The "Humming Metropolis" - tying features together into long term goals

[allmhuran]

Right now I'm a bit "lost" in KSP. 0.24 has brought some interesting mechanics, but more than ever I feel like we need something to tie everything together. Some kind of long term goal for which the player can employ a long term strategy to tie their missions together into some kind of coherent overall game.

Tying things together can be difficult in a sandbox game. There's no plot to advance, and no actual end to the game that the player progresses towards. But long term goals that give the player something to work towards can still be created. I think the canonical example is Sim City. Your goal is to build a humming metropolis. Every time you build a house, a road, a power plant, you're working towards some idea as to how your city should eventaully work. The game never "ends" as such, eventually the player simply admires their creation for a while, then tears it all down and starts again using some other long term strategy.

I think this kind of idea could work well with KSP. I know not everyone wants a "Tycoon" game, and right now we're all still excited by the new 0.24 features. But I think that, eventually, the endless supply of disjointed procedural contracts will leave people feeling empty. I would like the game world to evolve as I play.

So what I'd like to do in this thread is discuss features and mechanics that could provide this kind of long term strategic goal in KSP. I will provide my thoughts, and if others make suggestions I will try to work them into this post. Right up front I'm incorporating ideas I've seen posted by others in the forum. What I'm trying to do is tie all of it together. In Sim City "roads" by themselves don't do anything without a population, and "power plants" don't make sense without something that requires power.

Communications Network

I think this is the obvious place to start. The construction of a solar-system-wide communications network is obviously something that ties several launches into a long term goal. But I personally wouldn't do it quite like remotetech and require a comms link in order to control a robotic ship. Instead we could use it for other kinds of transmissions: The transmission of science data, and the transmission of contracts.

The basic idea is this: Without a line of communication back to KSC, you can't transmit your data; you have to fly it home. Also, without a line of communication from KSC to a craft, that craft can't pick up new contracts while in flight. This brings me to...

Contracts, and the automatic acceptance and completion thereof

Imagine a procedural contract pops up asking me to land on Duna and perform some particular experiment. Now imagine that I already have a base on Duna with the necessary parts. The game could, then, automatically accept and complete that contract for us. We'd get a notification that this had occurred, and we'd earn a bit of money. It would be nice if there was a new screen somewhere at the space centre to help organize this. For example, if we had a base on Duna that did not have the necessary science experiment, the screen would show the flight with a little exclamation point or something next to it, to tell us that we have a flight in the right place to meet a contract requirement but which cannot do so because it is missing something it needs. But in order to auto-complete the contract, we'd need the communications network from the previous point, otherwise we can't send the new mission to our Kerbal, nor can they send back notification of their completion.

We're not "wasting" contracts here, since contracts are endless. The idea is to have your evolving space empire provide you some benefit in terms of income. Note that you can sort of do this already in 0.24. If I have a base on Duna and then I get a contract for Duna, I can go to KSC, accept the contract, then go to the flight on Duna and complete the contract. I don't see why we shouldn't automate that away. This also provides a strategic reason to expand our "space empire", with bases, space stations, and so on. Something to actually make use of the communcations network we built.

Obviously surface samples requiring return or other contracts of this nature would require that the player actually control the mission, so the player is directly responsible for "high value" contracts.

Expenses

Now, obviously if we get to the point where we've built some of a communications network and we have a few bases and space stations and science satellites around, the contracts mechanic would mean we can turn on time warp, sit back, and watch the money roll in as automatically generated contracts are automatically completed. That's not fun. At this point we're not really playing the game anymore. So there needs to be some counterbalancing mechanic. And that mechanic can't just be the cost of launching, because then we could just sit back without performing any launches and wait till our bank fills up. The requirement is this: If the player isn't really doing anything, then their bank balance should at best stay pretty much static, or (if their overall strategy has been a poor one) actually slowly decrease. A poorly executed long term strategy should result in a failed program unless the player makes adjustments to improve it. This would be akin to scrapping a Sim City metropolis in its early stages when you realize you've done something that isn't going to work out. At the very least, you have to adjust your strategy to say afloat.

What's needed is some kind of maintenance cost. Now, to honest, I don't have any ideas for this that I think are particularly great. There are a lot of ways it could be done, but nothing really ideal springs to mind. So if anyone has a great idea for an expense mechanic that would work in an integrated, strategic environment, please post your thoughts!

One thing that I think is probably required is some kind of supply mechanic. Something like this: The hitchhiker module carrires three years worth of snacks for one Kerbal. Your kerbals never "die" if they run out, but without snacks they get cranky and won't do any work (ie, no contract completions!). Snacks act like a resource, so they have mass. Perhaps we could also allow certain bodies other than Kerbin to "generate" snacks. Say, the atmospheric bodies: Eve, Duna and Laythe. These could then become "off world" bases from which to generate supply without having to carry all of the mass all the way from Kerbin. Robotic probes wouldn't need supply, but also would only be able to complete simple contracts (like temperature readings).

