Poll: What Would Be Your Preferred Tech Tree Start: EVA, Probe, Car, Boat, Plane, or Rocket?

[inigma]

Starting a new career game requires that you decide the best means to grind your first science. And grinding early science, I've concluded, can only be done via six different methods:

EVA, probe, car, boat, plane, rocket

When I say probe, I mean just a probe with a single science instrument. Nothing else.

If you could choose (and you can via tech tree editing) which tech you'd like to start with to grind your first tech node, which would it be? (assume you could grind the first node within 1-3 launches, or rather 2-3 science experiments)

Bare minimum tech for EVA

Bare minimum tech for a probe (with only a science instrument and nothing else)

Bare minimum tech for an unmanned car

Bare minimum tech for a car

Bare minimum tech for an unmanned boat

Bare minimum tech for a boat

Bare minimum tech for an unmanned plane

Bare minimum tech for a plane

Bare minimum tech for an unmanned rocket

 

 

I should mention that I think the most logical starting vehicle is that of a simple car. Reasoning? You just arrived at KSC, it's old, used buildings, probably recently sold to you or made available to you for you use. Your first mission is to scout out your digs. This scouting then has you acquire the knowledge you need to know what it is you can and can not build at the facilities available to you. You apply this knowledge to your next choices... which are tech unlocks.

You may decide then to build your first glider, powered by nothing else by a simple sepratron booster rocket. And then this leading to the worlds first powered airplane.

Or decide to build a model rocket program based on the Sepratron static booster, that increasingly turns into Sounding Rockets and later solid rockets to space.

Or you may decide to go for building a better car, and gather more science or explore the larger areas around you and then use that knowledge to get a major boost ahead.

Or you may decide to construct a boat and checking out additional science to be gleaned from the area in prepartion for a future space program and how it would affect the local environment.

Or you may decide to go all out and start clobbering together a liquid rocket based on a theory and see if you can get it to launch upwards.

 

Anyways, the starting car tech tree approach is my theory and probably one I will use in my own game (I've never played career mode and hope to do so soon using my GAP contract pack (see link in sig)). What's your take on the stating situation? What do you think should be the best first vehicle to start your science grind?

Edited February 10, 2016 by inigma

[Vim Razz]

It would depend heavily on how much actual "grinding" might be required to hit this first node you speak of, tbh. (And additional nodes after that.)

[inigma]

Just now, Vim Razz said:

It would depend heavily on how much actual "grinding" might be required to hit this first node you speak of, tbh. (And additional nodes after that.)

Perhaps one or two launches only.

[worir4]

Lol, car.

I think it should start with planes but at the same time sounding rockets. Then un manned orbital probes and then manned pods. 

[Cornholio]

Probe, because this is Kerbal Space Program, not Kerbal Aqua Adventure.

[Vim Razz]

34 minutes ago, inigma said:

Perhaps one or two launches only.

A boat might be fun, then.  There aren't enough practical reasons to use boats in KSP.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Vim Razz

[regex]

Crewed rocket because this is Kerbal Space Program, not Probe Space Program.

[Superfluous J]

I pretty much agree with regex, but think the very first rocket should be unmanned. That way the player has an immediate goal of "earning" the right to launch a person next time.

And 2 launches is not a grind

[Nightside]

Start with a rock only, then grind it into a wheel. A few more techs and you're in space.

But seriously, it depends on what you are doing in KSP. If you like rocket science, then developing ballistic rockets in a historicalish way will be fun. Think about trying to hit particular targets with an uncontrolled sounding rocket.

If you just like building stuff then what ever floats your boat...floats your boat.

[HebaruSan]

I find the poll options too limiting.

[inigma]

Just now, HebaruSan said:

I find the poll options too limiting.

I'll add Other.

[inigma]

I should mention that I think the most logical starting vehicle is that of a simple car. Reasoning? You just arrived at KSC, it's old, used buildings, probably recently sold to you or made available to you for you use. Your first mission is to scout out your digs. This scouting (either by EVA or by car using a simple single science instrument) then has you acquire the knowledge you need to know what it is you can and can not build at the facilities available to you. You apply this knowledge to your next choices... which are tech unlocks.

You may decide then to build your first glider, powered by nothing else by a simple sepratron booster rocket. And then this leading to the worlds first powered airplane.

Or decide to build a model rocket program based on the Sepratron static booster, that increasingly turns into Sounding Rockets and later solid rockets to space.

Or you may decide to go for building a better car, and gather more science or explore the larger areas around you and then use that knowledge to get a major boost ahead.

Or you may decide to construct a boat and checking out additional science to be gleaned from the area in prepartion for a future space program and how it would affect the local environment.

Or you may decide to go all out and start clobbering together a liquid rocket based on a theory and see if you can get it to launch upwards.

 

Anyways, the starting car tech tree approach is my theory. What's your take on the stating situation? What do you think should be the best first vehicle to start your science grind?

 

Inviting @Probus and @Yemo to the conversation. If you guys know of other Tech Tree modders, feel free to invite them too!

I wanted to bring this up in the CCF thread (see link in my sig below) but figured a general discussion on this would generate more public feedback.

Edited February 10, 2016 by inigma

[Evanitis]

@inigma What you describe would be a totally awesome start of a career-game. Where tech unlocks adapt to my choices in what I'm building and doing. It would be nice if new parts just got discovered because I keep using similar ones.. Though it's hard to picture such, being used to the static stock tree.

