Balancing SSTO vs classical rocketry a.k.a. another take at part "aging"

[Red Iron Crown]

How about instead of an aging cost you just have a large initial cost so as to account for the maintenance of such a complicated plane

1= easier to implement

2= makes old school rockets more economical viable

3 approximates reality as those things have a HUGE maintenance cost to keep them running ...one of the reasons the space shuttle was originally scrapped

How would the game determine which craft are reusable and thus need the cost penalty?

[hawk_za]

any vehicle using a rapier engine or a rocket/plane engine combo

[Red Iron Crown]

That leaves a loophole of rocket-only SSTO designs, which are fully recoverable.

For that matter, upfront reusable costs are almost irrelevant when you can recover the craft for a 100% refund (minus fuel).

[hawk_za]

a valid point ........to which i do not have a current counter point well put and very well though out.....(feels slightly embarrassed)

[Laie]

In general you're dismissing the idea based on irrelevant and optional details.

No, I'm dismissing your idea because it's way more complicated than it needs to be.

[landing outside KSC]Sorry but this is SO easy to cheat. It does exactly what I am trying to avoid - opening gap between "recovery reusable" and "true reusable" ships. You'd just not land on KSC and you'd need to send the refueler a few kilometers away. Yes, true reusable ships are a hassle but can be used and if they come out significantly more profitable than other ways, it will be used.

(sigh) I thought i adressed this in the very next sentence, but... Sending a tanker off KSC saves money but it takes time. In the same time, you could have transmitted a lot of science and planted many flags, thus earning money. In both cases, you put effort in and get money out.

I don't want to defend my idea too much -- they key point I failed to bring across was that it's not necessary to prevent every kind of re-use. If saving money is just as much hassle as earning money, SSTOs have lost their advantage: Objective complete.

[UberFuber]

I think the suggestion adds complexity without adding much to the gameplay. Multiple issues with reusability can be resolved by tweaking the cap on recoverable amount.

Yes, that will widen the gap between "recoverable craft" and "fully-reusable craft". However, if you're skilled enough to design and land a fully-reusable craft (and have the ability to consistently reuse it), I say you deserve that boost in fund.

[Kasuha]

I think the suggestion adds complexity without adding much to the gameplay. Multiple issues with reusability can be resolved by tweaking the cap on recoverable amount.

Yes, that will widen the gap between "recoverable craft" and "fully-reusable craft". However, if you're skilled enough to design and land a fully-reusable craft (and have the ability to consistently reuse it), I say you deserve that boost in fund.

The problem with this reasoning is this:

If you ever played an MMORPG game, you know that they usually allow wide variety of customization in your skills and stats, yet only some of them make sense and they're often not easy to figure out. So people usually don't even bother experimenting and look up certain forums or wiki entries describing optimum stats/skills for certain purposes.

The same may happen to KSP. If there is one way of playing significantly better than others, everybody will use it. And if it is not easy to figure out, someone will post it somewhere and everybody will use it, without even thinking.

I don't consider it a good direction of evolution for a game like KSP.

[Laie]

Don't know about "deserve", but once you've mastered the game so far that you can pull this off, money will be a non-issue either way.

There's a bit of psychology involved, I presume. From the sheer number of "why can't I recover my boosters" threads and "cheapest this or that" challenges I suspect that a lot of people have a strong urge to save money, wether it makes sense or not. If recovery is nerferd, it may well happen that a lot of people come up with refuelable craft, while at the same time complaining that the game forces them to play this way.

[Jouni]

My take on this:

• We can ignore reusable designs for now. They'll eventually be balanced by reentry damage.
  
• To balance recoverable designs, recovery value should start at 0%. You can then increase the percentage by unlocking suitable tech tree nodes, such as Survivability, Landing, and Advanced Landing.
  

Edited August 21, 2014 by Jouni