How balanced is the career in 0.90?

[Laie]

What is not balanced is the funds awarded per contract relative to the other contracts and the difficulty of achieving them.

1. Nerf Outsourced R&D dramatically. An order of magnitude at least.

2. Boost the initial science returns from actually doing science in places.

3. Reduce the science awards from random contract completions.

I fully agree to 1, somewhat agree to 3, and oppose 2. Looking at your join date, you've already been around when career was still science mod, and should know that there's a lot (maybe too much) science that can be collected in the field way.

I wish that the game would again provide more of an incentive to earn your science the old-fashioned way. This *may* mean that ordinary contracts shouldn't yield as much science, but I'm not sure whether that's necessary or desirable -- there should be more than one way of playing this game, and noone should be forced to do the science grind if he prefers the contract grind.

6. Boost the funds and science awarded for the one-time completion missions (altitude, orbit, explore X body)

I thought that too, but please keep in mind that "explore Eve" can be completed with a cheap throw-away probe. For that kind of been-there-done-that, a few 100-200k is wholly sufficient.

I think it would be better to have a science-to-funds strategy that actually works. As of now, "real" science from the field bypasses the admin strategies: If you return 8000 science points from the mun, you will receive 8000 science points and not a single dime even if you have a 100% science-to-funds strategy. The game should be rigged in such a way that doing a serious exploration of a body (measured in science points) will, or at least can, also pay serious money. Doing a thorough survey of the Mun should pay like five satellites at the very least; and even the first flyby should contribute to the VAB upgrade you need before a serious science mission becomes possible.

7. Segregate the one-time missions from the others and make it so that they a. are automatically all accepted and b. do not count against your maximum contract limit.

Mostly because they're all three-star contracts. After Minmus, you'll get the exploration of Duna, Ike, Eve and Gilly into the pipeline, then Jool and its' moons, and so on. Effectively you will receive few if any other three-star contracts until you've been to every friggin body in the system. How about making a four-star category for that kind of achievement? And yes, automatically accept them when they come up.

[SkyRender]

Funds are definitely much tighter now that building upgrades are part of the mix. It takes an absurd amount of grind even on Normal to get up to basic interplanetary capability right now, let alone up to a level where a normal player would be willing to risk a Mun flyby. Science remains absurdly easy to get by comparison, especially with the still-10-times-too-powerful Outsourced R&D. Personally I think that the "achievement" contracts should not be ones you have to accept from Mission Control at all. Every last one should be accepted automatically at the start of the game, and simply have their details hidden until reach the point that they would be revealed. The way it's set up now, it's very easy to never even get offered a number of them (most notably the altitude ones, but Explore Minmus has been known to also fail to show up for ages).

[Laie]

The way it's set up now, it's very easy to never even get offered a number of them (most notably the altitude ones, but Explore Minmus has been known to also fail to show up for ages).

You know that you can decline contracts until there's one to your liking? Explore Minmuns (or Duna, Eve, whatever) is one of many possible contracts. The way it's set up, it's in the same league as high-yield part tests, stations on or around Mun, Minmus or the Sun, and a few more. Like, one out of ten possible missions. It will be void (never show up at all) if you enter Minmus SOI before accepting the contract.

So if someone does not actively decline pointless contracts, or maybe even tries to do everything that he's given, there's a pretty decent chance that the course of events will take him to Minmus without the Explore Minmus contract ever showing up. The risk is not as high for Duna, Eve and the likes, just because it takes time to get there and the player may complete a few more contracts in the meantime, increasing the chance for the proper contract to come up before he gets there.

[thyriel]

Playing around some days now with it, and i think overall it's balanced. I don't know what the goal is for default settings, but if they aim for players that played science/sandbox mode before and know the basics, then it's not too hard or too easy. If it's aiming completely new players (which should be easy settings in my opinion) then it's overall too hard.

