What if SCIENCE actually told you something about the world?

[eightiesboi]

Don't get me wrong, Science is awesome. It's the currency that allows me to unlock all sorts of neat toys for Jeb to play with. But what if Science did more than that? Specifically, what if the scientific missions you execute had a significant effect on your game?

I imagine this would be a hardcore mode. Here's how it works:

1. The KSC gets a new building. Tier 1 is an Observatory, Tier 2 is a Planetarium, Tier 3 is a Game Design Center called Squad (obviously, names are subject to change).

2. Each tier does two things: it tells you more about the surrounding space and allows you to interpret incoming and preexisting scientific data. Each Tier would only be able to see stellar bodies of a size and distance corresponding with its range and sensitivity. It would be possible to enhance the range / sensitivity with probes and space telescopes.

Before I get to point 3, consider that currently, if I want to know whether I can aerobrake on Eve, or how much dV I need for my descent and then return ascent from Duna, etc, I can look all of this up on a Wiki. But what if certain aspects of astronomical bodies were procedurally generated. What if (within a certain range) the gravity, atmospheric density, and like characteristics varied from game to game (obviously persistent within saves)? There would then be two ways of figuring out answers to the questions I just posed: send a manned mission and cross your fingers, or send an unmanned probe (with the proper scientific instruments) for SCIENCE!

3. Science transmitted by probes would tell you things about astronomical bodies that you could use in your space program. The data would persist between building tiers and could be re-analyzed. More missions would provide better refinements.

4. Tiered analysis would providing varying levels of detail. For example, Tier 1 atmospheric density data (thanks, barometer!) might tell you when the atmosphere begins on a world. Tier 2 would give you a table of terminal velocities for rough altitude breaks. Tier 3 (in conjunction with other data) would give you a chart showing a best-case ascent with gravity turn.

5. Special scientific instruments would be deployed that would allow for one time use and transmission of data, even beyond normal range (thanks Remote Tech!). In fact, some probes would be designed to deliberately crash into a solar body for the purposes of retrieving SCIENCE!

6. Obviously, the other thing the probes would do is help discover bodies outside the range of the current observatory / planetarium / whatever. Hubble telescope?

In sum, this addition to KSP would create a mode where every stellar body has some variation from "the book" and only by flying missions (hopefully unmanned ones) could you accumulate enough analyzed data to safely send Jeb outward.

Thoughts?

[Twreed87]

Before I get to point 3, consider that currently, if I want to know whether I can aerobrake on Eve, or how much dV I need for my descent and then return ascent from Duna, etc, I can look all of this up on a Wiki. But what if certain aspects of astronomical bodies were procedurally generated. What if (within a certain range) the gravity, atmospheric density, and like characteristics varied from game to game (obviously persistent within saves)? There would then be two ways of figuring out answers to the questions I just posed: send a manned mission and cross your fingers, or send an unmanned probe (with the proper scientific instruments) for SCIENCE!

The devs are very much against a procedurally/randomly generated solar system. They want the experience of each player to transfer over to everyone. Launching off of Eve should be the same in every game, etc.

Also, there is already a thread on something very similar: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/114960-Discovery-doing-actual-science

[Mr. Scruffy]

Uh, what an odd discision, in my book. Cause if there is one thing for me, ruining any feeling of accomplishment, it is realizing the fact, that probably 1000s of people of done this (whatever ´this´ is) before (fortunately my brain shuts the thought out, most of the time).

Still, the two possibilities are not exclusive. You could have the default system, that we all know, and at career mode start sliders allowing you to set a range of divergence from this default system.

I cannot tell the technical difficulties that might be involved in implementing this, though. They might be prohibitive.

BTW, there is not ´a´ thread suggesting this already, there must be dozens by now. I remember i openend one, pretty much like this, years ago. It was one of my first thoughts playing KSP.

Edited April 26, 2015 by Mr. Scruffy

[klgraham1013]

Hey. It's another "Why do we have mystery goo instead of the Hubble Telescope" thread. I very much agree with these threads. I wish Squad agreed with these threads.

[scy]

Yes, having the option of flying in a randomly generated system where you have to figure out how much δV is needed to get to another body and how to land there would make the game a lot more interesting to replay.