Technology

Rather than the current tech tree, here's what I propose. A set of parallel technology lines, independent from each other, and which cost funds to progress. Something like the picture below... which is just an example, the specific positions and costs aren't what's important here. The key points are that you can see what tech is available all the way to the end of each line, and highly advanced tech costs a *lot* to research:

I know this is controversial, but I'd probably throw upgrades into technology as well, plus certain very specific rewards that can't be "bought", but only unlocked by completing certain specific objectives. For example, flying through the atmosphere of Eve might teach you a lot about atmospheres and perhaps is the only way to unlock the aerospike. Landing on Minmus might be required to gather the goo needed to make the goo cannister available. Etc.

So, what's the strategic goal?

The goal would be for the player to build a high tech, networked space civilization that can, eventually "look after itself". Players choose their strategies.... what order to do things in, where to put comms relays, bases, stations, how much supply to provide up front, and so on. Once they have a fully functional empire covering the entire solar system, with communications to all points, and so on (IF they ever get there... their strategy might not work!) they've basically "won" the game. The game doesn't end... they can keep flying missions, keep playing with their empire if they want to. But when they've done all they want to do, the player simply starts a new game and tries a new strategy.

Community Contributions

Over on reddit /u/doofling suggested a way of tying ongoing expenses to the communications network. I struggled with the problem of electricity being infinite and free, but the suggestion was to give comms relays an inherent maintenance cost and associate it with the idea that the network requires command on control people on Kerbin. I like this idea a lot, it rewards you for building an efficient network, and it's a cost that naturally expands as your empire expands.

Edited July 20, 2014 by allmhuran

[allmhuran]

One thing I want to add....

If someone tells me that all of this can be actually done in a mod... an entirely new tech layout, a new space centre screen from which to "manage" your empire, the auto acceptance and completion of contracts if your empire makes that possible, and so on, then perhaps I will look at creating that mod. I've never done a KSP mod, but I have been a programmer for 20 years.

[Guest]

Eh... I see what you're on about but KSP, to me at least, isn't really the type of game where you let other things do all the work; it's a very involved and hands-on type of system.

That being said, it's probably feasible to mod this into the game.

[allmhuran]

Hopefully under this model you'd fly just as many missions anyway... surface sample missions, resupply, new components to your empire, and so on. It doesn't really change what you do as a player, although it might give you some direction and organization to your launches.

But with this there'd be something going on in the background as well, something that evolves and progresses with each launch you perform, tying them all into some coherent system that integrates all of the gameplay features into a single whole. The automated mechanics are really just to give that beast some overarching purpose.

Edited July 20, 2014 by allmhuran

[Laie]

Generally, I'm not in favor of an overarching goal -- as any goal can be reached, at which point you've beaten the game. However, the SimCity-like approach is something I agree with (though, do the youngens even know what SimCity is?).

The whole contract handling obviously needs improvement. Managing a space program is nice and fine, but handling the paperwork is becoming a chore. I've only played into the new career for an hour or so and can already see that I soon will only be interested in the most rewarding contracts. Spare me with part tests -- the contract inbox needs some filter and sieve functions.

Automatic acceptance and completion... well, the whole game currently is set up such that you can get an seemingly endless number of contracts, most of which are easy to fulfill. The contracts create a nice learning environment for newbies, but in the long run, they're bound to become a chore. Automating them away over time is one way to deal with this. But it somehow doesn't feel right. As regex says: it would be un-Kerbal. Then again, at some point I'm running a system-wide enterprise (be it public, private, or whatever). Do I really have to oversee each and every rescue operation?

[allmhuran]

The way I'm imagining it you'd still have to manually perform the contracts that, basically, require you to move something. Rescuing a Kerbal is something up to the player, because the system isn't going to automatically launch or intercept anything for you. Or, if you have a base on the Munar highlands but there's a contract for the lowlands, you'd still have to get into your rover and go for a drive. If you have to return a surface sample to Kerbin then you'll either need to fly your base's return ship, or send a new ship.

Automation would only be for contracts that don't involve any actual gameplay. IE, if the contract is "take a temperature reading from the Polar Lowlands" and you have a probe sitting on the polar lowlands with a thermometer, there's no gameplay for the player to participate in. Switch to craft, right click, take reading, then switch back to whatever it was you were doing. Switching around between ships just to click dialog boxes isn't fun, so let's automate that away and simultaneously provide a function for your empire.

In other words, we're not taking any gameplay away from the player... or as I said, we're not "wasting" contracts. We're just ensuring that the player is involved in doing the stuff that involves real gameplay and not the boring stuff.

[Kegereneku]

I think I understand what you mean by overarching goal, and just appreciating the system of satellite network you've launched.

