Optimal ways to gain science discussion

[smunisto]

Now, I am not sure whether this is the right section of the forum for a possible discussion.

I am making this thread to discuss the possible ways of gaining science and optimising the gain, and to answer the question for myself.

Since at this point of time there is not much information about gaining science, data transmission, etc. I want to ask/start a discussion about:

1. Experiments - Stacking more experiment modules on 1 craft vs. 1 experiment module + Many transmissions?

2. Antennas - Stacking multiple antennas to get more data transmitted - does it work?

[J.Random]

2. Antennas - Stacking multiple antennas to get more data transmitted - does it work?

More? No. Faster? Yes - with additional EC cost, of course. And only if you try to simultaneously transmit multiple data samples.

Edited October 24, 2013 by J.Random
grammar

[Taki117]

I usually set up an action group just for science bits. (with the exception of EVA everything can be set to an action group) Then I just do it over and over again until eventually the science content reads 0.0, at which point I never do it again. (Anything from Launch to LKO is useless to me now) Also, whenever I visit a new body just before I decided to go back I perform one last experiment and gather EVA report and surface sample then head back to Kerbin, at which point I gather an EVA report and Surface sample from the surface before recovering the vessel.

[Zephram Kerman]

1. Experiments - Stacking more experiment modules on 1 craft vs. 1 experiment module + Many transmissions?

Multiple transmissions is fine for crew reports, but I try to avoid it for other things because of the penalty. It's easy to stack a few modules instead.

[rewdew2]

Your optimal ways would be to attach to Mystery-gooâ„¢ canisters to the side of the pod, and then land those and different parts of kerbin.

Like the north poles, dessert, ocean, ETC...

Also, when doing the experiments click "store data" instead of transmit.

Once you recover the vessel you receive the science.

[Ekku Zakku]

I'm pretty sure the ideal way is to pack light (just one of each experiment), and make up for it with more fuel so as to go more places. Then, when you get somewhere, stay around for a bit and transmit like crazy. It's slower, sure, but it will net more science after several transmissions than taking, say, 4 material bays and filling them up with just one unique experiment each. The only requirement, obviously, is solar panels and batteries to be able to transmit constantly.

After all, multiple transmissions vs multiple science returns to Kerbin both net roughly the same amount of science; it takes either more transmissions vs returns to max it out, or more time going to and from somewhere to return it enough times. Of course, transmissions easily wins out there, all you need is to assign the experiment to an action group and mash it until you max out the science.

[molbal]

I gained plenty of science first by doing some landings at Mun with surface sample + goo + materials bay. + you also gain a lot if you just to a fly-by, return and then recover. Reach Minmus, make a goo observation when you enter its gravity well, then reverse burn until you have a kinda low orbit (50km about), observe the goo at space near Minmus, make an EVA report, crew report, materials bay experiment, get back to Kerbin, recover your ship.

[Franklin]

Science gain is easy: repeat, repeat, repeat. Repeat your reports until their return is whittled down to nothing (<1 Science), then move onto the next report/height/biome/planet. Start close then reach out when necessary.

You can collect your first big batch of science right from Kerbin. Equip every science part available to you always. You don't even need an engine, immediately start running reports from the launchpad, then EVA and grab surface samples (repeat, repeat, repeat) from the launchpad and surrounding grassy area. You should be able to advance to the 4th science stage without ever firing a rocket or going anywhere.

Also remember the value of experiments only diminishes in that specific repeated biome/atmosphere/planet. So sending a crew report at 70,000m is worth "full" value even when you've exhausted its value at 0m.

edit: Also a surface sample is different from an EVA report, is different from an IVA report, so you can exhaust all of them independently.

Edited October 24, 2013 by Franklin

[Franklin]

Even at the lesser value of transmitting reports vs. actually returning to Kerbin, the rate at which you can transmit reports over and over vs. how long it takes to return to Kerbin, transmitting reports has a far better time:gain ratio.

I'm well into the stage 5 sciences and I've only taken two orbital passes at Mun, and gone nowhere else.

Edited October 24, 2013 by Franklin

[maltesh]

If you have the power and the time for it, beaming back science through antennas is the way to go. There is typically more science available to any experiment type at any one location than a single return can deliver, and, as mentioned upthread, you do not lose any of the total science gainable at a location by beaming it back.

In general, as far as total science gainable from a location:

Beamspam + Return > Beamspam > Single-experiment return.

Some otheer weirdness.

Kerbals in an External Seat can make EVA Reports, and because they're attatched to the vehicle, can immediately beam them back if transmission capacity is available. If the vehicle is landed, they can also take surface samples and immediately beam those back. No in-and-out shuffle with a pod required.

Crew pods do not have to have a Kerbal inside them to do a Crew Report. Haven't checked to see if the requirement is that there be a Kerbal somewhere in the vehicle to get a Crew report, or if an unmanned, empty vehicle with a pod can do a crew report.

