Higher Part Cost

[mic_e]

Increases Career mode difficulty by making the budget an actual issue.

This is a ModuleManager conf file that increases the cost of all parts and resources by a constant factor of 6:

@PART[*]
{
    @cost *= 6.0
}

@RESOURCE_DEFINITION[*]
{
    @unitCost *= 6.0
}

It originated from this forum discussion.

Credits:

• Suggested by afranius
  
• Original code snippet/implementation idea by regex
  
• Implementation by mic_e
  
• Module Manager originally by ialdabaoth (who is awesome), now maintained by sarbian.
  

The snippet is placed in the public domain. I've zipped it up together with the ModuleManager DLL and uploaded it as a mod here:

Download

(I hope this is mod enough to be allowed in this forum section).

Screenshot:

Edited July 22, 2014 by mic_e

[Porkjet]

Oh cool! Its so simple! thx for sharing.

[kanelives]

aka the NASA mod.

[Rockstar04]

aka the NASA mod.

No that mod just cuts the funding by 99.99%

[Northstar1989]

Won't this eventually lead to inevitable bankruptcy if the rewards for contracts are not eventually increased by some factor as well?

Very early on, it's no problem to stay ahead of the contract rewards for the cost of your launches. But as the contracts become more expensive/further out, it QUICKLY becomes harder and harder to cut it even. It eventually reaches a point where a 6:1 profit margin (that is, costs are only 1/6th of the rewards) is absolutely impossible with disposable rockets (though you can still make it work with spaceplanes), even if you rely heavily on (relatively cheap) SRB's. So if you increase the costs by a factor of 6x, but the rewards remain unchanged, you'll eventually lead most players to inevitable bankruptcy...

I would suggest a 3-4x increase in cost, instead of a 6x increase, if you don't want most players to eventually go bankrupt. Simple enough to implement- just replace the 6 in that simple MM line of code with a 3 or a 4. You could also release separate versions of this "mod"- one for 3x, one for 6x, etc.

Oh, and by the way, you need a (simple) license for your mod or the thread will get locked by a moderator and the download link removed.

Regards,

Northstar

Edited July 22, 2014 by Northstar1989

[Agathorn]

If you want a different value, just change it yourself. It would be ludicrous to release a whole set of alternate versions of a mod that does nothing but change a number in a text file. Set it to taste as you want.

[mic_e]

Northstar: Thanks for your feedback. I got to admit that I've played stock 0.24 for only an hour or so, so your mid-/lategame balancing concerns might be very justified.

Unfortunately, the multiplier that is considered "balanced" varies greatly depending on what gameplay mods you're using (FAR making it a lot easier, DRE and TAC life support making it harder, ...), whether you're using Vessel Design/Trajectory helpers or Autopilots, and of course your individual skill level.

Luckily, it's just a conf file, and anybody who knows their [bash/vim] or [Windows Explorer/notepad] can adjust it to their liking (though I'd really prefer to ship a version that is balanced for stock...)

I'd like it to be balanced for a 'typical' advanced stock KSP player... I consider that to be someone who fails at maybe 10% of all launches, builds a LKO station in midgame to re-use crew and equipment in orbit, maybe has an SSTO for small payloads, and knows his basic landing, ascent and aerocapture profiles. But maybe I'm totally wrong there. Please, voice your opinions!

On the topic of License: I wrote that it's in the public domain, so that should pretty much cover it.

Edited July 22, 2014 by mic_e

[Renegrade]

Very early on, it's no problem to stay ahead of the contract rewards for the cost of your launches. But as the contracts become more expensive/further out, it QUICKLY becomes harder and harder to cut it even. It eventually reaches a point where a 6:1 profit margin (that is, costs are only 1/6th of the rewards) is absolutely impossible with disposable rockets (though you can still make it work with spaceplanes), even if you rely heavily on (relatively cheap) SRB's. So if you increase the costs by a factor of 6x, but the rewards remain unchanged, you'll eventually lead most players to inevitable bankruptcy...

