My suggestion to solve "completing" the tech tree.

[tater]

5 hours ago, Dr. Jet said:

And noone suggested EXPANDING a Tech Tree so that it could be only unlocked with 95% of all science gathered in stock Kerbal System...

Aside from the magic spaceplane stuff (parts all seem to be stronger, lighter, and better than any equivalent rocket part), all the tech tree stuff is mid-1960s tech. What would you add, fantasy stuff?

[Tw1]

On 08/12/2015, 10:17:43, Pthigrivi said:

What I'd prefer to see is the goal shifted away from completing the tech tree and toward exploration. Right now the bodies themselves are pretty empty, but if there were actual things to see and do there people might feel inspired to see exploring them as the real goal. 

Exactimo. We keep saying this. It's been years. 
I wish the science system was as sophisticated as the heat, or aerodynamics.

[Dr. Jet]

33 minutes ago, tater said:

Aside from the magic spaceplane stuff (parts all seem to be stronger, lighter, and better than any equivalent rocket part), all the tech tree stuff is mid-1960s tech. What would you add, fantasy stuff?

At least making more nodes to divide existing parts in more sane categories. Separate branch for electronics, separate branch for aerodynamics, etc.  Not a coctail with bit of everything.

Also, Squad can make tier upgrades for parts. For example, tier 1 of electronics give you Stayputnik part with SAS, but without reaction wheels or advances functions, tier 2 will give you next probe part, but also will upgrade Stayputnik to have weak reaction wheels, tier 3 wil give prograde-retrograde autmation and so on. Technological advancement will make electronics and mechanics smaller and lighter, allowing more functions in the same volume, construction alloys will become lighter and sturdier, engines, "tested" in lower tiers will have upgrades for better TWR and ISP in upper tiers, etc. Less parts for each node, but also a buff for previously unlocked parts. Something like that.

As for late-game tech tiers - Squad should possibly integrate NF or KSPI mods in stock. Their parts are far more realistic than green men who don't need to eat, drink or even breath.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Dr. Jet

[tater]

Makes sense. The gameplay issue in general with career is that the game already gets easier as you play, largely due to arbitrary parts limitations early in the game. It seems to me that good game design would have the game become more, not less challenging as you progress. Better and better parts doesn't help. 

This is why Life Support matters most, IMO, and LS with death, frankly. Improving LS recovery rates, etc, is an actual tech issue still being worked on now, so earl game attempts at crewed flight far afield will require more planning with early LS.

[Pthigrivi]

So I have a rather simple solution: just give monuments for each world a player has landed on and safely returned from. This could be done right at KSC. Before a player has made orbit the flagpole could be rather modest. After a successful recovery from orbit it would grow bigger and a message would appear from Gene Kerman saying congratulations. (Just so you didn't miss it.) After a Mun mission a pedestal would apear next to the flagpole with a model of the Mun on it and a lifesize golden Kerbal standing on that, with a plaque listing the date and allowing the player to change it's gender and make an inscription. Each new body visited would produce a similar monument, and after every planet and moon was visited a giant golden kerbal would appear in the center holding the flagpole. Visiting each body seems like a reasonable yet ambitious metric for "winning the game" and this way you could take your crew out to take screenshots in front of it.

 

[tater]

I'd honestly not care at all about a monument, but YMMV.

Depending on the tech, it would be interesting if it was possible to make a kind of system for intelligently tweaking parts. What I mean by this is not just making a 1.25m engine with the thrust of a 2.5m engine, I mean to stay with engines, something like a balance of trade offs in part design... gimbal range increases, but the mass increases as well (is there a thrust/Isp implication due to changes in combustion chamber design, or engine bell to allow more gimbal? Then add that, too). Thrust increases, Isp decreases, and vice versa. If failures were a thing, more complexity might also decrease reliability, and cost might be proportional to reliability (design to match whatever the base cost of current engines is for 100% reliability or something). Pods might have cost/strength/heat resistance/battery/mono/LS/crew capacity in the mix, you can design your own pod (external art stays the same, internal seats can be a range, say 1-4 for the mk1-2, pick 4, and something has to give).

