The Ressources-mining feature, do you miss it ?

[Northstar1989]

I used to have more complex kethane infrastructure, but then I slowly realized that it didn't make any sense. Fuel tankers and transfer stages are essentially the same: fuel tanks, nuclear engines, and a docking port. Because kethane containers weight less than fuel tanks and the conversion process creates mass from nothing, it's better to store kethane as kethane and convert it only when needed. Given that the kethane miner also needs engines, fuel tanks, and kethane tanks, and you already have those in the tanker/transfer stage, it's better to add landing struts to that ship, instead of using a separate lander with a lot of duplicate parts.

By making my kethane infrastructure simpler, I also made it more efficient and faster to use, until I had combined everything into a single class of ships. That's what I call successful engineering.

I'm more concerned about the big refinery that doesn't run out of supplies myself. Everything runs out of supplies sooner or later, and usually it happens sooner rather than later. Also, making things to require less maintenance usually makes them bigger, heavier, more expensive, and less efficient, which are all rather bad attributes when space travel is concerned.

The idea was that the small refinery unit is something you might include in a lander to produce the fuel for the return trip, saving you a lot of mass. If the refinery stops working after producing enough fuel, with a reasonable margin of error, nobody cares. The big refinery is supposed to big enough that you'll actually want to build infrastructure for faraway colonies, instead of carrying small converters with almost every ship just in case.

Ahh, I've had Kethane installed for the past few months, but didn't realize some of those points (like that it creates mass from nothing, for instance- which honestly sounds like the biggest problem to me. Fix that so that mass is conserved, and the fuel tanks are just as heavy for their storage-capacity, and players will actually have motivation to create separate refineries, either as immobile orbital stations or on the surface, that don't move with the rest of their mission...) as I haven't actually used it at all yet except for a brief stint with a Munar scanning satellite...

Regards,

Northstar

[cantab]

It's a tiny mass excess though, 3% at most (for making fuel with the large converter). For liquid fuel and oxidiser the mass ratios are near 1:1, so if you're mainly using kethane to produce LFO it makes little difference whether you refine on the surface or in orbit. This chimes with info second-hand from majiir (kethane dev) that he wants to disrupt optimal strategies.

If you're producing significant amounts of monopropellant or xenon, on the other hand, they have conversion ratios significantly worse than 1:1 so you're better off refining them on the surface.

[Rune]

OK, having read about two pages fully and glanced around a few comments, I'm going to throw my two cents in the ring:

First, crap, I didn't know resources where shelved that far back in the closet of "maybes". I always though it was short of implied some version of resource extraction would make it by the 1.0 release. The way you guys sound, that looks dubious now!

Second, let it be known that after a few corrupted savefiles, I now only use only two and only two mods that use parts, so I can scrub my installation of any of them at any given time and keep the savefile running (full disclosure: I do run pretty much all the partless mods, especially the visual enhancement ones). Well, those two mods I refuse to let go of are KAS and Kethane, and they both work for together in a separate class of ships for me. So, you could say I am very much pro-resources.

So why? Well, the way I see it, KSP has a fair number of different craft types you can build as it stands now. From the classic expendable rockets we started with, to the planes we got thanks to C7's mod, then stations with the addition of docking, later rovers... people with good building skills actually build boats, helicopters and surface bases now all stock! Well, the last ones are more about being able to build stuff the game wasn't meant to adn could be classes as "eye candy for the builder kind of player", but the first ones I mentioned actually have purposes and each add a big new dimension to the game:

Rockets are the heart of KSP, nuff said about them. Planes, on the other hand, allowed us to experience the joys of lights and the perils of aerodynamic instability, giving us priceless explosions on the runway and epic tales above the skies of Duna (and one of the longest lived challenges, the K-Prize! How many versions has that been running?). Rovers in their turn allowed us to explore in details going after anomalies and biomes, and hilarious cartwheels in low gravity. Even mulitpart stations served a purpose when docking was added, by allowing us to set up depots and extending our range, allowing for lighter missions to reach farther if you thought things through by set things up beforehand right (or allowing us to rescue our little green men once they run out of fuel if we didn't!).

BUT. The surface bases, the next fancy build project a KSP player can embark on, falls right now into square into the category of "eye candy" the rest of replicas as boats (well, maybe for Laythe) or helicopters: some people like me build them because they build everything, but they serve no real purpose.

Well, I posit that resources would add a new dimension to the game just like rovers or perhaps even planes did in their own way, and move the surface bases out of the "eye candy for builders" category. They would be the thing that makes them work! See, it would be like stations: by themselves, they are just eye candy serving no real purpose, but with the docking mechanic, they allow the setting up of depots and the reuse of spacecraft! That is a whole new game mechanic, setting up stuff beforehand or resupplying an ongoing mission, and for advanced players a lot of hours can be lost exploiting it for fun and epic screenies.