However there's a very Fundamental problem that break your analogy with simcity and make it undesirable to automatize contract-completion :

Timewarping (scale) and money revenue.

I'm the first one to advocate for a main government-funds every period of time, however I'm trying to respect to the letter diamond-carved rules :

- No important decisions must be taken outside of players' actions

- Gaining or loosing money/reputation must also depend of players' actions

- There must be a dialog between the players and the game-logic going both way.

ex : there's an incentive to tell the game that you will explore <planet> : get an advance in money.

The player is not forced to follow game-objective, but... should never ever be free from them, because this is a mechanism necessary to "have fun".

In game like Simcity you are also expected to solve problems you didn't planned, however KSP is a game where solving problems is hugely time consuming and missing a part mid-way to jool a catastrophe (just like in real space program).

And this is why I think the rules above are the most important one if the devs try to definitively tie in every feature into a complete gameplay.

[allmhuran]

I covered time warp (and why it's not a problem) in the original post, "expenses" section.

[CaptRobau]

I think it's important that the Humming Metropolis (HM) works on multiple levels. The difference between traditional sandbox games and KSP is response time/interconnectivity. In SimCity you can solve energy problems by adding another powerplant and all your homes and businesses will be lit up again. Energy problems will also influences other utilities like water. With KSP the distances involved from Kerbin don't always allow a fix and there shouldn't be too much interconnectivity. Losing one thing shouldn't mean that the entire ecosystem is at risk of total destruction. That's why the big HM needs to be made out of smaller HMs. On a mission, the communication for transmission/contracts needs to be separate from other systems. It should be a network of its own.

On the communications front, one mod already has you covered: AntennaRange/

[allmhuran]

Yeah, that's a good call and along the lines of why I didn't want kerbals to actually die if the snacks run out, but rather just have them refuse to do contracts for you.

[Laie]

The way I'm imagining it you'd still have to manually perform the contracts that, basically, require you to move something. [...]

Besides "transmit science from somewhere", is there any other kind of contract that could be automated under your rules?

Building a vast infrastructure with bases on many sites and stations in almost every orbit is one thing, but actually fulfilling all the contracts that could "easily" be fulfilled is quite another. The player doesn't scale.

I've only played into the new campaign for a dozen small missions so far, but it seems that the most juicy contracts are the "firsts": get to orbit, get to the Mun, and so on. Anything else is boring boiler-plate stuff. Don't know about you, but I will not carry a booster to the mun for testing, or even rescue a kerbal, unless short funds make me do it. Developing a huge network only so I can play save-a-kerbal ten times a day? Doesn't look like a worthwhile goal to me.

Edited July 20, 2014 by Laie

[Kegereneku]

I know you think you "covered" that, however timewarp in KSP is significantly different from strategy/gestion game-like Simcity.

Many strategy game are linear enough that timewarping will not drastically unbalance the economy in a flash second.

Not KSP in which the timewarp change things by several order or magnitude. A mere second on the highest timewarp setting have the potential to ruin you or give you absurd amount of money because the numbers involved are outside human ability to predict intuitively. And that's not talking about potential Life-support, one mistake and you've killed say 20 Kerbal and must relaunch all ships.

A perfect example I can give you for that is the small games "Stars Ruler", the game is all about exponential change. Fighting most AI is suicidal because they can do the math to optimize their productions.

Anyway, all this discussion is purely speculative, KSP isn't a large-scale gestion/strategy game. And you face the same critics done to "Colonization suggestion", you are not expected to manage more than a hundred ship simultaneously.

The game can't even keep track yet of work that happen outside player-focus.

Edited July 20, 2014 by Kegereneku
correction

[allmhuran]

I'd say anything that doesn't require something to move could be fairly easily automated. The only things that obviously don't fit are rescues and sample returns. Plus of course anything not specifically for a contract but required by the ecosystem, like new parts to your comms network, resupply, etc.

I understand exactly what you mean about the player not scaling and I definitely agree. But I don't think it creates much of a problem. We can simply limit the number of contracts on offer at any one time to 5 or 10, and the player can simply choose or not choose to accept any contracts that require their direct intervention. Meanwhile the automatic ones just hum along in the background.

[allmhuran]

A mere second on the highest timewarp setting have the potential to ruin you or give you absurd amount of money

No it doesn't, I think you need to read the OP again. I won't respond to this line further.

[Seshins]

I agree. I too crave something to truly work towards. Like constructing a civilisation out to the furthest planet. It can be an open ended game complete ending aswell.

[Kegereneku]

allmhuran, as much as I find your post usually very constructive and interesting, it's arrogant to believe you coined a whole new system that work in a mere post. Especially since it's quite different from how KSP work right now.

Isn't the thread meant to discuss the form such an end-game goal would take ? Or it is just you defending your suggestion is best ? We are all overly defensive with our "finely-crafter" suggestions.