The tech tree could then be a constraint on this design process some how (requiring tests of related tech to unlock the ability to change a certain aspect of a given tech.

Not expecting anything like this, just throwing out crazy ideas.

[Kerbart]

There's definitely an overhaul needed. Here's my thoughts:

Science and Reputation are the two "currencies" that generate income. Every month you get a budget from  the Kerbal government, based on your current Rep and Science. Rep is the actual base for income; science acts as some kind of multiplier. Rep decreases rapidly over time, so timewarping to generate money won't work. Science doesn't decrease but the incentive to get it higher is that it significantly accelerates your income needed for long distance exploration

Science is generated by experiments like it is now. However, the amount of science you can get from a planet or moon is capped, forcing your program ever more outward.

Contracts generate Research and Reputation. Research points are the currency of what is currently "science"; you use it to access slots in the tech tree. Rep is.. well... rep. Research contracts can provide interesting shortcuts in the tech tree (see below).

Tech tree is a bit more involved. You'll need research points just like science right now. Research cost for top tiers goes up significantly, requiring a good amount of science to get to a certain level. However, once you have enough science (it's only a multiplier), unlocking an entire column in the tree should be relative straight forward. In addition, unlocking technology isn't merely a matter of unlocking the node in the tree. Instead, you'll unlock research contracts that might (over time) appear in mission control. Contracts will unlock a node when fullfilled, or maybe just a part. A research contract could be to test, say, a certain kind of wheel in the east crater of the mun. It shouldn't be too hard to create a matrix that indicates what biomes are suitable for what parts, so that you don't have to test a parachute on the surface of Minmus.

Obviously the techtree

 

Benefits:

• No more caveman challenges. They're fun of course, but if the entire tree can be unlocked in two or three missions, something is obviously wrong. I think that this system could prevent that. Unlocking the tech tree should be the result of consistent gameplay and research, not a matter of doing five crazy launches that collect everything at once.
• Discouraging science grinding. First of all, your science maxes out pretty quickly per planet. Second of all, the multiplier effect makes it really attractive to collect as much science as possible, especially since the results are compounding
• Part testing is no longer just fun, it's necessary, making the contracts a feeling of usefullness instead of "how silly is this"

Additional Research

What would be really cool is when research unlocks data in the game (especially when coupled with randomized parameters). Want patched conics within a planet system? You'll have to scan the gravity with a probe first. Maybe the same for atmospheric properties. They could even be part of the tech tree ("planetary research" with nodes for each planet)

 

[Pthigrivi]

5 hours ago, tater said:

I'd honestly not care at all about a monument, but YMMV.

Oh you know you want that statue haha

My real point is that what the final end-condition reward actually is matters less than what you have to do to get it, or whether you're having fun getting there. Let's be honest, you could grind away for months to get a warp drive and you're going to use it once and stop playing. The rewards could be a series of fab looking habitation modules or arm patches or special decals. In Sim City its the space shuttle and in Skyrim it was getting to call a dragon to fight for you. Their functionality really didn't even matter. What mattered was all the fun you had getting there. What's good about making the ultimate goal visiting and returning from each body in the game is that its a clear, achievable goal that fits the ultimate idea of the game: to build rockets and go places. Its also hard! I mean I've been playing this game for years and I've yet to do a crewed Eeloo mission. The monuments are silly, and intentionally so, because they are merely a symbol. It's what they symbolize that matters. Its there so you can feel proud of what you've done, and maybe show your friends.

 

Edited December 11, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[tater]

I dunno, I expect that you are probably right, but personally, I want better stuff, or at least stuff to do things I want to do. I never totally fill out the tech tree anyway, as I don't bother with a few nodes that are exclusively plane junk.

[SomeGuy123]

You know, when you watch a movie, you have a beginning, introducing the protagonists.  You have a middle - the protagonists have a problem that prevents them from achieving their goals.  You have an end - the protagonists find a solution that just barely works by the slimmest of margins (to create drama in the story).  Roll credits.  Wasn't that movie a nice use of time?

