Mobile science labs. How do they work?

[Thegamer211]

What do science labs do?

And how does generating science over time works?

Edited August 14, 2015 by Thegamer211

[Geschosskopf]

What you do is, you store an experiment in the Mobile Processing Lab then review it from within the lab. It will have a new button on the pop-up called Process. Do that and the lab gains "data", which is a separate thing from the actual experiment. You can now take the experiment back out and either fly it home or transmit it (or but it in a second, separate lab on another ship to process it again), but the "data" derived from it stays in the MPL. Now you can put 1 or 2 Scientists in the MPL and they will start "analyzing" the "data", which consumes "data" and generates science points over time.

In theory, this is a way to get more science points out of fewer flights, as the "analyzed" data usually amounts to about 5x what the original experiment was worth. In practice, however, this is completely useless and counterproductive because the "analysis" takes eons of gametime, especially early in the game when you Kerbals have less than 3 stars. Just doing a single surface sample (which is all the MPL can hold at once) will take the better part of a year to complete. You can speed this up by having more experienced Kerbals or using multiple labs to crunch the same data (must be in separate ships). However, that takes a lot of money and effort to set up, and the faster it works, the sooner it all becomes obsolete and useless when you complete the tech tree. So I don't recommend ever doing this.

The only marginally useful function the MPL serves now is that it can store duplicate copies of experiments (like 2 Goo reports from the same biome), whereas capsules can only have 1 copy. Then you can return the MPL itself to Kerbin to get slightly more science per biome this way.

It used to be, the MPL had the essential function of being able to reset Goo and Material experiments for re-use, so any biome-hopping mission really needed an MPL, and the lander had to return to it after visiting each biome to drop off the science and have its experiments reset. But nowadays, a 0-level Scientist can reset Goo and Materials in the field so there's no more need of an MPL when biome-hopping.

So, basically, MPLs have no practical value in 1.x. I do, however, usually stick one in each of my space stations just for role-playing purposes.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Geschosskopf

[Starhawk]

I must respectfully disagree with Geschosskopf.

In my experience the MPL is an excellent way to supplement your science gains.

One of my common strategies in the fairly early career game to ease the science grind is to do a science sweep of Minmus (and, later, the Mun), trying to get as much science from as many biomes as possible. This generally involves a small lander which can hop to several biomes before returning to orbit for refueling. Now that scientists can reset experiments, this is much easier.

The orbiting fuel station which is returned to after a few biomes has a crewed MPL. When the lander docks for refueling, I review all the experiments on board and select the analyze option for each one. This adds 'data' to the MPL which it then works through, over time, to produce further science. The thing is, the science is still in the lander, and will be transferred to a return vehicle which lands on Kerbin for the full value of all the science. This, of course, is a one-shot science bonanza. But if the lab has been filled to capacity with data (it took data from a lot of experiments to fill it up), it keeps churning out science over time, and depleting the data. The science return rate will slowly drop as this happens.

After a few time-warps, you check back and find that science has built up, but the 'data' has depleted. The science that has built up may then be transmitted home (be sure to have sufficient power and an antenna). More data can then be added to increase the science return rate.

The limitation in the early game of using inexperienced scientists does make it a bit slow, but time-warp usually happens at some point, and then you can get a chunk of bonus science. This can be significantly mitigated by leveling up scientists early.

It worked for me. YMMV.

Happy landings!

[gary.townsend]

Yeah i'm with Starhawk here, part of the fun has been setting up a science base on the surface of the mun and then building that base up so it's fairly self sufficient, having an orbital science lab around mun which will eventually serve as the basis for my orbital shipyard.

I just recently sqitched to using the Training Akadamy from USI mods which stores 3 times the data. Lot of fun. They aren't a waste unless you are trying to be contrary and complain about something that can be time warped.

[Sobriquet]

I have never really understood their purpose, so have not used them.

You can warp the processing time same as for a transfer orbit. So time is not really an issue? Are they cost effective? Science is gathered pretty quickly. Wouldn't the MPL become obsolete fairly quickly?

