[WIP] - Full Realistic Tech Tree Overhaul

[MedievalNerd]

Howdy everyone,

I'm pleased to show you the early workings of the realistic tech tree which I've been working on with Nathan! To be honest, a lot of this would not be possible without him and his more extensive knowledge of rocketry and available plugin functionality. I came to him with my own tech tree concept, and we've basically reviewed the whole thing and came up with this new version.

This will most likely require multiple mods in order to make sense and also enable some of the key features of the tech tree. Which are as follows:

#1 - Completely separated lines of progress. Engines, Solid Rocket Boosters, each 'category' of parts has their own progression line. With some additional branching in some cases.

#2 - New series of Tech nodes: Engine Controls, Electronics, Light Weight Materials, Low Temp Materials, High Temp Materials and Life Support. Some of these will still unlock some parts, but will be linked to incremental bonuses to other part sub groups. (IE, researching high Light Weight Mats, will give a small mass reduction bonus to Ladders, Wheels, Chutes, etc.)

#3 - Inclusion of the Modular Fuel Tanks Fuels within the tech tree. (They each have their own tech line of progression with incremental bonuses for each tech level)

#4 - Nathan proposed an "experience" tracking system of which fuels/engines were used in past missions and would give slight bonuses each time you use them. (IE, if you want your space program to specialize with a certain engine only, sending multiple launches with them will progressively make them better.)

This is still heavy WIP, there is some branching missing and I haven't made it entirely pretty. We spent the whole night working on this, so bear with us.

Just to give a heads up here are some of the mods that will be needed for balancing purposes, and filling out the tech tree. (Stock parts provide no post 2.5M engines)

(Updated List - 2013/11/11 - Added links and 'authors')

#1 - Real Solar System (link) - By NathanKell

#2 - FAR (link) - By Ferram

#3 - Custom Experiments Plugin - link - By Myself!

#4 - Remote Tech 2 (link) - A Must !

#5 - Modular Fuel Tanks (link) - (BALANCED FOR KATO ENGINES!) Originally by ialdabaoth, currently maintained by NathanKell

#6 - KW Rocketry (link) - By Kickasskyle

#7 - Nova Punch (link) - By Tiberion

#8 - TAC Life Support (link)- By TaranisElsu

#9 - Mission Controller (Missions Packs & Economy) (link) - By Malkuth & NathanKell

#10 - KSP Interstellar (Late Tech) (link) - By Fractal_UK

This is a concept version of the Realistic Progression Tech Tree.

Feedback and ideas are always welcomed.

Thanks to all the hard from Squad & all of the above people in the mentioned mods for making all of this possible. Special thanks to Nathan for braving the late hours of the night with my ramblings.

Cheers!

UPDATE #3

Here is the monster of all tech trees. Behold:

Update #2

Since the initial concept of the Tech tree will require some more advanced plugin work; Make MFT's tech levels dependent on tech nodes, implement performance increases based on tech nodes, etc. I am currently working on a 'lite' version of the above tech tree.

Main Features:

1 - Full overhaul of experiments

1.a - "Removed" all stock experiments

1.b - Experiments are now body and situation specific

1.c - Experiments are now tied into probes, and unlocked by tier.

1.d - Implemented "Data resource" which needs to be gathered before an experience can be completed.

1.e - Probes have Data Module to generate the above resource at the cost of EC

1.f - Custom Plugin to make the above work. - By Myself (With special thanks to NathanKell, Ethernet, Majiir & Nerf Herder)

2 - Solar Panel Tweaks

2.a - Weights & Power Generation greatly reduced. (Stock weight/power ratios were good, but pieces too small/heavy)

2.b - Used solarpanel5 to 1 as tiers. Each progressively getting more efficient.

3 - Remote Tech 2 Tweaks

3.a - Much needed antenna range extensions (Real Earth Kerbin!)

3.b - NathanKell's multiple antenna boost.