You buy a copy of KSP.  You are introduced to the parts.  You have a problem - balancing science, funds, and reputation, complete the tech tree and visit all the planets.  You have an end - through a series of spacecraft that generally barely work at all, you complete the whole tree.  You go on the forum or youtube to brag - you win!

Realistically this is going to take dozens of hours to do even once.  Hundreds for most people.  More than worth the $25 or so the game costs.  Scott Manley can demo ways to insta-win, but it requires immense skill, like speed running Portal in an hour.  

[tater]

I've gotten great value from KSP, but the career is really the weakest part of the game. Not the tech tree, not gathering science, all of that stuff together. I'm not saying that it's easy to work out how to do it right, either, it's not.

 

 

[Pthigrivi]

^Yeah, which seems to me like the problem the OP is having (i.e. running out of rewards too early) is not the problem you or I are having. Its the getting there that's feeling a little dry. There are many ways of playing this game, and I threw out the silly monuments idea for all of those people who are really rewards driven, even if I am not one of them. I have my issues, but I don't think they require a total re-write of the game. It's really just a few incomplete game mechanics:

1) Experiments are too clicky, and don't require anything special of the player besides clicks. 

2) The building tiers are a little steep, and could use some extra functions (mission planning especially).

3) Experience feels incomplete and opaque. High tier kerbals need some new abilities and the process of leveling them could be clearer. 

4) The planets themselves feel a bit flat. Biomes aught to have varying multipliers and surface features could add special rewards waranting rovers and precision landings.

 

With those things addressed all of a sudden its the experience of playing the game that improves and fussing over tech-tree progression feels much less important, at least to me. In the end its about how a player is spending his or her time while playing, not necessarily how cool or shiny or perfectly placed the rewards are.

Edited December 11, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[tater]

32 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

^Yeah, which seems to me like the problem the OP is having (i.e. running out of rewards too early) is not the problem you or I are having. Its the getting there that's feeling a little dry. There are many ways of playing this game, and I threw out the silly monuments idea for all of those people who are really rewards driven, even if I am not one of them. I have my issues, but I don't think they require a total re-write of the game. It's really just a few incomplete game mechanics:

1) Experiments are too clicky, and don't require anything special of the player besides clicks.

So true. Science needs to actually be useful, not a point collection, but this requires gutting the extant career. Like camera and radar instruments required to map surfaces, and your map-view zoom level is dependent upon the resolution available for that region. If you try to show up and land without mapping first, you functionally have no map view to work from at all, the world is a colored ball.

32 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

2) The building tiers are a little steep, and could use some extra functions (mission planning especially).

I don't mind the cost, really, it's the only thing that stretches the early game out a few days, lol. The building are poorly labeled. Mission Control is not a real mission control, it's a contract office. Mission control is the tracking station, really, monitoring missions in flight.

32 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

3) Experience feels incomplete and opaque. High tier kerbals need some new abilities and the process of leveling them could be clearer. 

Yeah, I agree. And the idea that being in another SOI magically ranks them is silly. It should be based upon training and actually doing stuff. Use an engineer for an engineering task, and he gets some points, for example. Training could be a check box in the astronaut complex for each astronaut---clicking it trains them a point every X days, but costs Y funds per day.

32 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

4) The planets themselves feel a bit flat. Biomes aught to have varying multipliers and surface features could add special rewards waranting rovers and precision landings.

Yeah, this is true as well. Something to do once you arrive. KIS/KAS should be stock, honestly, but that still leaves pilots and scientists lacking. Non-clicky, useful science would be cool, but I have no idea what that might look like.

32 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

 

With those things addressed all of a sudden its the experience of playing the game that improves and fussing over tech-tree progression feels much less important, at least to me. In the end its about how a player is spending his or her time while playing, not necessarily how cool or shiny or perfectly placed the rewards are.

 

[kotomikun]

2 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Experiments are too clicky, and don't require anything special of the player besides clicks.

