The Problem with Contract Science

[problemecium]

I was going to submit a constructive vote, but then you had to include an option for SPACESHIP!!!!

SPACESHIP!!!!

SPACESHIP!!!!

[Jakinbandw]

Tier 2/3? Like with normal numbering (start being '1') or with programmer/offset numbering (start being '0')? (I actually prefer the latter numbering system, but I would expect a game to use the former system)

Anyhow, as long as you have some T30s or T45s and liquid tanks and decouplers, you can pretty much go anywhere. The higher tier engines are only a little better, and the LF/O tanks all have the same ratio now as far as I can see (the higher ones are just cheaper per ton of fuel, and not incredibly so). Part count limits from the VAB might get in the way, but if you're awash with money, that shouldn't be a problem even in Hard.

What I get from your post is that you are a very experienced player that needs to play on hard with custom difficulty. If you can go anywhere with that low level tech, you don't even need the higher tech levels. You've already beat the game. for myself I'm having a hard time with this because I used to focus on space planes and farm enough science to use them for most of the career. With the changes to how science works I can no longer unlock the turbojet and am pretty much stuck in LKO and atmo. Also if you want to make us go further, than you have to remove all the science from minmus and the moon, because when I finally made it to minmus (in 0.9) I collected enough science to unlock the entire tree with 2000+ left over.

[Merinsan]

In my opinion the testing contracts should be giving more science. However, they should also be limited - 1 part, 1 test only. For example, test LV-N in Kerbin orbit and get say 50 science. Once you've done it, it's never offered again.

[MacroNova]

Science from contracts was nerfed massively in 1.0. Players have a huge incentive to get science from experiments and lab research or they will progress at a glacial pace. I think it's totally fine the way it is right now and I would greatly prefer if the devs focused their attention on other concerns.

Edit: for people who aren't getting enough science in the early game, do a Munar flyby on a close orbit with free return trajectory. Not much delta-V required and you can get a ton of science. Bring a scientist Kerbal to reset your Goo and Materials Bay for even more efficiency.

Edited May 7, 2015 by MacroNova

[dryer_lint]

Yeah, as others have said, it's been majorly improved in 1.0. You should have seen 0.90, giving 20 science for each contract... it was insane. These little bonuses are much better. Honestly, most of them seem to stay around 5-20 science. What can you even buy with that?

[federicoaa]

Test contracts should give science since you are running tests, you are getting data, ergo, science.

Test contracts should then give more science and little money, and other kind of contracts no science at all

[merendel]

I know all this. I've been playing since the beginning. The point i was making is that this factor is now hitting me harder with the overall reduced science and lots more to buy. What you say about Minimus is true and if I had enough science to make a ship to get there and land I would. I am stuck on tier 2/3 with virtually no science coming in and not enough to buy the big rockets or fuel tanks i need to get there. This to me seems a catch 22 as i'm no longer able to get science from orbit as i've taken it all (which i've never agreed with). The only thing i seem to be able to get science from is farming the biomes on kerbal which is dull.

this shouldnt be a problem unless you've really cranked up the difficulty setings and neutered your science income to nearly nonexistant. you dont really need much more than the basic liquid engiens to get out to minmus. I suggest you go watch HMV's (the youtuber formerly known as 5thHorsman) latest KSP video.

He went and landed on Mun off tier 2/3 (or 3/4 depends on if you count the starting node as T0 or T1), basicly what he could unlock with what you could get from reaching orbit and spaming crew reports. That same craft could go to minmus and biome hop a couple times before heading home.

You dont particularly need bigger tanks/rockets to get out there. It can help your partcount and eventual endurance but you can go there really low tech

[Cdr_Zeta]

The Title is misleading...

Yeah there is a SERIOUS problem with Science I am planning on going back to v90 I dont know yet but as it stands I gave up on KSP for now until the spiders are done crawling around...me being one of them; I dont like your post and now you can hear my side.

The whole concept of Career Mode was to get Science, Reputation..then came contracts...that is all well and good...then Science is just like - 'GONE'?

Kerbalnauts have to get into orbit before they can crawl now? The game is absurd in 1.0+...it is a real drag - pun intended.

Most of the moons and planets dont have much of an atmosphere - it's called space. But to get there they have to learn how to fly first...wait to learn how to fly they need to learn how to drive a rover...ya right...rovers that cant climb up a molehill and LV909's that are as useless as a paper airplane.

