The World of The Gunny

NP bud. Just wanted to make sure you were ok, and not having problems.



Cheers, Thor

Mav, have you sent in your new orders yet?



Cheers, Thor

Thanks bud. I just got it. My email has been going nuts for the last four hours going up and down! I will get it processed ASAP!

I hope all of you players do not mind, but I posted the 'naut rosters over at Aurora.



Cheers, Thor

Ok guys, I have been thinking. I know I know, that's dangerous!

I think the possibility of adding some sort of Budget 'exchange' may be in order. By that I mean exchanging a variable amount of Wu's for either RPs or IUUs.

This could reflect overtime at the factories, or cracking the whip on the eggheads. Either way, I am thinking of a 5 to 1 exchange ratio, 5 Wu's for either 1 IUU or 1 RP. Up to 20% of your current Wu Budget.

Now, this is a mandatory question for the playtesters to answer, is this a good idea or not? Give reasons for or against.



Cheers, Thor

I think more flexibility is good. It all depends on how badly you need those wealth units, versus the IUUs.

Of course, the WUs to RPs could potentially be unbalancing. If I were to dump a bunch of surplus WUs into RPs it could get ridiculous how fast you'd shoot up the tech tree. That's assuming you have nothing better to do with the wealth units.

Unfortunately at this time I've yet to run short on wealth units so I'm not sure how helpful this feedback can be. It's a good idea if you have too many WUs for your program and need more of the other stuff. It can also come in handy if you have upkeep costs you can't pay because you foolishly overspent your RPs (in future versions). So, in that way it'd make things a bit less painful for the guy who gets a little overenthusiastic with his research and can't afford to maintain his teams (again, in future versions).

So, sorry I can't be that helpful about how it'd work out. I just have no idea.

It'd be nice for the WU and IUU but research I don't know...

I personally am overflowing with WU and IUU but research is really low. To be honest, I kind of like having to plan ahead, and later on in other scenarios where we can make money ourselves, it's be kinda cheap to saturate research and have 1000 teams working on every project.

Tssha, you have provided great feedback. You do not have to have much experience to have an opinion about something, and your concern about the RP situation is exactly what I am uncomfortable with.

Unlike most other designers, I value the feedback from my testers and players. So if you have an idea, or doubt about something, I encourage you to voice it. How else can I make the best game I can?

The RP conversion is the one problem I can see in the idea. Maybe a higher cost ratio? Like 10 to 1?

As for the WU budget, right now it seems a lot, but once you start those extremely expensive programs, you will prolly look back on the days of too much money!



Cheers, Thor

I hope you don't mind, but I spiced up your News post a bit.

Well, when you ramp up your purchase of Rockets you will not be so overflowing with IUU's.

And yes, the RP thing is the problem I have with it too, that's why I need all you to give me your thoughts on it.

Too much cash can be cured in one of two ways:

1.) Lower the monthly budget.
2.) Raise the price of things and require a WU AND IUU expenditure for hardware.

Comments?



Cheers, Thor

Gav, I hope you do not mind my updating your Sputnik post.



Cheers, Thor

As long as it is only in small amounts otherwise it may unbalance the game. Either way , lets test it and if it does not work , then we can scrap it. Also I am assuming that this would take place at the end/start of the year ? once per year only ????

And thanks for the template !

Gav, after thinking on it a bit more I was thinking of a 10 to 1 for RPs, and a 5 to 1 for IUUs. It can only be taken once per year, and only if the resource being exchanged for is currently exhausted. Up to 10% of the current Wu budget, and as long as the requisite Wu's are in stock.

This way it can only be done once, and only then if the player has run out of that resource. I like this form of the idea, since it can represent an emergency, and temporary, budget increase.

I think in this form it will not replace good planning, but it can help mitigate really bad random events or die rolls on the missions.

What brought it on was the way Mav's space program was nearly brought to its knees by that one bad die roll. It highlighted the need for something like this.

How does this sound to you folks?

You are quite welcome for the template. I hope to see more Sov fluff posts now, though!



Cheers, Thor

I gave this some thought. My concern is balance. There is the conversion cost as a limiter, but we could also limit the amount that can be purchased to a percentage of the Year start RP. Or both methods at once for that matter.

As always, the budget that we get is only increased by PP gained during the previous year. Large expenditures of anything means your out of something and its only going to be replaced at a limited rate each year. Large scale conversions of WU or IUU will increase your research, but leave you potentially crippled for years. Unless you manage to really get the PP rolling in, and even that will take years to catch up.