4 - Custom Plugin to make the above work - By Myself (With special thanks to NathanKell,

Here is the latest screenshot I made for Realistic Progression 'Lite' Tech Tree.

Edited November 16, 2013 by MedievalNerd

[rhoark]

I would make nodes more conceptual than part-oriented. Mechanics, chemistry, metallurgy, thermodynamics, aerodynamics, biology, etc.

[m4ti140]

Just to give a heads up here are some of the mods that will be needed for balancing purposes, and filling out the tech tree. (Stock parts provide no post 2.5M engines)

...

#5 - KW Rocketry

#6 - Nova Punch

...

Not a good idea... I don't know how about others, but I can hardly run my game with either of these packs installed (lagging and crashing) while with both it runs out of memory everytime. And that's even with all the optimizations that have been made.

I'd rather suggest including resized versions of stock engines and tanks (would only require including .cfgs in the mod) and requiring procedural wings and fairings, and stretchy tanks (though the last one may not be that good of an idea if you include modular fuel).

Still looking for realistic (aviation>probes>manned) tree for stock game.

[MedievalNerd]

I would make nodes more conceptual than part-oriented. Mechanics, chemistry, metallurgy, thermodynamics, aerodynamics, biology, etc.

That would be nice, but at some point there are logistical limitations of the usability of it all. Look at how complex the line patterns are. At some point it would require a whole seperate tech tree plugin to be able to customize the connection lines and how they are drawn. I'm able to make the above look 'decent' in the actual KSP tech screen, but it's borderline.

Also, its' a mix of conceptual and part oriented. Not all conceptual nodes will unlock parts, in some cases improvements to existing ones. And this is a quasi comprise again to logistical issues of making the nodes fit in a semi coherent way. Originally purple would have been conceptual, and light blue part nodes.

Ideally, if you could have 'required' tech nodes which don't have a link drawn would solve the issue. You could have just a series of tech lines next to each other. Obviously you'd need to have some sort of out game diagram to makes sense of it all. But it could work.

Not a good idea... I don't know how about others, but I can hardly run my game with either of these packs installed (lagging and crashing) while with both it runs out of memory everytime. And that's even with all the optimizations that have been made.

I'd rather suggest including resized versions of stock engines and tanks (would only require including .cfgs in the mod) and requiring procedural wings and fairings, and stretchy tanks (though the last one may not be that good of an idea if you include modular fuel).

Still looking for realistic (aviation>probes>manned) tree for stock game.

I have even more than the mods listed above and I pull it off. I don't use them, but there are redux versions of each of those with some considerable memory footprint savings.

Also, this is intended to be probe>manned. The tech requirements for capsules is quite massive. Also, space plane integration isn't done in that tree yet. This is probes/rockets. You'll notice science modules aren't included either. It's a WIP, as the title of the post suggest. Hard to say with no tech costs listed, but trust me. It'll be expensive to get to Capsules. Could even shift capsules down to branch off at Tier 2 only. (If you didn't notice, capsules require each of the purple nodes of that tier to be researched in order to be "researchable" itself.

If you want to create those parts and post them, I can put them in the tech tree no problem btw. Not "all" of them would be required. But it may leave gaps in some places. IE, manned missions without TAC might make the mission controller missions arbitrary since you wont' need to worry about power consumption that much, and no need for life support supplies.

Edited October 25, 2013 by MedievalNerd

[NathanKell]

This looks awesome! I look forward to writing the ModuleTechLevel to support the mass changes.

[dlrk]

Awesome! Now I can play career mode (:

Nathan, does Modular fuels work with KIDS now?

[NathanKell]

Rather than using KIDS I'm just using a real-Earth-size Kerbin.

I posted how ferram could integrate KIDS with MFS, but I think he's working on rescale-related stuff too, i.e. to fix joint wobble. And frankly, why play with KIDS when you fix the cause (planet size), not the symptom (too easy to get to orbit)?

[dlrk]

I'd rather not use earth-size Kerbin, since then all the other planets' scales would be out of whack.

[NathanKell]

Not for long.