I spent countless hours developing a decent resource game for KSP, and a challenging Science Tree that is all but washed up now; what a waste of time these last 6 months have been for me...and Science in this game.

Space is about Science and look at NASA now - we need money to help the poor and to research things like cancer ... that is all well and good but there is hope in space too; it all needs to be balanced...KSP has now tipped the scales in favor of a realistic game that does not live up to it's own espectations; even Contract Configurator is busted thanks to 1.0 I guess.

My Kerbanauts used to get 100's of Science testing parts and researching places; now; NOTHING.

I wont be around for awhile...that is my problem with contracts.

PS I just saw the POLL - how politically incorrect...put Science back and make parts researchable. The tally in my Tech Tree is around 40,000 Science; stock is about 18,000; the game...400,000 Science? ya right...I dont believe that anymore. To get it we have to write our own contracts now...epic fail.

Mr Zeta

Edited May 7, 2015 by Cdr_Zeta

[bitbucket]

My opinion is to leave it an option, and let people play the game they want to play it.

[Xavven]

Hm, I'm on stock default Hard career setting and I do NOT think contracts are giving me too much science. At several points in my 1.0.2 career, it has been science that was holding back my space program and not money. Of course, there have been other times where money has been an issue and science has not. But at no time have I thought to myself, "wow, I'm swimming in science" like I was in version .24 (or whenever "KSP: First Contract" was released) and I used the Funds -> Science strategy. Now THAT was unbalanced.

I think there's a lot of work to be done on the tech tree organization as a whole. And some contracts pay absurdly small amounts for the effort required... But I don't think that science rewards need to be tweaked just yet. Or maybe they do, but the other issues are far overshadowing this one.

Lastly I'll comment on the inexhaustible science game mechanic: I like it! After the tech tree is unlocked, I can fund missions by using science -> funds strategies or data -> science -> funds using the mobile science lab. In this way, I'm not completely beholden to contracts forever... in theory, at least, since I haven't gotten that far in my career save in 1.0.2 yet to see how viable that angle actually is.

[magnemoe]

Science from contracts was nerfed massively in 1.0. Players have a huge incentive to get science from experiments and lab research or they will progress at a glacial pace. I think it's totally fine the way it is right now and I would greatly prefer if the devs focused their attention on other concerns.

Edit: for people who aren't getting enough science in the early game, do a Munar flyby on a close orbit with free return trajectory. Not much delta-V required and you can get a ton of science. Bring a scientist Kerbal to reset your Goo and Materials Bay for even more efficiency.

This, science from contracts is just an bonus now, think just the explore contracts give more than 1 point.

In short surface sample from launchpad give more than 95% of contracts.

You can not convert funds to science economical anymore. However the other way around makes more sense, even if starved for science it might be an idea to convert a few to funds so you can launch an mission to Mun and clear out an missing biome.

The labs give unlimited science, land an lab on Bop, land an mining facility and an small lander, now do all the reports on Bop, Feed into lab to gain science over time. Repeat for Pol, do orbital science around the other bodies, fuel depot on Val orbit and spaceplane at Laythe give more science, launch an new lab to repeat this, note that both labs can be run in parallel.

Even before this point science is just bragging points or to be converted into funds who enables you to build stuff who might let your cpu feel like an probe core during an 30 minutes 12x LV-N burn, however you passed the 32 bit memory limit long before this.

[Sattorin]

If Science is removed from contracts, then the strategies to convert Reputation/Funds into Science should be buffed slightly.

I LOVE being able to complete the tech tree without biome-hopping all over everything, it's just how I want to play the game.

[uglyduckling81]

If Science is removed from contracts, then the strategies to convert Reputation/Funds into Science should be buffed slightly.

I LOVE being able to complete the tech tree without biome-hopping all over everything, it's just how I want to play the game.

Yeah I don't biome hop all over every planet or Mun.

I follow contracts and do as much variety as I can. Burning 20 missions to the Mun just to hit every bit of science is boring and appears to be the source of this complaint. "Oh I sent too many missions to the Mun and collected too much science. Nerf science".

[The Yellow Dart]

Yeah I don't biome hop all over every planet or Mun.

I follow contracts and do as much variety as I can. Burning 20 missions to the Mun just to hit every bit of science is boring and appears to be the source of this complaint. "Oh I sent too many missions to the Mun and collected too much science. Nerf science".