The 2-man landercan has 200% efficiency when beaming back Crew Reports. Yes, you read that correctly. You can get up to twice the science value of a Crew Report by beaming it back from a two-man landercan (Assuming the location has sufficient remaining Crew Report Science for you to do so.) in a single, normal-size transmission. This is probably a bug, the 3-man pod and the hitchhiker do not work that way.

[Franklin]

And always shoot for tech tree bits that get you more science parts. That's how you maximize your spend through the whole process. Transmitting back reports from 5 science sources at once in low orbit around Kerbin will do you more good in the short run than having all the advanced plane/lander parts early. In terms of the tech tree specifically: it doesn't matter if you can go anywhere if you've got nothing to do once you get there.

[Zephram Kerman]

Based on all the above, I figure the best way is to bring several canisters. In each biome, commit one canister for return to Kerbin and recovery of the most valuable data. Use the first canister for recovery, then the latter ones for repeated beam reports. Move on to the next biome, then use the second canister for recovery of the first sample there and others for beamed reports. And so on.

[maltesh]

It doesn't really matter whether you beam first or capsule first. The total you can extract will remain the same. You can beamspam down to 0.0 if you so desire. There may very well be some fractional bit you can't scrape out by repeated beamspamming that doesn't show up in the resolution of the UI, or you may just get tired of repeating before you beamspam out everything.

The amount of science available in a location is like an open-topped keg.

Bringing back an experiment is like a large pitcher that you can put under the tap of the Keg, but you have to leave after you fill it. If the amount of science left in the keg is less than the volume of the pitcher, you'll get it all.

Beaming back is like scooping out of the top of the keg, using a spoon with a hole in it, into as many cups as you want. It takes longer, and some of what you spoon out won't wind up in the cups, but what drains out of the spoon falls back into the keg, it doesn't splash on the floor.

[Franklin]

Based on all the above, I figure the best way is to bring several canisters. In each biome, commit one canister for return to Kerbin and recovery of the most valuable data. Use the first canister for recovery, then the latter ones for repeated beam reports. Move on to the next biome, then use the second canister for recovery of the first sample there and others for beamed reports. And so on.

The problem with multiples of the same science unit is (as far as I know, I may be wrong) reports can only be transmitted one at a time. So having two goo cans wont double your transmission rate. I've sent up probes with multiple antennae, but all the science reports seem to transmit using just the same, single antenna.

[Franklin]

And I know this isn't really related to the question, but: if you're bringing up a single goo can, attach it with a radial decoupler. You wont notice the lop-sidedness it causes on the big rocket going up, but you absolutely will when you've staged down to just the probe head and mini rocket. I've got a probe in Kerbal orbit that's uncontrollable at a thrust beyond 5% because the a-symmetrical goo canister causes it to tumble. If I had attached it with a decoupler I could've avoided this problem once I exhausted the science from it.

[Zephram Kerman]

...what drains out of the spoon falls back into the keg, it doesn't splash on the floor.

So what you're saying is the total amount of 'science' available from a biome isn't wasted if you 'beam' the data home. It just takes more time and patience. For the purpose of this thread, that one idea is a big deal. All my science probe rockets just got smaller! I've got to verify this next session.

And I know this isn't really related to the question, but: if you're bringing up a single goo can, attach it with a radial decoupler. You wont notice the lop-sidedness it causes on the big rocket going up, but you absolutely will when you've staged down to just the probe head and mini rocket. I've got a probe in Kerbal orbit that's uncontrollable at a thrust beyond 5% because the a-symmetrical goo canister causes it to tumble. If I had attached it with a decoupler I could've avoided this problem once I exhausted the science from it.

The goo seems quite at home here. Set it freeeeeeeee!

[Eric S]

So what you're saying is the total amount of 'science' available from a biome isn't wasted if you 'beam' the data home. It just takes more time and patience. For the purpose of this thread, that one idea is a big deal. All my science probe rockets just got smaller! I've got to verify this next session.

It's quite true, I've verified it. And frankly, if you tie your science gear to a hotkey and have enough solar panels, the amount of patience it takes to "strip mine" a region (biome/altitude/whatever) of science isn't as much patience as it takes to send up multiple craft for returns, especially if you're doing multiple regions in a single trip.

Not as a direct response, but just as a bit of the math behind science and diminishing returns, let's put the readers to sleep!

The reward for any given experiment is a percentage of the total available science for that experiment in that region. So if you've already turned in enough experiments to get half of the possible science for that experiment in that region done, the amount of initial science for your next experiment of that type in that region will be half as much as your first one. In theory, this means that you can never get the amount of science remaining down to zero. Once you start rounding numbers, either intentionally or just as floating point errors, it does become possible.