[dlrk]

^(: 10char

[MedievalNerd]

Howdy everyone,

Just updated the first post with some image updates on the progress of the tech tree. Although I've finally managed to figure out a specific layout that 'works', i'm running into some issues. Have a look and i'll keep you posted as the situation develops.

Also included a third image with some pointers as to what is what. Since the diagram is from North to South, as opposed to in-game West to East.

Cheers!

[Miller]

I am absolutely loving the realistic mod influx we started having recently. As to the tech tree overhaul, I think you should look into including AIES as well. It is the most under appreciated mod currently.

[MedievalNerd]

I am absolutely loving the realistic mod influx we started having recently. As to the tech tree overhaul, I think you should look into including AIES as well. It is the most under appreciated mod currently.

Yes, that one was put on my radar recently. And I do like how the probe parts look! There are some weird CoM on some pieces(IE on the point of origin rather than center of object), maybe they'll be fixed in a potential 0.22 update.

As my update mentioned though, right now sort of at a stand-still until I can figure out, or if r4m0n wisdom can shed some light as to what's happening with bigger tech trees.

Fingers crossed on all of this.

[Patupi]

This is looking very interesting.

Thought: Is it possible to 'hijack' the readings of certain science outputs? Specifically the science results from 'Successful sub-orbital launch' etc? You could then use those specific conditions to unlock certain tech nodes. In other words one of the prerequisites to getting capsules is testing space probes in orbit to see what the results are? Adding up certain values of science from specific sources might be an interesting way to unlock certain things, perhaps from certain biomes and planets too. It would depend on how to read the mission science reports and use them... also if you solve your tier issue with Tree Edit. Best of luck with that.

[MedievalNerd]

This is looking very interesting.

Thought: Is it possible to 'hijack' the readings of certain science outputs? Specifically the science results from 'Successful sub-orbital launch' etc? You could then use those specific conditions to unlock certain tech nodes. In other words one of the prerequisites to getting capsules is testing space probes in orbit to see what the results are? Adding up certain values of science from specific sources might be an interesting way to unlock certain things, perhaps from certain biomes and planets too. It would depend on how to read the mission science reports and use them... also if you solve your tier issue with Tree Edit. Best of luck with that.

Using the Mission Controller Extended plugin, I'll introduce 'abnormally high costs' for certain start of nodes/key points, which will match the payout of specific missions I've started designing.

Since I can't seem to make this more complex tech tree work without breaking the whole thing, I've completed a side project. Which I'm humbly calling Realistic Progression Lite. With heavy emphasis on the lite. It's definitely way more 'gamey' so to speak.

I've finally put all the pieces where they belong for all the mods I'll be using. Sadly due to logistical limitations, i wasn't able to keep consistent 'flow' of the nodes, so if people try adding stuff it might pop in very bizarre places. Making progression seperate per category took literally forever. Now I can finally start play testing this beast. Using remote tech will hopefully help see how far people can go and how much science can be generated within that range. I wish someone would have been able to list how much science can be generated on kerbin, Mun, etc. that would really help figure out the pacing of science.

In any case, here's the latest snapshot:

[Patupi]

So, you could scale the price up at first, then scale it back gradually based on Mission Controller successful mission results? No way to base it off the Stock research results? Either works, I was just thinking of something that would work for someone whether they were using that mod or not. Plus is this the actual construction cost in MCE or the research cost. Could make something upcoming (or the cost of the whole node) easier by doing something from the current node.

(EDIT: Thinking on it, changing research costs for items or nodes based on anything in game doesn't sound like a good idea. With fixed amounts of research available this would just force people to use certain strategies to maximise use of research data. For construction cost though, or for unlocking research nodes it might work.)

Edited November 1, 2013 by Patupi

[MedievalNerd]

So, you could scale the price up at first, then scale it back gradually based on Mission Controller successful mission results? No way to base it off the Stock research results? Either works, I was just thinking of something that would work for someone whether they were using that mod or not. Plus is this the actual construction cost in MCE or the research cost. Could make something upcoming (or the cost of the whole node) easier by doing something from the current node.

