Why I am not enjoying KSP right now.

[Kerbal007]

Don't get me wrong, I still love KSP as a game but as I play I think to myself that contracts, earning rep and $ is just too much of a complicated balancing act and very hard to grasp. I feel that as I run my space program a cannot make informed decisions as to whether I am being inefficient or not and it bugs me. Yes sure I can watch a 20min video if there is one on understanding this but it shouldn't be that way. I dont feel tgat it is clearly explained enough in game. I woule love to know how kerbalnauts or kerbalnots are finding it ? I am not overly active on here so my concern may be out of place or really wrong. I sit here playing wondering things like "because I spent alot on upgrading my launchpad is this going to create a harder game later on whilst I try to make the funds back?" I cant see a balance or natural or in my special needs case obvious progression options :s

Concerned Space program director.

[WanderingKid]

I'm thoroughly enjoying the new complexity. I like the balance funds force between more powerful rockets/planes and possible bankruptcy (rather difficult to do with advances though). I'm playing it on Hard and may need to go custom to force me to really have to get efficient with things. Right now rocket -> mission income isn't really balanced (10k rocket for an 80k satellite mission, for example) so it's just a cash grind for upgrades to the facilities before I miss launch windows for Duna and the like.

[Funeh]

If you dont like carreer then go play Science or Sandbox. KSP is updated and there are many new things to get accomodated, so of course it is hard at the begining.

[Janos1986]

I really don't like the overabundance of surface outposts and space station contracts.

Why do I have to clutter a single moon or planet with dozens of stations and outposts with labs and habitats just to delete them right after the contract pays off?

And since the pay is good, I feel almost obligated to accept them to get my R&D up and running (I need more than 6 MILLIONS for the level 3 R&D in hard mode).

EVA Report missions should pay a bit more and there should be more "Add THIS SPECIFIC part to an existing orbit station around X planet"

I partially solved this problem by installing StationScience, which also add orbital experiment contracts, check it out if you didn't already.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Janos1986

[MalfunctionM1Ke]

If you dont like carreer then go play Science or Sandbox. KSP is updated and there are many new things to get accomodated, so of course it is hard at the begining.

Can we please stop saying "If you dont like it, then leave it"?

This is like saying "Well if you dont like how I cook, we have to divorce".

The game is not getting better that way and I think Ashworth's critic is well explained.

[DunaRocketeer]

I'm perplexed at all this talk about things being too grindy - I don't have a huge amount of time to play the game and have more kerbal funds than I know what to do with. Besides, you can always tweak the difficulty settings if you're wanting to progress quicker, and if not, build efficient rockets and hoover up Science and Contracts from Kerbin, Minmus and Mun; you'll be well on your way before you know it

[Janos1986]

For me it's not about the grind itself, it's about how useless some missions are.

I usually try to get the best out of them, for example if I have to send up a satellite for a mission, I strap on a RADAR and a Spectrometer from SCANSat to make it a bit useful for future missions.

But even if you say "eh, I can keep my orbital station as a refueling relay", it justifies ONE station to be kept alive around a planet, two maybe, not a freaking dozen.

And I know that the contracts are randomly generated, but I still think it needs a bit of tweaking.

[samstarman5]

There are plenty of ways to tweak career mode to how you see fit with the difficulty options. I actually prefer more the pursuit of science myself, but like the added little bits of career. So I just fixed it so funds were much easier to get so they don't slow down my push for science. Of course, one has to be careful with that, as with my first try, I had decided for some reason to use an admin building option to pour some funds into science. After the next mission I had netted over a million funds, and with that admin option in play I ended up with enough science to almost finish the tech tree. Oopsie!

So I restarted with different settings and am more comfortable with my progression. I do balance it with no respawns of lost kerbals and very heavy penalties, which keeps me focused on making sure I do it right.

In the end, though, KSP has never been for the casual player or the like. Even with tutorials and such, it really comes down to you learning through practice. You can not be afraid to lose a rocket or a contract, as there is a lot to be learned from that alone. If it helps, it does actually require sheer will-power to actually lose the entire game. If you destroy your launch pad, you can still launch vertically off the runway. You can actually launch an aircraft off the launching pad, it just requires a bit of finesse to get off the pad first before accelerating to takeoff. This helps if you lose either the VAB or SPH and can't afford to repair them right away, as well.