This is probably the biggest issue; you design and build a giant rocket, maneuver it through space through realistically counterintuitive orbital mechanics, reach a new world for the first time, land safely, and your reward is... you have to right-click on several parts of your ship, and you get some potentially witty blurbs that don't really mean anything. (And there isn't nearly enough variety, even with the crowdsourced science descriptions mod you see a lot of repeat blurbs.) Kind of underwhelming, but you have to do it to unlock parts, so the grinding goes on. The only meaningful things you can do on a planet are planting flags and digging up ore. (And scanning for ore, I guess, but that doesn't require landing.)

I'm not sure how to fix this, but it would help if you could actually use the data your experiments collect for something. Maybe you need to take temperature readings from Moho before sending astronauts, so you can research new spacesuits to withstand the high temperatures. Gravity and barometric data could give you more accurate d/v in a built-in KER-like tool; the "spectro-variometer" could detect oddball things like Laythe's jet-friendly atomsphere. The Science-JR is just a generic box of science, so maybe it could be used to hold other experiment parts, KIS-style, and remove the need to click on them one at a time. Anything to make the science parts something more than interchangeable science points generators would be nice.

[Pthigrivi]

Yeah thats actually really similar to some thoughts I had earlier on experiments. Making experiments useful outside the tech tree so they still have a function after its complete would be huge. I also turned the Science Jr into a sample analyzer, so you have to think carefully about how you collect and route samples to maximize their value. I guess we'll see how things work out with transmissions, but I'd still be happy with making experiments 100% transmittable in principle, and letting the dishes control the actual value. 

Spoiler

Crew Reports: Gathered automatically by crewed capsules and stored for each new biome the craft enters, serving as a running log of the mission.

EVA Reports: Gathered automatically on EVA for each new biome a kerbal enters and stored when they return to the vessel. Scientists gather more valuable EVA reports, and their value can be further upgraded as they gain in levels. Kerbals cannot discern between biomes above the surface.

Surface Samples: Can be gathered on EVA by any crew member, though higher level scientists gather more valuable samples. Samples cannot be transmitted unless analyzed in a mobile processing lab, but give much more science than other sources. When a sample is analyzed either in a science lab or on Kerbin it will indicate precise ore concentrations and will become available for loading into Materials Bays (more below).

Goo Canister: First experiment available in the tech tree and acts as an introduction to gathering science. When it enters a biome with uncollected science it flashes blue for a few moments and then auto-exposes. Its one-time use unless there's a scientist on board in which case it auto-collects, stores, and then auto-resets. It draws no power. By default its set to activated, but it can be deactivated and reactivated via right click if a player wishes to hold out for more a more valuable exposure. It cannot distinguish between biomes above the surface.

Thermometer: Next experiment on the tech tree, flashes blue and then takes a reading and stores automatically when entering a new biome. Its activated by default, but draws 1.5 e/m while activated and can be deactivated to save power. It cannot distinguish between biomes above the lower atmosphere or high above a body. Vessels with a Thermometer on board show overheat bars in flight, though even without the parts will still glow red.

Barometer: Arrives shortly after in the Tech Tree and flashes blue when new science is available. The barometer is activated by default when in the atmosphere, but can be deactivated to save power via right-click. Unlike the thermometer, the barometer logs science based on the vertical swath of atmosphere it passes through while continuously running. This means it gathers a lot of data on ascent and descent, but sitting on the ground it gathers next to nothing. Later in the game, a body for which the player has completed a barometric scan will show trajectory, landing site, and aerobreak predictions factoring drag.

Materials Bay: Materials Bays should be able to be loaded with materials, i.e. samples, and replace the current Mobile Lab magic science generator. When a surface or atmospheric sample is recovered, it goes into a bank of available samples. Upon launch, the materials Bay can be loaded with up to 5 of these samples, and when activated (0.5 e/s) it generates and stores science based on the value of the sample multiplied by the value of the exposure location. This means that a sample from the launchpad exposed at KSC will be worth very little, but a sample from Ike exposed on Duna will be worth a great deal. Samples generate science for 30 days and then become spent. Materials Bays can be reloaded by an adequately staffed Mobile Processing Lab, but only with samples banked at the time of the Lab's launch and with samples processed by that lab. This means bringing a lab to another body will be useful for processing and gathering science from that body over time, but samples cant be magically transported across the Kerbol System.