By the way, there's this "transmit science from orbit of planet <x>" mission that can be repeated infinitely by having a probe in orbit of a few planets, with a solar panel, thermometer, and antenna.. it respawns pretty much instantly too, so it's dial-a-Funds.

My typical rocket to set this up in Kerbin/Minmus/Mun orbit is about 6k (remember, only once) and the payout is as high as 60k.

That being said, I don't like the multiplier cost for resource. I'm not big on the realism bit, but when a Saturn V launch costs 185 million USD, and it's fuel costs are 165 thousand USD... I'm probably going to tweak UP the parts cost, and DOWN the resource cost (personally, I'd rather divide the contract payouts by 6(or more) instead of increase cost by 6 to keep closer to stock costs, but I don't think ModuleManager does contracts ) in my own local copy.

Actually.. is there some simple way of dividing contract payouts?

[mic_e]

Actually.. is there some simple way of dividing contract payouts?

Not that I know of; all contract details seem to be hard-coded into the binary, so a plugin would be neccesary, but not neccesarily easy to write.

My typical rocket to set this up in Kerbin/Minmus/Mun orbit is about 6k (remember, only once) and the payout is as high as 60k.

Seems like the system is currently pretty broken, in a way that cost multipliers can't really fix... but oh well, it's the first release, I'm sure Squad will patch it in 0.25.

My personal guess is that things are gonna get a lot better (and these multipliers hopefully unneccesary) once Mission Controller has been adapted to KSP 0.24.

[regex]

I endorse this product/service.

[Renegrade]

Not that I know of; all contract details seem to be hard-coded into the binary, so a plugin would be neccesary, but not neccesarily easy to write.

Ah, that bites. Well, it would be great if a plugin-level modder could whip up something like that...

Seems like the system is currently pretty broken, in a way that cost multipliers can't really fix... but oh well, it's the first release, I'm sure Squad will patch it in 0.25.

I believe Squad did say that the missions presented are more or less placeholders and that they will be refined for .25 (can I book a ticket for the 0.25 Hype Train?), so hopefully Stock will be less insane in the future

My personal guess is that things are gonna get a lot better (and these multipliers hopefully unneccesary) once Mission Controller has been adapted to KSP 0.24.

About that - there was some discussion in the BTSM thread, and people pointed out (Streetwind, I think?) pointed out that MC tends to quickly diverge along one of two paths:

Path A - You can't keep up with costs (bad at rocket design, bad at piloting, bad at finance, or all three), so you end up bankrupt

Path B - You can keep ahead of costs, so eventually money stops mattering. (this is how stock plays mostly heh)

Basically if you don't walk a very, very thin line, positive and negative feedback loops are waiting on either side to whisk you away to Path A or Path B.

[troyfawkes]

The feedback loops are kind of like building a rocket with FAR though; sure once you stop building bricks it becomes easy mode, but that minimal respect for a legitimate issue needs to be there for every launch.

I guess the mechanic I'm looking for balance-wise is that I can afford to screw up one out of four or five launches, and if I get a really fortuitous contract through I can put a couple launches towards a pet project like a space station. The issue with stock right now is that after my first launch I've got $250k in the bank and my launches only cost $25k not even counting the fact that I'm offsetting the cost of the launch with another advance and I'll pick the pilot up in space for a $50k reward

[Northstar1989]

The feedback loops are kind of like building a rocket with FAR though; sure once you stop building bricks it becomes easy mode, but that minimal respect for a legitimate issue needs to be there for every launch.

I guess the mechanic I'm looking for balance-wise is that I can afford to screw up one out of four or five launches, and if I get a really fortuitous contract through I can put a couple launches towards a pet project like a space station. The issue with stock right now is that after my first launch I've got $250k in the bank and my launches only cost $25k not even counting the fact that I'm offsetting the cost of the launch with another advance and I'll pick the pilot up in space for a $50k reward

There are a few contracts that are extremely lucrative, yes, but in general you'll find it hard to just cut it even once your Contracts start taking you further out than just Kerbin/Mun/Minmus.

