Ironman mode

[Dombi]

I don't know if this was suggested before but there should definitely exist an ironman "like" mode in the final version.

For those of you who've played XCOM you're probably familiar with the concept. It basically prevents you from quicksaving or quickloading before a major event like a landing or a docking situation. Meaning all your actions are permanent and you have to deal with the consequences of your failure.

Of course it should be a selectable feature and not be made mandatory as this is a kind of hardcore mode for hardcore players. I feel like it would make stuff more realistic and even more dramatic.

Thanks

[lajoswinkler]

At first I thought you're proposing a mod that would allow Kerbals to be like this.

[Unfawkable]

It was in fact, by me. And by the same name. Glad to know I'm not the only XCOM fan here.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59146-IronMan-mode-difficulty

[TimMartland]

Woo! XCOM! Also, I agree with this - its a great idea and would not be massively difficult to implement.

[Marcuzzi]

Can someone explain why I see so many people trying to make KSP harder with suggestions similar to this?

If quick saving/ quick loading is to easy for you... stop using it..

-sarcasm ensuing-

"Wow that means hard mode was in the game the whole time!?! If only other's knew, I must tell the world!"

Obviously I'm an idiot and this isn't the case here (right?) and I must clearly be missing the point. Could someone explain?

At first I thought you're proposing a mod that would allow Kerbals to be like this.

...and I thought this thread was going to be this also

[astropapi1]

Just don't quicksave/quickload.

[Unfawkable]

Wouldn't that function the other way around as well? If you don't want this feature, then don't use it?

[Dombi]

Having the option to do so with so little effort simply means you're going to end up by doing it at some point even though you estabilished you would not. See, we're all humans and all prone to temptation... Who hasn't used the debug mode in a situation where you needed just that little extra fuel?

On the other hand, it would be just a tiny little box that could be checked before you start a new game. Nothing that would hurt anyone.

[horndgmium]

How about... not quicksaving?

[Marcuzzi]

Having the option to do so with so little effort simply means you're going to end up by doing it at some point even though you estabilished you would not. See, we're all humans and all prone to temptation... Who hasn't used the debug mode in a situation where you needed just that little extra fuel?

On the other hand, it would be just a tiny little box that could be checked before you start a new game. Nothing that would hurt anyone.

Or, show some restraint and fail horribly with honor.

Or, use the menu and feel okay with not having to repeat the whole process due to your playing time frame.

Or, use the menu and keep your mouth shut about how 'easy' you 'think' the game is.

(not attempting to insult you Dombi, just generalizing)

[Dombi]

Well, I didn't mean to say the game was easy. It's just a different game mode that actually happens to be harder but also offers a different gaming experience as in, you can't just build something that has an engine under it and throw it at the Mun. There's actually some planning involved which may or may not include making Deltavee calculations or testing each feature of your craft before sending it to Jool. It's just a different game experience and from what I'm feeling there are some people trying to play that way right now (just watch Scott Manley's interstellar series). So if there's people playing that way perhaps it should be made as a game feature.

Also it's just a suggestion... Not trying to insult anyone.

Anyway, when I first heard of ironman mode in XCOM I also reacted that way... "Why would anyone ever play like that?" But then I tried it myself and ever since I don't think the game makes sense any other way around.

[datubaman]

The amount of "ermagerd if yer wanner pleh it lahk that thein jurst dern't quickserve!" is just...*exasperated sigh* Look. I have no idea why there is so much hostility to these suggestions every time they are made. You can make that argument all you want, but there is one little thing that you don't understand, and that Dombi has already pointed out, that invalidates that argument. Saying that you are going to do something is one thing, but actually following through and doing it is a completely different monster. There WILL be moments where you will break your rule, because of a botched maneuver or screwing up the time acceleration, or whatever. I, myself, have tried on numerous occasions to follow a set of rules, but, in the end, I always break them. However, by making these rules hard-coded into the game, that temptation is totally removed. It becomes easier to actually play the game, because you don't have to fight the urge to break your rules. The game becomes fun again.

