Why time-based experiments are worth it.

[Whirligig Girl]

The Devs have said there may not be time-based experiments because of Time-warp. However, I think that long-term experiments are still a good idea.

Right now, getting science is as simple as going somewhere. If you can make an SRB-powered ship that goes straight up, it will be able to collect ALL of the Kerbin Space biomes, even though it will linger in that area for merely a few minutes to an hour. I think that there should be experiments that don't require you to be at the helm of the ship to collect the science, and you just have it automatically feed back the data for a constant power drain. The science would, over time, slowly stop being produced, it would taper off. An example might be monitoring a Kerbal's life-signs in orbit for extended periods, or seeing how a material reacts under space radiation for long amounts of time.

Another idea is that of mapping and scanning planets. If you bring a satellite with a camera and you take a picture, it's worth some science. If you have a mapping camera that continually generates a map and each new area of the ground that is scanned gives more science, you can automatically get science, and because you eventually run out of things to look at, the science tapers off. This doubles as a tool for mapping planets. Read more of painting the map for science here.

[boomerdog2000]

At the moment rewarding the player for putting their one science probe in orbit, hitting timewarping, and going to make a sandwich doesn't seem like a very good idea. Perhaps the idea will be more feasible once we have an economy to deter timewarp abuse, but at present it just doesn't make sense.

Also, what if you have too many ships doing science in the background for the game to keep track of? I'm aware there are sometimes ways to make the game keep more than one ship semi-active at a time but how would that affect performance?

Fully on-board for mapping however. I love mapping.

[JimmyAgent007]

For time warp, can we not just suspend any economic or scientific rewards while in time warp? Just have things happen while at normal speed.

[Keldor]

One idea would be a longish term experiment rewarding a player for putting a probe in orbit in the first place, rather than just doing a flyby. So the duration of the experiment would just be perhaps 10 orbits or so - too long to fit in a flyby, but short enough that it's only a brief timewarp.

[Keymaster89]

Well... this will probably happen for economy missions: the most basic economy mission that i can think of is putting a comms satellite into geostationary orbit.

U put that there, u gain a credit reward, and then u get credit/hour at reeeeeeealy low rate.

Or at least this could happen for science when they will implement some sort of time limitation for space travels in order to prevent time warp spam, like needs of food for the crew, or a manned tool that have durability and had to be repaired by EVA with spare part that have to be stored in a dedicated container or launched from the surface.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Keymaster89

[regex]

timewarp abuse

timewarp spam

I'm curious what everyone thinks of the four hundred sixty five days to Eeloo (and the similar time in transit back) and whether that constitutes "timewarp abuse"? For that reason alone I am against time-based mechanics, and I suspect the devs have the same sort of reasons not to restrict players or build a time-sensitive economy. KSP should be more about getting out and doing things, and less about managing a clock or worrying about making the rent, and having to do useless activities that don't contribute to your overall goals in order to make ends meet, especially when your space program is concentrating on Eeloo.

[boomerdog2000]

I wouldn't count that as abuse, since that is the purpose that time-warp was implemented to fix. It was put in place to surmount the large travel times inherent to space travel.

[a.g.]

One place where the 'time warp' argument does not apply at all is flying planes and driving rovers, since in that case it is limited to 4x at most. These two activities are also nearly useless for producing science at the moment. I'm actually experimenting with a plugin that generates science for doing that, but can't decide what the most balanced per minute rates should be.

[regex]

I wouldn't count that as abuse, since that is the purpose that time-warp was implemented to fix. It was put in place to surmount the large travel times inherent to space travel.

So how do you penalize players for timewarping in order to gain time-based resources? I can launch multiple flyby missions to Eeloo during a career game to "justify" my timewarping; it's not all that hard to do with tier 0 parts and I don't imagine other resources will be hard to come by. There's no reason to penalize players for "timewarp abuse" because it doesn't exist, it shouldn't be considered a problem, and the game shouldn't be balanced around it.

[Themohawkninja]

So how do you penalize players for timewarping in order to gain time-based resources? I can launch multiple flyby missions to Eeloo during a career game to "justify" my timewarping; it's not all that hard to do with tier 0 parts and I don't imagine other resources will be hard to come by. There's no reason to penalize players for "timewarp abuse" because it doesn't exist, it shouldn't be considered a problem, and the game shouldn't be balanced around it.

If you are doing it to just get to Eeloo, than fine, but if you are doing it as a way to "justify" you actions, then it's not justified at all.