The problem with most player's early perceptions of cost is that they don't realize that Squad has intentionally given us an early buffer in terms of cost/reward so as to help new players get used to the game and allow for many early failures. Once you start progressing beyond the Kerbin system (heck, even once you start to get to Mun landings), the Contracts become extremely difficult to cut something as high as a 6:1 cost margin on.

You've got to remember it doesn't matter how much money you have in the bank- it matters how much you make/spend for whether you'll eventually go bankrupt. Thus if costs start to consistently exceed income with a 6:1 cost modifier mod like this, you WILL eventually go bankrupt even with that early-game buffer.

All this ALSO assumes you don't intentionally/deliberately cheat or exploit the Contracts system- for instance leaving probes in orbit around celestial bodies just to cheaply pick up the "Transmit/Recover Data" contracts- instead of launching a new probe for each Contract...

Regards,

Northstar

[troyfawkes]

True. I've been having a good time with the 6x part cost multiplier, it's keeping my bank in check. I screwed up a couple launches and had to resort to taking easy contracts for a bit to build up my bankroll again, but I eventually had enough to spare to send up my polar satellite for my bare bones remote tech communication network (1x geosat, 1x super high orbit polar satelite).

It's a good feeling. Mun and Minmus missions tend to include some re-use (slightly over-sized launch stage left in orbit w/ a probe), 2x docking ports, now it just needs a tug to connect it to a space station and it's a usable fuel tank.. Apollo style lander left in Mun orbit with comms equipment and probe core, now it's an equatorial Mun comm sat.

Anyway, thanks for this, really made career more exciting and dangerous

[Renegrade]

I guess the mechanic I'm looking for balance-wise is that I can afford to screw up one out of four or five launches, and if I get a really fortuitous contract through I can put a couple launches towards a pet project like a space station. The issue with stock right now is that after my first launch I've got $250k in the bank and my launches only cost $25k not even counting the fact that I'm offsetting the cost of the launch with another advance and I'll pick the pilot up in space for a $50k reward

That sounds reasonable. I sort of envisioned something like X-Com when they said Budgets and Contracts, but having to at least pay attention to it a bit wouldn't be a bad change over the 'ew money! take it, we don't want it' model we have now...

The problem with most player's early perceptions of cost is that they don't realize that Squad has intentionally given us an early buffer in terms of cost/reward so as to help new players get used to the game and allow for many early failures. Once you start progressing beyond the Kerbin system (heck, even once you start to get to Mun landings), the Contracts become extremely difficult to cut something as high as a 6:1 cost margin on.

I'm going to do a stock + info mods only playthrough mode... with a 10x part modifier (none for fuel though)! Muahaha~

All this ALSO assumes you don't intentionally/deliberately cheat or exploit the Contracts system- for instance leaving probes in orbit around celestial bodies just to cheaply pick up the "Transmit/Recover Data" contracts- instead of launching a new probe for each Contract...

..and I'll only do the science contracts with a new ship each time. And I'll only plant flags that come from KSC (ie KSC->space ship->mun/whatever->flag, not capsule-on-mun->flag->another flag->etc, or to put it simply, as if a capsule has but a single flag that cannot be re-used until it returns to KSC).

And I won't test launch clamps on Eve. No wait...

I'll see how long I last..

(I dislike the cost of fuel in KSP -- I'm not a hardcore realism guy but really.. Fuel is like 0.1% to 3% of a real world launch)

EDIT: So far things are very tight but still working at 10x.

- A mun landing is 260k with science, 60k return, and nets about 160k, so if 40k extra can be snagged during the mission, it's a net gain of science. If more than 40k can be snagged, it's a net gain of science and funds.

- A minmus landing is about 184k, payouts are probably higher, will be easier to "net" this one.

- "In flight" testing of smaller components via reusable atmospheric airplane (ie non-space plane) is incredibly profitable obviously and I've been able to hit 3 of those so far. Testing basic jet in flight was icing on the cake!

