Let the game clock run in buildings

[tntristan12]

So a discussion that cropped up in the general discussion forum got me thinking: I can see why the devs would not like to have the player wait for their rocket to be built, since A) that imposes artificial difficulty that does not need to be there, and they could just fast forward through it anyway. However, I can see a few benefits to having build-times at least somewhat accounted for.

For one thing, it adds pressure on the player to build their rocket quickly in the event that it is needed for a time-critical mission. For example, if a contract is running out, or they are trying to catch an impending launch window, or they are playing with life support mods and they are trying to conduct a rescue mission, etc.

Second, and what primarily motivates me, is player inmersion. It feels strange to me that 20 minutes into a game, I have already launched half a dozen spacecraft, broken every altitude record, and made orbit with half the tech tree unlocked. It doesn't impact the game play any, but it does slightly ruin the immersion for me.

The simplest solution I can think of that neither punishes the player nor can be trivially bypassed with time warp would be to simply have the game clock run inside buildings, including the VAB. In doing so, players would have incentive to plan their designs out in advance and construct their rockets quickly. It would also give that little checkbox in the difficulty settings which allows stock vessels some added importance: since the player might have a suite of rockets available at the outset, they can fire off their missions at a higher rate than someone playing without them, thus suiting individual playstyles.

This would also solve another problem that has been bugging me about the VAB for some time. Namely, when you go inside the VAB and look through the doors, it's broad daylight regardless of whether the time on Kerbin is day or night. Since the devs already went through the trouble of making the space center scene reflect the actual state of the game around the space center, wouldn't it just make sense to have the VAB and SPH reflect it as well? Especially since that is where the player spends the vast majority of their time when they are not flying missions.

There are probably some other benefits as well, but I'd like to open the thread for discussion. What do you guys think?

[xrayfishx]

I always thought the game clock does run while in VAB/SPH. I definitely agree with this. It's not very intuitive to have the clock stop while building, considering I'm nearing some 2000h and I didn't know. I never tested either and it doesn't affect much if I never realized it, but since I'd wholeheartedly support construction time and this is as close as we could get if Squad is ok with this, then I support this idea.

And the bit where it's always day in the VAB/SPH has been annoying since ever. They should either close the door or fix it.

Edited February 7, 2015 by xrayfishx

[tntristan12]

It seems reasonable that it would, but alas, you may spend several hours in the VAB but zero time actually passes in game. It's kind of funny when you launch a rocket into orbit, spend the next several days tweaking the design (using revert flight) and then launch it to find your other craft hasn't moved. It is also a little disorienting (harkening back to the idea of the game upholding player expectations). I would hope that if time could pass normally in the VAB, then it would give the player some sense that their space program is a tangible thing, and that their actions or in actions have an impact all across the board.

[pandaman]

If 'construction time' proper is not to be integrated then yes I do support this idea as a reasonable compromise. But, as I mentioned on another thread, I envisage time in VAB as background 'design office' time so in that respect it should not affect 'normal game time' for current missions etc.

Edited February 7, 2015 by pandaman

[SorryDave]

This is a nice suggestion as it may improve immersion. You could build at night and launch during the day.

However, it may just encourage uglier rockets. Usually, after building a capable rocket I spend a great deal of time making it look cooler.

[Tuareg]

it would just encourage save/load... save, go to vab, build ship, save it, load game, load ship launch... pointless

[SaturnV]

Maybe true after they implemented construction time. Then time will becom another important resource on Kerbin

[tntristan12]

it would just encourage save/load... save, go to vab, build ship, save it, load game, load ship launch... pointless

It isn't pointless. If that's how people want to play their save then the game shouldn't discourage it. However, if the "use stock vessels" option is ticked off, then it discourages the game from progressing at a blatantly unrealistic pace. New rocket designs and tweaks to existing designs would not simply be time free, though launching an existing design wold possibly indicate that the rocket engineers at KSC have settled into their routine with building that particular design. It makes sense as a compromise from a gameplay point of view.