Gene Kranz once said, 'Failure is not an option.'

Well, in KSP, failure is always an option. Embrace that philosophy and suddenly new opportunities do become visible to you.

Even in Career Mode, there is no One Way to play the game. You can still pick and choose the contracts to play. You can change your difficulty settings to play solely for funds, prestige, or science. You can stay inside the atmosphere and just explore Kerbin. There are certainly other tactics and methods to choose from. If you feel discouraged, step back a moment and think about what your goals are. Pursue them! Plant that flag! You are the Space Program Director/Commander/Overlord.

Remember, not every career mission has to be contract-based. You can always launch a rocket on a whim for science or giggles, as long as you have the funds. Go have fun.

[Streetwind]

Don't get me wrong, I still love KSP as a game but as I play I think to myself that contracts, earning rep and $ is just too much of a complicated balancing act and very hard to grasp. I feel that as I run my space program a cannot make informed decisions as to whether I am being inefficient or not and it bugs me. Yes sure I can watch a 20min video if there is one on understanding this but it shouldn't be that way. I dont feel tgat it is clearly explained enough in game. I woule love to know how kerbalnauts or kerbalnots are finding it ? I am not overly active on here so my concern may be out of place or really wrong. I sit here playing wondering things like "because I spent alot on upgrading my launchpad is this going to create a harder game later on whilst I try to make the funds back?" I cant see a balance or natural or in my special needs case obvious progression options :s

KSP is now in Beta. This means they're going to make a concerted effort to take the existing features and really polish them up.

As such, this is a great time to head over to the Suggestions forum and post your idea as to how you would like career mode to be polished up. What kind of info would you like the game to show you so you can make informed decisions? Where would you put that info in the UI if it was up to you? And other questions like that. Answer them for yourself, then post the result in the Suggestions forum.

This is called "constructive criticism", and the devs love it. On the other hand, simply saying "I don't like things the way they are" is criticism that isn't constructive. It doesn't help Squad fix the problem. An in-depth description of a problem is a start, but a suggestion as to what you would personally consider a solution is even better!

[Kerbal007]

So after a siesta and putting my feet up, I guess what I am asking to see is some kind of gauge to see how effective or efficient I have been during my space program. I appreciate all this feedback and it has done what I wished by opening up my perception on the issue I was facing. I expressed this feeling as I have been overwhelmed with the changes and just felt directionless, and as such this has put it into perspective. I will consider making a proposial but I am not the best at explaining my thoughts.

I think we can end this thread here. Ill look into station science, Id actually be interested in a career mode that focused on gaining scientific data as opposed to "test this part" etc over and over.

Thanks people!

Ashworth.

[Janos1986]

Here's Scott to help you get a general idea.

I don't know if it's the mod itself that generates related contracts or they show up thanks to the now-stock FinePrint, probably the former.

[Audiopulse]

The problem with contracts is that you will eventually always grind one or more missions just to get the missing funds for mission XY - which will never be fun compared to the fluid gameplay you got with lets say Kethane for example. Getting a fuel-producing outpost running on Minmus, for example, required you to design severel crafts from orbiter over interplanetary haulers to tugs, possible planetary transporters to get the products to your desired equator and finally another launchvehicle to get the juice to your target-craft in orbit around the celestial body.

And it doesnt stop there. Want to optimize the process? How about one of those SSTOs? You build prototypes and take them on test-runs. Everytime you swap that crane on minmus for another, you may have to construct another launchvehicle again. Not enough Vespene- Energy? Make another Solar Powerplant - maybe with enough ground-clearance for your vehicles.

It never ends. Theres always something you can do whereas missions repeat rather quickly and get more boring everytime you accept one of the same type. In my humble opinion just adding funds would have helped a lot as it would have added another dimension to the planning-process of your crafts and basecomponents. Of course this is just my point of view and I do not insist on being right.

Research is a little cumbersome, yet, but a very nice addition nonetheless. I would have linked some requirements for some branches of the tech-tree to other things than visiting biomes, though. For example no atomic motors before having at least one craft in SOI around Duna for example. A possible solution would have been utilizing Ion-motors to get there with a probe for example.

