MPL Data procesing and reasons to get out of Kerbin (there aren't)

[EstebanLB]

Hello all, I've just started getting into the use of the MPL and read a lot about how insignificant it is to process data on the surface of kerbin compared to the orbit or surface of another celestial body.
While that makes total sense and encourages the player to send a manned MPL to other places I decided to have my first MPL on orbit arround Kerbin.
Reading the data on the wiki and forums I got the explanation that you won't get much data on the orbit of Kerbin either and landing it or at least orbiting any of the moons or Duna would be a better option to spend the scientists and money on.

BUT, with little planning and micromanaging, I gathered sufficient surface(launchpad), atmosphere(just the path to gravity turn) and space experiments (less than a couple of 30' orbits) to convert them all to data on orbit arround Kerbin to fill the 750 data pool on the MPL even BEFORE I finished the experiment list on the "space near" situation arround Kerbin, my whole plan to get more data on "space far" and remain there was a total waste, not to mention going even further.

Is there any benefit at all to send the MPL outside of Kerbin? Of course that I could do it just for the milestone and fun, but I think that all the higher science multipliers of other celestial bodies are irrelevant. It would make more sense that the data to science conversion or the science production rate gets multiplied and not just the experiment value to data.

What do you think?

 

TLDR: You can fill the 750 data pool by just orbiting Kerbin

Edited February 26, 2017 by EstebanLB

[Jestersage]

Science mode or Carrier?

[EstebanLB]

2 minutes ago, Jestersage said:

Science mode or Carrier?

Career

[Hotaru]

The data stored in the lab drains and needs to be replenished for it to keep producing science. Filling it up is easy. Keeping it filled can take some doing.

I'm not sure how the whole science in/data/science out relationship works out, but I believe there is a benefit to sending them elsewhere. Certainly in my career save the labs I have in Munar orbit, Minmus orbit, and on the Munar surface are quite a lot more productive than the one in Kerbin orbit.

Mind you, a lab anywhere except the surface of Kerbin is pretty OP. I maxed out the tech tree ages ago and thanks to the Patents Licensing strategy, these days labs are my space program's main source of income.

[EstebanLB]

13 minutes ago, Hotaru said:

I'm not sure how the whole science in/data/science out relationship works out, but I believe there is a benefit to sending them elsewhere. Certainly in my career save the labs I have in Munar orbit, Minmus orbit, and on the Munar surface are quite a lot more productive than the one in Kerbin orbit.

Do al of them have the same scietist level and ammount of data? Because that ammount determines the science gain rate

[Hotaru]

1 minute ago, EstebanLB said:

Do al of them have the same scietist level and ammount of data? Because that ammount determines the science gain rate

Yes to both. (The crews rotate and the data is periodically drained and replenished, so any differences mostly average out.)

[WanderingKid]

2 hours ago, EstebanLB said:

Is there any benefit at all to send the MPL outside of Kerbin? Of course that I could do it just for the milestone and fun, but I think that all the higher science multipliers of other celestial bodies are irrelevant. It would make more sense that the data to science conversion or the science production rate gets multiplied and not just the experiment value to data.

There's a few factors you have to understand about the MPL and it'll finally click.

First you have to understand  data generation.  The physical location of the lab decides how much data you get per experiment it converts.  So, for your case of converting experiments, you want to convert them to data after you're in orbit.  In most other cases, you want to be landed at the body the experiments come from... for example, landed on Minmus when converting biome experiments for Minmus.  This lets you get more data out of your experiment supply.  So you only want the MPL outside of Kerbin's SOI if it's processing experiments from outside Kerbin's SOI.

Next, your scientist's level is the deciding factor in how much data, per day, gets processed.  So, if you have a full tank of science data, 750, and you have a single 1 star scientist (only orbited Kerbin), you will get 750 * 0.000675 data processed into raw science per day, which is roughly .5 data processed a day.  For comparison, a 3 star scientist will convert 750 * 0.001755 data, for 1.3 data processed per day in a full lab.  This data processing value feeds into the resulting 'stored science' that needs to be transmitted from the lab to Kerbin.  Also, in case you aren't aware yet, processing data is an electricity hog.

This ends up with your Science/Day rate, along with multipliers based on where the base is located (and as far as I can tell) your research rewards settings in the difficulty options for your game.

As an example, an MPL sitting on Minmus with 734 data and two 3 star scientists is producing 6.94 science/day.   I don't remember what a full data run in Kerbin's orbit is, but it's a lot lower.

[EstebanLB]

2 minutes ago, WanderingKid said:

There's a few factors you have to understand about the MPL and it'll finally click.

First you have to understand  data generation.  The physical location of the lab decides how much data you get per experiment it converts.  So, for your case of converting experiments, you want to convert them to data after you're in orbit.  In most other cases, you want to be landed at the body the experiments come from... for example, landed on Minmus when converting biome experiments for Minmus.  This lets you get more data out of your experiment supply.  So you only want the MPL outside of Kerbin's SOI if it's processing experiments from outside Kerbin's SOI.