Assuming a 10 to 1 conversion and a starting yearly budget of 720 Wu, you can get 72 RP if you convert it fully. It sounds like a lot, but it will disappear rapidly if your spending it on LEO, MEO, etc. At 5 teams on a MEO, it costs 60 RP a month if i read it right. So a full blown convert is a desperation move. If your going to do it, you either need a lot more funds to convert, or use it to finish a research item for a month if your a few RP short.

A 5 to 1 ratio conversion provides 144 RP, which is 2 and a half months worth of RP for a MEO. A wee bit better, but now you have the rocket, and no way to buy it....

Now, no one has seen what potential funding could be like 10 years in...
But I suspect it will not be that much more per year. My estimate is 30 to 400 PP spent on WU, RP, and IUU gains. I also suspect that much of it will have been spent on RP!!! lol

The ability to spend WU on IUU, or cash in IUU for WU seems to be much less unbalancing in the long run to me.

After thinking about it, if a player is willing to take the risk of blowing his financial reserve on RP for what seems like a only mediocre gain and a long term tight WU budget, then why not? 5 for one is only marginally crippling, 10 to one is extreme and no player who can do math would even try that exchange rate. At least not in the early game!

After having thought about it, and only being 2 years in mind you, I vote for 5 to 1 conversion to RP. Anything greater simply makes it too expensive to really use without potentially crippling the player in the long term.

As a caveat, if i need those 3 or 4 RP to let that extra team finish working on the MEO, then its a doable exchange at either rate.

Yes, it's really late and I am rambling badly. Good night all!

Now, if its meant as a emergency measure and limited by a rule as to when it can be used then your thought on that makes sense Ken.

I don't know what straights Mav's boom did to him, aside from Pad repairs and a dent in the PP generation, but how much would he had to have had converted to repair that disaster and how would that have left his WU reserve?

If it would have used up close to half, then the conversion may be too expensive.

Again, I am rambling. Ciya at lunch Ken.

Yeah, it's meant as an emergency measure, and is limited to 10% of the budget and once per year.

The one die roll cost him nearly 40 PP's, by last count, due to that bad roll. We were neck and neck in our race, and he would have garnered the PP's for first with animals, not me.

Between the mandatory scrubbed launches, the forced rebuilding, and loss of IUUs to that, along with the need to scub missions due to not having hte IUU's to pay for the HW needed in those launches, his Agency ground to a halt.

And this was all due to one bad die roll. It was not the loss of the rocket that killed him, it was the loss of the Pad and the loss of 50% of the Safety to his LEO Rocket Program that damn near did in his Agency. His LEO Rocket Safety at the time of the explosion was over 90%...

Since, as you well know, budgets are very tight in the beginning, having to spend the extra IUU's and RP's to just regain what he lost put him behind in the race.

And as you have already pointed out, it takes a LONG time to recover from any possible shortfall of resources.



Cheers, Thor

I have had some thoughts based off of what I see of the game so far.

Running basic missions, even if they are not pushing the edge, is crucial to generate PP each year. Even a basic satellite shot with a LEO, satellite, and a Comm package will net me 2 PP each at the end of the year resulting in me being able to increase my budgets by that amount. Last year i spent it all on increasing my RP budget as I feel that that is my most crucial budget category at the moment.

If you have any thoughts or observations that you have thought of, please post them!

Mav, you make a very good point about the usage of resources, and we do have an extensive resource conversion system in BTS! full.

Guys, I REALLY appreciate your responses. They have given me plenty of food for thought.

So, I think come Y.E.S., and before we begin '59, we will implement the followng:

If a player is out of a certain resource, and other resources are available, once per Fiscal Year he may convert 10% of a resources unmodified budget for the year to another resource. Listed below are the conversion rates.

1.) 10 Wu's = 1 Rp
2.) 5 Wu's = 1 Iuu
3.) 10 Iuu's = 1 Rp
4. 5 Iuu's = 1 Wu

How does this sound?

@Haegan, you are absolutely correct. Those sat launches are the easiest way to increase your PP haul. I STRONGLY recommend every player, once he gets a good LEO-OS-CP combo, to get in the habit of launching one per month.

It is not a fast way to gain PPs, but it is a steady way, and will help mitigate any losses Random Events and bad die rolls can inflict.