[PTNLemay]

I randomly got a contract for hauling an LFB-KR-1x2 into a sub-orbital trajectory. It was tricky because I didn't really have anything big enough to haul it up there, but I just used 2 of prototypes to lift a third (empty) one up into orbit. Gave me a 750,000 input of cash, at a point where most of my missions are returning less than 50,000. It was such a boost to my program it almost felt... cheaty. Aside for that I'm really liking the pace at which the game progresses. I picked Normal mode, except that I added the bit where you have to pay for the first prototype of each part when you unlock in the tech tree. It gives it a nice extra little challenge, but also it means that I can leave parts I never use un-researched, which lightens the parts list.

(for reference, cause I can never remember the parts by their name)

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/LFB_KR-1x2

[Joonatan1998]

In general the balance isn't that bad, on the default settings science can be very easy to get after you reach mun/minmus, but funds seem to be fine.

The real problems are the exploits, there are so many of them it sometimes can be hard to avoid them.

1. No negative money: Accept contracts, use all your money to place an huge pile of parts on the launch pad, cancel contracts, recover the pile of parts.

2. place flag contracts: just leave an kerbal on every planet/moon, place and remove a flag every time you get an contract for that.

3. Send science contracts: leave an probe on orbit for infinite money

4. the satellite deployment contracts have many exploits, using the same satellite for multiple contracts, recovering the satellite back to kerbin...

And probably many others

[quasarrgames]

i couldn't pick any one answer, as there's nothing wrong with science, but cash requirements are way too high.

i'd just say that building upgrades are too pricey (especially the R and D facility - ouch!). If building upgrades cost about half as much (and R and D upgrades cost one sixth as much) then the game would feel less like a grind for cash and more like a grand journey of exploration and growth.

although i guess as it stands now the game's more realistic, amiright?

[ArmchairGravy]

I've worked through Normal difficulty to the late game, and now I'm again staring at grinding for updating R&D. Even after I complete Explore Duna, Ike, Eve, and Gilly I'm going to be a million funds short. This does not include the rest of the space center (I only have the launch pad maxed). While the mid-game was perfect, the early and late games on Normal are a touch too grindy. Taking 30% off the cost of building upgrades would still make players work, but the grind would be somewhat alleviated.

[Laie]

In general the balance isn't that bad, on the default settings science can be very easy to get after you reach mun/minmus, but funds seem to be fine.

The real problems are the exploits, there are so many of them it sometimes can be hard to avoid them.

My satellites are dead cheap, recovery isn't worthwhile; can you really re-use satellites? The contracts say no. Flag-planting doesn't really seem to work anymore; I got 2-3 contracts and then no more until my kerbal left the surface. Science from orbit still works, but with lots of other contracts getting in the way it's no longer as common as it used to be; also, they don't pay all that well. With a mix of Mun / Minmus / Kerbin contracts, you'll need like 60 of them to afford the top-tier R&D facility. Or twenty satellites. Or a dozen-odd "stations".

I don't know how long it takes you to plant a satellite -- for me, it's on the order of twenty-thirty minutes. Earning one million through satellites takes on the order of two hours of my time; also, it's getting really boring after the fifth. The surveys have a much worse payout per time, but I find myself doing them anyway just for a change.

i couldn't pick any one answer, as there's nothing wrong with science, but cash requirements are way too high.

This poll allows multiple answers. You're supposed to give one for the balance of science vs funds, one for is it enough overall. the wording is bad and I apparently can't change it.

I randomly got a contract for hauling an LFB-KR-1x2 into a sub-orbital trajectory.

Payout seems to be based in largely on part costs; also, orbit and suborbital pay especially well (compared with in flight or escape trajectory). The large kerbodyne engines are fund machines; but mainsail and ion drive also pay very well, on the order of 150-200k.

[CallisTrOn Entertainment]

I played now until going to Kerbins moons in HARD mode. And I can say it is quite balanced I think. If you got enough science you can focus on earning funds and the other way. Of course it is hard some times, but that's what it makes fun. It nearly gives me as a very good player (imo) nearly the same great experience than when I started with KSP. I also was able to overcome a bug on the radial decouplers which ruined my craft 2 times.

