"Fatigue" energy rescource for kerbals.

[Capt Snuggler]

kerbals should get tired. sitting in a cockpit for an 30minutes being subject to high G forces makes you pretty tired. as does sitting in a cockpit for 30 hours waiting for the next burn.

My suggestion is kerbals should have a energy resource: "Fatigue"

Fatigue would build up as a kerbal performs tasks. obviously at different rates depending on the task.

Tasks include:

• piloting.
  
• driving.
  
• performing EVA.
  
• experiencing G force.
  
• writing crew reports.
  
• other science.
  
• conducting repairs.
  

When a kerbals fatigue meter gets to 100% its time for bed. if they continue to work beyond 101% then their ability to perform tasks would rapidly diminish.

The effects could be:

• tunnel vision and loss of color.
  
• falling over more often.
  
• much lower science return.
  
• poor repair jobs.
  
• poor control from jet pack.
  
• falling off ladders.
  
• falling out of command seats during turns.
  
• involuntary napping (loss of control).
  

Visual indicators would need to be added to show fatigue level to the player. like a bar under their portrait that turns red once it goes past 100% fatigue. also the tunnel vision and loss of color.

To rejuvenate your kerbals (lower fatigue), kerbals need rest. they can do this by taking a nap. (preferably not at the controls)

Different seats could have different rejuvenation rates and a maximum rejuvenation level. Your kerbal is not going to be bright eyed and fresh after a trip to Duna in a Mk1 command pod.

The lower seat in the MK1-2 is a better place to relax then the upper two. same with the rear seat in the MK2 lander can, but hitchhikers are the best place to relax.

I believe this would work well with kerbal XP also. for example as a kerbal gets more pilot skill become less fatigued by G forces and general piloting so they can sit in a pilot for longer between breaks.

Simply more experienced kerbals can work longer and rest quicker.

what do you think?

*edit*

the player will get plenty of warning that the Kerbal is becoming fatigued.

• 0-50% the fatigue bar is Green. Kerbal is fresh. no effect on performance.
  
• 50-80% the bar is Yellow. Kerbal is less excitable. no effect on performance.
  
• 90-100% the bar is Orange kerbal is wavering. science reports are full of spelling errors. soil samples less interesting. screen darkening around edges. eyelids heavy. uncontrollable yawning.
  
• 100% + the bar is RED and flashing kerbal is exhausted. eyes bloodshot. they could fall asleep at any moment. worsening tunnel vision. loss of picture color.
  
• Napping the bar is Black. kerbal is now asleep and unresponsive. the fatigue bar starts counting back to 90%.
  

Edited November 7, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Majorjim!]

Interesting idea Snuggler.

I could see this as part of the difficulty settings. Perhaps snacks could boost your energy temporarily?

[Capt Snuggler]

Interesting idea Snuggler.

I could see this as part of the difficulty settings. Perhaps snacks could boost your energy temporarily?

lol, I love the idea of Jeb shoveling chips in to his mouth during a 8G turn.

[Javster]

lol, I love the idea of Jeb shoveling chips in to his mouth during a 8G turn.

The chips weighed 8 times their mass... Jeb was struggling, but he knew he had to shovel them in his mouth, or the turn would exhaust him, he'd lose control and die.

[Laie]

what do you think?

If it means that it will be my job to tell the Kerbals that it's about time to take a nap, I'm all against it.

[Capt Snuggler]

If it means that it will be my job to tell the Kerbals that it's about time to take a nap, I'm all against it.

If they're working, piloting for example then they would continue to do so beyond 100% fatigue, but with the risk of falling asleep at the wheel.

If they are idle in a control seat, then they would nap automatically when they reach 100% fatigue or when you tell them to.

Kerbals in passenger seats take naps and relax as they please and only get fatigued by G forces.

EVA counts as a task. you cannot tell them to nap but they might just nap anyway if beyond 100% fatigue. involuntary napping during EVA does not rest them much. its hard to "catch Zs" in a space suit.

The chips weighed 8 times their mass... Jeb was struggling, but he knew he had to shovel them in his mouth, or the turn would exhaust him, he'd lose control and die.

lol, maybe snacks could only be eaten when idle and not during high G-forces.

*edit*

Rovers would be much more important under this system. The fatigue from being on EVA would act like a range limit of a sort. Rovers would extend this range considerably.