Another thing that I would like to point out is that actually HAVING these difficulty settings would actually have some other benefits as well. It could encourage players who normally wouldn't have thought to try to play in a different way. Because, now that it is there, the idea is there. It opens up a possibility that they would have NEVER come across otherwise. If you want an example of this happening, just look at the introduction to Hardcore mode to Minecraft.

So, TL;DR Adding this as a game mechanic has more benefits than you think it does. So, stop moaning about how people should just, "not use quicksave."

[Canopus]

They just don't want more factions of people who think better of themselves for not reloading and therefore rescuing themselves out of tricky situations similar to other problems this community has... Although i haven't observed this at the 2k forum i still think they may be right.

But yes you are right XCOM is a great game

[tetryds]

Isn't it easier to just set a checkbox that does not allow you to use quicksave at all?

Because you will never need it other than when a major event fails anyway.

At first I thought you're proposing a mod that would allow Kerbals to be like this.

http://media.moddb.com/images/downloads/1/59/58033/iron_man_fly_render_farrukh.jpg

Jeb approves.

[Supernovy]

If you open up the persistence file in a text editor, you can see several changeable options, including whether quicksave/load is allowed and whether KIA crew respawn. You can even block off access to certain buildings (e.g. Spaceplane only mode with a locked VAB).

[peadar1987]

Not until after the Kraken has been slain!

[Marcuzzi]

Isn't it easier to just set a checkbox that does not allow you to use quicksave at all?

Isn't it easier to not push a button.

Also, you can just unbind the quicksave and quickload in the settings menu when the game first loads.

[MSD]

They could enable you to set the options ingame... But of right now it is avaible in de persistance file.

[Nerei]

Considering the number of bugs in the physics engine I would say no thanks. I cannot keep track of the number of times a craft spontaneously disintegrated after docking, firing a decoupler or just decided to disassemble itself. My last case was a Kerbin return vehicle that disintegrated after docking with the ascent stage of a lander module. In that case I darn well want a function to take me back before a flaw in the game decided my ship should not exist even if I do not plan to use quicksave to solve the problem when my lander crashes due to poor piloting.

If they can fix those kinds of bugs then fair enough I can see a point with a dedicated ironman feature but until then I would not touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Have to ask a question though: If Ironman is to avoid people being tempted, what is preventing them from copy-pasting persistance files as an alternative? I personally use it as a backup in case I destroy my save (yes it has happened before) but nothing prevents you from effectively using it as a full scale save function.

Also deliberately crashing the game right after something bad happens might just allow you to retry and prevent it from happening.

Creating a mode that does not allow any kind of "exploits" is a big project and probably not worth the resources. For the record it has been some time since I last played the new Xcom so they might have fixed it but at release there was a ton of different ways to exploit or work around their "anti-cheat" system if you felt like it and that was by a company that can throw considerably more resources at it than Squad can be expected to.

Making a checkbox as have been suggested to simply enable/disable quicksave should be fairly simple and a good enough substitute for a true secure ironaman mode.

[allmhuran]

I tried to create Iron Man in the VAB.

I got as far as creating most of the frame for the head. 200 parts... just for the frame.

So I gave up.

[Dombi]

I would definitely go with a no quicksave/quickload feature in game.

About the bugs, well... that's a part of the risk gamers have took ever since gaming exists. How many Game Boys have you destroyed 20 years ago when you were on that final stage of Super Mario and the game simply crashed? I know I destroyed some. Just about 10 years ago and a save game option was something of a luxury... People have managed to survive that somehow... I can play more than 100 hours of KSP and not find any major game affecting bug. Knowing your way around the system's flaws is also a part of mastering the game.

Trying to work your way around the anti cheat is something that will happen, and even if it happens it's ok... This is simply supposed to make you play in a certain way, and there might be this unique event that will make you crash your game on purpose to get back to a previous point but that just won't be your normal game play style. And in case it is then you should allow the quicksave option anyway as it will be easier than crashing the game or rescuing persistance files.