(EDIT: Thinking on it, changing research costs for items or nodes based on anything in game doesn't sound like a good idea. With fixed amounts of research available this would just force people to use certain strategies to maximise use of research data. For construction cost though, or for unlocking research nodes it might work.)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "scale it back later based on MC successful results?" This first version will not have any of those expensive nodes I was talking about. Here is the scenario of how/when I would use it. (Once I make a MCE specific version of the tree)

I would add a tech node, before let's say manned tech line. (Capsules) Then I would put a science point cost of that node to 101,000 RP. Then, that would be tied into an MCE mission, that once completed yields 101,000 Research points. This would 'simulate' that a certain MCE mission needs to be completed before advancing to this newer section of the tech tree. (As finding 100k science points won't be possible). Right now there is no way to make an MCE mission as a requirement for a tech node. This is the best way I thought about how to do it. But before I deal with that, I want to balance the tech tree first. (in terms of which parts go where)

Speaking of balance, it would be of tremendous help to know how much science is available on each planet. this would give a good indicator on how to gauge SP progression/tweaks. From what I heard/read about the stock tech tree is that it's extremely easy to fully unlock as you can make loads of science points. The stock tech tree is about 33,000 science points total to unlock. I'll definitely give that a nudge.

Other tweaks:

#1 - Use of Remote Tech 2. By using RT2 this will greatly limit the range of unmanned missions. (Not sure if science transmission is now dependent on a working sat relay)

#2 - Whether or not FAR/KIDS/DR is used and at what setting. Sadly it appears that trying to make an 'overall' balanced tree for with or without kids is extremely difficult, see impossible. Since with the same rocket designed with FAR and KIDS set to real adjusted will yield ~1100m/s of DV, whearas the stock version will yield 3000+DV. The range in those value is so extreme that i'll have to pick for which of those combinations to balance the tree with.

#3 - Including new experiments: Have Dust Experiment(Mod), and I've also added probe sensors to all probe control modules. Each probe head can do an experiment that is roughly worth 50% of a crew report. Will most likely add unmanned surface sample collection. (0% data transmit)

#4 - Do we keep science experiments, repeatable or not? I'm specifically talking about how each science part can be repeatedly used until a region is drained of science. That really, really bothers me. Ideally I would like science instruments to have a number of charges (how many experiments it can carry out in 1 mission), but since that's not even close to implemented. I'd rather lean towards single experiments per module. Meaning after you've taken a sample or whatever, even if you delete/clear it you won't be able to take a new one with that specific module. You'll have to relaunch another ship and come back.

#5 - Massive overhaul of solar panels. Gone are the day that the lamest solar panel could generate 45KW per min. Current blancing is it takes 4 cheap solar panels to cover the running cost of a stock probe. Stock probe average consumption is ~ 1.7 EC/minute. So why in tarnation would 1 single panel be enough to power the whole thing. Crazy.

#6 - Probes overhaul. Making them different not only in shape but charge/consumption/torque. Potentially could put specific science experiments in higher end probes. (AIES)

Some of these tweaks will require the .cfg file pack i'm making for this tree. (all with module manager)

After literally 3 weeks of making excel sheets and tracking part id's and performance, I've just started to try and balance this whole thing. I have no doubt that depending on which mods people use it will definitely change the experience. As a few I've mentioned above.

Obviously with MCE being used, and having to pay for parts you use. It'll curtail the profile of the user's space program, and rely on missions (which will be progressive) to get income. One thing is for sure, I won't be bothered to make things 'non-exploitable'. People who truly want this will be able to set themselves some house rules as to not mess with the intended progression.

First focus for now is to see if I can manage to progress and unlock nodes in a timely fashion. It's a relief from spending my days looking at excel.