[Nathair]

Gene Kranz once said, 'Failure is not an option.'

Only in a movie.

On topic, I find the game currently a bit unbalanced, unpolished, exactly what I would expect in a beta. The contract system does, to a large extent, feel like a placeholder but I expect we'll see a lot of improvement in later versions.

[spinomonkey]

I agree with the original post. I'm a bit more seasoned so its not a huge deal. But that's not to say I wouldn't love to have some data charts tracking how much I've spent on what, how much return I'm making in recoveries, that sort of thing. Feedback would be great.

Not to mention this once again highlights that the game has no context at the moment. Other then to finish the tech tree players are left with a very open ended question of what to do? That's especially confusing for new players.

[Kerbart]

I really don't like the overabundance of surface outposts and space station contracts.

Why do I have to clutter a single moon or planet with dozens of stations and outposts with labs and habitats just to delete them right after the contract pays off?

And since the pay is good, I feel almost obligated to accept them to get my R&D up and running (I need more than 6 MILLIONS for the level 3 R&D in hard mode).

EVA Report missions should pay a bit more and there should be more "Add THIS SPECIFIC part to an existing orbit station around X planet"(...)

THIS.

The FinePrint contracts are fun but, just as the original ones, become repetitive very quickly and leave you with a pile of junk (unless you delete it). It also encourages unmanned missions for those space stations and outposts, which I think is the opposite of what Squad has in mind.

As Janos mentions, it would be much better if, after the initial creation (and as long as that station/outpost is in existence) there would be missions as:

• Transfer Bartfred, Blingbob and Zeefod to the Minmus Outpost
  
• Land a new power unit within 1500m of the Mun Outpost. The power unit needs to have at least two Gigantor XL Solar Arrays
  
• Return two Goo containers from the Duna space station to Kerbin
  
• Bring a new laboratory to within 500m of the Mun Outpost
  

That would feel like you're doing something with a purpose (maintaining space stations/outposts) rather than placing empty stations/outposts all over the Kerbal system for the sake of fullfilling contracts.

[EtherDragon]

One thing to keep in mind is that KSP is still under active development, yes - it's reached Beta, but now is when the real fine-tuning and adding of content begins.

Before, we've seen new Features added with each new build - but nearly all the features are present now, and the game has a complete game cycle, all-be-it not particularly well balanced. It's balanced enough to be playable, and enjoyable, but not really dialed in to a polished enjoyable experience. Another thing is, most of us are approaching this game as old hats / seasoned KSP professionals. Imagine what learning curve is still necessary for those who would come new to the game? They would need to learn how to make a rocket, maintain profit, learn how to orbit (this is HARD) all while gaining little money due to as many failures as successes.

So I say again, in this phase of development, I'm thinking SQUAD will be spending a lot of effort on balancing out how career mode works to make some of the features easier to approach. That's where our feedback is really helpful!

[SkyRender]

I found personally that dropping building prices by 50% (you can adjust them, illogically enough, with the funds penalty slider) makes the whole experience much more tolerable. Especially on Hard difficulty, where building upgrades are effectively 3 1/3 times more expensive than on Normal. The high building prices don't make the game harder so much as they make things much, MUCH more tedious.

[tater]

My very first post here was about career mode and science. The paradigm has not changed, just the slight (mostly pointless) variation now added. Some contracts make a lot of sense, others are still mostly annoying. All this is also connected to how exactly wrong the science/tech paradigm is.

One, break science into Planetary (pure science), Medical (kerbal physiology in the space/microgravity environment/life support), and Spaceflight science (rocketry, etc). Two, rework the tech tree so that different kinds of science are required to unlock next levels. For example, command pods and other crewed parts require Medical AND Spaceflight to unlock. Lander parts might add in a small add mixture of Planetary science (how to keep munar dust out of the snacks, etc). Contracts would then be related to specific kinds of science to do. Pure, planetary work, or long-term manned labs to see how kerbals deal with spaceflight.

In addition, tech would be unlocked as it is for parts contracts provisionally, so that you can get stuff in advance of unlocking it. Missions drive tech, mission completion doesn't drive tech (we didn't land men on the moon so that we could then learn to build a lander). The cart is before the horse.

