Rocket improvements (usability, automation, etc.)

[Hexicube]

I've not actually gotten to rockets in a survival game, but I'm close. All of my information about rockets comes from creative testing.

• In-game information is lacking

The in-game information on rockets is massively bare-bones and does not give the relevant information to the player on what a rocket would be able to do. There is no in-game way for me to know that with steam engines I need a booster to bring back cargo due to the weight, or what the potential range is for a specific rocket design. I'm forced to use a site to work this out as the required numbers are not made visible.

There should be some sort of rocket launch-pad, where you set up a rocket via adding modules, and it tells you what the maximum range is for that rocket. Nothing complex, just a 1x7 base (or maybe 1x8, to match the width of two bunker doors) made of steel, same cost as 7 steel bunker tiles (700kg). You would set up a rocket design (i.e. steam engine, booster, booster, solid cargo, liquid cargo, command capsule), confirm it, and then the pending construction appears in-world for dupes to carry out, possibly with auto-added gantries for specific modules on either side.

Considering that hydrogen/petroleum engines also seem to have a 3:1 mixture, it should also automatically add the appropriate number of oxidiser tanks based on the fuel tank count. If I have 4-6 tanks of fuel, I need 2 oxidiser tanks. Alternatively, some sort of warning that the ratio is wrong.

• Rocket returns shouldn't be fixed

If a celestial object has 95% coal and 5% iron, I am forced to take in 950kg of coal to get my 50kg of iron (or vice versa). There is absolutely no way to change this, and if I do not need some of the resources from a celestial body, I am forced to either invent a use or somehow dispose of it.

As an example, I have a celestial body with 31% refined carbon on it. Refined carbon is exclusively used to make steel (which is on celestial bodies too), and there is no legitimate way to dispose of it as the melting temperature is over 4000C. Once you no longer need steel, or have a different source, refined carbon becomes a massive issue that has no long-term solution.

The resource proportions should be a "time to collect 1 ton of X" instead, where it would take maybe 1 cycle to collect a ton of coal but 10 to collect a ton of iron, with the time spent being whatever resource takes longest (3t coal + 1t iron is 10 cycles, not 13). That way, if you want some rare resource like niobium or fullerene, you could simply say "spend 100 cycles collecting a full bay of niobium" and do other stuff in the meantime, rather than dealing with everything else it regularly brings back. This also means you don't end up with weird quantities, for instance one of my bodies gives me 1710.7g of fullerene; I can only use it in 1kg quantities, so I would like to specify I want maybe 5kg of it to get started with some designs.

There should also be some maximum round-trip time, such as 100 cycles, so that you can't just ask for 5t of fullerene and get it from one launch by waiting for 5000 cycles. This maximum time could also be based on supplying the astronaut and passengers with food, and would be a great opportunity to give berry sludge an important role as it does not spoil.

This also opens the door to making more distant bodies give better speeds on resources, which could mean for large enough quantities of rare materials you would want to go far out, since the time to collect it would make up for the trip time.

• Rockets should only take in the fuel they need

Pretty simple, once you specify a mission (above point) the distance to travel is known, and fuel should only be added up to the point where it hits that distance. The desired materials could also add a bit to the fuel requirements, with some materials having a higher fuel cost per ton (even though ton is a measure of weight, it seems to be used to mean volume).

There should probably also be some sort of fuel priority system, where you can prefer to partially load either LF+OX or boosters, and it works out how much would be required before fuelling starts. If you prefer boosters to be full, it works out a partial LF+OX mix, and vice versa.

• Automation should be more fleshed out

There is no way to automate the return timing of the rocket. Rockets can potentially return during a meteor shower, which basically forces having bunker walls to protect against damage, and makes blast doors for the exit pointless. The simple solution is to just have an output port on scanners - rockets ready to land send the usual arriving signal, and you then give it the go-ahead - but ideally it should be a separate building...some sort of control room style thing.

Combining this with being able to say what resources you want actually also opens up being able to fully automate a space program, where astronauts are only allowed to enter a specific rocket when a resource runs low. This can already be done with checkpoints, so there's nothing to do there, but automation wires need to ignore rocket damage first in order to control launches properly, and being able to have rockets only bring back one material would mean you can have a bunch of rockets with different purposes. With the proper design and automation, you could design systems that ultimately never need maintenance.

[Gwido]

2 hours ago, Hexicube said:

In-game information is lacking

These infos are available.

It's not shown in the construction menu, but once a rocket is built, the rocket status in the starmap screen shows the ration km/kg of fuel,

So once your first rocket is build, with a steam engine, you know that is uses 1 kg of steam to travel 20 km. And each other engine infos say there better than the previous, so it's not realley hard to know you finnally have to change your steam engine of add a thruster if you want to go farther than 18 000 km.

