Part storage for later use

[jalapen0]

I know we don't have that many details yet but I would like to get a conversation going about Ship storage in .24. With money coming in .24, I would say most of us will want to reuse ships and parts as much as possible. Will we have a place to put pieces, parts, and complete ships for later use? Or will we just get money back when we recover them? Will there be a refurbishing cost?

What do you think?

Edited March 20, 2014 by jalapen0

[LethalDose]

First off, let me state I'm not expecting a particularly refined or balanced monetary system in 0.24, so I don't think the system we see is going to be the system that is in the final release.

I think the most likely system that will be implemented will be that the player will be refunded the cost of parts recovered. In this way, there's no need to track parts, as recovered parts just go back into the "money pool". A twist on this system may be that you're only refunded for parts recovered from KSC/Launchpad/runway biomes.

I'd like to see individual parts purchased and tracked in a "part pool", but I don't see that happening. If the devs don't think resource mining is fun, I doubt they'd think a system like this would be fun.

[Pthigrivi]

Do the devs not like resource mining? or is it just too much for them to worry about at the moment?

[sal_vager]

Lets not start another mining thread please guys

[Nemrav]

-snip-

I doubt there will be any kind of recoverable vessel thing until reputation comes into career mode.

speaking of which... Do you think we will get any kind of currency exchange in 0.24 ?

Edited March 20, 2014 by KasperVld

[cantab]

I expect when money's first introduced, there won't be any benefit to recovering stuff. That will come later.

[CalculusWarrior]

I would love to see a system of reusing parts, perhaps a warehouse where you keep all your SSTO and reusable ships. There could also be a giant pile of parts which result from recovering debris

[KasperVld]

Again people, this thread is about Recovering or storing parts from spacecraft you bring back to Kerbin. Keep it on topic.

[arq]

Since we haven't heard much mention of money yet with regard to contracts, I would expect it to be only primitively included in 0.24, if at all.

Besides, as it stands parts are horribly imbalanced when it comes to cost (and some in other aspects *cough* 48-7S and aviation fuel tanks *cough*). For example, the mainsail, skipper, and T30 have same cost (and all are cheaper than T45). The X200-32 fuel tank is cheaper than the FL-T400 tank that holds 1/8 the fuel. Meanwhile, the Jumbo-64 tank costs over 20x what the -32 does, even though it holds only 2x the fuel. Also, the -16 holds 1/2 the fuel of the -32 but costs over 3x more.

Current costs are placeholders and a rebalance, though not necessarily difficult, is something that I don't expect to see in 0.24. Without one, any money system would be annoying or exploitable, depending on your perspective, but certainly not fun.

[cantab]

With things that bad, I think when money's introduced there would be a rebalancing.

The current physics system is ill-suited to parts recovery anyway. At the moment parts in the atmosphere far from the current ship disappear, so any parts jetissoned after the earliest part of the launch and before reaching orbit cannot reach the ground for recovery. Simply extending the distance (which can be done in the current game with a mod) leads to performance issues as orbiting craft can come into physics range of the rocket being launched.

[timsfitz]

Wow I never bothered looking at the cost of things before. It makes no cents at all!

Edited March 20, 2014 by timsfitz

[katateochi]

I would really like to see some way of storing craft at KSC. Something that could store reusable craft like SSTO's or other craft like ground support crew so they don't need to be loaded all the time.

I made a suggestion about this a while back, here's the sugestion thread http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52101-A-Hanger-for-Reusable-craft-and-ground-crew

[Seshins]

As others have said - i always assumed you would get the cost (or a percentage of the cost) for recovered parts. I think restricting recovered parts to the KSC area biome would be a bit tedious though.

[lammatt]

theres a part storage container in KAS

[ArmchairGravy]

There used to be "number in stock" on items in the VAB, but this went away. I agree with the others that we'll most likely get a lump sum for recovery.

[Guest]

I don't think 0.24 will concern itself with money in the slightest. I think we'll get a contracts system, reputation, and some other things. A later version will handle the money rebalance and actually introduce financing.

FWIW I don't think any part/craft should be reusable or recouped or saved, but that's mainly because I'd love to see the smug wind taken out of the SSTO master-race's sails. Of course that also removes the possibility of being a smug rocket guy and taking pride in paying full price for every launch (hard mode) but I'd prefer the level playing field we have now.

[cantab]

On the contrary, being able to recover parts and get some money back benefits rockets much more than spaceplanes. Spaceplanes can land at KSC and get a refuel anyway.

[LethalDose]

Wow I never bothered looking at the cost of things before. It makes no cents at all!

heh. I c wut u did thar.

Lets not start another mining thread please guys

Again people, this thread is about Recovering or storing parts from spacecraft you bring back to Kerbin. Keep it on topic.

I just mentioned resource mining as a point of reference and took what devs have said about the system (nearly verbatim, mind you). And other mods have stated that topics on the WNTS list (and this topic specifically!) can be discussed if done so if done constructively, and I assume a reasonable person would believe that means it can mentioned in passing.

With things that bad, I think when money's introduced there would be a rebalancing.

The current physics system is ill-suited to parts recovery anyway. At the moment parts in the atmosphere far from the current ship disappear, so any parts jetissoned after the earliest part of the launch and before reaching orbit cannot reach the ground for recovery. Simply extending the distance (which can be done in the current game with a mod) leads to performance issues as orbiting craft can come into physics range of the rocket being launched.

This is a really important point. Given the variety of play styles and strategies that are currently balanced on mass and physics, the way the devs balance the costs of parts may have little impact on play styles or totally invalidate some.