Anyways... I like planes. I'd love start by trying to reach higher and higer Machs until someone finds himself on orbit. I heard it was a plausible looking way to do so before everyone got a piece of Wherner's V2.

[Wjolcz]

I don't think simply redoing the first node would do. In my opinion it needs to split early on into at least 4 branches: Jet propulsion, Rocket propulsion, Solid rocket motors and Pods/Probe bodies.

And I know that Devs kind of tried to achieve it, but placement of some parts and nodes is still ridiculous because "balancing".

[inigma]

3 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

I don't think simply redoing the first node would do. In my opinion it needs to split early on into at least 4 branches: Jet propulsion, Rocket propulsion, Solid rocket motors and Pods/Probe bodies.

And I know that Devs kind of tried to achieve it, but placement of some parts and nodes is still ridiculous because "balancing".

ETT has a good start on this.

But to get started properly, I do think a serious discussion on what most feel should be the starting vehicle available to a player needs to be hashed out. It sets up everything. 

[HebaruSan]

For which target audience? A more "realistic" start would satisfy many experienced players, but I think the game would fundamentally fail if a new player couldn't sit down and immediately start building some kind of rocket that explodes hilariously on the first few tries. That's the important gameplay hook, not re-enacting some imagined research progression from the 1940s.

[inigma]

2 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

For which target audience? A more "realistic" start would satisfy many experienced players, but I think the game would fundamentally fail if a new player couldn't sit down and immediately start building some kind of rocket that explodes hilariously on the first few tries. That's the important gameplay hook, not re-enacting some imagined research progression from the 1940s.

Maybe offer different Sandbox modes?

[panzer1b]

I say capital ships, since with the parts to make capital ships you can make almost anything else (tanks, starfighters, bunkers, APCs, ect).  that and i never understood why the armor plating was so high up in teh tech tree?  Seriously 2x2 structural panels need to be early on, unarmored vessels are worthless on kerbin where every day creates new threats that want to charge at you and empty a salvo of missiles into you!

 

(yes, im crazy)

[Probus]

I really like the idea of planes and rockets first (it is a Kerbal Space Center after all).  Rockets being of the sounding type, Liquid or Solid, then let the player choose which way to go from there.  That being said, even if you start with planes, eventually you will want to have space planes which brings you back around to rocket engines.  Exploring Kerbin with aircraft can be fun but the jet is a bit OP for the start node, or the 2nd node really.  It is way easier to make a primitive rocket than a jet engine.

The hard part is keeping everything in balance to make it fun yet challenging.

I've put the command chair in the starting node of my tree so that with one mod ( @seanmcdougall's Take Command), @regex's wishes come true.  With a second mod, there's @RoverDude's Sounding Rockets galore.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Probus

[regex]

1 hour ago, HebaruSan said:

not re-enacting some imagined research progression from the 1940s.

That's what we have RP-0 for, and the career experience therein is far superior to stock/vanilla.

Edited February 10, 2016 by regex

[Bill Phil]

2 hours ago, regex said:

Crewed rocket because this is Kerbal Space Program, not Probe Space Program.

Go home regex, you've drunk too much rocket fuel.

I just never expected you to say that.

On topic:

I would prefer a tech that makes sense within the world of KSP.

[sumghai]

Given that the theme of the game is Kerbal Space Program, I'd start with unmanned rockets - my understanding is that aircraft parts in the tech tree progression are for spaceplanes rather than ordinary aircraft.

To elaborate my desired tech/contract progression:

- The earliest missions would be focused on very low altitude unmanned suborbital flights, using very primitive probe cores. Contract could be in the vein of "Use a rocket to deploy a highly-volatile package at a specific location on Kerbin" or "An entrepreneur wants to start a rocket mail service, build a rocket to demonstrate/examine the feasibility of his idea."

- These could then be followed by more higher altitude suborbital or low orbital flights, with the more typical probe cores.

- From there, the progression could split into two independent but not mutually exclusive branches; manned rocketry or rocket-assisted spaceplanes.

[Raptor9]

While I would personally prefer planes to start out with, like doing rocket-powered plane tests similar to the real-life X-planes (ie X-1, X-15, etc), I believe starting out with basic rockets would be better for gameplay.  It requires the least amount of KSP "design" knowledge.  Select capsule, put parachute on top, a fuel tank and rocket engine on the bottom, add some fins for flavor (or stability ) and push launch.  With airplanes you need to balance all the different force vectors, worry about control surface placement and assignment, enough lift vs weight, intakes, landing gear, etc etc.  I can see planes frustrating new players* more easily than rockets.

*Assuming the new player doesn't have any prior knowledge in aerospace mechanics.

[regex]

41 minutes ago, Bill Phil said:

Go home regex, you've drunk too much rocket fuel.

I just never expected you to say that.

Why?  I've always defended the stock paradigm of overly enthusiastic (but not suicidal or "Orky") Kerbals.  The only time I want to deal with something like sounding rockets is when they are detailed and require actual design considerations, which rules out pretty much anything in stock/vanilla.

[pandaman]

I makes sense to me to already have the tech to build a car of some sort at game start up, perhaps even a stock 'Ford Kerman Model K' in the SPH as a starting point, and basic tech for sounding rockets, to prove the concept that an explosion in a tube can actually make stuff go UP rather than just BANG to introduce the basics. Then open up options for manned/unmanned rockets and planes to suit player preference