JimmyAgent007

@Kasuha I agree to a point. Mun rocks shouldnt help make an SLS rocket. But getting too realistic would be too tedious to be fun. Thats why I suggest that science points act as a type of bait for the researchers to come work for you. Once they are there then they can get to work on a new engine. Part testing would help move things along but you dont need to circle the globe for it. Just test it under specific conditions. Plus you can invent a part without having tested it for its specific use. NASA didnt need to send a probe with the Lunar lander landing legs before Apollo 11 used them. Though it may have helped.

Sandbox doesnt rely on you actually doing anything. Have people stopped playing that? I also mentioned that researchers would cost money, if you just left the game running it would run out and nothing would happen. So you would still need to do things for the money to pay for the research team. All the while you are doing experiments and tests to increase the rate that research progresses.

Not sure why you seem to think my plan involved you sitting at KSC twiddling your thumbs. If you are launching rockets and landing on other planets like you said, then you would be gaining science the whole time. My plan for dealing with timewarp was that if say you wanted to send a probe to Duna and it takes a year that you timewarp at x100000 for. I just didnt want the whole tech tree unlocked by the time you get into your next mission. But if the whole process took you two hours or so of real time then you got two hours or so worth of research. The research done in those two hours or so would depend on your achievements in the game. As for leaving the game running, thats just silly, if you want the tech tree unlocked without effort then just edit some files. As for a time frame for newbies and veterans it would really need play testing like i mentioned. A difficulty slider could adjust the rate of research to suit the player.

So I've been thinking about how I would change research if I was in a position to do so. This is how I would prefer to play. It might not work for everyone. It might not solve all the problems. But I would like to share it in the hopes that it may be refined into something that could indeed work and maybe get incorporated. So let's keep things friendly and civil. The first thing I'd like to get out of the way is that anyone who wants to cheat any science system can do so. With timewarp or simply editing the persistence file. So really it doesn't make sense to say no to a system because some people can cheat it. That being said, timewarp sees normal legitimate use so we don't want to have people 'accidentally' cheating because they were focused on a single long term mission and using timewarp a lot. So to solve this I would reduce any resource gained over time by the same factor as the timewarp. For example, x100 time warp would take your income and divide it by 100. (x/100 while Tx100) So your resource gain is always calculated in real time opposed to game time. This can apply to money, reputation, science, snacks, anything. Second, I'd break down the tech tree so that each node is a single part. Only combining parts where they are useless without another. Such as ion engines without a xenon fuel tank. Science itself I would break into two types of points. Science Points and Research Points. Science points are collected as we always have. Doing experiments, reports, goo, measurements and so on. However instead of being used to unlock parts they are spent on attracting researchers. The idea being that your program is doing some interesting projects. (Look at this goo we sent into space!) Your reputation determines how big the pool of researchers is and how smart they are. Early game you would only be able to hire interns but working towards triple PHDs and Kerbin HawKing as your program reputation grows. Research points come from those you hire and are produced slowly over time. (Assuming you have the money to pay them) The chief scientist you already have working for you has his hands full administrative duties so let's say he only produces 10pts an hour. (The actual rates would need balance and play testing so for the purpose of explaining my system lets assume they are balanced) You hire an Intern who produces 5pts so you have a rate of 15/hr. The first tech node needs 100 pts to unlock. So with just your Admin it would take 10 hours to unlock. With the Intern it takes 6.6 hours to unlock. Once it's done it splits into several nodes. Each take a slice of your pts per hour. That really slows things down right? That's where part testing comes in. Take a contract to test a part and you get a boost to that part. Test a new engine and suddenly you get a 25% boost to any points applied to that part. Testing that part again in a different context gets you a 20% boost, then 15% and so on. For example, on the launch pad gets you the 25%, flying over kerbin gets you 20%, in orbit gets you the 15% and progresses from there. (or we can invert the process and give you 5% boost for the easy test on kerbin and 25% for testing it in deep space) To me the first test should be on the launch pad and the first test should always yield the most useful data. The way the boost helps is that if a part node gets 10pts an hour, and you do the first test, it gets boosted to 12.5 pts an hour. 75% being the most you can boost a part via testing, resulting in 17.5 pts an hour. What then? Well science over time shouldn't just be limited to your scientists. All science experiments gain another option. Continuous transmission. Meaning they feed directly to your R&D building producing extra Research Points. Antenna would have a new use but also a limit. Communotron 16s can transmit to local orbit, DTS-M1s to deep orbit, and 88-88s to different planetary orbits. (Or they keep their unlimited range for now, as long as they can maintain the signal with power and line of sight) Each type of experiment produces pts/hour. Less than a researcher but more points depending on the type of experiment and its location. If a mobile processing lab is within range (assuming range of transmissions are limited) then the pts/hour get a boost. However! The lab needs to be staffed by researchers and not pilots. So the Kerbals you hire at the astronaut complex cannot man the lab. You need to send the scientists you hired but whom cannot fly the ship. (This would undoubtedly require you to pay them more money) Finally, once the tech tree is unlocked then the research generated can be applied towards Pure Research (ie. More money) for now until they introduce something like part upgrades or whatever. Hopefully I explained this well (and avoided the WNTS list) and it will get a lot of you thinking about science and maybe make it a lot more interesting. Please keep the demand for specific parts at specific points in the tech tree to a minimum. We all feel very differently about that.