And if you keep playing it like a realistic spaceprogram, and do not search the whole time for any cheating possibilities, it really takes time to get a progress. But in reality spacesciences takes ages aswell.

[panzer1b]

personally, from my experience in career, is that there is way to slow (it can get quite grindy) early game, and then it becomes so easy late game it becomes more or less sandbox where aside from parts that havent been unlocked, neither funds, nor science really limit you too much.

I enjoy career best when you add soem starting funds/starting science, it gets rid of that no-fun early game grinding, and with proper reward multipliers, make the later game actually fun, while still not being able to ignore funds and science.

[Jouni]

The career mode seems to be much less grindy than in any previous version. There is always something different to do, and you can unlock a new tech tree node or upgrade a building after almost every mission. Maybe this time I don't get bored with the career mode by the time I unlock nuclear engines. The last time I kept playing after that was in 0.22.

[Xaidin]

I'm a brand new player, I've only been playing about a week. I started in career mode on normal. I wanted to play a science game however I wanted the contracts as a guide. That way I'd know about what I should be doing. So I just used a cheat to get lots of funds.

Everything was wonderful, until I started getting really stupid contrats. Ones that gave out tons of science.

For instance I've only gotten to the Mun, I've gone there a few times. I did 3 Mun contrats at once and when my crew got back I had over 12,000 science! So I unlocked everything. Then I was lost in all the parts I had never seen before. I haven't even been to Minmus yet!

Right now I'm very frustrated with the game. It's no longer fun for me with everything unlocked. I no longer have a goal (unlock all science). I could go to the next planet but why. *sigh*

Overall I really liked most of the contracts. I didn't do any Kerbin survey ones as I was only interested in space flight.

They need to either totally remove science rewards from contrats, or perhaps nerf the rewards to 10% or less of what they give now.

My two cents.

Xaidin

[KerikBalm]

IMO, the biggest problem is the R&D facility upgrade....

It seems that Science is pointless, because the thing limiting my technology unlocks is funding, not science.

The cost of the R&D upgrades and tech unlocks needs to be brought down, or have a science cost (and reduced fund cost).

Who cares about science when I have loads of it sitting around that I can't use until I've stockpiled 4 million funds....

A few contracts of outsourced R&D, and I can then unlock the whole tree, and I can then switch to patents liscencing and run it as 100% the rest of the game.

And then there's no point to doing any more science, because no funds are given and theres no need for additional science.

[michaelsteele3]

If I had to put how balanced it was into a real life scenario, this would be it:

In other words, not very balanced

[Pthigrivi]

I actually think a huge issue is that people see unlocking the tech tree as beating the game. I've always seen the game much more like legos or Simcity, in which you get the basic tools (the tech tree) and then you build whatever you like. Unlocking everything is the beginning, not the end. I think even if you added some really hard to unlock top rewards letting the tech tree become the endgoal would be a real gameplay pitfall. People are just going to work to get that VASMIR or Greenhouse and be like okay Im done. Its a game about building and exploration, not grinding away at science. Ultimately I think the best solution is to put some things out there in the Kerbol system that people can strive to visit. Things like geysers and volcanoes and fossil formations that offer the player big in-game rewards like huge science and resource boosts and are worth striving for, not just easter eggs that you look at and say "neat!" If "beating the game" (if so many people feel they need that) meant precision landing on sites on every planet and moon in the Kerbol system instead of collecting parts it would not only focus things more on exploration, but it would give the game a lot more longevity. It would be no big deal if you could unlock the tech tree in Kerbin's SOI, because that wouldn't be the point and you'd have a lot left to see and do.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[KerikBalm]

Well... you're describing sandbox and easter eggs...

But we have a science mode with no funding limit, maybe we should have a funds mode, with no science limitations:

All parts available from the start... go out and do things for funds.

We should have contracts to actually do specific science, not just spamming thermometer readings/crew reports.

Stuff like returning a surface sample or taking a seismic reading

[tater]

I actually think a huge issue is that people see unlocking the tech tree as beating the game.