[Patupi]

Re #4: Bear in mind that it looks like the transmission of data is going to be nerfed in 0.23 by what was said in the Daily. But for now, if there is a way to cap TRANSMISSION of data, forcing you to bring samples back beyond a certain point I'd be for it. Capping science after transmitting so much, no. That would tend to force people to NEVER use transmitters if they didn't want to permanently loose science from a biome. The idea of 'charges' might work, but I think just limiting transmission would mean you could only get science from a unit if it was kept 'full' and brought back home (or to a specialized anaylsis center, as it looks like their going to do in stock with the labs)

#5 I'm for nerfing solar panels if RTGs aren't nerfed, but have some other limitation. IE some fuel needs or lifespan. Plus, if panels are nerfed you'd need some large, high output panels, like a stack of the flat ones as some weld mods have done or the scaled up ones from the old Hybrid Ion pack. Forcing people to use tons of smaller panels or stacks of the large ones is ok, just ups the part count on ships needlessly. Managing weight of panels verses need is fine, managing parts count to stop the computer slowing down verses need... not so much.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Patupi

[sidfu]

would love to use but problem is with other mods like interstellar and near future tech dont fit on there good

[MedievalNerd]

Re #4: Bear in mind that it looks like the transmission of data is going to be nerfed in 0.23 by what was said in the Daily. But for now, if there is a way to cap TRANSMISSION of data, forcing you to bring samples back beyond a certain point I'd be for it. Capping science after transmitting so much, no. That would tend to force people to NEVER use transmitters if they didn't want to permanently loose science from a biome. The idea of 'charges' might work, but I think just limiting transmission would mean you could only get science from a unit if it was kept 'full' and brought back home (or to a specialized anaylsis center, as it looks like their going to do in stock with the labs)

#5 I'm for nerfing solar panels if RTGs aren't nerfed, but have some other limitation. IE some fuel needs or lifespan. Plus, if panels are nerfed you'd need some large, high output panels, like a stack of the flat ones as some weld mods have done or the scaled up ones from the old Hybrid Ion pack. Forcing people to use tons of smaller panels or stacks of the large ones is ok, just ups the part count on ships needlessly. Managing weight of panels verses need is fine, managing parts count to stop the computer slowing down verses need... not so much.

#4 - There is a flag in the science defs that allows you to not make an experiment reusable. You can tweak the % of data which is usable. No need to wait for 0.23, this can be tweaked right now. I wouldn't make all experiments have 0% transfer rate, just in case I was giving that impression. What I want is to make new experiments, which are the instrument needs to keep the data and "can't be transmitted'. Don't worry it'll get balanced in the end. It's going to take a while.

Even if you would limit the use of all science instruments to a one shot per flight deal. Transmission would still have the benefit of not needing to send the vessel back. (With the use of a viable sat network (RT2))

#5 - Putting aside lifetime of RTGs, the power generated by both are way, way off. The RTG it seems to resemble the most is the SNAP-27 model. which generates 73 watts. Right now the stock RTG generates 750 watts. So it's too much by a factor of 10. There are some slight weight considerations, but in all it's clear that stock power generation is way off. Not only that, but power consumption is minimal in comparison to stock generation. As I explained in my previous post, the Solarpanel5 generates EC 0.75 / sec. That's enough to power 26 probes!! With the lowest tiered panel! In the end, this will be in a .cfg file that i'll share. So tweakable, removable at anyone's leisure. But it should be noted that balance will be taking into consideration the tweaked values. Experiences may vary if you play without.

would love to use but problem is with other mods like interstellar and near future tech dont fit on there good

You'll see that Interstellar will be at the tip of the tree, and will have very high costs. And since this will be meant to play with Mission Controller Extended, then it'll be one thing to have the tech, but another to have the funds to use it.

And in any case, you could play without it, it'll just mean that nodes which have exclusively Interstellar parts will be empty. I think that apart for a few in the electric/electronics tree line, the rest are all in propulsion at the very end.