You don't penalize players, you just don't put in the time-based experiments in the game in the first place and avoid the issue.

[regex]

You don't penalize players, you just don't put in the time-based experiments in the game in the first place and avoid the issue.

Exactly my point.

[TimMartland]

If it tapered off, then maybe, but it would have to be more difficult then 'Just give it some juice'. Maybe do something like the Station Science mod?

[Kegereneku]

The problem with Time-based anything suggestion here, is that it's easy to dismiss the concept for bad reasons.

Time based experiment for example, look bad/worthless because timewarp exist, but you have to look at the full picture.

For starter everything is time based already. You are timewarping while your probes go to Eeloo right ? And doing that give you "Science" Faster than if you didn't right ?

So as you see time-warp AND time-based game mechanic don't negate each other.

Example of why a probes could profit from "time-based experiment" :

- Justifying satellites.

As of now, you don't actually need to orbit things, so you don't need an artificial satellites. Just a probes passing close to a planet.

In this case, it doesn't matter if anybody will "warp" through the waiting time, what's important is that such a mechanism asked the player to design a satellite, not a flyby probes.

I could say a lot more on this subject, but just don't dismiss time-based mechanism too fast

[tetryds]

I always try to say that "time based experiments" aren't about leave the ship orbiting to get science, but for example collect pressure data of a full launching -> LKO flight.

Something like telemachus mod.

You get science for the percentage of the atmosphere reading, for example. (like a bar that fills up during flight, you stop whenever you want, then get the science for those readings)

Or watch the behaviour of the Goo from low Mun orbit to landing on a specific crater.

Not sit down and leave it orbiting at timewarp and go do something else.

Hope someone listen to me this time.

Edited January 23, 2014 by tetryds

[regex]

As of now, you don't actually need to orbit things, so you don't need an artificial satellites. Just a probes passing close to a planet.

In this case, it doesn't matter if anybody will "warp" through the waiting time, what's important is that such a mechanism asked the player to design a satellite, not a flyby probes.

Then it's a situation-based mechanic, not a time-based mechanic. E: I also think there are far better mechanics that could be explored as reasons to put something into a stable orbit than to time-warp through a science experiment.

I always try to say that "time based experiments" aren't about leave the ship orbiting to get science, but for example collect pressure data of a full launching -> LKO flight.

Something like telemachus mod.

You get science for the percentage of the atmosphere reading, for example. (like a bar that fills up during flight, you stop whenever you want, then get the science for those readings)

Or watch the behaviour of the Goo from low Mun orbit to landing on a specific crater.

Not sit down and leave it orbiting at timewarp and go do something else.

It's not a bad idea but it's not really any different than how science is done now, aside from the science "accumulating" over the mission instead of being collected in one click. In fact, you still pretty much collect it with one click, you just provide a mechanism to bail out of the experiment with less results.

Edited January 23, 2014 by regex

[Dwight_js]

I really hope that Squad aren't fixating on trying to tailor career mode to one fixed idea of what is "fun". It seems to me that "fun" is extremely subjective, and that appropriate level and type of difficulty is what drives people's enjoyment in a game. If there is a potential game play element that makes sense in the context of the game universe, then that element should be included. Managing money and time both make sense in career mode. But since they are not necessarily fun for everyone, their impact on gameplay should be optional, or at least adjustable.

I'm hoping that elements like money, science, time management, resources, etc. can be added or removed from a career save so that the game can be tailored - adding or removing layers of complexity to the puzzle that is career mode to create the best possible challenge.

[boomerdog2000]

It just seems to me like using time-warp to speed through a time-based experiment is making the time-based experiment trivial and the time component irrelevant.

The only difference (right now) between a time-based experiment, and an experiment we have currently is a few presses of < and >.

At the moment if time-based experiments were implemented all most people would do is, start them, time-warp, finish them.

If that's the game-play change what's the point of the time-based experiment?

Which is why I said the idea may come together depending on how Squad adds the economy but as it stands currently I don't see it

[Ruinsage]

Personally, i think people are wrong about why time based experiments should be implemented. It's not to force people to do something else while it gathers science, it's to check that you have put up a stable rig, which is something that is absolutely essential for science. It forces you to have a stable orbit that doesn't fluctuate in altitude, or a base that can keep itself charged through the night. So what if they fast forward, as long as they have a stable rig i don't see the problem.