[CaptainKipard]

Agree. Time management should be a thing.

[tater]

Real time management should be a thing, but this suggestion is pointless, IMO. 15 minutes passing in the VAB is pretty much meaningless. People routinely time warp many months at a time (yet some get upset at the notion that building a huge rocket might do the same exact thing, inexplicably).

[tntristan12]

I've easily spent 12 hours or more in the VAB obsessing over certain designs. That's two kerbin days. You don't think that can make a difference when you have a rescue mission pending for a dead ship with failing life support?

[tater]

Most people don't spend 12 actual hours in the VAB. Even if they did… 2 days. That's nothing. It's not like they designed Apollo, then built it in 2 days. Doesn't need to be years, but it should be many weeks for large designs at least to be meaningful.

[tntristan12]

Yeah. I can see what you mean. I saw it suggested over in another thread (I think you might have pitched this as well) that time could run at an accelerated rate when in the VAB. Maybe 10 to 50 times, so 2 hours becomes 20, or even 100. Now that is a lot of time in the kerbal verse.

Such is an idea I can get behind. I would still like to see the passage of time through the big bay doors, and perhaps 10x or 50 would not be so distracting that you wouldn't be able to focus on what you're doing, but the sun would at least move perceptibly faster.

That said, I have no problem with a proper implementation of something like KCT. I think it could, if done right, add a whole new dimension to the game! However, since the devs have pretty solidly stated that that isn't going to happen (not that they can't change their minds like they have on any number of different things), I am not holding my breath.

What I suggest would at least be something. I just think it's weird how time freezes in the VAB/SPH. Other buildings too, for that matter, though obviously the effect isn't nearly as pronounced in, say, the R&D department.

[KerBlam]

Time running in VAB/SPH I could deal with.

10-50x?? No way. I would feel too rushed.

[tater]

The problem is, that everything is connected. They don't way X in the game, but X impacts so many different things that are really required for meaningful career gameplay. Sandbox is sandbox, and science mode uses science points as the goal. Career needs to be more all-inclusive of management issues. I say that as someone who does't care in the least for a "management" game.

I look at it like a "campaign" game that supports a tactical game. What you like to play is the tactical game, the units on the battlefield. The campaign is abstracted, and exists solely to create novel battles to fight. If all the battles were evenly matched, on the same terrain, with the same victory conditions, the game would be BORING. Sort of like what you might see in an exploration game where you already know where everything is, and exactly how to get there before you start, and you can in fact explore the entire game in a very short period of time, every time (since it is always exactly the same). Hmm, what game is like that in career that we all know?

People whine that X, Y, and Z additions are "too hard" or in the case of time progression that "people will just warp past it." They miss the point that everything is connected. Missing an ideal launch window because of lack of planning… is a good thing. It rewards planning ahead. Just like the current game rewards planning ahead and putting solar panels on a ship, or attitude control if all you have is an OCTO2 probe core.

Combine time for construction with life support and you get some interesting (and FUN) gameplay problems for people to solve. Lander tips, and you need a rescue mission before LS runs out. You might have a stock launch vehicle already built, and in the time remaining you might be able to slap on a lander using parts you already have… not ideal, but they can work. Or maybe you cannot alter the launch vehicle/probe enough for rescue, but there is a cheap, fast part that can be bolted on to land LS supplies such that you have time to mount a proper rescue. I just like the idea that a Kerbol system spanning program might take more than a couple years to happen, I suppose.

- - - Updated - - -

Time running in VAB/SPH I could deal with.

10-50x?? No way. I would feel too rushed.

This makes no sense at all. You are already "rushed," you go from no spaceflight, to manned missioned everywhere in a year or so. How is that not rushed? Time moving for construction is the opposite of rushed.

[RainDreamer]

Nah, design phase shouldn't be timed. It is one thing when you have a whole team of engineers designing a space craft and race against time, but being alone and being forced to deal with time limit is not fun. Building time, though? Maybe. We have kerbal construction time for that, so we don't have instant rockets all the time.

[KerBlam]

^^^ THIS.

How on Kerbin do you think that time passing at 50x while you're trying to design a ship isn't going to feel rushed? Especially if you were approaching a transfer window or some other event. I know myself well enough that I would definitely feel extremely pressured and forget stuff, if that was the case. Kerbals would die. It would be bad. Not fun. I would stop playing.

Another point that I just thought of.

Often I'm just in VAB designing and testing craft, sometimes multiple craft for specific missions that I don't intend to launch properly for quite some time, so lots of launch and revert. I don't use hyperedit so this is a time-consuming process in itself. There's no way I could do that if time was passing at 50x in the VAB.

Edited February 8, 2015 by KerBlam
Another point

[maltesh]

^^^ THIS.

How on Kerbin do you think that time passing at 50x while you're trying to design a ship isn't going to feel rushed? Especially if you were approaching a transfer window or some other event. I know myself well enough that I would definitely feel extremely pressured and forget stuff, if that was the case. Kerbals would die. It would be bad. Not fun. I would stop playing.

Another point that I just thought of.

Often I'm just in VAB designing and testing craft, sometimes multiple craft for specific missions that I don't intend to launch properly for quite some time, so lots of launch and revert. I don't use hyperedit so this is a time-consuming process in itself. There's no way I could do that if time was passing at 50x in the VAB.

Ultimately, what making significant time pass in the VAB winds up promoting is the "Do your building in a separate save, test it there, then move the craft file over when it's ready," style. Which is a tactic I've been using since 0.17 brought multiple saves into existence, and I imagine is already somewhat common.

[pxi]

A good candidate for an optional game setting imo.

[KerBlam]

Ultimately, what making significant time pass in the VAB winds up promoting is the "Do your building in a separate save, test it there, then move the craft file over when it's ready," style. Which is a tactic I've been using since 0.17 brought multiple saves into existence, and I imagine is already somewhat common.

I do that as well, mostly so if I kill someone it doesn't matter as much :/

Which brings me to another point. Say in the event that what you're suggesting was implemented; If you just want to load a craft file, do you then have to wait, or warp until you can get it on the launchpad?

Or, if you want to do several successive launches, and you already have the designs ready-made, do you still have to wait?

What if your gamestyle says, "I've designed that ship, it's now 'in production' and I can get a fresh one instantly whenever I need it"

I really like the *idea*, but I would never install this as a mod, and I certainly wouldn't like it to be stock, and if it was, I'd want to be able to turn it off.

If I couldn't turn it off, I'd find a mod to turn it off, or stop playing.

[tntristan12]

Perhaps it could scale with difficulty. Easy=1x, then 5x, then 10x, with perhaps an optional super hard difficulty level of 50x.

The reason it is an abstraction is because it simulates things inside the VAB (workers, cranes, welders, etc) working more slowly than a 1:1 time passage. It accounts for the fact that building rockets is a time consuming process.

[Jouni]

Time should pass in the VAB only if you spent more time there than in the rest of the game. If you've warped past 10 years, you can spend 10 years of real time for free in the VAB.

[tater]

Better would be to only warp for construction time. Finish design, and have 2 buttons, "Build in the background (XXX days required) and continue play," or "Skip (warp) to completion and Launch."

[tntristan12]

I like that idea too, but I think it falls in the scope of what Squad doesn't want as far as "needless" time warping, which is a shame because it is a good idea. Especially if it were used in conjunction with a KAC-type feature.

[Louella]

i remember, recently, it was something like, I had unlocked everything in the first tier of the R&D centre, and it was still only something like day 3 or 4 of globally elapsed time. Lots of short duration part testing contracts and so on.