Edited November 1, 2013 by MedievalNerd

[Patupi]

There is a flag in the science defs that allows you to not make an experiment reusable. You can tweak the % of data which is usable. No need to wait for 0.23, this can be tweaked right now.

Huh, did not know this. I really should get into modding KSP but I always have something else I wanted to do and I still haven't learned c# yet. Did learn basic C back in university but been a while. Also haven't modded much in many many years. The last serious thing I was involved with was a couple of Homeworld mods way back when (small additions to Sacrifice of Angels and Movements of Fire and Shadow). I did do a little mod for UFO Afterlife, but never finished that one. Maybe I'll get back to that sometime and get it done.

Anyway, if basic experiments can have the percentage transmittable tweaked so they can transmit once or maybe twice before the rest from that biome must be physically brought back I'd be interested. However I understand you don't want to alienate people who are already used to the existing experiments being transmitter spammable. Thus I understand your suggestion to make it work on experiments you add in.

Putting aside lifetime of RTGs, the power generated by both are way, way off. The RTG it seems to resemble the most is the SNAP-27 model. which generates 73 watts. Right now the stock RTG generates 750 watts. So it's too much by a factor of 10.

True, RTGs are overpowered in KSP vs reality, but then a lot in KSP is off vs reality However a lot of mods have based their power usage on what power is available, especially things like firespitter which seems pretty well balance with existing RTGs and solar power. It's tricky to get a solar plane to work without spamming loads of the small flat panels which increases parts count, and RTGs can work as a battery charger, but usually are too heavy for most planes to power props on their own. Thus if things are changed like that it might throw out some other mods. If they had KSPI it wouldn't be an issue One of the smallest nuclear reactors from KSPI would work quite well on a firespitter plane I think, though probably wouldn't be a small plane.

Stock doesn't use the power generated much at all except with the (relatively) new torque system. Even that you could at LEAST halve RTG and solar panel output and I don't think it would hurt torque much when designing ships, even with ships with spammed SAS units on.

[Lucius]

Really looking forward to this, MedievalNerd. The tech tree as it is is QUITE well designed, but for complete novice players to the game.

I especially think this particular design of tech tree is fantastic for Nathan's Real Earth Size mod, incorporating a more believable approach to progressive space exploration. I wonder, is there any word on when you'll have a test version up? Very excited to try.

[MedievalNerd]

Really looking forward to this, MedievalNerd. The tech tree as it is is QUITE well designed, but for complete novice players to the game.

I especially think this particular design of tech tree is fantastic for Nathan's Real Earth Size mod, incorporating a more believable approach to progressive space exploration. I wonder, is there any word on when you'll have a test version up? Very excited to try.

I'm also very excited if that makes any sense. I can't wait to finish some tweaks here and there. And thank you!

Running into some difficulties to keep science balanced and introduce some pre-orbital flights. For those who don't know, Kerbin gets it's potential science multiplied by 0.4 (0.3 on the launchpad) and Mun gets multiplied by 4. That's quite a big leap. After i'm done tweaking this, i'll be able to switch to focusing on mission creation and potentially re-tweak the tech tree for a mission controller extended.

Once it's in an 'ok' state, IE, I can reach mun and not unlock he whole tree. Or perhaps the opposite I've been running in, not enough DV to get anywhere. (Using KIDS & FAR)

Almost done with tweaking solar panels and the RTG. So I'll be able to put at least the static panel early on, without arbitrarily putting them further down the line since they basically give you infinite power. But doing that, beckons another tweak. Power required to transmit data. it's pretty high. 15kw per 1 data unit. I think the thermometer does 10 base data, if you do it on mun then it's 10 x 4, so 40 units of data x 15kw. Yeah, it's quite expensive power wise. I guess the devs 'balanced' it with the current power generation, rather than balance the panels themselves.

So much tweaks, so scare.

Huh, did not know this. I really should get into modding KSP but I always have something else I wanted to do and I still haven't learned c# yet. Did learn basic C back in university but been a while. Also haven't modded much in many many years. The last serious thing I was involved with was a couple of Homeworld mods way back when (small additions to Sacrifice of Angels and Movements of Fire and Shadow). I did do a little mod for UFO Afterlife, but never finished that one. Maybe I'll get back to that sometime and get it done.