Cheers, Thor

London Times:

The Space Ministry announced late yesterday that a test launch had detonated in mid-air during its launch phase. The purpose of the launch was to test the data streams from the One Man Capsule design and to determine how the capsule would effect the dynamics of the lifting body upon lift off.

A spokesman from the Space Ministry has said that an investigation has been opened and the debris is being searched to reconstruct what happened. It is felt that the defect is in the structural support members that handle the weight the capsule imposes upon the rest of the lifting body upon lift off. The spokesman admitted that the investigation would not return definite answers for several months, but that in the meantime additional launches would occur based off of a modified lifting body.

The Daily London Rag:

An informant inside of the Space Ministry has admitted to us that the recent failed launch was not the first failure the Ministry has had. Evidently both of their attempts to launch a living creature into orbit have ended in blazing glory. And a free lunch for sharks in the North Sea.

At least our Ministry is consistent, said the source. If they're going to blow something up, they don't do it with half measures. Nothing like having your LOX ignite to cause a flaming cascade failure in the rocket's frame!

So, a kicker is sufficient to get a satellite on a fly-by of the moon, or even into orbit, right? Is it also sufficient to put a satellite on a trajectory that it will fly-by or orbit another body in the solar system, like say Mars or Venus?

Additionally, aside from lifting power, what reason do I have to use a Middle Orbit Rocket as opposed to a LEO Rocket and Kicker to get, say, a satellite into lunar orbit? What about into orbit of another body in the solar system? Also, what advantages are there to a Geostationary Orbit over a Low Earth Orbit, for satellites?

In comparing the weights for capsules, I see the Three Man Capsule just simply cannot be lifted by a LEO Rocket, or even a Middle Earth Orbit Rocket. Just thought I'd point that out to everyone, since I was wondering myself if I really needed that kinda oomph to put a manned mission on the moon. There is a point to the stronger rockets in this case.

Lastly, is there any way to see the stats of an astronaut before you pull him out of basic? Is basic a more efficient way to train an astronaut in all skills, while the individual training fields train one specific thing? Or do I not get to know that without having a red light flashed in my eyes? Is there a cap on advanced training? I assume you have to train an astronaut to fly the vehicle he's piloting for six months before he can fly it, is that correct?

Guys, I have been thinking, I am gonna take the US out of the game. I will step to the side and allow you all to race for the moon colony. And right now Mav is in the lead, with Haegan right behind!

I will still run the US, but not as a participant. Mainly as a way to test to see what changes and tweaks are needed.



Cheers, Thor

If the sat or probe is light enough, yes, all you need is a kicker. Below are the new steps for a Lunar Fly-By, with the new HW power on steps added.

Launch - MLB
Orbital Insertion Burn - MLB
Trans-Lunar Injection - Kicker
Mid-Course Correction Burn - Kicker
Hardware Power-On - Orb Sat
Hardware Power-On - Comm Pack
Hardware Power On - Photo Pack
Lunar Activities - Orb Sat

If all you need to do is lift sats, no reason to use anything but LEO's and a Kicker, just like the real folks do!

In this game, just a name to get the players used to having to deal with is all. In the more advanced game certain types of sats will require different type of orbits.

No, you do not positively need it. You can use a two man capsule, 1 man LEM, kickers, and multiple launches to put things into orbit, The Mission LOR (Lunar Orbit Rendezvous SP?) is the way to go if you wish to do it that way.

This was, in point of fact, what the Soviets planned to do if their N-1 rocket had not blown up in their faces three times in a row, the last one destroying Baikanour, their launch facility.

An astronaut can have a number between 0 and 5 for his skill stats. But, if he does not complete basic, the best they can ever be is a 2. So yes, it is to your benefit to have your 'nauts complete basic training. While they are doing so use the time to complete all of those non-manned missions, like increasing your photo recon of the moon and such.

Correct on the Manned Program familiarization length.



Cheers, Thor

Wait a sec...you don't need the Interplanetary satellite to do a lunar fly-by mission? Is it just for Mars or Venus?

Thanks a lot for answering those questions, it helps a lot.

What you need is an Orb Sat for the Fly-By of the moon, a Lunar Probe for the Probe landing missions on the moon, and IP sat for anything else. Thats why they are called inter-PLANETARY Satellites.

In real life, the original US sats to fly by the moon were not much larger than the later explorer sat. Attach is a pic of one of the early Pioneer Sats.

The IPs are for any mission outside the Earth-Luna system, example, Titan, Io, Mars, Venus, etc. etc.

NP, glad to answer any q's you may have.



Cheers, Thor