Atmospheric analyzer: Essentially works as an atmospheric sample collector. Its deactivated by default, and once activated (1 e/s) the vessel must maintain roughly the same speed and altitude for 10 seconds to collect a viable sample. Like surface samples they may not be transmitted unless analyzed by a mobile processing lab. If atmospheric xenon collection were enabled perhaps precise concentration levels could be determined from these samples.

Surface Sample Collector: This part would replace the surface scanner, and aught really to be a small arm and drill that drops down when activated. It aught to come very late in the tech tree, but in principle enable collection of surface samples by probes. Like other surface samples these would be available for loading into Materials bays and would show ore concentrations when analyzed.

Survey Scanner: Works much as it does now, once placed in a polar orbit it generates a rough ore concentration map which can then be transmitted for additional science.

Gravoli detector: This part works 2 ways, its activated by default and draws .5 e/s, and like the thermometer automatically collects and stores data for each new biome it passes into. If however it is placed in a polar orbit it gathers all biome information for that body at that altitude, and if it is attached to a vessel that also has a survey scanner it can generate an overlay map of all biomes on that body. If a mission planner were to be added including flight time and delta-v estimates, completing a gravoli scan might unlock that body in the planner, encouraging players to send a probe first if they wanted to optimize their kerbaled mission.

Seismometer: This part is redesigned as an impactor experiment. Once on the surface and activated (2 e/s) a blue circle appears on the body in map mode indicating the scanning radius. The higher the level scientist on board the larger the radius. If while activated another object is slammed into the surface a red impact radius is shown, whose radius is determined by the mass and speed upon impact (I can foresee some really fun asteroid antics here ) The Seismometer generates science based on the area of overlap between the scanning and impact radii, meaning more precise collisions and bigger booms make for more science. Additionally, ore concentrations can be seen with detail within this scanned area making for better landing site decisions for mining operations.

Transmitting data: As almost all data is automatically logged and stored, all that would be left would be transmission. For simplicity's sake, I feel like the data should be attached to the vessel, not a part, and no limit should be placed on how much can be stored. Clicking any pod or antenna aught to bring up a single data log indicating all stored data in one screen, the value of each piece of data, and giving the option to transmit. I'll be interested to see the changes Roverdude has made, but in my mind the most straight forward solution is that all data except samples should be 100% transmittable. You should just need an adequately large dish to complete it. If surface samples could not be transmitted and were worth a great deal (as they should be) then returning these samples would make 2 way trips worthwhile without the over-complication and grind of multiple transmissions. The gamesmanship and trade-offs between parts aught to lie in the act of experimenting. Making simple data more or less transmittable doesn't really seem to make sense or add anything to the gameplay.

 

Edited December 12, 2015 by Pthigrivi

[mcirish3]

4 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah thats actually really similar to some thoughts I had earlier on experiments. Making experiments useful outside the tech tree so they still have a function after its complete would be huge. I also turned the Science Jr into a sample analyzer, so you have to think carefully about how you collect and route samples to maximize their value. I guess we'll see how things work out with transmissions, but I'd still be happy with making experiments 100% transmittable in principle, and letting the dishes control the actual value. 

 

You sir, have my respect.  To me it would would seem what you laid out above is a road map for a MOD.  If you can't make the mod yourself please share this in Addon discussions and see if you can get this idea to a loving home.  I am not sure Squad is in any position to make the changes you propose.  But man I think a MOD maker could go to town with the details you have given above.  Oh and you realy should not hide this idea under a spoiler. soo...

 

4 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Crew Reports: Gathered automatically by crewed capsules and stored for each new biome the craft enters, serving as a running log of the mission.

EVA Reports: Gathered automatically on EVA for each new biome a kerbal enters and stored when they return to the vessel. Scientists gather more valuable EVA reports, and their value can be further upgraded as they gain in levels. Kerbals cannot discern between biomes above the surface.