I got it that you said "normally nothing would change unless you have to move thing physically", that's a principle just as good as what I suggested earlier. But I insist that any sort of large-scale management with "maintenance cost over time" or "life support" is dangerous because KSP Timewarp work with insanely high numbers.

And about this, KSP is clearly not a game where you launch and manage ship as abstract units. You are expected to pilot each of them.

Yes, there's not too much planet/moon that you can't cover the radio with one sat, but if we go further into your "Suggested Discussion" the objectives would be to cover every single "biomes" with all sort of experiment. THAT is a lot, too much for micromanagement.

To give my own cents on a possible "end-game goal" : Technology.

The tech-tree is like a finite progression bar, since I would really like for SQUAD to redo entirely the tech-tree I would really see it as the "goal" for reasons like theres :

- the technology is what you actually play with

- but you don't want to be forced to grind all science, some of use just like to build

- but everybody will want all the parts to play with

And so, my solution would be to just make sure you need to explore either many planet/moon, or thoroughly a few planet/moon to unlock all science.

This way :

- The player get to choose his way of playing

- The science at least is not as grindy.

There's however still the balance of Contract. but that's something else entirely, I doubt the game is completed enough to discuss of this.

[allmhuran]

Sorry Kegereneku, I know you as a thread derailer.

This isn't an idea I thought up in a 10 minute post, I've been thinking about it since I started playing KSP. Your contribution here is "it fundamentally doesn't work" and "but this isn't what the game is currently like". Well my responses are "it fundamentally does work", and "this is the suggestions forum".

So no, this is not a thread for me to defend the idea I wrote. I'm hoping people will offer up other mechanisms that could be incorporated (a really good expense mechanic is something I explicitly asked for in the OP), refinements that could help, and so on. If you would like to discuss your particular objections further I'd ask that you send me a PM so as not to end up with the derailment of yet another thread.

[Laie]

I understand exactly what you mean about the player not scaling and I definitely agree. But I don't think it creates much of a problem.

I think it is the core of the problem. Imagine what Simcity would look like if you had to babysit each commuter on their way to work. Individually. If it was me alone who had to provide for the humming, that metropolis would be a sad and dreary place.

[allmhuran]

Yeah, that would suck. Fortunately, as I said, we can just limiit the number of concurrent "player has to do it" contracts to 5 or 10, and the player can choose or not choose to accept them, much as they do now.

[prophet_01]

First of all: i like the idea of building up infrastructure. I hafe been tryin to do this for a long time involving diferent mods like kethane, remite tech and tac ls.

Its a really cool thing to think about BUT the repetitive gameplay just kills the fun. All those flights and hours of watching the burns to outer planets... even with mechjeb to help u, u still hafe to perform too many docking maneuvers to make itany fun.

The whole supply chain does not work for such a project without forms of automation. I am not even talking about budget and contracts. The microing, docking and ressource transfering take to much affort.

i will definetly start a new approach with multiplayer and friends to help me koordinate and maintain.

Another important aspect to me is the motivation. I hafe been vastly more aktive since i use visual enhamcers. It is absolutly worth the view and the screenshots.

exploration has always been the one big factor that motivated me to pull of komplex an time consuming missions.

if the planets had more to explore, not only in terms of easter eggs but landscape, lighting or planetary systems there would be a good reason to get the equipment for big explorations in place. There is a reason to build bases at laythe and jool i would like to see that expanded

[Laie]

Yeah, that would suck. Fortunately, as I said, we can just limiit the number of concurrent "player has to do it" contracts to 5 or 10, and the player can choose or not choose to accept them, much as they do now.

That would only make it worse. So I develop a huge infrastructure, only to get as many contracts as before? How am I supposed to pay for the upkeep (shipments of snacks)?

This, of course, will resolve itself nicely if you have enough auto-fulfilling contracts. If you want to keep the player in control of everything that moves, this means that the vast bulk of contracts has to be science transmission. Or you could allow for more missions to be resolved automatically. The supply runs would be prime candidates, I presume. Otherwise, the player would spend a lot (most?) of his time shipping snacks. Could as well christen the game "Space Trucking".

I say it again: The player may design and build a metropolis, but he can't fill it with life. The hum in a humming metropolis has to be provided for by software agents or automation or whatever.

[allmhuran]

Not sure if trolling....

[M3tal_Warrior]

For the humming (aka supply automation): Ever thought about sub contractors? Like we do the important stuff and get the money/reputation for building a new base/colony/mine on planet/moon whatnot, and asking other companies to supply that base for x time, handing out money. This way experienced players don't sit on infinite amounts of cash any longer, can do the interesting stuff, while everything else rolls along. Real space agencies do that too, alas not (yet) with base supply but rocket building etc.

Of course the contracts offered to us have to be able to support those financial means...