[Starhawk]

As with all science gear in the game, it becomes pretty obsolete once the entire tech tree is unlocked. You can still gather science and use the Admin building to convert it to cash, of course.

I wanted to unlock later nodes on the tech tree at the time, so, for me, it was very cost effective.

Happy landings!

[Randazzo]

MPL's can generate quite a lot of science over time. I usually only deploy one around the Mun to avoid unlocking the tech tree too quickly. Just make it part of a station with fuel and it's own lander and crew. Send them down when you get a contract for the munar surface (or minmus if you prefer), get more data, bring it back up, process it.

Send a ship from time-to-time to rotate out the crew (for experience purposes) and bring the raw experiments back

[eddiew]

As others have said; drop your experiments/results off at the lab and set it researching. Come back later for much more science points than you started with. You can take the original data/samples back to KSC for recovery as well.

I play at a mere 20% science and Community Tech Tree, so having a science lab running early was basically mandatory for me to get anywhere. The simplest option is a lab in LKO with a few scientists, an antenna, and plenty of solar panels. Here, it'll be easy to rendezvous with at the end of a mission. A kerbal can EVA the data over to it if you don't want to design all your craft with a docking port

You can always build a new station later, with better tech, and abandon the original if it's a bit rough and ready ^^

[Starhawk]

The simplest option is a lab in LKO with a few scientists, an antenna, and plenty of solar panels. Here, it'll be easy to rendezvous with at the end of a mission. A kerbal can EVA the data over to it if you don't want to design all your craft with a docking port

My understanding is that the lab's effectiveness at generating science is linked to the proximity of the biome where the experimental data originates.

I could be wrong.

Happy landings!

[Randazzo]

My understanding is that the lab's effectiveness at generating science is linked to the proximity of the biome where the experimental data originates.

I could be wrong.

Happy landings!

You get a bonus for being in orbit of the body the experiment came from.

[Starhawk]

You get a bonus for being in orbit of the body the experiment came from.

Ah yes, that was it. Thanks.

Happy landings!

[eddiew]

My understanding is that the lab's effectiveness at generating science is linked to the proximity of the biome where the experimental data originates.

I could be wrong.

I believe you're right, but...

You get a bonus for being in orbit of the body the experiment came from.

...this is also true. Any orbital lab anywhere is better than returning to Kerbin directly. The LKO option is the most basic, and very easy, since it requires only a brief rendezvous when you come home.

My rough estimate is that for every result point you feed an LKO lab, it generates about 0.25 points of data - which then multiplies up by 5 as it researches. Ultimately spits out about 125% more science than you fed it with, and of course you can still take the original results down to KSC as soon as you've finished the initial processing, so it's something like 2.25x as much science as you'd otherwise be getting. Decidedly worth having as soon as you can put one in orbit, especially if you prefer a low science setting

[Randazzo]

The LKO option is the most basic, and very easy, since it requires only a brief rendezvous when you come home.

This is actually a great idea, as you can put experiment data in as many labs as you want. So for example, with the Munar research station, you could end up processing that data twice and then still recover it.

[Geschosskopf]

I must respectfully disagree with Geschosskopf.

In my experience the MPL is an excellent way to supplement your science gains.

Well, I guess we must agree to disagree then.

And BTW, MPLs work better when on the ground than they do in space.

Anyway, consider the mathematics of science as they stand today in 1.0.4:

* The entire tech tree only requires 18468 science points to unlock. Of this, 11600 is the top 2 tiers (5x 1000 and 12x 550), leaving only 6868 for ALL the rest of the tree.

* A Minmus biome will yield about 1000 science points if you go with lots of different instruments and use them both on the ground and (where possible) in space just above each biome. Minmus has 9 biomes so Minmus is worth about 9000 science. Combined with what you've already earned to make a Minmus biome-hopper possible, you'll be well into the 2nd-to-last tier of the tree when you're finished with Minmus.

* A round trip to Minmus takes about 14 days, or about 16 if you hit several biomes. If your Minmus biome-hopper can hit 3 biomes per tank of fuel and still get home, then you can get that 9000 science in just 48 days. If you have a fuel tank in orbit so the biome-hopper can do all of Minmus in 1 trip, then you get 9000 science in about 20 days.