Also multi kerbal craft would also be more important, so you can rotate crew in shifts.

The MK1-2 command pod would have a clear advantage over others. Two control seats for redundancy and a passenger (rest) seat for nap time.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Vallius]

So would this be kind of like losing control on a probe that runs out of batteries? This would be an interesting way of looking at life support, and gives us a reason to send multiple crew. Would I need to tell the kerbals to take shifts, or would they figure it out themselves?

I don't like the idea of kerbals losing control in EVA though. It's bad enough that Jeb keeps bouncing off the command module when I try to him back in. I'd hate to lose a kerbal on EVA just because he got tired pushing buttons on his jetpack.

[kujuman]

Interesting in theory, not sure how well it would work in practice because it seems hard to balance. Most of the time Kerbals are doing things in space they're just waiting. Correction burns are far and few between.

So to make the system actually have an impact on gameplay, it would have to be scaled to fatigue quickly. Different activities would fatigue at different rates as well.

There are two times I could see this being a simple (relatively) case: after attaining orbit and after landing (if not just dropped on chutes). The shuttle wasn't really scheduled to do anything for a while after it got to orbit (at least the few mission timings I've looked at) and after landing the Apollo astronauts had rest. "Fatigue" could be a catch-all for both tired-ness and having to readjust to new environments.

But it should be something that's easy and fast for the player. If I have an hour, I can easily do a Mun mission if I already sorta know what my objective is. On my good days I can design and launch, and dock a new station module in LKO in about 30 minutes. I don't want to have to spend extra time waiting for my Kerbals; if that were the case, I'd just attach a probe to get around the fatigue issues. A gameplay feature that just ends up getting circumvented by players is not something worth doing.

[Capt Snuggler]

So would this be kind of like losing control on a probe that runs out of batteries? This would be an interesting way of looking at life support, and gives us a reason to send multiple crew. Would I need to tell the kerbals to take shifts, or would they figure it out themselves?

if the pod has more than one control seat the kerbals could figure it out them selves.

eg:

Jeb Bob and Bill are in a MK1-2 pod. Jeb and Bob are each in a control seat. Bill is in the passenger seat snoozing. Jeb and Bob will alternate control automatically as each get tired from piloting. they will only recover back to 50% as the control seats are not as comfortable as the passenger seat. Bill maintains a happy 0-5% fatigue as he Naps and snacks as he pleases, only waking for crew reports and G-forces.

I don't like the idea of kerbals losing control in EVA though. It's bad enough that Jeb keeps bouncing off the command module when I try to him back in. I'd hate to lose a kerbal on EVA just because he got tired pushing buttons on his jetpack.

the player will get plenty of warning that the Kerbal is becoming fatigued.

• 0-50% the fatigue bar is Green. Kerbal is fresh. no effect on performance.
  
• 50-80% the bar is Yellow. Kerbal is less excitable. no effect on performance.
  
• 90-100% the bar is Orange kerbal is wavering. science reports are full of spelling errors. soil samples less interesting. screen darkening around edges. eyelids heavy. uncontrollable yawning.
  
• 100% + the bar is RED and flashing kerbal is exhausted. eyes bloodshot. they could fall asleep at any moment. worsening tunnel vision. loss of picture color.
  
• Napping the bar is Black. kerbal is now asleep and unresponsive. the fatigue bar starts counting back to 90%.
  

so you wouldn't necessarily loose the kerbal. they would just take a Nap until they reached 90%. then they would wake up you resume control.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Capt Snuggler]

I don't want to have to spend extra time waiting for my Kerbals; if that were the case, I'd just attach a probe to get around the fatigue issues. A gameplay feature that just ends up getting circumvented by players is not something worth doing.

Yeah, I though about this too. probes are in desperate need of re-balance. they are way too powerful at the moment.

I'm not sure exactly how this could be done just yet. an idea I was thinking about would be probes needing to be "programmed" to perform flight tasks. eg:

>set attitude =90°E

>set SAS = on

>wait for altitude = 100,000m

>set throttle =100%

>wait for speed = 2300mps

>set throttle =0%

>end

if you want direct control over a probe it would need a communotron and allot more electric charge.

i know allot of people would hate this though...

Edited November 7, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[Majorjim!]

