Waxing_Kibbous Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 There's always a push for realistic rocket analogues in KSP, but I'd love to see some proper real science. Spectroscopy, geographical mapping, measuring the pressure and composition of an atmosphere at various altitudes, mineral composition at various locations, etc. Really mapping out data as opposed to taking a single point. Plus, planets would have harsh conditions that one would have to analyse and build craft accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shdwlrd Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 This has been speculated on before. But my opinion is that type of science will be necessary once you start going interstellar. Nate has said each new planet will have a non DV puzzle to figure out before you can safely land, you will have to find and mine resources. So the only way to figure it out is the types of science you mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerminator K-100 Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Kind of like Kerbalism Science? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K^2 Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 A good example would be weather forecasting for planets that might be tricky to land on during inclement weather. There was a bit of a discussion in another thread on pros and cons, but I still think that it'd be a good addition to gameplay if it's a factor on at least a couple of worlds. The way to tie this into science is that you can't really get a good forecast without a lot of data. So you'd want to drop probes in multiple points on the planet to get temperature, pressure, and maybe humidity readings, on top of setting up some monitoring satellites in orbit. Once you are getting enough data off the planet, you can start seeing what the weather's going to be like before it happens, so that you aren't caught off guard with a storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandaman Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Maybe one possibility is something on the lines of sending probes to gain gravitational and atmospheric info etc. This can then be used in the Dv tool in the VAB. Until probes are sent the Dv tool uses 'estimates' based on 'what the astronomer kerbals coukd work out' so will not provide fully accurate info, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incarnation of Chaos Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Real Science? So we wanna have to bust out {Insert preferred calculator} to work out the equations for reacting our fuel mixture, then derive the proper amounts of Fuel and OX based on that? And this isn't going to be 1 to 1 ratios either, since engines generally run fuel or OX rich and we'll have to take that into consideration. Then calculate the DV by hand using the Rocket Equation, draw our orbital information using a drafting table and the proper tools and finally plug it all into the game and hit launch only to witness in horror our meticulously designed machine break apart mid-flight because the Kerbal installing the gyros hammered them in upside down? Jeez; hope there's an easy mode for plebs like me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubinator Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 7 hours ago, Incarnation of Chaos said: Real Science? [rocket engineering] Jeez; hope there's an easy mode for plebs like me. I think that, like in KSP1, we'll be able to trust that our fuel mixtures are fine and our pre-valves and main valves are set up with the right flow rates and chamber pressures and bolts are screwed in tight. The science we'll have to deal with is: We won't know the exact mass and density of a planet until we get there. We can have a rough idea through prior observation, but if you launch your colony ship straight there you're going to have to improvise a little. Details like exact atmospheric conditions, geography, axial tilt and rate of rotation, and even small moons or rings would be impossible to pick out from Kerbol. You might have to analyze the world before designing your lander for it in space above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sesshaku Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 One thing I would love, if to have the experiments deliver actual data that can be read and that comes with a real life explanation of sorts. What I am saying is: when you read all the data you've collected, you can actually learn stuff about how planets are composed, how gravity works, how space radiation works, etc. It would be like an optional encyclopedia for learning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incarnation of Chaos Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 hours ago, cubinator said: I think that, like in KSP1, we'll be able to trust that our fuel mixtures are fine and our pre-valves and main valves are set up with the right flow rates and chamber pressures and bolts are screwed in tight. The science we'll have to deal with is: We won't know the exact mass and density of a planet until we get there. We can have a rough idea through prior observation, but if you launch your colony ship straight there you're going to have to improvise a little. Details like exact atmospheric conditions, geography, axial tilt and rate of rotation, and even small moons or rings would be impossible to pick out from Kerbol. You might have to analyze the world before designing your lander for it in space above. I know, that was intended as a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcwaffles2003 Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 Shameless related thread plug: Really hoping to see a more practical use for science in the game beyond just advancing a tech tree. Hiding orbits until analyzed