* A round trip to Mun only takes a few days. With what you've unlocked from the Minmus science, you can now build a Mun biome-hopper out of bigger rocket parts and repeat the process there. Mun's biome are worth only about 900 points each, but it also has more biomes. So in another 20 days on the outside, you'll be done with the tech tree. So somewhere in the neighborhood of 50-100 days total, depending on how much time you spend doing non-exploration contracts.

* Meanwhile, an MPL's data banks are filled to capacity with a single Minmus surface sample. That sample, when returned, is worth about 150 science. The MPL can create about 600-700 extra science from this. This is less than the value of a single biome on Mun.

* With Kerbals having 1-2 stars, the time required for the MPL to create this paltry amount of extra science is measured in years. Thus, unless all you do is timewarp instead of actually playing the game, you will have finished the tech tree LONG before the MPL finishes its job. And even if you somehow have dawdled around and haven't quite finished the tech tree yet, all you'll have left by this point are 1000-point nodes, maybe a couple of 550s. So another way to look at the MPL is that it's worth 1x 550-point node, or part of a 1000-point node.

------------------------------

BOTTOM LINE:

The direct gameplay value of an MPL can be measured. It is:

* less than 1 Mun biome

* either 1x 550-point node, or >1x 1000-point node

The time required to recoup the insignificant value of an MPL is about 6-10x longer than it takes to complete the whole tech tree doing conventional science return missions.

The MPL has no other function in the game these days.

Therefore, the MPL is totally useless for practical gameplay purposes. It does, however, have some aesthetic value as nonfunctioning decoration for a space station.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Geschosskopf

[Randazzo]

And BTW, MPLs work better when on the ground than they do in space.

Yes, but the difficulty (or time investment, if you drive or something silly like that) of getting the data from each biome to a lab on the ground is of a much higher scale.

* A Minmus biome will yield about 1000 science points if you go with lots of different instruments and use them both on the ground and (where possible) in space just above each biome. Minmus has 9 biomes so Minmus is worth about 9000 science. Combined with what you've already earned to make a Minmus biome-hopper possible, you'll be well into the 2nd-to-last tier of the tree when you're finished with Minmus.

* A round trip to Minmus takes about 14 days, or about 16 if you hit several biomes. If your Minmus biome-hopper can hit 3 biomes per tank of fuel and still get home, then you can get that 9000 science in just 48 days. If you have a fuel tank in orbit so the biome-hopper can do all of Minmus in 1 trip, then you get 9000 science in about 20 days.

* A round trip to Mun only takes a few days. With what you've unlocked from the Minmus science, you can now build a Mun biome-hopper out of bigger rocket parts and repeat the process there. Mun's biome are worth only about 900 points each, but it also has more biomes. So in another 20 days on the outside, you'll be done with the tech tree. So somewhere in the neighborhood of 50-100 days total, depending on how much time you spend doing non-exploration contracts.

* Meanwhile, an MPL's data banks are filled to capacity with a single Minmus surface sample. That sample, when returned, is worth about 150 science. The MPL can create about 600-700 extra science from this. This is less than the value of a single biome on Mun.

* With Kerbals having 1-2 stars, the time required for the MPL to create this paltry amount of extra science is measured in years. Thus, unless all you do is timewarp instead of actually playing the game, you will have finished the tech tree LONG before the MPL finishes its job. And even if you somehow have dawdled around and haven't quite finished the tech tree yet, all you'll have left by this point are 1000-point nodes, maybe a couple of 550s. So another way to look at the MPL is that it's worth 1x 550-point node, or part of a 1000-point node.

------------------------------

BOTTOM LINE:

The direct value of an MPL can be measured. It is:

* less than 1 Mun biome

* either 1x 550-point node, or >1x 1000-point node

The time required to recoup the insignificant value of an MPL is about 6-10x longer than it takes to complete the whole tech tree doing conventional science return missions.