For example, using actual data from in game, doing materials science on the launch pad and radioing it in:

You start with a maximum possible science return from that experiment at that location of 10.5 units of science. The percentage of that that you could get from a recovery is just a tad over 71%, so your first experiment will return 7.5 science if recovered, 20% of that, or 1.5 if radioed in. Assuming you radio it in, now there's only 9 points of science available, and 71% of that is 6.4, so that's the value of the experiment the second time, or 1.3 if radioed in. Radio that in, and now we're down to 7.7 science remaining. 71% of that is 5.5, so that's the value of the experiment the third time. This continues until you stop, probably somewhere around 57 total transmissions, depending on how the rounding goes.

Now, some of you mathematically inclined people are might already be seeing a different way to view this. A materials science experiment leaves 29% of the unknown science if recovered, or 85.8% of the unknown science if radioed in. This basically means that you can look at it this way.

total science earned by materials science experiment on the launchpad = 10.5 - (10.5 * 0.29^(number of times recovered) * 0.858^(number of times radioed in))

You'll notice that since we're just multiplying each of the factors, it's commutative. So if you've done X recoveries and Y radioing it in, it doesn't matter what order you've done them in, you'll be at the same place (barring the ever present rounding errors). You might also notice that at a 20% return plus diminishing returns, it takes just about 8 transmitted experiments to return the same science as one recovered materials science experiment, regardless of how much science that one recovery got.

This isn't to say that these same numbers can be plugged into any experiment in any location. For example, one recovered mystery goo experiment only returns about 55% of the available science, so the diminishing returns don't kick in as fast. If transmitted however, the experiment loses less value, and diminishing returns winds up kicking in faster. At the other extreme, a gravity scan reading returns over 90% of the available science if recovered, so the diminishing returns kick in even faster in the case of recovery on that one.

In fact, atmospheric analysis, between high total yields and limited losses due to transmission, can be ground out in eight transmissions to the point that the available science rounds down to zero. All the other experiments fall between these two ranges, except for Crew Reports, which take about 5 transmissions to hit zero available, due to the 0% loss because of transmissions.

[SkyRender]

The "fastest" way to get science (ie. takes the least game time) is to get docking ports and all science experiments besides the PresMat unlocked, then perform a multiple-land-and-return mission to the Mun. The basic idea is this: get a super-light science lander that only needs 90 fuel/110 oxidizer to perform a land-and-return operation, bound by docking port to a cumulative 1440/3520 fuel supply left in polar orbit around the Mun (preferably at the terminator, but that's not strictly required; it just makes things MUCH easier). By gathering and transmitting data as soon as you land and repeatedly (being sure to get all of the science you can for each scientific part), then waiting for and re-intercepting your orbiting fuel source, you can get all 14 (15?) biomes of the Mun fully documented and get enough science just from surface trips to completely unlock the tech tree. Indeed, it should provide you with more science than is needed, since you will have to have spent a fair bit just getting docking ports and all science parts. (Each biome is worth 664 science per landing, plus an extra 90 science from EVA and gravity scans done while landing and by jumping and getting an EVA report after landing.)

[JoCRaM]

Uh... if you're just going to bend the rules don't bother with career mode, use the sandbox?

[maltesh]

Uh... if you're just going to bend the rules don't bother with career mode, use the sandbox?

It isn't bending the rules. It's playing the game as it currently exists. The title of the thread is "Optimal ways to gain science discussion." If, as seems likely, the benefits of beaming back all the science are going to change in future updates, then the optimal way to gain science may change. If the methods presented conflict with the way you wish to play the game, don't use them.

[brienne]

So, I started a brand new career game.

Ok, it's fun. But when you don't have any idea about what give "science", it's not so fun anymore. And you get useless flight.

Why my scientist can't give me goals, achievements?

Edited October 26, 2013 by brienne

[Zephram Kerman]

Uh... if you're just going to bend the rules don't bother with career mode, use the sandbox?

This is a valid topic for this thread. As with most games, the quest to "level up" may interfere with immersion and the actual fun. It depends on what each person finds fun. Since KSP tends to attract engineer types, it's only natural that a lot of the players would want to maximize efficiency of the new feature. Personally, I'm interested in the game mechanics, but when I ignore them as spoilers when I play the game.

So, I started a brand new career game.

Ok, it's fun. But when you don't have any idea about what give "science", it's not so fun anymore. And you get useless flight.

Why my scientist can't give me goals, achievements?

KSP has always been open ended and free-form. Part of the fun is figuring out and planning what the missions should be. Having to set goals is realistic.

Other than Kennedy's "We choose to go to the moon" speech, NASA did not have any goals spelled out for them, either.

[JoCRaM]

It isn't bending the rules. It's playing the game as it currently exists. The title of the thread is "Optimal ways to gain science discussion." If, as seems likely, the benefits of beaming back all the science are going to change in future updates, then the optimal way to gain science may change. If the methods presented conflict with the way you wish to play the game, don't use them.

I'm trying to draw a disinction between an optimal way to do sience, and science spamming

[maltesh]

I'm trying to draw a disinction between an optimal way to do sience, and science spamming

There isn't one. The line you're attempting to draw is between "Ways the game can be played" and "Ways that the game can be played that you decided are acceptable."