KSP2 Science mode same as KSP1 science mode (Another Expectations Poll)

[RocketRockington]

Another expectations poll.   In today's Discord AMA, Nate gave the following answer 

Quote

[9:31 AM]
Are there going to be any significant changes to the science system in KSP 2, or any changes that you feel are worth talking about?

For context, the first of the progression modes that will be coming in a roadmap update will be science mode.

It will be similar to the KSP1 experience. Gaining science points, redeeming them for parts.

Differences would include: 

We don't want people to be able to gather huge amounts of science around the KSC. We want to push people to explore and visit all the other Celestial Bodies.

There will be a opt-in mission system that gives you a reward for doing a particular thing.

So, basically this sounds exactly like KSP1's science system, including having missions (eg: contracts) that can award science points.

And the first thing he mentions as a 'significant' change is something you could have changed in KSP1 in a tuning file by removing the biomes from KSC.  

I know a lot of people were expecting something different from the science system in KSP2, or at least, it sounded like they were pre-release, now do you feel about having something just like KSP1's science system but with minor tuning changes and renaming contracts to missions in KSP2?

[The Aziz]

That quote misses a lot of what was actually said there. It's more meaningful exploration based, rather than artificial currency. Nate mentioned how getting a temperature reading at certain altitude is going to be out because it brings nothing, instead there will be more science in collecting that science - like discovering something that's related to technology that will get developed.

[regex]

Fundamentally I have no issues with KSP1's science points and tech tree. However, if the gathering of science points amounts to nothing more than right-clicking parts and shifting around little report objects, and gaming those through transmission or labs, then I'm going to be sorely disappointed because that system was incredibly uninspired and literally boring AF. Surely they can come up with something new, even just aggregating science points for transmission or return, automatically in the background, based on the instruments onboard a given craft, would be miles better than KSP1.

[uglyduckling81]

I think the best we can hope for is them ripping off the Science System in Kerbalism. It's a lot better than stock.

[RocketRockington]

2 hours ago, The Aziz said:

That quote misses a lot of what was actually said there. It's more meaningful exploration based, rather than artificial currency. Nate mentioned how getting a temperature reading at certain altitude is going to be out because it brings nothing, instead there will be more science in collecting that science - like discovering something that's related to technology that will get developed.

That was in reference to the resource system - that you'd have to both unlock the part and then gather the resources.  Presumably this doesn't impact science mode, both because science mode sounds like a stand alone mode vs needing to build colonies, and because it will be released far before the resource system in the roadmap.  I don't see it as being relevant, its like saying 'money changes the science mode in KSP because now you have to pay for the parts too!'  Completely irrelevant.

2 hours ago, regex said:

Fundamentally I have no issues with KSP1's science points and tech tree. However, if the gathering of science points amounts to nothing more than right-clicking parts and shifting around little report objects, and gaming those through transmission or labs, then I'm going to be sorely disappointed because that system was incredibly uninspired and literally boring AF. Surely they can come up with something new, even just aggregating science points for transmission or return, automatically in the background, based on the instruments onboard a given craft, would be miles better than KSP1.

 I feel like if it was more like Kerbalism like that, he would have had a better answer - either its not that, or the plans are so iffy/unsure that he doesn't feel he can comment.  And man - if they're THAT unsure of the next feature on their roadmap - something that SHOULD have been mostly developed by now... you gotta wonder what this design team was doing for 6 years (I guess writing tutorial scripts from the sound of it)

Edited March 25, 2023 by RocketRockington

[regex]

7 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

6 years

6 years, 5 years, 3 years, 10 years, get your story straight lol

Intercept isn't the same as Star Theory isn't the same as Squad.

[RocketRockington]

14 minutes ago, regex said:

6 years, 5 years, 3 years, 10 years, get your story straight lol

Intercept isn't the same as Star Theory isn't the same as Squad.