The MPL has no other function in the game these days.

Therefore, the MPL is totally useless for practical gameplay purposes. It does, however, have some aesthetic value as nonfunctioning decoration for a space station.

The conclusion is that it does not suit your play style.

It serves a perfectly good purpose for me if left running while I undertake years long trips to other planets, generating science in time that I would otherwise not being doing anything but watching time warp go by.

Like the ISRU system, it's an option for those who want it, but not a necessity for success.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Randazzo

[goldenpsp]

What do science labs do?

And how does generating science over time works?

FYI, that's what the tutorials Subforum is for...

[Geschosskopf]

The conclusion is that it does not suit your preferences or play style, not that it is entirely useless for gameplay in general.

Play style and preferences have nothing to do with it. I'm talking about the objective gameplay value of the MPL, which is indisputable. And that is effectively zero by the time it finally pays out. This is because of the time-value of both money and science in KSP. Time IS money, and time IS science, even in this game. Time spent warping just waiting on the MPL to do its thing is time not spent making money or earning science. By the time the MPL finishes, you could be rich, have the tech tree finished, and be on the way back from a Duna trip, maybe even home already.

So, that's the objective gameplay value. You can now compare that value to your subjective play style and preferences and decide whether or not to use the MPL.

Personally, I think the MPL is a complete waste of time, dV, and money because you get so little to show for so long a wait. And if you don't wait for it, then you get zero return because you've already finished the tech tree. Therefore, I consider the MPL utterly useless and in great need of having its properties rebalanced to fit in better with the normal way of getting science.

Now, if in your game you'd rather wait on the MPL and take decades to finish the tech tree, that's entirely your business. Knock yourself out. But that has no effect on the objective gameplay value of the MPL. That's just your subjective way of doing things.

[Randazzo]

Play style and preferences have nothing to do with it. I'm talking about the objective gameplay value of the MPL, which is indisputable.

The fact that this "objective" value mirrors your subjective opinion is purely coincidence, certainly.

I'm not saying your opinion is invalid, just that it is one of many.

[Starhawk]

Play style and preferences have nothing to do with it. I'm talking about the objective gameplay value of the MPL, which is indisputable. And that is effectively zero by the time it finally pays out. This is because of the time-value of both money and science in KSP. Time IS money, and time IS science, even in this game. Time spent warping just waiting on the MPL to do its thing is time not spent making money or earning science. By the time the MPL finishes, you could be rich, have the tech tree finished, and be on the way back from a Duna trip, maybe even home already.

I absolutely disagree with this analysis. Time is free is KSP because of time-warp.

The statements that 'time is money' and 'time is science' seem to me to be obviously and patently incorrect. You may value game-time, but that doesn't mean other players do. Thus, that is a personal preference, or playstyle, if you prefer.

Nothing is lost when you advance the clock by time-warping in KSP. There is no lost opportunity cost. There is no deterioration of facilities or vessels. No maintenance is required. There is still exactly the same opportunity to gain further science after a time-warp that there was before the time warp.

I also must disagree that there is even such a thing as objective gameplay value.

Sorry, but I agree that we disagree.

Happy landings!

[Geschosskopf]

The fact that this "objective" value mirrors your subjective opinion is purely coincidence, certainly.

Absolutely not. My play style is what is it is BECAUSE I ran the numbers above, and then verified them in actual play (see 1st 2 episodes of this thread).

I'm not saying your opinion is invalid, just that it is one of many.

The numbers don't lie and are not opinion. That's how the game functions under the current set of rules. In its current incarnation, from an objective POV, the MPL is worthless. Period, end of story. If you choose to believe otherwise, you're delusional. If, OTOH, you realize it's worthless but choose to use it anyway because you're strangely attracted to it, that's your business. Knock yourself out.

Understand that back before 1.x, I used the MPL extensively (see the old post linked in the 1st post of the above thread). Back then, I also ran the numbers and determined the MPL was a vital thing. Mostly because it was the ONLY way to reset Goo and Materials, so was the only way to do biome-hoppers which, then as now, were the most efficient way through the tech tree.