Surface Samples: Can be gathered on EVA by any crew member, though higher level scientists gather more valuable samples. Samples cannot be transmitted unless analyzed in a mobile processing lab, but give much more science than other sources. When a sample is analyzed either in a science lab or on Kerbin it will indicate precise ore concentrations and will become available for loading into Materials Bays (more below).

Goo Canister: First experiment available in the tech tree and acts as an introduction to gathering science. When it enters a biome with uncollected science it flashes blue for a few moments and then auto-exposes. Its one-time use unless there's a scientist on board in which case it auto-collects, stores, and then auto-resets. It draws no power. By default its set to activated, but it can be deactivated and reactivated via right click if a player wishes to hold out for more a more valuable exposure. It cannot distinguish between biomes above the surface.

Thermometer: Next experiment on the tech tree, flashes blue and then takes a reading and stores automatically when entering a new biome. Its activated by default, but draws 1.5 e/m while activated and can be deactivated to save power. It cannot distinguish between biomes above the lower atmosphere or high above a body. Vessels with a Thermometer on board show overheat bars in flight, though even without the parts will still glow red.

Barometer: Arrives shortly after in the Tech Tree and flashes blue when new science is available. The barometer is activated by default when in the atmosphere, but can be deactivated to save power via right-click. Unlike the thermometer, the barometer logs science based on the vertical swath of atmosphere it passes through while continuously running. This means it gathers a lot of data on ascent and descent, but sitting on the ground it gathers next to nothing. Later in the game, a body for which the player has completed a barometric scan will show trajectory, landing site, and aerobreak predictions factoring drag.

Materials Bay: Materials Bays should be able to be loaded with materials, i.e. samples, and replace the current Mobile Lab magic science generator. When a surface or atmospheric sample is recovered, it goes into a bank of available samples. Upon launch, the materials Bay can be loaded with up to 5 of these samples, and when activated (0.5 e/s) it generates and stores science based on the value of the sample multiplied by the value of the exposure location. This means that a sample from the launchpad exposed at KSC will be worth very little, but a sample from Ike exposed on Duna will be worth a great deal. Samples generate science for 30 days and then become spent. Materials Bays can be reloaded by an adequately staffed Mobile Processing Lab, but only with samples banked at the time of the Lab's launch and with samples processed by that lab. This means bringing a lab to another body will be useful for processing and gathering science from that body over time, but samples cant be magically transported across the Kerbol System.

Atmospheric analyzer: Essentially works as an atmospheric sample collector. Its deactivated by default, and once activated (1 e/s) the vessel must maintain roughly the same speed and altitude for 10 seconds to collect a viable sample. Like surface samples they may not be transmitted unless analyzed by a mobile processing lab. If atmospheric xenon collection were enabled perhaps precise concentration levels could be determined from these samples.

Surface Sample Collector: This part would replace the surface scanner, and aught really to be a small arm and drill that drops down when activated. It aught to come very late in the tech tree, but in principle enable collection of surface samples by probes. Like other surface samples these would be available for loading into Materials bays and would show ore concentrations when analyzed.

Survey Scanner: Works much as it does now, once placed in a polar orbit it generates a rough ore concentration map which can then be transmitted for additional science.

Gravoli detector: This part works 2 ways, its activated by default and draws .5 e/s, and like the thermometer automatically collects and stores data for each new biome it passes into. If however it is placed in a polar orbit it gathers all biome information for that body at that altitude, and if it is attached to a vessel that also has a survey scanner it can generate an overlay map of all biomes on that body. If a mission planner were to be added including flight time and delta-v estimates, completing a gravoli scan might unlock that body in the planner, encouraging players to send a probe first if they wanted to optimize their kerbaled mission.

Seismometer: This part is redesigned as an impactor experiment. Once on the surface and activated (2 e/s) a blue circle appears on the body in map mode indicating the scanning radius. The higher the level scientist on board the larger the radius. If while activated another object is slammed into the surface a red impact radius is shown, whose radius is determined by the mass and speed upon impact (I can foresee some really fun asteroid antics here ) The Seismometer generates science based on the area of overlap between the scanning and impact radii, meaning more precise collisions and bigger booms make for more science. Additionally, ore concentrations can be seen with detail within this scanned area making for better landing site decisions for mining operations.

