Progression Systems make it a game. Incomplete access to parts drives innovation that Sandbox can't. Hopefully, SCIENCE has some Progression Elements.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

I keep flipping between unbridled optimism thanks to the glimpses of the grand vision of the developers and frustration with the current Communications Strategy around the present state of the game.  I'm hoping that via the next couple of patches we can get back on track with the Roadmap!

To that end - and as I work around the bugs and enjoy what I can get to work - I notice that I miss being constrained by the game elements of KSP.  In fact, I rarely ever used the Sandbox mode in KSP - unless I wanted to try something out with parts I did not have.  There was a real joy in cobbling together a craft that was barely capable of getting my payload to orbit - and after several tries, recreations and rebuilds with the parts at my disposal - finally getting to orbit and my destination.  That gave a sincere and distinct sense of accomplishment.  It's what made KSP a game.

I think Sandbox is perfect for the current bug hunt.   But with Sandbox, I'm just building overpowered crafts that are effectively SSTO - leaving me with an overbuilt second stage that can easily accomplish the mission (when the game works).  The accomplishment feeling is 'yaay - it didn't break!' not 'wow, that was hard, but I did it!'.

I know that Nate has talked about Colonies and Resource Extractions bringing progression elements to KSP - and I'm very excited to see what the team has in store for us!  I also know that will come after Science - and to that end, I hope that Science does include some form of progression.

I know people critical of the old system: doing a Crew Report in Orbit over the Mun doesn't link up with an advancement in Jet Propulsion (unlocks).  But clunky as it was - the constraints on unlocks forced players to 'work with what they had'... and that was a good thing.

Regardless of what Science adds to KSP2, the increased content and 'things to do' will be greatly appreciated.  I just hope that it also adds somewhat of a progression system to make KSP2 feel like a game.

Fingers crossed!

Edited March 10, 2023 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[The Aziz]

I think there's a lot of personal approach to what's been given.

Instead of 

8 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

building overpowered crafts that are effectively SSTO - leaving me with an overbuilt second stage that can easily accomplish the mission

You can still

9 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

cobble together a craft that was barely capable of getting my payload to orbit - and after several tries, recreations and rebuilds with the parts at my disposal - finally getting to orbit and my destination

Just because I can craft a Vector powered ssto that could get me to Duna and back, only to send a small sat to the Mun, doesn't mean I want to. Years of playing career in KSP1 taught me to go light as often as possible. So I guess you could call it a habit. Even at the end of my KSP1 science save, and now in KSP2 sandbox, I'm still building rockets that get me to my destination - but only just - instead of overpowered monsters. I am looking at my delta v/twr stats, and only go bigger when smaller doesn't cut it. Sure sometimes a little overengineering happens, but not much.

Of course all these mental restraints will be gameified at some point but assuming it's going to be sensible, I won't feel much of a difference because I was doing it almost automatically, for a long time. Limited parts, resources? Most likely not a problem, I was always using as little as I could.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

53 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

You can still

True.

But that's like a kid playing with legos and deciding to use only the red pieces.  Can be fun - but these internal constraints are distinct from the meaning of 'game'.  (Yes, I get that the kid is making a game out of only using red.)

When KSP2 does offer constraints - whether its comes in part in Science or we have to wait for Colonies - that's when I think the real fun happens.

Edited March 10, 2023 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[Vl3d]

Limitations spark creativity.

[Kerbart]

The big unknown is how progressive mode is implemented. Just because there's no money (which in KSP1 led to contract grinding) doesn't mean there are no restrictions.

[Superfluous J]

I can't see how they'd implement Science without the Science being used to unlock something.

But there's a lot about KSP2's future I can't see so that may not mean all that much

[Kerbart]

30 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

I can't see how they'd implement Science without the Science being used to unlock something.

I don't think any of us had imagined the game being released in the current state it's in, so Intercept has already proven to have superior creativity compared to ours. That being said, there's two things to consider:

• It's hard—nearly impossible— to think about a Science Mode where Science is not used to unlock new features. I wholeheartedly agree. Until we see how it's done and then it's suddenly blindingly obvious. I'm not saying that Science won't unlock things, it's the most obvious way to use it. But who knows?
• The "unlocking" part is not the shortcoming we have though. It's the “you did a temperature reading on the surface of Minmus and now you can use ladders" part. that irks most who criticize Science. So instead of relying on a singe experiment the gane probabky demands something more holistic

Here are some thoughts of I have on the subject:

• You can divide your science in various areas, like fundamental physics, materials, chemistry, biology, psychology, economy. Perhaps each area has even subdivisions.
• In each of these areas you collect science at a steady rate which can be increased by having more science labs, equip those labs with more experiments and by putting more scientists in them
• Certain technology gets unlocked when reaching certain thresholds, and perhaps a combination of them. A hybernation chamber may require certain levels for physics, biology and psychology.
• But your tech levels also influences how your technology functions. Engie efficiency goes up with increased understanding of Physics and Materials, etc

You'd end up with a system where technology doesn't just become "unlocked," but rather gradually becomes feasible.  So instead of collecting resources for 10 years to build a colony ship, you'd rather focus on developing science for 2 years and now you only need 6 years worth of resources. That's a system where things don't get unlocked, just become more and more attractive, to the point where you decide that they're now worth using.

[Superfluous J]

1 hour ago, Kerbart said:

The "unlocking" part is not the shortcoming we have though. It's the “you did a temperature reading on the surface of Minmus and now you can use ladders" part. that irks most who criticize Science.

I've never had an issue with that. I guess I've killed enough Kobolds to raise my potion skills (and similar) in other games that I just accept that progression is just kinda random and more based on what works than what is logical.

 

1 hour ago, Kerbart said:

• You can divide your science in various areas, like fundamental physics, materials, chemistry, biology, psychology, economy. Perhaps each area has even subdivisions.
• In each of these areas you collect science at a steady rate which can be increased by having more science labs, equip those labs with more experiments and by putting more scientists in them
• Certain technology gets unlocked when reaching certain thresholds, and perhaps a combination of them. A hybernation chamber may require certain levels for physics, biology and psychology.
• But your tech levels also influences how your technology functions. Engie efficiency goes up with increased understanding of Physics and Materials, etc

Place one lab. Place one scientist. Time warp at max overnight. Unlock everything.

It's the same argument against build times, and I can't think of a way around it.

As I said, though, I can't think of a lot of things and I'm not a professional game developer so maybe they've got better ideas than I could drum up.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

3 hours ago, Superfluous J said:

Place one lab. Place one scientist. Time warp at max overnight. Unlock everything.

Which practice I never understood.  If you're gonna do this - just play Sandbox?

(Must be too difficult for some)

[OHara]

On 3/10/2023 at 3:21 PM, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I know that Nate has talked about Colonies and Resource Extractions bringing progression elements to KSP 
[ . . . ]
I hope that Science does include some form of progression.

What I've read (here, so same as you've read) does suggest that reaching off-Kerbin resources will be what 'unlocks' technologies and opens up design-constraints, rather than a Civilization-style technology tree.

The 'Science' system, though, might involve collecting information that we use in the game.  In KSP1 the best example is the mod ScanSat, where you need to launch a scanner in an orbit capable of covering the interesting parts of a planet, in order to get an in-game map of the planet.  Such maps are required for landing on Eve if you have a mod producing clouds, as KSP2 has natively.  ScanSat has players do something useful for their game-progression using the core mechanics of the game (putting things in orbits).

Players here have suggested other ways to make 'Science' make sense in KSP:
requiring us to send up rockets carrying barometers before we have access to high-altitude jet engines,
applying the 'experience points' to the parts rather than Kerbals and unlocking the next parts in the tree once we have enough experience with the existing parts.
But, I don't know of any specific mods that use these ideas.

Myself, I played only one Career-mode game because I never learned the rules covering the tech tree.  I liked having to design within constraints, but whenever the constraints made little sense (ladders come surprisingly late) or when I was ready to move on to new parts, I relearned the unlocking rules from forum searches and didn't enjoy that part of KSP1 very much.

[K33N]

Agreed. I hope that the campaign that they implement at least someone captures the harsh restrictions that career mode imposed on KSP1.

[KSK]

19 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Which practice I never understood.  If you're gonna do this - just play Sandbox?

(Must be too difficult for some)

It's that red Lego analogy you made earlier, I think. Sure, you can deliberately avoid cheesing your way around a game mechanic using timewarp but then you're back to applying internal constraints rather than playing the game.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 minute ago, KSK said:

It's that red Lego analogy you made earlier, I think. Sure, you can deliberately avoid cheesing your way around a game mechanic using timewarp but then you're back to applying internal constraints rather than playing the game.

I get what you're saying - but to me its more analogous to 'cheat codes' - which I think I stopped using back in the days of the original Duke Nukem.

No - I take that back.  I did use the bug in Diablo that let you recreate stuff you'd dropped.

I guess what I'm saying is that exploits are there, and yeah, people are gonna use them - but when you have full sandbox mode available, I just don't see any purpose in doing the Time-Warp exploit; it's just a waste of electricity, if nothing else.