Unless you want to create a plugin, using something like module manager is extremely simple! Open any cfg file and you'll get an idea of the layout/how it works.

True, RTGs are overpowered in KSP vs reality, but then a lot in KSP is off vs reality However a lot of mods have based their power usage on what power is available, especially things like firespitter which seems pretty well balance with existing RTGs and solar power. It's tricky to get a solar plane to work without spamming loads of the small flat panels which increases parts count, and RTGs can work as a battery charger, but usually are too heavy for most planes to power props on their own. Thus if things are changed like that it might throw out some other mods. If they had KSPI it wouldn't be an issue One of the smallest nuclear reactors from KSPI would work quite well on a firespitter plane I think, though probably wouldn't be a small plane.

Stock doesn't use the power generated much at all except with the (relatively) new torque system. Even that you could at LEAST halve RTG and solar panel output and I don't think it would hurt torque much when designing ships, even with ships with spammed SAS units on.

Yes, KSP is a unrealistic. But we try to make it 'work'.

For RTGs, one could modify his stock RTG and use the resource generation module from Kethane. Invent a resource, whatever they have in RTGs. (Not bothered to check right now , lol) And then put the consumption to something decent and boom. Like how the interstellar mod handles nuclear reactors.

As for compatibility with Firespitter, might not work it's not on my list of mods. :/ One could tweak the power consumption rates to fix it. Or just remove the SP tweaks i'm doing. Although that would offset the balance of the tree a lot.

Edited November 2, 2013 by MedievalNerd

[Lucius]

Oh god, 15 KW? Isnt the average satellite tv transmission something like ... 80 watts? No wonder you have to sink so much work into this.

I'll definitely be keeping an eye open! Thank you again!

[MedievalNerd]

Finally got to play a little bit with the 'lite' version of this tech tree. And I'm not liking science balancing at all. The whole concept of loss of science per transmission just introduces a grind factor to the whole science collection concept. And it actually surprised me since they had stated they did not want to make science grindy.

For those who don't know, science has 2 values which contribute do what makes science a grind. Each experiment has a base and a cap value. Cap value is how much science you can generate with that experiment in a given area. (with a multiplier based on location) Base value is how much of the total cap value you will be taking per experiment. So when you have an experiment that has a low amount of base, with a low transmission value. It does indeed make it a grind. Which encourages the whole transmission spam people are doing.

And this is compounded when an experiment has a low % of transmission. So not only are you only getting a fraction of the total, but you can only transmit a fraction of it! Which is why you end up with quasi trivial amounts left over in some circumstances. Not only that, but it literally makes bringing back science purely optional thing. (No extra science, other than vehicle recovery)

A few ideas to help these issues:

#1 - Remote Tech 2 - Need viable sat network

#2 - MCE - Science instruments could have a significant costs associated to them, to discourage spamming multiple experiment modules on the craft in a single mission. (Obviously this would be balanced in with my mission pack)

#3 - Make experiments have matching base/cap values. So when you do your experiment you potentially have all the science that circumstance can generate.

#4 - Make instrument single use per flight. So, you either keep the data and bring it back (getting 100%) or you transmit and only get a fraction. This still keeps s form of diminishing returns but at least it gives returning science more interesting.

#5 - As I'm also working on the power balancing, transmitting data might shorten the lifespan of your mission depending on whether you are able to generate enough power to support transmissions energy cost. (Currently testing with 150watts per packet)

As someone pointed out to me, Harvester mentioned that they wanted to make repeat experiences have 0% transmittable data within the same mission. So you'd have to bring back the rest or send another mission. Of

Also, I can't wait for them to put biomes on the other bodies, since right now I'm pretty sure that Mun is houses more science points than any other body. Even though it has a multiplier of 4. (most other planets are 7+)