Recovering a vessel landed at KSC yields a science bonus

[Maxwell Fern]

Hi there,

here's the basic idea: right now, no watter where you land or splash your vessel on Kerbin, recovering it gives you a fixed number of science points. That's ok, but I think there should be a little incentive to control your landing spot.

So I suggest a little tweak:

- +15% bonus for a KSC landing

- + 5% for a splash down

- -5% for a landing at poles

- on top of that, up to a -5% depending on how far you are from KSC

I think this is low enough for new player to not care about it, but still interesting for experienced players who want to maximize their missions' results.

But above all, this would make spaceplanes/shuttles usefull, and give players a reason to land on the runway.

What do you think ?

Edited December 20, 2013 by Maxwell Fern

[Dweller_Benthos]

Yeah, I had the thought, that once an economy and costs are introduced, that recovering vessels should cost something. The further away from the KSC you land, the more it costs.

Until then, though, a "bonus" in science for closer landing would be cool, and not that hard to implement. Though unless they plan on keeping it forever, might not be a good idea. I can just hear the screams when they announce "You can longer get bonus science for a close landing, you now have to pay for a recovery team/vessel" LOL

[Maxwell Fern]

Actually the penalty for landing far away is not the main point: I just want to have an excuse to build a shuttle to go in orbit, rendez-vous and pick up my hero crew back from a mission on the Surface of Eve, and land them safely home on the runway, with all the press and fans throwing a huge parade.

Yeah, I'm a dreamer.

[jcraft]

Yeah, I had the thought, that once an economy and costs are introduced, that recovering vessels should cost something. The further away from the KSC you land, the more it costs.

This is what Squad is planning, or at least it WAS planned to be that way. But if they do it like that it will suffice as for giving player a incentive to land as close to KSC as possible.

Adding science bonus (or handicap) dependant on landing location doesn't seems like good idea - after all, what's the difference where you land? Are the rocks you brought from the Mun for some reason should be more valuable for your scientist if capsule landed on KSC roof than in the grasslands? Science system is already unintuitive right now - and it should be made rather MORE intuitive than LESS intuitive. Your idea unfortunately makes it less intuitive... at least in my opinion.

Edited December 20, 2013 by jcraft

[bombo1]

wrong forum

[SpaceSphereOfDeath]

Yeah, I had the thought, that once an economy and costs are introduced, that recovering vessels should cost something. The further away from the KSC you land, the more it costs.

I want this, but if you land in water it costs more as well

[Maxwell Fern]

Adding science bonus (or handicap) dependant on landing location doesn't seems like good idea - after all, what's the difference where you land? Are the rocks you brought from the Mun for some reason should be more valuable for your scientist if capsule landed on KSC roof than in the grasslands? Science system is unintuitive as it is now - and it should be made rather MORE intuitive than LESS intuitive. Your idea unfortunately makes it less intuitive... at least in my opinion.

If you want to go there, then tell me how intuitive it is that bringing back a thermometer provides more science than transmitting its readings ?

Carreer mode is just blooming, there's not a lot of sense in what we're doing anyway. I'm not talking about realism here, I just want to suggest a simple tweak that will justify the mere presence of the SPH.

But if you want some logic, just see it that way: the ressources (money, kerbals, whatever) you used to recover a ship stranded on the other side of kerbin are ressources you can't used on studying the experiments they brought back.

And that's actually accurate: if the Apollo missions had not been so expensive, maybe there wouldn't have had been so many "lost" moon samples.

[Maxwell Fern]

I want this, but if you land in water it costs more as well

Most of the return missions mankind has realised were intentionnaly splashed down.

[Bobbydylan]

Most of the return missions mankind has realised were intentionnaly splashed down.

Not true. Only the Pre Shuttle american capsules splashed down. The shuttle never did, and neither does the Souze.

[Maxwell Fern]

The Shuttle can land on a runway, and that's exactly why they made it: they had an incentive.

[richiespeed13]

Water splash downs are very common for "pod" landings. Of course a shuttle does not land in water, it is a glider with full landing gear...

I don't know about you, but I would rather impact water at 20mph+ than solid land.

[lazarus1024]

Yeah, I had the thought, that once an economy and costs are introduced, that recovering vessels should cost something. The further away from the KSC you land, the more it costs.

Until then, though, a "bonus" in science for closer landing would be cool, and not that hard to implement. Though unless they plan on keeping it forever, might not be a good idea. I can just hear the screams when they announce "You can longer get bonus science for a close landing, you now have to pay for a recovery team/vessel" LOL

I agree. I think it makes more sense that in the future the closer to KSC you land, the more you recover cost wise from the mission, or you earn more or something along those lines.