*edit*

Rovers would be much more important under this system. The fatigue from being on EVA would act like a range limit of a sort. Rovers would extend this range considerably.

Also multi kerbal craft would also be more important, so you can rotate crew in shifts.

The MK1-2 command pod would have a clear advantage over others. Two control seats for redundancy and a passenger (rest) seat for nap time.

That point sold it for me. It wouldn't be a hassle, you just have to plan for it. I'm all for that. At present all we have to plan for is fuel and elec and whatnot. Nothing to do with the squidgy green cargo.

Then a 'absolutely will not stop' robo rover will be a genuine alternative to a crewed one. The Kerbal could even nap while the robo rover chauffeurs them around the surface.

"Wake up sir, we have arrived"

[tater]

I think that barring huge changes to kerbals in KSP, this is a pretty bad idea.

There is little to actually do with kerbals, so making it harder to get them done means making it simply more annoying to get it done. Adding life support makes far more sense (which supposedly won't happen).

For this to be useful, kerbals would need complete autonomy, IMO. AI kerbals that do stuff. THEN, fatigue makes tons of sense. Without the AI, it's just tedium.

I can see the point in forcing larger crews, I suppose (having shifts, basically).

[Majorjim!]

I'd just attach a probe to get around the fatigue issues.

See! Because you managed your crew poorly you have tired crewmembers so you have to automate the mission.

[Capt Snuggler]

There is little to actually do with kerbals, so making it harder to get them done means making it simply more annoying to get it done. Adding life support makes far more sense (which supposedly won't happen).

Obviously this idea relies heavily on the assumption that there will be much more for kerbals to do in the future. they are already scheduled for a big update in .90 (.26)

things I would expect by V1.0 release are:

• greater variety of repair tasks
  
• simple construction tasks
  
• greater variety of science tasks
  
• training (ether directly or by doing stuff)
  
• picking things up and moving them (broken parts, larger rock samples, experiment packages, etc)
  
• maybe even photography
  

I'm also relying on the assumption that Probe cores will also get balanced to make manned missions much more appealing. right now, probe cores are just too easy.

personally I think probe cores should require some kind of programming to operate. Direct control of probes should require large amounts of electric charge and an antenna. maybe even a remote tech like communication link from KSC to probe.

probe cores would become harder to operate, but they are a more complicated way of running a mission in real life, and also offer their own distinct advantages also.

Yes, these are some pretty big constraints, but they could be easily communicated to the player. Through normal progression, they become more important the greater the distance from Kerbin. it would also encourage building larger ships with an emphasis on planning.

Edited November 8, 2014 by Capt Snuggler

[tater]

I can see that. Again, AI is needed all around. Programming them is fine, but in RL they have done the math, and it's far more exact than KSP nominally is. Having a probe "programmed" to do a correction burn makes sense (you drag the node around, and when the time comes, the probe simply executes that command exactly as you have set it (a 3 second burn as angle X in 57 days, 2 hours 3 minutes, and 23 seconds). When it comes to landings, etc, that's where it needs AI as the "soonest" node you can program can be set to the distance in light seconds from Kermin (disallow setting a node closer than XXX seconds away where XXX is the distance in LS).

I'm changing my mind a little on your idea, I can see it as a way to drive multiple kerbals. The game could simply assume that any kerbal not actively doing something is resting up, and dividing the "on duty" guy status so that whenever you want to do something, there is a guy good to go---except if he's a single crew member, then if you utilize him too much, he gets tired. Most of the time it seems like ti would not be used, and could be abstracted, though. You land your lander, then one guy gets out, plants flag, takes soil, files EVA report. Done (in about the time it took you to read that sequence). With FP maybe it might take longer.

It seems like an easier way might be to weight science gain by crew members aboard the ship (or within physics distance when gathered). So a single man lander might get 25 points, but the exact same sample gathered by a 2 man lander might get 50. A simpler abstraction.

Edited November 9, 2014 by tater

[Nemrav]

Good idea, even better than the snacks ish system that was suggested....

But the "simply put a probe on it" is a pretty big issue...

Solve it without having the younger audience complaining and I'l be sold...

[tater]

For long duration missions, what about morale? After XX days, a solitary kerbal goes nutty, or something. Maybe they stay alive alone, but become catatonic without their pals around after a while.