What? Did you read the first post? Because it is the exact opposite of that. I said nothing about Mun science, the idea is actually to make players leave the Kerbin system sooner. Remove contract science (or just add the option to do so in the difficulty menu) because

1) it makes science too easy on hard mode (hard mode makes you grind out funds from contracts and you are getting science the whole time without even trying while doing contracts you have to do anyway to progress), and 2) it makes science unlimited while the tech tree takes a finite amount off science to complete, which throws off the balance of the game somewhat.

[Vanamonde]

This discussion for the game's development has been moved to Development Discussions.

[tater]

We need more science Missions (contracts that are renamed,"missions" and come from your own space program). Ideally they would know more about what broad missions are still planned (explore Duna, etc), and what has been accomplished, so that they have a sense of being built upon what you have already done.

[uglyduckling81]

What? Did you read the first post? Because it is the exact opposite of that. I said nothing about Mun science, the idea is actually to make players leave the Kerbin system sooner. Remove contract science (or just add the option to do so in the difficulty menu) because

1) it makes science too easy on hard mode (hard mode makes you grind out funds from contracts and you are getting science the whole time without even trying while doing contracts you have to do anyway to progress), and 2) it makes science unlimited while the tech tree takes a finite amount off science to complete, which throws off the balance of the game somewhat.

Like I said in an earlier post this already exists. Set your game to custom difficulty and set the science to 10% or what ever level suits you. Then you will need to get science from all over the place.

Someone mentioned there is Approximately 400k science to collect from around the solar system. Setting it to 10% means there would be 40k. You need 18k to unlock the tree completely. You would have to collect almost half of all available science to completely unlock the tree. That sounds exactly like what you are after.

[KSK]

I don't know how repeatable this is but we do have that Strategy to exchange a 'lump-sum' of science points for funds now. Does that help at all on Hard mode? Swap some of that spare science for funds, reduce the grind a bit and reduce that 'too much science' problem.

Genuine question - I haven't played on Hard mode so I don't know how well its balanced. On Normal, I'm finding that science from contracts is really more of a bonus than anything else - to progress through the tech tree I'm needing to get out into space. Which I like because now I'm running a space exploration program supported by an auxilliary commercial program, rather than a mix of disconnected contracts as I was in 0.9. Caveat, I haven't gotten out of the Kerbin system yet - don't know how well this scales once you get to interplanetary contracts.

On the other hand, I could live without that bonus science, so I wouldn't be sad if it was removed. Not keen on having yet another difficulty slider to monkey around with though.

[TothAval]

here are my thoughts on Science and Funds

i voted spaceship 'cause i wasn't sure what to vote. basically i don't care with science on contracts, it is not much after the first 2 tiers and a nice but small addition to some contracts.

i have more a problem with contracts as the only source of income at all, there should be a daily, monthly or yearly income in funds and very, very little in science, simulating

planetary research and governments on kerbin. contracts should be a tool to boost funds and to a very small degree science, but not the sole way of income, at least thats my opinion

on this matter

[Cdr_Zeta]

If Science is removed from contracts, then the strategies to convert Reputation/Funds into Science should be buffed slightly.

I LOVE being able to complete the tech tree without biome-hopping all over everything, it's just how I want to play the game.

I dont mind going out into space, doing some biome hopping; that is science. Researching parts is Science...I will probly just end up writing my own contracts now with CC; it was inevitable and I should have seen it coming; but it wasnt obvious.

I could write up multiple resource contracts as it is I will have alot of different resources to mine now but that makes it a financial game as well...UGH !

For me KSP isnt about money but it might be 60/40 money/science - afterall it is private investors looking to make a buck...look at the movie 'Avatar' - case in point; I guess I am a partial game designer now - ugh!

That and Outer Planets MOD...I have had to add resources to those moons and planets...I need to add contracts there too...more work just to play a game/sim; or I could revert back to v90.

I used custom mode also and it may be contract corrupted; if you change any settings it goes to custom; I dont know how orbit contracts are affected...I can go with the idea of tweaks; there was a MOD for it too but I aint usin it.

Cmdr Zeta

[nholzric]

I thought it was great getting tons of science in 0.90 . That doesn't mean I didn't do science in the field, but I saw it as reducing the grind a little. Or maybe diversifying the grind - but hey, when I realized little rockets were a great way to do atmospheric testing instead of wrestling with airplanes things got a whole lot more fun!