Let me put it into perspective:

I was just at tenerife to take some pictures with the 80cm telescope for a university class. The telescope is located as high as possible to minimize interference from the atmosphere, which isn't really a surprise. What was a surprise though, was that they had brought white rocks to put around the telescopes, because if the rocks around the telescope were heated by the sun, the heat emanating from them could distort the pictures, leading to noise. This is how stable scientific measurements have to be. Not "oh hey, i launched a rocket up 500km, now i know everything about the space around kerbin, and how micro-gravity works".

[Algiark]

If time-based experiment means 'x amount of Science per y amount of time,' then no.

But if time-based experiment means 'this science experiment will finish in x amount of time,' then yes.

[tetryds]

If time-based experiment means 'x amount of Science per y amount of time,' then no.

But if time-based experiment means 'this science experiment will finish in x amount of time,' then yes.

Just like transmitting then?

Yeah that seems better

And if it's like a bunch of secconds you could just lock the progress at any timewarp.

So you have to stay at LKO for some time to run an experiment (which should consume energy) on LKO.

Reports could be still instant anyway.

[regex]

Personally, i think people are wrong about why time based experiments should be implemented. It's not to force people to do something else while it gathers science, it's to check that you have put up a stable rig, which is something that is absolutely essential for science. It forces you to have a stable orbit that doesn't fluctuate in altitude, or a base that can keep itself charged through the night. So what if they fast forward, as long as they have a stable rig i don't see the problem.

It is very easy to detect whether a craft is in a stable orbit, or how much that orbit fluctuates, so why would you want to put the player through that required timewarp and waiting? As far as keeping things charged I would much rather see other mechanics dictate my power usage than one that involves only waiting. Maybe something like a satellite relay that allows me to operate probes beyond Kerbin SOI or a simple life support system.

I don't understand why everyone wants to be bored while playing this game...

[Grover]

how about if the science gain is proportional to ACTUAL game time, rather than the simulated game time (eg. if you left it 10 minutes at 1000x time warp, it gives you science gain based on only 10 minutes, rather than just under a week

[Dwight_js]

Maybe something like a satellite relay that allows me to operate probes beyond Kerbin SOI or a simple life support system.

Those are just other hoops for the player to jump through. Communications relay requires the tedium of launching and arranging a bunch of extra satellites before getting on with your real goal. Life support just necessitates the adding of extra parts full of supplies to the craft. Why would those options be any more exciting than time based science?

I don't understand why everyone wants to be bored while playing this game...

Your way or the highway, eh?

[regex]

Those are just other hoops for the player to jump through. Communications relay requires the tedium of launching and arranging a bunch of extra satellites before getting on with your real goal. Life support just necessitates the adding of extra parts full of supplies to the craft. Why would those options be any more exciting than time based science?

They add more gameplay elements than "waiting". OTOH, I think you're right, the devs should have just stuck with sandbox mode and called it good.

Your way or the highway, eh?

Right, because no one can have a dissenting opinion in a "discussion".

[Dwight_js]

They add more gameplay elements than "waiting".

Adding a life support container in the VAB is a gameplay element? Just put on another oxygen tank - Yeeeehaaaa!

Or perhaps the fun is in accurately calculating the duration of your trip and adjusting the life support resources to match the demand, which then translates into the satisfaction of knowing you got it right when your Kerbals make it home safely. No different from knowing that an experiment will take x amount of time and consume y amount of power per second, so my satellite has to have enough power generation to match demand, and it will spend z amount of time in the shadow of the planet, so I have to calculate enough power storage for that too. And I want to unlock a couple more science nodes in time for the Jool window coming up, so I have to make sure the mission is launched in time for that.

It's not about waiting, it's about adding complexity and challenge. Anything that makes sense in the context of the space program and that adds a reasonable amount of complexity should be added as an optional layer to career mode.

Right, because no one can have a dissenting opinion in a "discussion".

That statement perfectly sums up your approach to this discussion. Your argument invariably consists of "I don't find it fun, who in their right mind would? So it shouldn't be included". The main problem you're missing is that you don't have it all figured out as far as what constitutes a worthwhile gameplay element, because different people have different ideas of what's fun. Some people do their DV calculations by hand, some have an autopilot do their flying, some build rockets and don't even fly them themselves.

The key to game design is offering a level of challenge and complexity that is right for the individual. Give me a game where all I have to do is set course, then fast-forward for hundreds and hundreds of days, and I'm ready to blow my brains out. Give me a puzzle where I have to balance time, resources, money, juggle concurrent missions, and keep everything in balance so the space program stays afloat, that's the game for me. Time-based science fits right in there in the game I want.