Next, your scientist's level is the deciding factor in how much data, per day, gets processed.  So, if you have a full tank of science data, 750, and you have a single 1 star scientist (only orbited Kerbin), you will get 750 * 0.000675 data processed into raw science per day, which is roughly .5 data processed a day.  For comparison, a 3 star scientist will convert 750 * 0.001755 data, for 1.3 data processed per day in a full lab.  This data processing value feeds into the resulting 'stored science' that needs to be transmitted from the lab to Kerbin.  Also, in case you aren't aware yet, processing data is an electricity hog.

This ends up with your Science/Day rate, along with multipliers based on where the base is located (and as far as I can tell) your research rewards settings in the difficulty options for your game.

As an example, an MPL sitting on Minmus with 734 data and two 3 star scientists is producing 6.94 science/day.   I don't remember what a full data run in Kerbin's orbit is, but it's a lot lower.

But my question is, will two MPL with the 2 same scientists with the same level and the same ammount of data in the pool generate the same ammount of science per day if they are in different locations?

[WanderingKid]

21 hours ago, EstebanLB said:

But my question is, will two MPL with the 2 same scientists with the same level and the same ammount of data in the pool generate the same ammount of science per day if they are in different locations?

Short answer: no.

It depends on where the experiments come from, if they are in orbit or landed, and a few other factors.  But, in general, no.  There are multipliers for location and where the experiment comes from which aren't listed in the wiki.

Edit: This is incorrect.  See Streetwind below for correct answers.

Edited February 27, 2017 by WanderingKid

[W. Kerman]

The lab is unbalanced, and while you can grind all the science you need with it, that is boring!

Ditch the lab, use the saved delta V to get to Duna!

 

 

[WanderingKid]

11 minutes ago, W. Kerman said:

The lab is unbalanced, and while you can grind all the science you need with it, that is boring!

Ditch the lab, use the saved delta V to get to Duna!

It's only unbalanced if you time warp the heck out of it.  Which, comparatively, what's the difference between timewarping an MPL and timewarping your way to Duna?  Otherwise, it's a heck of a lot of investment for eventual returns.  I'm okay with that.

[W. Kerman]

3 minutes ago, WanderingKid said:

It's only unbalanced if you time warp the heck out of it.  Which, comparatively, what's the difference between timewarping an MPL and timewarping your way to Duna?  Otherwise, it's a heck of a lot of investment for eventual returns.  I'm okay with that.

But you get a pretty flag on Duna if you go there, whereas you only have a lab by the end of your time warp of a MPL.

[WanderingKid]

9 minutes ago, W. Kerman said:

But you get a pretty flag on Duna if you go there, whereas you only have a lab by the end of your time warp of a MPL.

But, my lab looks really cool...

[drhay53]

try a modded tech tree and turn down the science multiplier in the settings menu. You can slow down your science gain basically as much as you want, and set it up so that you can't max out the tech tree without some good interplanetary missions

[Snark]

51 minutes ago, W. Kerman said:

The lab is unbalanced, and while you can grind all the science you need with it, that is boring!

Ditch the lab, use the saved delta V to get to Duna!

I wouldn't call the lab "unbalanced".  It's designed to provide an alternate play style for people who don't want to grind lots of biome-hopping.

The two main schools of thought on the science lab:

• "It's great, because now I don't have to do all that biome hopping, or go to other planets!"
• "It's terrible, because now I don't have to do all that biome hopping, or go to other planets!"

I have zero use for the MPL myself, since I like the biome hopping and going to other planets, so it's a buzz-kill.  So I never use it, ever, at all.

But someone who has a different play style can get lots of good use out of it, and thereby enjoy the game more.

It's all about making KSP accessible to a variety of play styles.  So, basically, it boils down to "use it if doing so makes you happier; don't use it if it doesn't."

[EstebanLB]

1 hour ago, WanderingKid said:

Short answer: no.

It depends on where the experiments come from, if they are in orbit or landed, and a few other factors.  But, in general, no.  There are multipliers for location and where the experiment comes from which aren't listed in the wiki.

But the wiki states that the ammount of science per data is always 5, My concern being at wich rate said data gets converted to science

[Biggen]

I would say it's not worth it to send the MPL outside of Kerbin's SOI.  If you packed it full of data just from orbiting Kerbin proper, than that alone will give you thousands of science points and will unlock 3/4 or more of the tech tree by itself.

No need to ferry an MPL out beyond Minimus.

I setup my MPL at Minimus, biome hopped, and filled it up.  I was able to unlock the entire tech tree doing it this way.  I don't enjoy biome hopping so I wanted to get that out of the way pronto and get my hands on the cooler tech toys deeper in the tree before sending crafts interplanetary.

[Snark]

3 hours ago, EstebanLB said:

But the wiki states that the ammount of science per data is always 5, My concern being at wich rate said data gets converted to science

So, there are three things you need to care about.

• How much data do I get from a science experiment when I put it into the lab?  This depends on location, at the time the data is loaded into the lab, as has been discussed above.
• How many science points will each data point turn into?  5.
• How fast will the data turn into science?  This depends on the level of the scientists staffing the lab.

So:  It matters where the lab is when you put the data in.  But after you've put in the data, the rate at which it converts to science depends only on the skill level of the scientists-- it doesn't matter where you take the lab after you've input the data.