6 years.  Per news articles released during the star theory kerfuffle, it was revealed the project started in 2017.  Nate Simpson got made creative director in 2017.  Not 5, not 3, not 10.  A very specific time.  And the entire design team from Star Theory got moved over to Intercept (Nate, Shana, Tom).  This is pretty precise knowledge, not sure what you're throwing shade around for.

[regex]

8 minutes ago, RocketRockington said:

6 years.  Per news articles released during the star theory kerfuffle, it was revealed the project started in 2017.  Nate Simpson got made creative director in 2017.  Not 5, not 3, not 10.  A very specific time.  And the entire design team from Star Theory got moved over to Intercept (Nate, Shana, Tom).  This is pretty precise knowledge, not sure what you're throwing shade around for.

Sure dude, whatever you say.

[Kerbin Launch Coalition]

The whole science gathering, experiment system needs a complete rebuild. Kerbalism-esque 'gathering time' should be stock, the whole idea that one can do an ultra high speed flyby of Moho, and gather detailed gravimetric data is just silly. You need a much bigger push to have to stick around, I unlocked entire tech tree almost using nothing but unmanned probes and flybys in Kerbal Space Program science mode. Kerbalism on the other hand is an 'all in' affair, you're forced to enter an orbit of target bodies to conduct science gathering, and then that data cannot be instantly transmitted back.

 

[mcwaffles2003]

Again, I'm hoping to see science have a more natural use in the game beyond tech tree progression. Also, really preferred Kerbalisms manner of passive time based science retrieval as opposed to stock KSP 1's get to a specific condition for a moment and spam click all your experiments. As for the more natural uses:

 

• Temperature and pressure create usable data tables that give detailed charts that show that atmospheres  characteristics

Spoiler

Have the top image be the true data where as the bottom chart shows what data has actually been collected

• SCANsat type sensors that generate interactive maps showing altimetry, biomes (if something like them exists), surface material composition, etc..
• Drill experiments that give more detailed or accurate surface material compositions/concentrations

Spoiler

Maybe have different qualities of sensors where the top image is the true data and subsequently increasing qualities of sensors show better accuracy as in the bottom image

• Radiation sensors to generate radiation maps (maybe make sure these probes cant have nuclear reactors nearby as a nuance?)
• Magnetometers to generates magnetic field maps for planets (maps can correlate with radiation maps)

Spoiler

• Seismic sensor that gives details on the planets deeper composition and show its tectonic activity (maybe concentrate rare resources at the boundaries and maybe diverging or converging boundaries could provide different rare resources)

The list goes on..

 

Then make a compendium section of the tracking station to display all the data that's been recovered in an accessible/navigable manner. I genuinely believe having science work in this kind of manner would make in more engaging and true to life in its purposes and execution as well as translate into accidentally teaching people how and why space science works or contribute to our day to day lives.

Edited March 26, 2023 by mcwaffles2003

[Strawberry]

The transcription of the ama understandably lacks a good bit of text that gives more nuance and detail compared to the audio recording (it was done live afterall). Answer starts roughly here, I honestly recommend watching the whole thing in general as it has info that was left out.. Nate describes science similar in broad strokes as in you get science and bring it back to a r&d center (this implies colonies can have R&D bases which sounds neat). He also mentions how the team is playing around with having localized areas within biomes to play around with. 

I read the would include in the answer as "this is not an extensive list", and instead the main broader changes he thought of. Personally while I dont expect the changes to be as extensive as kerbalism, I dont expect these to be the only changes. Also one thing that has been mentioned extensively by Nate is that youll have specific resources for specific "vehicle architecture", this is more speculative but it seems weird for you to be able to research things when you havent visited the planet you need to get the materials to craft it, maybe surface samples are needed to unlock specific branches of the tech tree?

[Dakota]

Going to give a lengthier response to this later, but I agree with @Strawberryabove that that transcription is missing some good information and detail. I would recommend listening to the recording. 

