tater

I'm a new player, and I think OP makes a good point, though I think the idea of "difficulty level" is wrong-headed (meaning making it arbitrarily harder). As was pointed out above, when life support is in, it will be a game-changer. Your ship for a distant mission will require much more work and planning. The same might be said for more realistic atmospheres, and reentry parameters that are life and death. I don't really see any arbitrary difficulty levels as being useful. Orbital mechanics is orbital mechanics.

Not even just fairings, but things like the (real) Apollo rocket. Some standard diameter tubes with an internal decoupler (little or no ejection force), and open on one end. So your CM is built. You have a subassembly already made of a lander that fits inside the standard tube and you stack that with more tanks and engines below. Blow the stage before the payload tube. Now your CM can separate. You maneuver to dock, and on the bottom of the payload tube (invisible before, and not done by hitting "space") you can click "decouple payload" when ready. Different versions might open the container like a clamshell, or split it lengthwise, drop a ramp, etc.

First post, be gentle. I'd divide science/research/tech tree in a different way. Planetary Science Spaceflight Science Medical Science (assume the kerbs get life support at some point). The Tech Tree would be completely revamped. Each tree component would have some or all types of points to progress. So new lander pod tech would be say 60% Spaceflight Science Points, 20% Medical Science Points, and 20% Planetary Science Points (made up %s ). Most rockets engines might have just Spaceflight Science Points, for example. Planetary Science (PS): ---Mapping (orbital flights) ---Surface samples ---Geology (seismic, etc) These would give points mostly towards making better instrumentation for doing this kind of science. The mapping, combined with landers could map out resource areas (assuming this is added). This is a benefit outside the tech tree (you know where to build a mining base). Spaceflight Science (SS): ---Space measurement sensors (orbital, the different distances, etc). The "environment" of space to make better stuff, in other words, these might give points to 2 or even all three branches of science). ---Returned craft (how they held up) ---Time in flight (just plain experience feedback from pilots (perhaps weighted by their stupidity?)) ---Spaceflight milestones (orbiting worlds, first docking, etc). This type of data gives points to virtually everything on the new tree. Medical Science (MS): ---Time in flight (their medical condition over time, there can be experiments or station pods to test medical stuff) ---Returned craft feedback ---? Medical is just "life support" issues. These points would go towards habitat tech, including any manned elements of spacecraft. The tech would be more available than it is now. You'd not need to do major munar exploration to get the "science" in order to build.. a ladder, for example. Fewer brand-new branches, and more incremental stuff. Clunky, fixed ladder, then a later retractable one. Mk 1 pod might have a few days worth of life support, while the Mk1b has more, and the Mk1c even more. Retexture existing models and reuse. Take command pods, since they use all 3 types of science. Start with a Probe body and a manned pod with almost no life support. That could branch. With some SS points, you can get maybe a 2 person pod, pods that are better at reentry (assume deadly reentry), less mass (carbon fiber or something), etc. Another command pod branch is for MS points. Spend those and get pods with more life support time, are more survivable at a slightly higher impact speed (they add seat cushions ). Lander pods would use more of PS stuff (improved storage space for experiments, etc). Combine the 2d level for SS and MS command pod improvements, and start getting habitats, etc. You get the idea need work, but it is more incremental. I should be clear that I don't like automatic science points per unit time---unless they are linked to player actions. Mapping probes can generate science over time while they orbit. Maybe someday robot rovers would be possible, same thing, they slowly move, and check for minerals that are useful and prod cast back "science" over time. For OP: think of it this way, the baseline of tech development over time is subsumed in the choice for whatever the tech tree order is. The "stuff" done by players is what drives the specific space tech (without a space program, there is no need for that tech).