I absolutely disagree with this analysis. Time is free is KSP because of time-warp.

The statements that 'time is money' and 'time is science' seem to me to be obviously and patently incorrect. You may value game-time, but that doesn't mean other players do. Thus, that is a personal preference, or playstyle, if you prefer.

Well then, sir, I strongly advise "neither a borrower nor lender be". You do not understand what the time-value of money really is in the real world so are unable to see that it's exactly the same in KSP.

Gametime in KSP has an objectively measurable value, in several different ways. First, contracts only have a lifespan of a few days before you either accept them or the offers expire. If you warp through weeks and months of gametime, you miss countless opportunities to acquire wealth. Same as, in the real world, you put your money in mason jars under the bed instead of putting it to work in investments. Also, transfer windows wait for nobody. If you want to go to Planet X next, but warp until your MPL is done, then the desired window might be months away and you have to warp to it, again losing more money. And it gets even worse if you use life support, so CAN'T afford to warp indefinitely or your Kerbals on missions will starve.

You can, of course, refuse to believe any of this, but if you do, then how do you make an objective decision about the value of the MPL? If you set no standard to compare it to, then you're just going on hunch and emotion, not making a rational decision.

[Randazzo]

The numbers don't lie and are not opinion. That's how the game functions under the current set of rules. In its current incarnation, from an objective POV, the MPL is worthless. Period, end of story. If you choose to believe otherwise, you're delusional. If, OTOH, you realize it's worthless but choose to use it anyway because you're strangely attracted to it, that's your business. Knock yourself out.

Data processed through an MPL generates more science than data not processed through an MPL. This gives it a value.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Randazzo

[FancyMouse]

I thought the fact that different MPLs can add up science for the exact same experiment is its true value?

But right - I don't use MPL as well because I also know how to mine science from Minmus efficiently, and MPL is not an attractive choice comparing to that. But I'm afraid it has to be designed that way, otherwise it might become Kerbal Lab Program.

But anyway - you'll have to use MPL in some other scenario - say you want lots of science for whatever reason in late career. Science experiment only gives finite science except asteroids, but those are way less efficient than MPL.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, but the difficulty (or time investment, if you drive or something silly like that) of getting the data from each biome to a lab on the ground is of a much higher scale.

You'll find a hopper with basic roving capability carrying all science experimentsis extremely convenient. Anywhere >1km you hop. Put experiments around seats so you don't need to walk around to collect data. With that it's not annoying at all to collect surface sciences for both regular science and MPL. Other than designing and testing the roverable hopper, it's not really harder than doing it in orbit, but surface gives you much more science and data.

It's for sure not meant to work on big planets/moons but up to the size of Mun it still works great for me

[Geschosskopf]

I thought the fact that different MPLs can add up science for the exact same experiment is its true value?

Actually, all attempts to speed up MPL processing time actually are less efficient in the end than using a single MPL with your single starting 0-level Scientist in it, due to the costs involved. Which, as pointed out above, is already a horrible waste of time, talent, and labor.

To operate multiple labs, you of course have to launch them and get them where you want them. Then each lab needs at least 1, preferrably 2, Scientists, each with as much experience as possible. So now you have to grind out an average of 3x the number of rescue missions as you need Scientists, then optionally send all these Scientists on a training cruise to level them up. Then you have to get the Kerbals in the labs, and move the same experiment around to each of the labs so they can all crunch the same thing simultaneously.

If you go this way, you can construct a monumental lab complex that is really great at generating vast amounts of science. But the faster it makes science, the faster it works itself out of a job when it finishes the tech tree. At which point, the entire enterprise ceases to have any value. No more use for MPLs, no more use for Scientists, and all the money and time spent on unrecoverable. In the end, you spend less money, effort and time (both gametime and real time) just ignoring MPLs completely.

But right - I don't use MPL as well because I also know how to mine science from Minmus efficiently, and MPL is not an attractive choice comparing to that. But I'm afraid it has to be designed that way, otherwise it might become Kerbal Lab Program.