Simply put, surface bases would be the things that supplies stations when far from kerbin. Never mind the exact resource gathering mechanic right now (though it would be best that it was as little intrusive as possible), it would be about as important as the exact mechanism of joining two things (docking ports in this case): the point is that resource extraction is something bases do to supply stations with consumables, providing another option for exploring the kerbol system along with multistage rockets, spaceplanes, rovers, and stations.

There, that sounds as a good actual reason to put some mining system in place, right? They add more options and possible aims to the game, don't subtract anything, and can be ignored by players until they have exhausted other gameplay options. It's also not a metter of clicking to get coookies or a pat in the back, it's a synergistic mechanic that works well with the other pieces of the game, filling space stations, providing a target to fly to in your spaceplanes or a place to base your rovers from. As to how the exact game mechanic should be done, yes, I concur with a lot of comments, mining kethane by right clicking on one part then hitting the timewarp button isn't fun. But the point is not to watch the level of an indicator to slowly grow, the point should be that when you want to resupply an orbital fuel depot you consider building a surface base nearby instead of sending another load from kerbin as a viable alternative option. That doesn't even require the mechanic to use clicks, just a passive resource collection and refining by a few new parts (say like the drills and refineries form the kethane mod), working in the background (probably on rails) and giving you resources when you go to get them, probably by figuring out then how much was produced since the last time you looked into the tanks with a simple timer. The engineering challenge would be to set up a balanced base with enough storage/mining/refining/power production capabilities, and thereafter the reward would be to refuel the stuff that visits there, extending the reach of your kerbals further by yet another different route.

Well, I said it. I hope I was half coherent as I wrote, it was a really compelling argument in my head. I really hope more people think like I do and soem form of this mechaninc makes the cut into the final game! I really think we would all win by that.

Rune. Cares a lot for this game, which is why he opens his big mouth every now and then.

[Northstar1989]

OK, having read about two pages fully and glanced around a few comments, I'm going to throw my two cents in the ring:

First, crap, I didn't know resources where shelved that far back in the closet of "maybes". I always though it was short of implied some version of resource extraction would make it by the 1.0 release. The way you guys sound, that looks dubious now!

Second, let it be known that after a few corrupted savefiles, I now only use only two and only two mods that use parts, so I can scrub my installation of any of them at any given time and keep the savefile running (full disclosure: I do run pretty much all the partless mods, especially the visual enhancement ones). Well, those two mods I refuse to let go of are KAS and Kethane, and they both work for together in a separate class of ships for me. So, you could say I am very much pro-resources.

So why? Well, the way I see it, KSP has a fair number of different craft types you can build as it stands now. From the classic expendable rockets we started with, to the planes we got thanks to C7's mod, then stations with the addition of docking, later rovers... people with good building skills actually build boats, helicopters and surface bases now all stock! Well, the last ones are more about being able to build stuff the game wasn't meant to adn could be classes as "eye candy for the builder kind of player", but the first ones I mentioned actually have purposes and each add a big new dimension to the game:

Rockets are the heart of KSP, nuff said about them. Planes, on the other hand, allowed us to experience the joys of lights and the perils of aerodynamic instability, giving us priceless explosions on the runway and epic tales above the skies of Duna (and one of the longest lived challenges, the K-Prize! How many versions has that been running?). Rovers in their turn allowed us to explore in details going after anomalies and biomes, and hilarious cartwheels in low gravity. Even mulitpart stations served a purpose when docking was added, by allowing us to set up depots and extending our range, allowing for lighter missions to reach farther if you thought things through by set things up beforehand right (or allowing us to rescue our little green men once they run out of fuel if we didn't!).

BUT. The surface bases, the next fancy build project a KSP player can embark on, falls right now into square into the category of "eye candy" the rest of replicas as boats (well, maybe for Laythe) or helicopters: some people like me build them because they build everything, but they serve no real purpose.

Well, I posit that resources would add a new dimension to the game just like rovers or perhaps even planes did in their own way, and move the surface bases out of the "eye candy for builders" category. They would be the thing that makes them work! See, it would be like stations: by themselves, they are just eye candy serving no real purpose, but with the docking mechanic, they allow the setting up of depots and the reuse of spacecraft! That is a whole new game mechanic, setting up stuff beforehand or resupplying an ongoing mission, and for advanced players a lot of hours can be lost exploiting it for fun and epic screenies.

Simply put, surface bases would be the things that supplies stations when far from kerbin. Never mind the exact resource gathering mechanic right now (though it would be best that it was as little intrusive as possible), it would be about as important as the exact mechanism of joining two things (docking ports in this case): the point is that resource extraction is something bases do to supply stations with consumables, providing another option for exploring the kerbol system along with multistage rockets, spaceplanes, rovers, and stations.