- Rescues vary in payouts. My initial rescue craft is 60.4k, and a T6 one is 54.7k, with a high percentage of recovery. When I get turbojets, it will probably be 99% recovery >.>

Edited July 27, 2014 by Renegrade

[TranquilTempest]

That sounds reasonable. I sort of envisioned something like X-Com when they said Budgets and Contracts, but having to at least pay attention to it a bit wouldn't be a bad change over the 'ew money! take it, we don't want it' model we have now...

I'm going to do a stock + info mods only playthrough mode... with a 10x part modifier (none for fuel though)! Muahaha~

..and I'll only do the science contracts with a new ship each time. And I'll only plant flags that come from KSC (ie KSC->space ship->mun/whatever->flag, not capsule-on-mun->flag->another flag->etc, or to put it simply, as if a capsule has but a single flag that cannot be re-used until it returns to KSC).

And I won't test launch clamps on Eve. No wait...

I'll see how long I last..

(I dislike the cost of fuel in KSP -- I'm not a hardcore realism guy but really.. Fuel is like 0.1% to 3% of a real world launch)

EDIT: So far things are very tight but still working at 10x.

- A mun landing is 260k with science, 60k return, and nets about 160k, so if 40k extra can be snagged during the mission, it's a net gain of science. If more than 40k can be snagged, it's a net gain of science and funds.

- A minmus landing is about 184k, payouts are probably higher, will be easier to "net" this one.

- "In flight" testing of smaller components via reusable atmospheric airplane (ie non-space plane) is incredibly profitable obviously and I've been able to hit 3 of those so far. Testing basic jet in flight was icing on the cake!

- Rescues vary in payouts. My initial rescue craft is 60.4k, and a T6 one is 54.7k, with a high percentage of recovery. When I get turbojets, it will probably be 99% recovery >.>

I'm running 10x part cost 10x fuel, and I'm still accumulating money. I'm at 2.4m after mun minmus, Duna and Ike. I'm using FAR, DRE, and RT as well.

I think flag missions(beyond the first one for each planet) need to require the mission flag be set to the company that gives you the mission. So you have to fly a new mission to complete multiple flag planting contracts on a single moon or planet. As right now it's possible to just farm infinite funds without flying new missions. That's a limitation I place on myself voluntarily.

The part testing missions usually aren't worth it, unless you're already going to be in a position to test the part during an exploration mission.

[Renegrade]

I'm running 10x part cost 10x fuel, and I'm still accumulating money. I'm at 2.4m after mun minmus, Duna and Ike. I'm using FAR, DRE, and RT as well.

I think flag missions(beyond the first one for each planet) need to require the mission flag be set to the company that gives you the mission. So you have to fly a new mission to complete multiple flag planting contracts on a single moon or planet. As right now it's possible to just farm infinite funds without flying new missions. That's a limitation I place on myself voluntarily.

The part testing missions usually aren't worth it, unless you're already going to be in a position to test the part during an exploration mission.

Yeah, I put a similar limit on my flag missions, only I didn't bother putting up a company's flag or anything. I just required that the flag had to be "transported" from KSC each time. The transmit/recover science I basically required to be recovered.

As it's been pointed out in other threads, generally a system designed like First Contract will always result in money either accumulating until it's irrelevant, or draining away until bankruptcy. Increasing the cost cautiously to a balance just pushes it towards the latter, and makes the former take more time, it's the same result in the end. Once I noticed I had several repeatable missions that were edging ahead of cost, I knew it was doing the 'accumulating' path and stopped.

It needs something else to push it along towards a balance, which would pretty much involve heavy re-design of costs (ie, there'd have to be costs other than parts and fuel). Otherwise, contracts are just a little diversion that you run every once in a while to fund up your own sandboxy missions (which isn't bad, really, just kinda less than advertised heh).

By the way, why 10x fuel? Fuel costs are out of whack with physical parts cost in stock..

[mic_e]

Any ideas how the gameplay mechanic could be prevented from "depending on your skill/mods/gameplay 'ethics', you'll either go bankrupt or have infinite money"? Stock has this issue, and Mission Manager seems to have it too, so I think a lot of people already tried to find solutions, and failed... I can't think of anything, good either. (see below)

How is this 'gameplay mechanic' 'handled' in real life, anyways? Well successful, huge companies tend to waste money and ressources on paying exorbitant sums to their managers, who then go on to hire incompetent personell for superfluous job postings, but in the end they are still making lots of profit, so... real life has the same problem!