That being said, I understand why science got nerfed in contracts in 1.0.x and even though it kills my previous strategy I think it is a good change. Now you can't rely on contracts to get science, even in the early/middle parts of the game and that's okay. I still choose contracts that have science rewards since science feels like my primary limiting factor at the moment. Sure, 3 science, or even 3x4 science isn't much compared to 160 but this weekend I had 154 science so I needed 6 more - one contract was perfect!

As I understand it science is unlimited even without contracts - if I understand RoverDude correctly as he posted on a different thread, science labs will take experiments - even experiments with no transmit or return value - and produce science over time with them. When those experiments are exhausted you can launch a *different lab* and start the science over time again *with the same experiments* (maybe collected again, I dunno). So contracts are not the only problem if you're concerned about unlimited science. (PS, does science to money strategy only work with contract rewards or all science? If it only works with contract rewards then that satisfies any imbalance concerns towards science lab spamming)

Don't worry about the little science rewards from contracts. They've hit the sweet spot between being too small to significantly change game-play but large enough that it's fun to go after them.

[Cdr_Zeta]

Test contracts should give science since you are running tests, you are getting data, ergo, science.

Test contracts should then give more science and little money, and other kind of contracts no science at all

Okay I know I am a bit of a noob here but please confirm...Test Contracts are 'Part Tests' ???

Cmdr Zeta

[herbal space program]

For my part, I think that the best solution for overall gameplay would be to have the contracts actually carry somewhat larger science rewards, but that just like for exploration-based science, you can only collect the rewards the first time you do them. That way players would not be able to grind out the same mission over and over again to keep getting more science (who wants to do that anyway?), but there would be more than just a money motivation to do a variety of different types of missions. Grinding out EVA reports in every last biome in every body in the Kerbolar system is IMO just as boring as doing the same inane part-testing contracts over and over again. The devs IMO should really try to focus on creating a system of rewards that motivates players to take on all sorts of different challenges, and not just have a randomized system that endlessly spits out barely different versions of the same thing. They really haven't even scratched the surface AFAICT of the sorts of things you could put in the contract system.

[MNorman]

I am beginning to think that being able to freely run experiments anywhere is begining to become part of the problem. This is particularly so for Kerbin EVA, where so many science points are available around the space centre. this combines with another problem that orbital EVA sciance is biome specific,requiring you to get Kerbals in and out of the capsule all of the time.

I would replace the current science system with a system of 'academic' contracts, which would require specific experiments to be run in specific locations, and would be the primary source of science. These contracts could then be tuned, so that simpler contracts become less available as time goes on, to reflect the 'biome exhaustion' effect seen with the current science system. However, it is unlikely that with any system like this, a player would get as much science from Kerbin as currently available. One necessity of this, though is to make there a sufficient number of different contracts that a player is given options of a wide variety of different missions. On the other hand, it is quite easy to have more different contract types than there are experiements.

While part tests can be included in this, I would ideally want part tests to be a slightly different approach. A part test would allow free use of a part without it's technology being researched. However, to reduce the possibility of abuse of test parts, the part would not be functional for other uses until tested (a tested engine, for instance would not activate when staged until in the correct location for testing).

The ultimate developement of this, which mught be a bit excessive, would be to have 'technology demonstration' as an alternative to part entry costs, where to unlock any part (or group of similar parts, to avoid the system being too boring) when it becomes availble, you would have to do an associated contract. These contracts would sometimes be tests of that part, but not always. You could sometimes have special 'test' versions of similar parts (described as being modified to simulate the new part). You could have special materials bay tests (for example, one test for an LV-N would be to test the shielding material in low Jool orbit). One restriction on making this sort of system fun is to make the test mission make some sense. for example there is no value in testing a vacuum optimised engine on the launch pad, and there is no point in testing parts outside the Kerbin-Mun-Minmus system, unless tesing in an atmosphere or a high radiation environment.

[nholzric]

...Grinding out EVA reports in every last biome in every body in the Kerbolar system is IMO just as boring as doing the same inane part-testing contracts over and over again...

Grinding every biome would be a problem if there was only as much science in the Kerbol system as was needed to complete the science tree. Since there's more science than is needed (unlimited science with the new science labs) then I don't see this as a problem. Of course, that means there's a new problem of what to do with all that science in the late game - I suppose there's strategies for converting that into cash, but also in previous careers/versions when I got to Duna I sent science labs and experiments because it was fun!