There, that sounds as a good actual reason to put some mining system in place, right? They add more options and possible aims to the game, don't subtract anything, and can be ignored by players until they have exhausted other gameplay options. It's also not a metter of clicking to get coookies or a pat in the back, it's a synergistic mechanic that works well with the other pieces of the game, filling space stations, providing a target to fly to in your spaceplanes or a place to base your rovers from. As to how the exact game mechanic should be done, yes, I concur with a lot of comments, mining kethane by right clicking on one part then hitting the timewarp button isn't fun. But the point is not to watch the level of an indicator to slowly grow, the point should be that when you want to resupply an orbital fuel depot you consider building a surface base nearby instead of sending another load from kerbin as a viable alternative option. That doesn't even require the mechanic to use clicks, just a passive resource collection and refining by a few new parts (say like the drills and refineries form the kethane mod), working in the background (probably on rails) and giving you resources when you go to get them, probably by figuring out then how much was produced since the last time you looked into the tanks with a simple timer. The engineering challenge would be to set up a balanced base with enough storage/mining/refining/power production capabilities, and thereafter the reward would be to refuel the stuff that visits there, extending the reach of your kerbals further by yet another different route.

Well, I said it. I hope I was half coherent as I wrote, it was a really compelling argument in my head. I really hope more people think like I do and soem form of this mechaninc makes the cut into the final game! I really think we would all win by that.

Rune. Cares a lot for this game, which is why he opens his big mouth every now and then.

Nice post Rune. Very well thought-out.

Regards,

Northstar

[bigbadben]

I'm with Northstar1989.

Ask yourself what did Squad do? They made 'space physics' fun! They made a game where I've learned orbital mechanics, rocket equations, things that NASA takes into account when they plan missions. I -understand- the Apollo program, and appreciate it greatly more than I ever did. When I hear news articles about our space program, I (kinda) understand what they are talking about, and the obstacles they face.

Squad made 'space physics' fun!

Now, the idea of resources have been floating around. Different ideas have been fronted. Easy or hard. RTS-game style or Eve-spreadsheet style. Squad seems like they are looking around for a vision for the idea....an overarching concept to guide them...

And here it is: Make 'space chemistry' fun!

They should do what they do best, take a complex/interesting concept, and make a fun game/simulation out of it.

Northstar1989 is along that route, just needs some KISS and polishing. Imagine if they go this route, what journey would we take in chemistry? My interest in orbital mechanics and all NASA things has skyrocketed. Perhaps chemistry would too.....?

How many students/adults/kids might become more interested in chemistry, just like the knowledge and interest in space has skyrocketed with KSP. I never though delta-v would be fascinating, ....and now it is. I also don't see how 'hydrolysis' can be an riveting endeavour, but....maybe.....

And how did KSP start? With a kid launching bottle rockets into the sky with green toy men taped to them. That has grown into a game that takes people along for a journey of exploration and discovery.

How should ISRU start? With a kid opening his 'science kit' to mix stuff up and see what happens...

"hhmmm....I have my Duna colony working pretty good and..." BOOM!

"Awww crap, there goes the greenhouse."

Edited June 5, 2014 by bigbadben

[Kegereneku]

KSP is a game focused around rocket science with very big simplification.

Just to give a few example :

- The entire Kerbol system is 10x smaller than our own solar system.

- Planets have way more gravity than their mass/volume should give them

- The game use "Patched Conic" to calculate physic meaning that only two source of gravity apply at any time.

- And all atmospheric model are purely fictional.

But at least those match loosely enough reality,

If you had to apply the same gamelogic to a chemistry "minigame" it would be like saying you can convert Oxygen into H2O(water) using Helium because there's a H and you have to keep the "e" aside. You wouldn't be learning you would be making yourself more stupid.

I'm exaggerating, yes. I know. But it keep things in perspective : KSP is a video game.

And we shouldn't forget that ISRU would for some people only be a way to refill "fuel" (again an abuse term for "reactive mass"), and wouldn't like to be forced to play a new game inside the game. And that's supposing they are not overwhelmed by the difficulty of getting anywhere to be thinking about building a whole infrastructure to gather all elements needed for what they want to do. (because you are not going to let player synthesize everything)

There's also the risk of turning the gameplay into a Quest-game

"okay, I want to make fuel out of Ice but to electrolyze fuel I need a Catalyzer, so I have to search red rock then test them to see if they contain the metal I seek using a third liquid that can only be found and separated from another one found in dark red rock for which I need a truck to extract it from the next crater...

... you know what ? I'll just launch a tanker ship it will be faster and easier."