play stuff like Dwarf Fortress or Minecraft on hardcore mode. As for a "final" goal, make your own; that's the whole point of a sandbox game. Having a failure condition is much more interesting, especially when you get down to the line and keep managing to send up ship after ship, where every launch could be your last. Now that's exciting gameplay.

It is funny that the games I like can not be won. You can only lose. Yet they keep me entertained for weeks on end, as doing things that are hard are more fun than achieving some predefined arbitrary thing.

[Unfawkable]

It is funny that the games I like can not be won. You can only lose. Yet they keep me entertained for weeks on end, as doing things that are hard are more fun than achieving some predefined arbitrary thing.

Either that, or you are a masochist