I don't think it really makes sense to have a science bonus for it.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

No way, you should get bonus points for landing capsules in the poles and fighting off wolves, USSR style

[jcraft]

If you want to go there, then tell me how intuitive it is that bringing back a thermometer provides more science than transmitting its readings ?

Well that is what I have in mind by saying it is "unintuitive". I really hope that Squad will figure out a way to balance between gameplay and some logic - because for now this balance is completely on "gameplay" side and in some cases my brain just want to melt by just thinking about it (like in thermometer example you brought up).

Carreer mode is just blooming, there's not a lot of sense in what we're doing anyway. I'm not talking about realism here, I just want to suggest a simple tweak that will justify the mere presence of the SPH.

As I stated in previous post. When money will come in to play - there will be good incentive to land in KSC area.

But if you want some logic, just see it that way: the ressources (money, kerbals, whatever) you used to recover a ship stranded on the other side of kerbin are ressources you can't used on studying the experiments they brought back.

And that's actually accurate: if the Apollo missions had not been so expensive, maybe there wouldn't have had been so many "lost" moon samples.

Good point - but I don't think it should be translated into the game mechanic in a way you're proposing. If I have to lose resources because of my sloppy landing that can be used to do research then they should be lost in terms of real game mechanics not some science bonus/handicap:

- I landed on the north pole - I must spend good amount of money to recover vessel so I have less money to do research

- I landed in the KSC - money is not required (or just some small amount) to recover vessel so I have more money to do research

Judging from Squad plans - it will work in a very similar way to what I described: to unlock parts you will need not only the science points (to unlock tech nodes) but also money (to unlock certain parts in the unlocked tech nodes) - so spending more resources on vessel recovery will slow down your research.

Edited December 20, 2013 by jcraft

[vexx32]

Moved to Suggestions and Development Discussion.

[kookoo_gr]

It is an interesting idea but i believe it would be good to add to the reputation of the player and have smaller recovery costs at KSC and not a bonus to science.

If the devs decide to add this option to the game it will have to be well balanced so that it won't discourage new players if the fail at landing at KSC. Looking at Mission controller mod you can get an idea of what i mean

Also i believe it would be nice to add alternative landing sites that allow smaller recovery costs and and add reputation to the player and/or allow for planes to refuel for some cost. This will allow some variety at exploring Kerbin and seasoned players can have a bit of challenge to land at different sites since after some time just aiming for KSC can get boring. Also this will allow for less fuel consumption when coming for a landing at a weird orbital plane. Finally they can provide an emergency landing site if something goes wrong during a flight that will allow the recovery of a craft without loosing much reputation and your ship along with your Kerbals if the devs implement missions.

[Maxwell Fern]

Well that is what I have in mind by saying it is "unintuitive". I really hope that Squad will figure out a way to balance between gameplay and some logic - because for now this balance is completely on "gameplay" side and in some cases my brain just want to melt by just thinking about it (like in thermometer example you brought up).

As I stated in previous post. When money will come in to play - there will be good incentive to land in KSC area.

Good point - but I don't think it should be translated into the game mechanic in a way you're proposing. If I have to lose resources because of my sloppy landing that can be used to do research then they should be lost in terms of real game mechanics not some science bonus/handicap:

- I landed on the north pole - I must spend good amount of money to recover that vessel so I have less money to do research

- I landed in the KSC - money is not required (or just some small amount) to recover vessel so I have more money to do research

Judging from Squad plans - it will work in a very similar way to what I described: to unlock parts you will need not only the science points (to unlock tech nodes) but also money (to unlock certain parts in the unlocked tech nodes) - so spending more resources on vessel recovery will slow down your research.

Well... I totally agree with you but you're thinking on the long run, I just suggest something that can be done right now, and later integrated in the money management or whatever.

Science is the only thing we can earn right now.

[jcraft]

Well... I totally agree with you but you're thinking on the long run, I just suggest something that can be done right now, and later integrated in the money management or whatever.

Science is the only thing we can earn right now.

Earning money is not that far away - everything what we heard from Squad lately suggest that next big update (0.24) will focus mainly on money and means to earn it. So there isn't really a good reason to implement a somewhat placeholder feature like that at this point of development as it would end up quickly replaced by more robust system.

Edited December 20, 2013 by jcraft