Also, IIRC, there are also separate prices to unlock parts (in the tech tree) and to buy individual parts (in the VAB). It'll be interesting to see how these interact. These separate costs can have substantial impacts on gameplay.

[LethalDose]

On the contrary, being able to recover parts and get some money back benefits rockets much more than spaceplanes. Spaceplanes can land at KSC and get a refuel anyway.

I don't think I understand your point. With SSTO's, you can recover the entire craft, and recoup the entire cost of the vessel. With rockets, you can only recover a small part of the vessel. How does being less recoverable benefit the rockets?

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

Whats gonna happen is the following:

Sooner or later you will plug Docking ports on EVERY part so you can Launch everything into Orbit, assemble and disassemble your ships to your needs.

Once you have all the parts (and enough of them) in Orbit you are good to go.

The only bad Thing will be to find the right Part in your kesslered LKO

[Red Iron Crown]

Since we haven't heard much mention of money yet with regard to contracts, I would expect it to be only primitively included in 0.24, if at all.

Besides, as it stands parts are horribly imbalanced when it comes to cost (and some in other aspects *cough* 48-7S and aviation fuel tanks *cough*). For example, the mainsail, skipper, and T30 have same cost (and all are cheaper than T45). The X200-32 fuel tank is cheaper than the FL-T400 tank that holds 1/8 the fuel. Meanwhile, the Jumbo-64 tank costs over 20x what the -32 does, even though it holds only 2x the fuel. Also, the -16 holds 1/2 the fuel of the -32 but costs over 3x more.

Current costs are placeholders and a rebalance, though not necessarily difficult, is something that I don't expect to see in 0.24. Without one, any money system would be annoying or exploitable, depending on your perspective, but certainly not fun.

Check the part prices in game, the Wiki is inaccurate in this regard. There's still some irregularities but it's much better balanced than the Wiki would have you believe.

That said, I would imagine a rebalance of pricing will come when money becomes a factor.

[Kruleworld]

The current physics system is ill-suited to parts recovery anyway. At the moment parts in the atmosphere far from the current ship disappear, so any parts jetissoned after the earliest part of the launch and before reaching orbit cannot reach the ground for recovery. Simply extending the distance (which can be done in the current game with a mod) leads to performance issues as orbiting craft can come into physics range of the rocket being launched.

still, it would be nice to recover SRBs, have chutes on top of them instead of nosecones, so they gently float back to Kerbin.

[Rickenbacker]

I also suspect that the first implementation of this system will be simple, i.e. you recover a booster, and immediately get 50% of its "new" value refunded. In the future, though, I hope we can recover and "park" ships and probes with some kind of control core (i.e. crew pod, probe body etc), pull them out later and add a new booster to them and so on. That way we could have ships with a real history, that took part in several missions, to go with the hopefully detailed crew stats we'll also be getting at some point in the future.

I know, this is a very minor feature, since most of us won't be recovering entire ships. But some of us will be building SSTOs that can land again, and try to reuse as much as possible.

[Rickenbacker]

The current physics system is ill-suited to parts recovery anyway. At the moment parts in the atmosphere far from the current ship disappear, so any parts jetissoned after the earliest part of the launch and before reaching orbit cannot reach the ground for recovery. Simply extending the distance (which can be done in the current game with a mod) leads to performance issues as orbiting craft can come into physics range of the rocket being launched.

That can be solved, though. Just have any parts that leave the rendering range on a collision course with the planet, and not going too fast, automatically recover.

[KerbMav]

Either the rule will be players get only scrap value for recovered parts, as the materials would be deemed unsafe for reuse due to wear and tear or a real storage system will have to be introduced or Kerbals are a throw-away society and everything is lost once it is on the launchpad.

Circumventing part storage by refunding the costs for a part looks like a solution, but:

1. Refunding the full value (for a used part even) makes an economy system arbitrary.

Bill does not have enough Kesetas for a new Mainsail, but he still has 20 burned solid boosters fished out of the bay in the barn. He sells these to buy a new Mainsail.

This at least simulates the storage of the monetary value of recovered parts, but it is not really storing anything, simply exchanging parts arbitraily, as you could not end up with the realistic situation of having not enough money to built a Mainsail if you bought 20 boosters the day before.

2. Refunding at a reduced value does no longer simulate "real" storage.

Bob landed a pod softly in the bay. Bill sells it at a reduced value - and buys a new one for full price.

Even perfectly reusable parts would have to be bought back at full price. Everything the player does not manually park at KSC (like a spaceplane) would be sold at a loss, rebuying it no longer simulates having in storage.

So, if reusability were to be a thing in KSP - besides parking a spaceplane next to the hangar or building a huge crane to dock a pod onto a new rocket - it would have to go all the way really:

Scrapped parts would have to be stored as a numerical value in the VAB. As soon as the player presses launch this value would be reduced as would be the budget by the costs of the parts newly bought to assembe the rocket.

This would also open the possibility to introduce "mission parts" from contracts, special payload put into the players storage to be rocketed to its destination.

That can be solved, though. Just have any parts that leave the rendering range on a collision course with the planet, and not going too fast, automatically recover.

Alternative/possible solution: Every part/stage that gets deleted from the simulation is stored in limbo. Via an option at the space center a background simulation is run to calculate the survival/destruction of the stored parts. This allows for lag-free (cough) continuation of gameplay and the background simulation can be run by the player at any time he is comfortable with it. (Which might take a few minutes depending on the size of said limbo), would probably have to be limited to a fixed number of part-assemblies/timespan.)

Edited March 21, 2014 by KerbMav