Maybe making the KSC fully destructible like they mentioned a long time ago? It would require lots of 3D work and could be considered a single feature. OR They could be populating Kerbin with cities.

After reading all this, my wild speculation is that since SQUAD doesnt want a lot of parts since they slow down testing they will probably add a mod that adds limited but high impact parts. Could be plane parts, one of the ones mentioned but slimmed down maybe. Personally I dont do planes but Id be tempted if they did add more stock parts. Personally Id be happy with being able to do struts or action groups in space.

Maybe something a bit more abstract, like a stock market graph that just breaks down who you buy most of your parts from. Like Rockomax has a 43% market share of the space industry because you buy 43% of your parts from them. But recovered parts dont count towards it since if you recover it you arnt buying a new one. It doesnt make it finite but just adds a small layer or immersion. Not really going to change gameplay so its more of a late stage polish type thing.

I like the idea of science being done at a constant thing over time, testing parts helps develop them. Returning science experiments grants boosts to your science team (They love learning new things) As for the timewarp, well if the scientists cost money then you would run out if you just time warped. Personally I think you just reduce the rate of science proportional to the timewarp. x10 speed? you get 1/10 the science. it would give you a reason to do part test contracts that i personally find rather annoying currently.

Very much yes, ive tested a few parts that I thought were something else when i accepted the contract. Not a big deal but still would be nice.

I revert when I do something stupid like forget solar panels on a probe with no batteries or quickload when a Kraken kills my EVA Kerbal. Really i try to limit myself to when its a "That shouldnt happen" moment. Aside from those times I only reverted once when I did something really stupid during a rescue landing and i landed on the side of the mountain because i fired my engines to slow me since i had fuel left.

I think part testing should leave you with the part afterwards but for a single use. So if you dont recover it you dont get it back. Also the "return science" missions work even if you report science from where its already empty. Doesnt seem right to me, a little too easy. I think individual kerbals should get rep for the missions they complete just so we can see who your rockstars are. Havent seen any "return samples" just return or transmit science. Id suggest returning grants a better reward than transmission.

About 750,000 had to go away for the weekend. Ive been keeping launches limited to serving the contract but I already stopped doing most part testing missions since they need to be staged at that point, not just in use. Might still do them for science though. Been taking my time with it so I dont max the tech tree right away. When I do Im going to start doing my own missions to burn money and do contracts when i run short.

Kerbals in orbit should be from ships/stations you left up there yourself. You move on to other missions. But maybe they went out for a space walk and cant get back. So you go rescue them and either bring them down or put them back on the ship/station they are supposed to be on.

newspaper would be neat but give it a toggle, not everyone wants popups all the time, newsticker seems less intrusive. Id also like it to say something if you revert a game. "Rumors of a catastrophic explosion on the launch pad are apparently false."

Can we tell them we want it delivered in exactly 24 slices?

I must not have ever messed up that badly then. Either way I think my original idea of having a separate game mode for each side of this debate is valid. like they are doing with the science mode and contracts mode. eventually i think they should just have a list of features you select for a new game. I dont see why everyone needs to get so worked up over other people are not having fun the right way. This is only the first pass, like exchanging sci/rep/money bankruptcy could just be in the next update once a few thousand people have played and the devs figure out how to balance things. If you think you should go bankrupt for now, just quit and delete your game. then start a new one

Will Wright specifically stated he didnt believe in fail states. If being in debt got you kicked out of office then explain the US Government. Ive gotten massively in debt in SC 2000 and never got a game over.

Sim City had money and no fail state. (Dont count the newest one) Im certain there is still a game in there. Thats how i see this current version of Kerbal.

If your rep is in the toilet you wouldnt get massive contracts worth that much. But a good middle ground between both sides of this debate is an Iron Man Mode. turned off it tells you the director has been replaced or whatever. Turned on is a sad jeb standing outside KSC with a CLOSED sign on the door.

would be neat, id also like to see stories about people on your friends list doing things, "Rival Agency rumored to have landed on Duna" Nothing they do actually in your world but just some fun updates.

I like the idea that the "Guy In Charge" gets canned if you fail too much or go totally broke. Still get the feeling of a failed game without the loss of everything you worked on.

well there can be the top options, but also a write in slot, First Contract wasnt an option to choose IIRC but there was a write in slot. Did they include a currency poll with that?

Career all the way. Wont start anything new unless something breaks. If they revise the economic model later I can just say the economy shifted and keep going. Ever since my .17 save ended with all my missions going underground on the Mun in a later update ive been habitually restarting. More so with science and its changes. Now I hope to have my long term game again and stick with it.

The testers called them Roots because of the symbol. But that has issues with Australian slang. Basically it means S3X though im not sure being paid that way would be a bad thing either. It was actually funny because the ROOTS clothing company was the Canadian Olympic teams sponsor at Sydney. So all our athletes were running about with naughty words on their clothing. Back to the matter at hand, Funds is... ok if a bit generic sounding. Would have liked a survey like they did with the update name.

I always thought of Kredits. But the devs didnt want another K word for some strange reason. A facebook poll had Manleys (sp) as the top choice. Snacks was always my backup currency. Lets face it, getting paid in Snacks would be awesome.