For the thruster, it's true that the info is not available ine the construction menu (just like the engine efficiency. But quite the same way has the engine, once you have build one and start to fill it with iron and oxylite, the rocket status shows the amount of distance added to the rocket.

So, for the informations about efficiency and distance, it's all available in the starmap, that you should have unlocked by constructing a telescop to start analysis of celestial objects.

 

2 hours ago, Hexicube said:

Considering that hydrogen/petroleum engines also seem to have a 3:1 mixture, it should also automatically add the appropriate number of oxidiser tanks based on the fuel tank count. If I have 4-6 tanks of fuel, I need 2 oxidiser tanks. Alternatively, some sort of warning that the ratio is wrong.

In my opinion, it's part of the fun to understand what's needed for the rocket to run properly.

And it's also the base system of this game. You don't have any information until you get to an issue and have to build a system. Then you have to understand how it work, make some settings so that it run properly, etc.

It's the same for the rockets.

 

2 hours ago, Hexicube said:

Rockets should only take in the fuel they need

No need for automation, here.

Once you've understand how it works, you can easily control the amount of fuel you want to add in the rocket.

For example, currently, I explore the objects between 30 000 and 40 000 km.

For the first flight, I've progressively refueled my rocket, until I've found the correct amount of petroleum and oxylite. After that, for each launch, I've set a system so that duplicants can't load too much oxylite in the oxydizer tank. And control by myself the correct amount of petroleum in the fuel tank.

 

2 hours ago, Hexicube said:

Automation should be more fleshed out

I think it's good this way.

A game should never be fully automated.

[Hexicube]

Quote

These infos are available.

It's not shown in the construction menu, but once a rocket is built, the rocket status in the starmap screen shows the ration km/kg of fuel,

So once your first rocket is build, with a steam engine, you know that is uses 1 kg of steam to travel 20 km. And each other engine infos say there better than the previous, so it's not realley hard to know you finnally have to change your steam engine of add a thruster if you want to go farther than 18 000 km.

For the thruster, it's true that the info is not available ine the construction menu (just like the engine efficiency. But quite the same way has the engine, once you have build one and start to fill it with iron and oxylite, the rocket status shows the amount of distance added to the rocket.

So, for the informations about efficiency and distance, it's all available in the starmap, that you should have unlocked by constructing a telescop to start analysis of celestial objects.

You would still have to physically build a rocket to find out this information, only learning that some seemingly easy designs do not work. For one thing, I'm surprised that a steam engine alone cannot carry cargo bays, and must be used with a booster.

It doesn't seem like a lot, but it's potentially the difference between a rocket fitting in the bay you have, as well as the annoyance in the first place of building a rocket only to discover it will not work. Couple that with the fact rockets are built bottom-up and not top-down, and you have a very annoying rebuild if you don't want to (or can't) extend upwards.

There's no reason for this information to not be more front-and-center.

Quote

In my opinion, it's part of the fun to understand what's needed for the rocket to run properly.

And it's also the base system of this game. You don't have any information until you get to an issue and have to build a system. Then you have to understand how it work, make some settings so that it run properly, etc.

It's the same for the rockets.

That's fair, but it's a non-obvious issue and the test-learn-repeat cycle time is pretty long. Once you have to wait 10 minutes to try something new (unless you make two rockets), it's not really working since you can end up forgetting...especially when the entire wait time is genuinely just a wait.

Quote

No need for automation, here.

Once you've understand how it works, you can easily control the amount of fuel you want to add in the rocket.

For example, currently, I explore the objects between 30 000 and 40 000 km.

For the first flight, I've progressively refueled my rocket, until I've found the correct amount of petroleum and oxylite. After that, for each launch, I've set a system so that duplicants can't load too much oxylite in the oxydizer tank. And control by myself the correct amount of petroleum in the fuel tank.

I guess it would be a good automation opportunity, as you could always max-fill boosters and partially fill LF+OX.

1 hour ago, Gwido said:

I think it's good this way.

A game should never be fully automated.

The thing is, that suggestion was also pointing out the problem with how late that rocket return signal can be (not personally verified it yet), as well as the fact you sometimes can't avoid damage. Sure, you can just open the doors during a shower to let a rocket in, but meteors are practically guaranteed to enter that gap meaning you basically have to reinforce the entire launch bay...and gantries will still get hit. It's not a huge deal since you likely have the steel to repair the gantries, but either way the option should be there instead of limiting design options. ONI is going to thrive on creative designs that are made possible with this sort of automation.