Slitherine

Hey everyone,
after playing the current build for a while, I couldn't help but think of quite a few features from BARIS that I hope will make an appearance in SPM, eventually, in one form or another. Others also have referenced old features (mission configurations, f.e.) they are missing from the current build of the game. Since this game will inevitably be measured against BARIS, I believe it would be helpful to know what one can expect it to do and not to do, compared to its ancestor.
I'll hazard a guess and assume that the list on the Early Access program's product site about what is not yet in is not comprehensive, so I'll simply start a list of my own - if a dev could chime in and comment on the list items (planned, possible, not planned, not possible), that would be great. Some of the items may seem like no-brainers, but AFAIC no software feature is along for the ride, ever, until explicitly mentioned. Feel free to add to this list.

So, off the top of my head:

• Step Failure Screen
• Step Failure Animations
• Random Events at the start of each season
• Equipment purchase & stockpiling
• Mission configuration options - activities & duration
• Vehicle assembly options
• Flight crew management - training, primary & backup crews
• Launch Pads & Mission date management

Thanks in advance and keep up the good work.

No question about it Chris has some great points with note to the random events and the fail animations etc as the game will be compared to it predecessor

I just downloaded the early release today. The lack of mission configuration is huge for me. Choosing what rocket to use, etc. is great fun and brings your R&D choices into it. Without it, your R&D choices don't really matter and it feels like going down a checklist. The spaceport is well done.

I'd like the ability to click on a launch pad or assembly building and see the missions I have planned. As of now, you have to dig to remember what you scheduled. Not a problem when you have a program or two, but throw in a bunch of unmanned missions and it's hard to remember.

I think these are in the works, but I'd like to be able to shut down programs and fire people.

Triller is so right about mission config

hand in favour on all of the above (I just hope that if enough people will be squabbling about something then the dev's will feel obliged to do it )

Agree, and step failure animations and explanations is a priority for me.

N_Molson wrote:Agree, and step failure animations and explanations is a priority for me.

I'm with you

yes great idea and a few little real early recordings like in BARIS.

it was nice to see a recon photo of planets and moon

+1 to all of these! <--- big BARIS fan.

I would like to mention the incremental R&D you get in BARIS for developing first a capsule/rocket, then starting to develop the next one. For example, if you research Mercury at max, you get a R&D advantage when you start with Gemini.
I would like that especially for rockets; for example, having maximum R&D with the Jupiter C would be advantageous when you develop the Redstone.
That's just a general idea, I'm not knowledgeable enough to go into details.

I would like to see the competion between Nasa and the Soviet Space Agency for a real race into space and have the ability to have actual astronauts and cosmonauts in the game plus to be able to edit not only the astronaut names but to be able to input my own director name as you can do with BARIS
thanks

Italianfan88 wrote:I would like to mention the incremental R&D you get in BARIS for developing first a capsule/rocket, then starting to develop the next one. For example, if you research Mercury at max, you get a R&D advantage when you start with Gemini.
I would like that especially for rockets; for example, having maximum R&D with the Jupiter C would be advantageous when you develop the Redstone.
That's just a general idea, I'm not knowledgeable enough to go into details.

Technology transfer, yes please! Maybe not an all-or-nothing affair. In BASPM, R&D slows way down as we near max R&D reliability, maxing out those last few percent of R&D reliability can take a while. Instead, what the mechanism reflects that the space agency has a knowledge pool in rocketry or module design or probe design so that it doesn't always have to start from scratch. This is really important because it seems very few missions share the same components, so you're constantly developing new components. Maybe the more R&D you do and the more missions you launch, the stronger the knowledge pool is. And if a key personnel leaves, some knowledge is lost.

jgf1123 wrote:

Italianfan88 wrote:I would like to mention the incremental R&D you get in BARIS for developing first a capsule/rocket, then starting to develop the next one. For example, if you research Mercury at max, you get a R&D advantage when you start with Gemini.
I would like that especially for rockets; for example, having maximum R&D with the Jupiter C would be advantageous when you develop the Redstone.
That's just a general idea, I'm not knowledgeable enough to go into details.

Technology transfer, yes please! Maybe not an all-or-nothing affair. In BASPM, R&D slows way down as we near max R&D reliability, maxing out those last few percent of R&D reliability can take a while. Instead, what the mechanism reflects that the space agency has a knowledge pool in rocketry or module design or probe design so that it doesn't always have to start from scratch. This is really important because it seems very few missions share the same components, so you're constantly developing new components. Maybe the more R&D you do and the more missions you launch, the stronger the knowledge pool is. And if a key personnel leaves, some knowledge is lost.

Well, the last part was simulated in BARIS with the early German personnel or key personnel execution events; but here we might go deeper. When the age feature is implemented, key personnel would retire and would have to be replaced; of course there might be some events that make one top researcher unavailable for political or personal reasons

What I would like to have is some meaningful decisions... in the original BARIS there were some options and these options affected the gameplay, like
- should I choose the spaceplane... then lag behind in the early stages, but gain money by the reuseability?
- is it worth trying the direct ascent and skip the whole docking training?
- should I try the Gemini path, with the dirt cheap Atlas+booster combination for the early stages but stuck with that pesky one manned lander?
- should I go on the safe side and test all the components or take the risk to beat the opponent?
and so on

So the game is still in the beta stage... but replay value IMHO comes from the fundamentally different pathways and the fact that one cannot have everything in one session.

(oh I would love to have some space race type situation for the early chapters with practically unlimited funds as long as there is success... and a constant threat of budget reduction for the later chapters, where abandoning a mission would be a necessity sometimes)