Real companies don't have infinite cash because they tend to spend surplus on acquisitions (-> unlocking parts?) and paying it out to stockholders (-> increase your 'game score'? your reputation maybe?)

Maybe there should be 'prestige missions' that will be very hard (-> expensive) to do, increase your 'game score' (reputation?) but not pay you any money, thus forcing you to build up cash, and allowing you to put your surplus cash to good use.

If such prestige missions would be the only way of gaining reputation, or maybe science, it might make for a very interesting gameplay mechanic.

The prestige missions could be unique and pre-determined, maybe to mirror earth's actual prestige missions (man in space, orbital docking, hypersonic aircraft, mun landing, duna landing, ...), and your skill would determine the time it takes you until you can afford the next prestige mission. That prestige mission will, in turn, allow you to unlock a wider range of parts and missions (as well as the next bunch of prestige missions).

At that point, the main difference to NASA's program would be that instead of begging for government money, you'd have to earn your money by doing commercial missions, which is, I think, far more enjoyable

Sure, once you've done everything there's to do in the game (the last prestige missions could be a grand tour and an Eve ascent), it will be back to usual business, i.e. your money hurling towards infinity, but there's nothing you can do about that. Except constantly reducing payouts until you go bankrupt, which would be no fun either.

Edited July 28, 2014 by mic_e

[Dragonchampion]

I know this is a very old mod and probably out of date, but is there any way that this works on .90, and is there maybe a way to reduce the price for fuel as well? I want my parts to be expensive by my fuel to be cheap; essentially encouraging multi-use rockets and part recovery.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Dragonchampion

[somnambulist]

I know this is a very old mod and probably out of date, but is there any way that this works on .90, and is there maybe a way to reduce the price for fuel as well? I want my parts to be espensive by my fual to be cheap; essentially encouraging multi-use rockets and part recovery.

It's a ModuleManager patch so it should work just fine. To reduce the cost of fuel change the the number in "@unitCost *= 6.0" to whatever you want to reduce the fuel cost by. If you want fuel to be 1/10 of stock, change 6.0 to 0.1.

Changing resource cost will wreck the balance of any part that uses Firespitter to switch between multiple different resources in a single part (e.g., B9's or USI's tanks)

[Dragonchampion]

Changing resource cost will wreck the balance of any part that uses Firespitter to switch between multiple different resources in a single part (e.g., B9's or USI's tanks)

Crap. Is there any other way to do it then? Because I use B9, MKS/OKS and Karbonite which all use that! How exactly does it wreck the balance?

Edited January 6, 2015 by Dragonchampion

[somnambulist]

Crap. Is there any pther way to do it then? Because I use B9, MKS/OKS and Karbonite which all use that! How exactly does it wreck the balance?

It's because of the quirky way that KSP handles part costs for tanks. The price set in the CFG is the cost of the including any contained resources; by reducing the cost of resources you effectively increase the cost of the empty tank.

Edit: This is how KSP handles part costs. Lets say you sell me a bag of stuff for $1. If you fill the bag with gold the cost of the empty bag is less than 1¢. If you fill the bag with sand the cost of the empty bag is 99¢.

Edited January 6, 2015 by somnambulist

[Dragonchampion]

Well, since I am wanting to increase the part cost anyways, wouldn't that be perfect?

[mic_e]

This config file should work properly with the current version of KSP/MM; however, KSP now provides its own slider to change the carreer mode balance, so I consider it obsolete.

[PataSolar]

The link for this mod is dead. Can anyone help me with how you'd go about changing or creating a .cfg file to enact this?

EDIT: Apologies for reviving this dead thread. If I could delete this post I would. I've learnt how ModuleManager works and how to utilize it now. So, hunky dory here. 

Edited August 15, 2018 by PataSolar