Transmitting data: As almost all data is automatically logged and stored, all that would be left would be transmission. For simplicity's sake, I feel like the data should be attached to the vessel, not a part, and no limit should be placed on how much can be stored. Clicking any pod or antenna aught to bring up a single data log indicating all stored data in one screen, the value of each piece of data, and giving the option to transmit. I'll be interested to see the changes Roverdude has made, but in my mind the most straight forward solution is that all data except samples should be 100% transmittable. You should just need an adequately large dish to complete it. If surface samples could not be transmitted and were worth a great deal (as they should be) then returning these samples would make 2 way trips worthwhile without the over-complication and grind of multiple transmissions. The gamesmanship and trade-offs between parts aught to lie in the act of experimenting. Making simple data more or less transmittable doesn't really seem to make sense or add anything to the gameplay.

 

Edited December 12, 2015 by mcirish3

[Pthigrivi]

That's super nice of you to say, but I confess I'm in no position to mod myself. I actually really love the game as is, and I'm sure Squad has both a much broader overview of the game and a keener understanding of the programming hurdles ahead. These are just my armchair thoughts on the subject. 

[mcirish3]

 

51 minutes ago, Pthigrivi said:

That's super nice of you to say, but I confess I'm in no position to mod myself. I actually really love the game as is, and I'm sure Squad has both a much broader overview of the game and a keener understanding of the programming hurdles ahead. These are just my armchair thoughts on the subject. 

I think Squad has another plan to be sure.  But that does not mean what you described is not worth anything.  I really would love to see your Idea's implemented as a mod.  I see people make mod suggestions all in time in the Addon discussion sub forum.  I really think you should post this as an Add-on Idea in that Sub Forum.  The worst that can happen is no one takes you up on your idea.   But hey you never know if you don't try.   And there is always the possibility that some day your idea will be something we could play.

[Perry Apsis]

This is what I was worried about when they first introduced the tech tree and career mode. KSP is now two games. There's a really great sandbox and a slapped-together reward system that obscures what's so good about the game. The problem here is not that the reward system isn't continuing to provide motivation. It's that it compromised the real motivation to play the game, which is to get to be inventive and do something hard, maybe elegant, maybe funny, maybe even something beautiful. If you revert to career, you're constantly reminded that you're not playing the "real" game. That is demotivating.

We should think of career mode (and Squad should have presented career mode) as a tutorial, a gentle way to familiarize yourself with the parts and processes. Then, when you finally finish career mode, you're ready to embark on your adventure. The system is yours. The real game has begun.

[tater]

16 minutes ago, Perry Apsis said:

This is what I was worried about when they first introduced the tech tree and career mode. KSP is now two games. There's a really great sandbox and a slapped-together reward system that obscures what's so good about the game. The problem here is not that the reward system isn't continuing to provide motivation. It's that it compromised the real motivation to play the game, which is to get to be inventive and do something hard, maybe elegant, maybe funny, maybe even something beautiful. If you revert to career, you're constantly reminded that you're not playing the "real" game. That is demotivating.

We should think of career mode (and Squad should have presented career mode) as a tutorial, a gentle way to familiarize yourself with the parts and processes. Then, when you finally finish career mode, you're ready to embark on your adventure. The system is yours. The real game has begun.

I agree with some of your observations regarding career, but I disagree entirely on what career should be. Career is a context, a storyline that the player creates. Ideally, it should present the player with novel problems to solve (how to do X, with only Y available). Sandbox has the same problems to cover every time. Make an Eve return lander, visit Jool and all moons in 1 trip, whatever. Honestly, career needs a FOIL for the player. Career would be vastly more interesting/engaging as a Space Race. Time and Life support would need to be a thing (it's a race, after all), and the tech tree would need to be redone entirely. Ideally failures and some limits to extant part would be added---how deeply different engines might throttle, how many times or if engines can restart, etc. The goal would be to create choices for the player vs his foil. You want to push the speed, but waiting for better parts results in a better chance of success.