The reality in games is that people reliably behave in certain ways when confronted with reward systems. Players like checking off boxes and "finishing" things, even if they are entirely unconscious of it. In KSP, the sole reward is new parts, hence most players likely consider unlocking the tree as "winning." We can all talk about other reasons we play, things we like to have fun building, but for the bulk of people, tech is the reward, since it is the only reward, and the only reason to gain "science."

For this to change, at the very least there needs to be more use for science. Actual, in game use.

I agree on the "cool stuff to see" ideas, for sure, but that doesn't change the psychology of players quickly internalizing reward structures.

[jman508]

hey hey hey!!!!!! what about you need science to upgrade verbal society!

like you only get really lame extremely low orbit contracts for satellites.

and maybe you'll have to compete with other space agencies but if you progress you can become the master space agency. or maybe you just disappear into the thousands of new companies trying to get rich in the boom or bust lifestyle of space.

[Kedwin Hubble]

I'd say a combination of the first two options: there is way too much science, and too little funds. The main problem with the funds is that the building upgrades are way over priced.

[Slam_Jones]

IMHO, unbalanced as *insert colorful phrase here*. I feel a player should basically have to leave the Kerbin system to finish the tech tree.

As it is, a player can complete the tech tree before visiting Minmus, which means all the time and effort they put into having biomes on all bodies seems rather... pointless.

I'm not so sure putting artificial "level gates" (x funds to upgrade R&D) that require you to grind a bunch of funds to get past are ideal either. Not sure what would be better, yet, but it doesn't quite feel right.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Slam_Jones
Sorry for language!

[Caelib]

I think career mode is like an accordion with balance as you progress ... but isn't the point of Administration Facility to help you offset this? If you have too much science, you can fix that by trading science for funds.

[Pthigrivi]

I agree on the "cool stuff to see" ideas, for sure, but that doesn't change the psychology of players quickly internalizing reward structures.

It does if the special places come with rewards. I had a thread about this a while back but something like:

Interesting Rocks: +25% to science

Very interesting Rocks: +100 to science

Ice Crystals: +50% to science and rich resource location (type 1)

Mineral Deposit: +50% to science and rich resource location (type 2)

Geysers/Hotsprings: +100% to science and rich resource location (type 1)

Fissure/Volcano: +100% to science and rich resource location (type 2)

Cryovolcano: +200 to science and rich resource location (type 1)

Fossil Bed: +200% to science

Stromatolites: +300% to science

Primordial Goo Pond: +500% to science

Spooky Object: +500% to science

There would be a few to several of these scattered on each planet except the last two which might only have a couple in the game. Each would only be about the size of a KSC building, and with texture remapping you'd only have to model 7 or 8 of them. If they were scattered in tight little clusters in a few biomes they could simultaneously demand precision landings and give a use to rovers. The gather science at x contracts could point to these rather than random non-descript points in space. I was also thinking samples from them could be loaded into the Materials Bay each enhancing its science payouts, so collecting and distributing these samples would be an important part of gameplay.

The main point being it would add another layer to the game, not just pretty places. You wouldn't have "finished the game" until you'd collected samples from all of them, meaning the game would be about exploring and going to each of the worlds, and unlocking parts could be more easily understood as simply a means to do so. Balance would be a much different notion if this were the case, as science would not be an end-goal currency.

Edited February 7, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[Pthigrivi]

Grandios requests aside though, my feeling is you should have just about what you need for the next type of mission after completing 3 of the previous type. After 3 sub-orbital missions you have what you need to go orbital. 3 Orbital you have what you need for a Mun or Minmus mission. Toss in 3 probe and plane missions. After doing each of these you have what you need to visit an asteroid or Duna. To be honest so few people get there I really think its okay if you could unlock just about everything after doing all of the above and a Duna Mission. Now the system is your playground.

[tater]

That's just getting more science. Science is not the reward, buying new tech is the reward. I could get 1,000,000 science for something… what would the point be, exactly?