There also needs to be "real" science. By this I mean science that is not abstract, but actually useful. Add a camera part (can have upgrades automatically, so the more advanced you are the better they work, without chaining the part to keep the count down). Alternately all command pod, science lab or probe parts have a camera with no extra part required. Flying over a world maps it, which can simply change the zoom level allowed the player on that world. It might also allow showing the biomes with enough advancement (based on research facility rating at KSC?). Other useful science can be thought up. A real reason to do stuff like send probes. In a perfect world, the Kerbol system would be slightly randomized each new game to make such probes/data really useful. Even if it is just slightly different orbits, planet mass, atmosphere, etc. Enough to matter, without being gross changes that break things. Using the "stock" system would be a difficulty option.

Another idea I proposed was that the launch windows should generate contracts with specific launch date ranges. This is a tool for new players to see when the best windows are. "Launch a probe/mission to Duna between days 213 and 253." for example.

[qromodynmc]

When I got bored from career mode,I installed some funky mods and started to new save. After some point I missed the career mode again. ^^

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Yeah... I kind of agree with the OP. Right now (and I guess they'll introduce some sort of tutorial or something at some point) it's full of What's this? and What's that? Should I pay attention to that? What do they mean when they say ABC? What's that other thing? How does that work? Is this important? and a big big list of unknowns.

Again, I guess it will come with time. But right now it hard for the new player. I'm not new to the game, but when I started playing career in 0.90 (first time I tried career "for real") I was completely lost as to what to do or what should be my objective as a player. Should I aim at getting A before B or advance in X instead of Y?... and so forth.

[Travisfv]

I'm really enjoying career actually. Just put together a spreadsheet of my current contracts (which I focused all on Minmus), and am doing the maths to ensure that my costs don't run over the total rewards for the 10+ contracts I have.

[Cdr_Zeta]

HI,

The added admin building I aint practically using altho it may work out later.

The research limits should be explained somewhere - dont they have a doc on the basics of KSP ?!

Yes the game is a balancing act - when you play chess you win some and you lose some and you keep playing to get further into the game; and so it goes.

I use an old system of generating my own Career Tree in Beta to find that middle ground of challenge and fun; one can make it easy sure and even still it aint so easy to send stuff out there; takes KSP time too all the while asteroids abound and they should be dealt with.

I dont like it cause at times I play it too much so I am working on dividing my time...I need to get more fresh air outside !

Mr Zeta

[Janos1986]

• Transfer Bartfred, Blingbob and Zeefod to the Minmus Outpost
  
• Land a new power unit within 1500m of the Mun Outpost. The power unit needs to have at least two Gigantor XL Solar Arrays
  
• Return two Goo containers from the Duna space station to Kerbin
  
• Bring a new laboratory to within 500m of the Mun Outpost
  

Come to think of it, I'm doing this for free, expanding outposts and all.

How uneconomical.

I mean, I was putting up a karbonite mining station and comm relay, but could have done it FOR MONAY!

[boxman]

I really don't like the overabundance of surface outposts and space station contracts.

Why do I have to clutter a single moon or planet with dozens of stations and outposts with labs and habitats just to delete them right after the contract pays off?

And since the pay is good, I feel almost obligated to accept them to get my R&D up and running (I need more than 6 MILLIONS for the level 3 R&D in hard mode).

EVA Report missions should pay a bit more and there should be more "Add THIS SPECIFIC part to an existing orbit station around X planet"

I partially solved this problem by installing StationScience, which also add orbital experiment contracts, check it out if you didn't already.

And for me such contracts give me a reason to actually go visit those planets again. My biggest complaints about career mode has been that there has been very little use for let's say a satellite, ground bases or rovers. Now that we have contracts for that and biomes on all planets there is actually some reason to go there again.

There are plenty of contracts i just dont care about as well and just ignore or decline those.

That being said... I think they should tweak it further to make satellites and stations more useful. It does not make much sense that they are more or less obsolete after placing them there. I also wish the science we do had something more than just generic results, like maybe something that gives a backstory of the biome or kerbal system.

Edited December 29, 2014 by boxman

[RocketPilot573]

I like how I have to think these missions through now.