economy in contracts

[g.koster]

I have been thinking since posting “easy on extreme difficulty†how to get contracts so that they can be a right balance. One option I think is request and demand. So if you do a type on contract often then the demand will be high so price rewards will drop. If you don’t do them ad all then the price rewards will go up. I have already the feeling that contracts fall in categories. Like testing, viewing, rescue: on kerbal, mun, minima, dune etc. in this way. The profitability of over prove table/easy contracts will go down in time while the unprofitable/ difficult once will go up in time.

A similar thing can be done with reputation. But that should only go down let say half it each five contracts. Why would you gain reputation on a routine job?

At the end we could probably send the saves to the designer so he can use it to rebalance prices for contracts

Another thing that probably needs rectification is reputation. At the moment reputation is earned very quickly compaired to the other two. Let see You get 10k roots and maybe 1 science and 10 rep ad a time while at the end you need about 10M to 1000 M of roots 50k of science and 1k of rep. Although roots and science are pretty well balanced rep is in no comparison its ad least a factor of 100 if not 1000 out of sink. This is probably one of the main reasons the admin office is not working.

Any one wanting to use these idees is free to do so.

[Monger]

Well, this depends on the playstyle, I guess. Do we want to enforce that players need to accept contracts that they would avoid otherwise? KSP was always about freedom, about choosing your own way how to proceed things. If players want to grind the same tasks over and over again, well... Usually, riskier contracts are already more rewarding, and you need bigger rewards to progress within the tech tree.

I am unsure. Self-balancing systems are always attractive, but they tend to appear generic and intransparent. Hm.