via telescope Hiding atmosphere characteristics until a probe with a barometer/thermometer is sent there Base game inclusion of a SCANsat type system for biome and resource mapping Hiding whole star systems until proper sky surveys discover them etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waxing_Kibbous Posted January 14, 2021 Author Share Posted January 14, 2021 On 1/9/2021 at 7:47 AM, Incarnation of Chaos said: Real Science? So we wanna have to bust out {Insert preferred calculator} to work out the equations for reacting our fuel mixture, then derive the proper amounts of Fuel and OX based on that? And this isn't going to be 1 to 1 ratios either, since engines generally run fuel or OX rich and we'll have to take that into consideration. Then calculate the DV by hand using the Rocket Equation, draw our orbital information using a drafting table and the proper tools and finally plug it all into the game and hit launch only to witness in horror our meticulously designed machine break apart mid-flight because the Kerbal installing the gyros hammered them in upside down? Jeez; hope there's an easy mode for plebs like me. I said real science, we can keep the engineering fake It'd be cool to have some randomness with planets so different plays would require research to develop appropriate craft. Also, graphs of data would be pretty awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crenelatedcheese Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 I think you should have application specific science. For example, you only start with solid fuel and liquid fuel, but you need to "discover" other types of fuel, by outlining the problem or discovering a resource. You might "discover" propellers after landing on another place with an atmosphere and taking an atmospheric scan. You might only "discover" bigger engines after you take a seismic scan or something during takeoff. You might only "discover" fusion torchships or xenon engines after collecting helium 3 on the mun or xenon on kerbin. Heat shields might be "discovered" after taking a temperature scan during atmospheric entry. I'm not sure how to include all bigger parts in the equation, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James M Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 If we're analyzing atmospheric properties of planets/moons, I'd like it to be so you have to measure each layer of the atmosphere for one to gain relative data. Like if you dive into only the upper atmo, then you'll only know about the upper atmo. Or if you land on a mountain to save delta v on ascent, then you wont know about sea level atmospheric effects. I'd also like a tab somewhere where all this data is permanently available for one's viewing pleasure lol (Unlike the barometer we have now which only feeds data in real time) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shdwlrd Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 58 minutes ago, James M said: I'd also like a tab somewhere where all this data is permanently available for one's viewing pleasure lol (Unlike the barometer we have now which only feeds data in real time) That's actually a very good idea. What good in collecting all that data if you can't put it to use. @crenelatedcheese Mcwaffles2003 little plug for the re purposing science discusses a ton of ideas. Most of what you have suggested was discussed in that thread. But yes, science should be apart of the tech progression, but haphazardly finding something shouldn't always lead to a breakthrough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcwaffles2003 Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 Just wanna say, it would be nice if we got a dev diary or something around what they plan to do with science... An outline would be fine even if it hasn't yet been fully coded into the game, but just knowing a bit about what route they'd like to go along would be really nice info to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vv3k70r Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 (edited) On 1/8/2021 at 12:34 AM, Waxing_Kibbous said: There's always a push for realistic rocket analogues in KSP In such case there is need for procedural shapes, procedural inner constrution suport. So game have to be splited for separate program just to make vessels and one to play them. Meybe this is future for such games because people do parts in separate program and import them anyway. On 1/8/2021 at 12:34 AM, Waxing_Kibbous said: Spectroscopy, geographical mapping, measuring the pressure and composition of an atmosphere at various altitudes, mineral composition at various locations, etc. Really mapping out data as opposed to taking a single point. Reasonable, but in such a case we can split game in separate subgames/minigames around every celestial body, because timeline&scale for travel and for plying on celestial body have diferent magnitude. On 1/8/2021 at 12:34 AM, Waxing_Kibbous said: Plus, planets would have harsh conditions that one would have to analyse and build craft accordingly. Different suits, differnt material for chemistry reason, preasure, gravity. Very reasonable. In such case those games would be very intresting, but are hard to develop in current publisher/economic solutions. It can be delivered by comunity on main engine build by publisher. Then we come to economy, rights and so on. It could be very complex. But will meet expectation of narrow market that like it. There are similiar community solutions, as far I remember for panzer general at least. For sure there is more, but it is a narrow market. If market att all. Number of mods to this game sugest it is posible to be done even if not to solve on economic and legal terms. Edited January 14, 2021 by vv3k70r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts