In real life missions not everything goes according to plan always, we've all seen our fair share of space dramas and movies depicting famous events where something didn't go to the letter of the plan and backups had to be kicked in, new missions thought of to fix things, or extra planning done to try to avoid it.
A possible alternate mode (or even part of the main mode) could have some parts degrade with time and require missions to replace, restock, or repair parts to bring them back up to speed. Most parts are meant to last, but something going wrong and performing with a degradation when you've calculated everything to the nth degree would mean you'd have to design redundancies, over-commit, etc. Such a thing could force different gameplay focii than just building the best "checklist" rocket.
Some players would want to play conservatively and have extra backups, others risk it and change things in action as problems arise. It would also open up new missions as rarely a problem might spring up with a satellite or a station and a mission might need to be sent with "repair packs" to fix it. This also creates new situations with high tech pieces being more resistant to these issues so as you progress you get safer (or maybe some kittens have traits that reduce the chance or remove it entirely.) It also introduces new reasons to EVA as you'd have to do repairs and replacements with a kitten directly.
Spacecraft might also enter a phase of "stability" after some time, which is when you're in the "green" on no issues arising, so this isn't a system where you are constantly maintaining old ships and satellites, but instead run into problems earlier in the mission timeline.
Examples
- A science module is malfunctioning, it can't seem to send the science by remote. You might fly up repair packs to repair it, or manually fly to retrieve the science if the mission is not intended to be long term. You may pack an emergency antennae when designing just in case (or pack repair packs on launch.)
- Suddenly a solar panel is outputting 10% less, and it seems to get worse every cycle. You might be expected to fly up repair packs and in EVA repair the solar panels with them.
- A fuel tank has ruptured, reducing how much fuel you have by a small percentage. If you planned tightly on the burns you now have to change your mission plan, but if you over-estimated the fuel you'd need you might be able to ignore it.
- A CO2 scrubber on your moon base is acting strange and rarely sparking, creating a fire risk in the high oxygen environment. Your kittens need to address this directly on hand or a mission needs to be flown as an emergency to bring a replacement or repair packs.
Concerns
- It shouldn't feel like acts of god are punishing the player, such a system could easily turn into RNG pain. Perhaps these events are more likely when the rocket is flown erratically on launch or launch procedures are ignored (bad weather, cheap parts with chances to fail, etc.) something to instead make it a skill based thing?
- It shouldn't feel like something you're constantly doing to where you won't want to add more missions to your docket because of fear you can't repair and handle the ones you have already. Hence the idea of a "mission in the green" where long term missions stabilize and you no longer have to worry about them.
A possible alternate mode (or even part of the main mode) could have some parts degrade with time and require missions to replace, restock, or repair parts to bring them back up to speed. Most parts are meant to last, but something going wrong and performing with a degradation when you've calculated everything to the nth degree would mean you'd have to design redundancies, over-commit, etc. Such a thing could force different gameplay focii than just building the best "checklist" rocket.
Some players would want to play conservatively and have extra backups, others risk it and change things in action as problems arise. It would also open up new missions as rarely a problem might spring up with a satellite or a station and a mission might need to be sent with "repair packs" to fix it. This also creates new situations with high tech pieces being more resistant to these issues so as you progress you get safer (or maybe some kittens have traits that reduce the chance or remove it entirely.) It also introduces new reasons to EVA as you'd have to do repairs and replacements with a kitten directly.
Spacecraft might also enter a phase of "stability" after some time, which is when you're in the "green" on no issues arising, so this isn't a system where you are constantly maintaining old ships and satellites, but instead run into problems earlier in the mission timeline.
Examples
- A science module is malfunctioning, it can't seem to send the science by remote. You might fly up repair packs to repair it, or manually fly to retrieve the science if the mission is not intended to be long term. You may pack an emergency antennae when designing just in case (or pack repair packs on launch.)
- Suddenly a solar panel is outputting 10% less, and it seems to get worse every cycle. You might be expected to fly up repair packs and in EVA repair the solar panels with them.
- A fuel tank has ruptured, reducing how much fuel you have by a small percentage. If you planned tightly on the burns you now have to change your mission plan, but if you over-estimated the fuel you'd need you might be able to ignore it.
- A CO2 scrubber on your moon base is acting strange and rarely sparking, creating a fire risk in the high oxygen environment. Your kittens need to address this directly on hand or a mission needs to be flown as an emergency to bring a replacement or repair packs.
Concerns
- It shouldn't feel like acts of god are punishing the player, such a system could easily turn into RNG pain. Perhaps these events are more likely when the rocket is flown erratically on launch or launch procedures are ignored (bad weather, cheap parts with chances to fail, etc.) something to instead make it a skill based thing?
- It shouldn't feel like something you're constantly doing to where you won't want to add more missions to your docket because of fear you can't repair and handle the ones you have already. Hence the idea of a "mission in the green" where long term missions stabilize and you no longer have to worry about them.
Upvote
4