[Alexoff]

It has long been clear that KSP2 is a remaster of KSP1, which may someday add mods for large parts, new planets, bases and multiplayer. It’s not worth it to have high hopes, something will change a little, but no more. You've been given a deltaV button and that's enough! It's just a business of gullible fans, nothing personal.

[pandaman]

Science mode as a precursor/test bed for the  upcoming 'exploration' mode could make sense.

Also it could work as a 'less serious' campaign type system for those that want it. 

The biggest issue with the KSP1 science mode was the balance (which should be a simple fix) and complete lack of context or relevance for the experiments.

[Kerbart]

On 3/24/2023 at 7:59 PM, regex said:

However, if the gathering of science points amounts to nothing more than right-clicking parts and shifting around little report objects, and gaming those through transmission or labs, then I'm going to be sorely disappointed because that system was incredibly uninspired and literally boring AF

Clearly a matter of semantics but that is what I see as the KSP1 science system. I had high hopes that KSP2 would be something different, but given of what we've seen so far and after re-calibrating my Nate interpreter I suspect that we'll end up with something very similar.

I was really hoping for something where the research subject somehow relates (maybe not directly) to what you can unlock with it. But everything hints at the same anonymous points that can be used to unlock anything from ladders to nuclear reactors.

On 3/27/2023 at 1:08 PM, Dakota said:

Going to give a lengthier response to this later, but I agree with @Strawberryabove that that transcription is missing some good information and detail. I would recommend listening to the recording. 

Doesn't Discord have automatic transcribing? Teams has it, and to call it "excellent" doesn't do it justice. I cannot imagine that the platform that was used for the AMA lacks such a service.

[regex]

2 hours ago, Kerbart said:

Clearly a matter of semantics but that is what I see as the KSP1 science system. I had high hopes that KSP2 would be something different, but given of what we've seen so far and after re-calibrating my Nate interpreter I suspect that we'll end up with something very similar.

I was really hoping for something where the research subject somehow relates (maybe not directly) to what you can unlock with it. But everything hints at the same anonymous points that can be used to unlock anything from ladders to nuclear reactors.

The way I see it (and I am admittedly limited here because I am super picky about my sim games) there are two basic ways to go about "science" in a video game: "anonymous" points which can be applied to anything and dedicated research on certain topics which completes over time. Time-based research clearly doesn't work as a driver in a game like KSP where you are encouraged to time warp at will with no real penalty, so we really only have some variation on points to work with, and for a game like KSP you must actively go out and collect them somehow in order for them to drive gameplay.

I'm not opposed to the idea of arbitrary points unlocking whatever on the tech tree, that gives me agency in choice on how to proceed, which is fantastic. More agency is always better IMO. The collection part in KSP has always been the real worrying point because the whole right-click a part to receive a little reward box which you then game is just tedious AF. Even mapping actions to collect all the science has its issues, especially with parts that are not reusable in the mix and trying to remember where you've been before to gather science... That kind of thing should have been axed early on.

I suppose one option could be something like an allocation of research percentage to individual part categories and then the activity of going out any actual parts in certain situations accumulates research points in each category. Maybe the science parts, locations, and biomes all influence the increase you gain for activities. In that way science "activity" is sort of a background thing, you set it and forget it and then just go about doing things actively, playing with spaceships and colonies and doing the other parts of the game loop.

There are other things the community has done to make the collection less tedious as well, I'm sure, I haven't kept up on those things. I just don't think arbitrary "science" points are necessarily bad for this game, provided the collection mechanism makes more sense and has more imagination than "go place, right-click part, get loot box".

[pandaman]

I think there should be more 'long term' experiments, a bit like the  seismic sensors in KSP1.

As in....  You leave an experiment running and it sends (hopefully useful) data periodically.  Such as take a temperature reading every hour and send the results every 10 days, on receipt you get a few science points, the amount of which would diminish over time, depending on the nature of the experiment.