[W. Kerman]

3 hours ago, Snark said:

I wouldn't call the lab "unbalanced".  It's designed to provide an alternate play style for people who don't want to grind lots of biome-hopping.

The two main schools of thought on the science lab:

• "It's great, because now I don't have to do all that biome hopping, or go to other planets!"
• "It's terrible, because now I don't have to do all that biome hopping, or go to other planets!"

I have zero use for the MPL myself, since I like the biome hopping and going to other planets, so it's a buzz-kill.  So I never use it, ever, at all.

But someone who has a different play style can get lots of good use out of it, and thereby enjoy the game more.

It's all about making KSP accessible to a variety of play styles.  So, basically, it boils down to "use it if doing so makes you happier; don't use it if it doesn't."

*When you have a biome hopper on Minmus with a lab.

I just don't like that you stay inside Kerbin's SOI with it in terms of science.

But whatever floats people's boats!

[EstebanLB]

IMO the MPL mechanics should be modified to make players go to other bodies to deploy it as they progress in the tech tree and need even more science. That's why I said that the science rate production should depend on the body and situation multiplier as well, not just the convertion to data

[Snark]

22 minutes ago, EstebanLB said:

IMO the MPL mechanics should be modified to make players go to other bodies to deploy it as they progress in the tech tree and need even more science.

The problem is that that would largely defeat an important purpose of the MPL, which is to enable players who don't want to go to other bodies.

[DerekL1963]

3 hours ago, Snark said:

The problem is that that would largely defeat an important purpose of the MPL, which is to enable players who don't want to go to other bodies.

The key word in his post is "make" - One Playstyle To Rule Them All. 

[Streetwind]

I think @EstebanLB does have sort of a point. The lab is, I feel, not encouraging the player to travel enough. Perhaps what @Snark said is true in terms of design intent by the devs, but then why even have a location bonus in the first place?

Right now, the lab gives you:
- a x1.10 multiplier for having the vessel landed on any surface
- a x1.25 multiplier for converting an experiment in the same SOI it was collected in
- a x5.00 multiplier for... well, just using the lab at all.

Or, in other words: you get 500% science return if you use the lab anywhere, 550% if you use it landed anywhere (other than Kerbin), 625% if you convert experiments in the same SOI they were taken in, and 687.5% if you convert experiments from the same SOI of the body on which the lab is landed (except Kerbin).

This is the reason why it's irrelevant where the lab is. So much of the gain is loaded into the base conversion rate, while the location bonuses are not rewarding enough. What if you just bumped the usage multiplier down to 3x, the landed multiplier up to 1.2x, and the location multiplier up to 2.0x? Then you'd get 300% for using it just anywhere, 360% for using it anywhere landed, 600% for being in the correct SOI, and 720% for being landed in the correct SOI. Now that's a much more interesting spread, one that encourages the player to put the lab where it works best, while still allowing it to bring useful returns when simply sitting in Kerbin orbit.

 

The way I see it, there's several logical flaws in argumenting for the current stats to be strictly necessary to cater to players who "don't want to travel". The first being that even using the lab at 500%, Kerbin alone may not be able to offer enough to unlock the whole tech tree. The player is highly likely to go to the Mun anyway, if only to speed up the process and procure additional experiments. Then why not send the lab to the Mun - where it is in fact enough to unlock the whole tech tree by itself without going anywhere else? Shuttling the lab those extra <1200 m/s is less effort than flying a single Mun landing and return mission, which the player would have to do anyway in order to procure enough experiments for the lab residing in Kerbin orbit. There's no net amount of effort saved here, no matter which way you turn it.

And then there's the many ways in which the game lets you generate infinite science (all of which, by the way, are intentional). Contracts can do it. Strategies can do it. Asteroid captures can do it. And the science lab, too, can do it - if you just keep launching fresh ones. Each lab can only process a crew report in space above Kerbin once, but an infinite number of labs can process an infinite number of crew reports in space above Kerbin... and infinite copies of every other experiment from every other location too. So even if the lab was more strongly weighted towards rewarding the player for putting it in the correct SOI, it would in no way, shape or form impede a player's ability to farm science in low Kerbin orbit.

(And then there's the debug menu, for those who prefer to just start a career game with the science tree fully unlocked from the start.)

 

This is why I personally agree with EstebanLB in thinking that the lab should reward intelligent usage more. And I've already started tweaking the lab with my own stats for all future games I will be playing

[KerikBalm]

12 hours ago, Hotaru said:

thanks to the Patents Licensing strategy, these days labs are my space program's main source of income.

This... taking an MPL on a long voyage to Jool igves it plenty of time to pay for the mission. 750 data when leaving kerbin won't last. As data depletes, the rate falls. If you don't want to recover MPLs on kerbin and launch another one up (after collecting tons of tiny experiments), you cand send it to jool where each experiment generates hundreds of data, and there's a lot of experiments to do.

The MPL is a money printer, the longer it can print money, the bigger the mission it can finance.

[Streetwind]

...and even as a money printer it is better when rewarding the player for putting it where it works best