Actually, the MPL doesn't have to be this way. Pre-1.0, it was something totally different. Back then, it was the ONLY way to reset Goo and Materials, so was the ONLY way to do a biome-hopping mission, and such missions consumed more time and fuel because the lander had to return to the MPL between biomes. That was the MPL's main ability. It could also buff the amount of science you could get from transmitting data instead of returning it, but hardly anybody ever used that function. The only thing that's still the same about the MPL today is that it can still hold multiple copies of the same experiement from the same biome. Thus, if you return the MPL to Kerbin, you can get the full return value of all experiments, instead of just 80-90% of Goo, Materials, and surface samples from returning a single copy.

I do NOT like the current incarnation of the MPL because it's useless. I liked how it used to be. Squad needs to do something here. There are 2 ways to make the MPL useful again. You can either give it back the exclusive ability to reset Goo and Materials, or you can drastically decrease the amount of time required for it to process data into extra science. The problem is, the MPL can't be viewed in isolation, and that just points up the failings of the existing science and Kerbal class and experience systems as a whole. The entirety of Career Mode needs a thorough rework and rebalance: contracts, science acquisition, the tech tree layout, Kerbal classes, the way Kerbals gain experience, Kerbal hiring costs, the works.

Edited August 15, 2015 by Geschosskopf

[FancyMouse]

Actually, all attempts to speed up MPL processing time actually are less efficient in the end than using a single MPL with your single starting 0-level Scientist in it, due to the costs involved. Which, as pointed out above, is already a horrible waste of time, talent, and labor.

You probably got me wrong. For the statement you quoted, my point is that I think infinite science is the value of MPL. I didn't say/attempt anything about efficiency/conversion rate there, and I totally agree scientist stars and # of scientists don't eventually benefit you in terms of efficiency E2E.

[Starhawk]

You do not understand what the time-value of money really is in the real world so are unable to see that it's exactly the same in KSP.

I really don't understand how you can suggest that you have any knowledge of my understanding of what the 'time-value of money really is in the real world'. This just seems to me like a personal attack.

Gametime in KSP has an objectively measurable value, in several different ways. First, contracts only have a lifespan of a few days before you either accept them or the offers expire. If you warp through weeks and months of gametime, you miss countless opportunities to acquire wealth.

It seems to me that you are missing the fact that there is an endless stream of the same contacts continuing to come up. The value of the new contracts does not deteriorate over time if you do not accept contracts during a time warp. Once again, I must point out that there is no lost opportunity cost due to time passing. The same opportunities to garner wealth exist after you time warp as existed before, on average. There is no advantage to having more wealth at a given time point in the game, whatsoever.

In KSP there are no fixed expenses over time. The probability of a given contract coming up does not change with time. The funds in your account do not change with time.

Same as, in the real world, you put your money in mason jars under the bed instead of putting it to work in investments.

Once again, this can only seem to me to be a personal attack.

Also, transfer windows wait for nobody.

Transfer windows always recur. You can always time-warp to the next desired window for any given destination.

If you want to go to Planet X next, but warp until your MPL is done, then the desired window might be months away and you have to warp to it, again losing more money.

I do not accept that any funds are lost.

And it gets even worse if you use life support, so CAN'T afford to warp indefinitely or your Kerbals on missions will starve.

Life support would change everything. If life support is in the game, then time has a definite meaning and value.

You can, of course, refuse to believe any of this, but if you do, then how do you make an objective decision about the value of the MPL?

I tried out the MPL and found that I had more science using it than I would have otherwise had for a given amount of science gathering. I enjoyed that I got the science without as much grindy clicking. I value the enjoyment. Therefore, it has value to me.

There is no such thing as an objective measure of value. Value is both subjective and deeply bound to circumstance.

If you set no standard to compare it to, then you're just going on hunch and emotion, not making a rational decision.

There is no subjective way to measure enjoyment of the game. Pleasure at overcoming an obstacle successfully. Fulfillment from mastering a new skill. These are places that I find value in gameplay. I cannot agree that there is, or should be, an objective measure of gameplay value.

With all due respect.

Happy landings!