Mobile Processing Lab is OP

[basic.syntax]

I've bookmarked the original MPL thread for when these questions come up, some great Q&A in there.

On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2015 at 5:53 AM, RoverDude said:

You can in fact generate infinite science, provided you're willing to invest in the infrastructure and time. This is by design, because Science was the last currency that had a limited supply.

 

I started a customized moderate-to-hard mode during the 1.0 cycle, that I'm still playing with, giving myself a huge nerf to science gains and starting with a negative reputation (so I'd have to "earn rep") and find that even with no real nerf to funds, science gets ahead of what I can afford to build...and I don't timewarp for science. I do a combination of biome hopping until tired of that, and MPL stuffing, have three running. Scientists have to be acquired somehow, perhaps if I had more, I'd run more MPL's, that's a nice limiting factor. I do every rescue contract I can, b/c hiring them gets expensive (I like this design, to encourage rescues. Gene is sad for every Kerbal you don't bring home.)  If you do too much time warping for science for its own sake, I don't think you can be making much money... there's KSC upgrades, research parts unlock costs (if you enable this, it makes you think about which parts you will actually use, because of the additional cost) and then wanting try out the expensive parts you've unlocked, on heavier and heavier missions.

I think the game balance is striving for a relationship between the currencies, such that you can have more of one or the other, but not have it all at the same time. I don't think it's quite there yet in terms of the default difficulties, but getting closer. This last year was spent just upgrading the game engine, Squad has had little time to revisit overall game balance. I'll pin my hopes for some tweaks in v1.2 - 1.3 time frame. Until then, the mod community carries the ball with their ideas.

Today I completed one of the more "complicated" asteroid captures near Kerbin (a contract to establish a Minimus base... in a class C) I've done so far. It was a retrograde launch at 315 degrees Way the heck up there, with the Mun doing its usual job of interfering. I overbuilt as usual, and will barely profit on the contract     

[cantab]

"5. You can in fact generate infinite science, provided you're willing to invest in the infrastructure and time. This is by design, because Science was the last currency that had a limited supply"

I didn't think that was the case. Even without the MPL there were three other sources of limitless science: strategies, contracts, and asteroids.

[Xavven]

I like the idea of having limitless science via the MPL. I like the idea of the MPL being an alternative advancement path to biome hopping. This isn't a black & white argument, though -- the balance isn't quite there yet. The MPL can still fill those needs without the multiplier being 25:1

 

12 hours ago, RocketBlam said:

I'm not saying that what it does is OP, I'm saying the scale it does it is OP. 25:1 science gain? How about 5:1?

 

Quoted for truth!

[Zhetaan]

If you'll look through the changelogs (or ask someone who was there), Science mode was first introduced in KSP version 0.22--the same time as biomes were introduced on Kerbin and the Mun.  Minmus got biomes in 0.23, and that was it until 0.90, when they finally gave biomes to everything.  Also remember that asteroids were not added until 0.23.5, and contracts (and Career mode) were not added until 0.24.  Strategies didn't appear until 0.25.

My point is this:  at the start, science was finite, and the vast majority of it was in the Kerbin system (with the KSC microbiomes, that may still be true).  From this perspective, it makes sense that the science found in the Kerbin system be enough to unlock the entirety of the tech tree:  if that's where the science is, then what you get there has to be enough.

Now there are many places to get science, several of them are infinite, and nowhere do I see evidence of the original science values and multipliers getting a balance pass in order to account for those changes.  Therefore, I think the MPL is overpowered, but only because the biome-derived science system as a whole expanded on roughly the same scale as when Kerbin and the Mun were the only places to get serious science.  The pool of science is larger, but the tech tree--either in size or in cost--is not.

Unfortunately, the global problem isn't really adequately addressed by the global science slider.  The biome-derived science may scale, but maybe contract science, for example, was built on a different scale.  Or maybe Gilly has too high of a multiplier, or Tylo too low, because they got the multiplier early and got biomes later, thus changing the relative amount of science to be found between them.  These issues don't go away with a flick of the slider; the slider merely changes the scale of it.

[msasterisk]

I get that this thread is about the stock game, but until Squad fixes the science system, you can exit the part configs to move them around on the tech tree.

[jarmonik]

On 10.5.2016 at 1:03 PM, Codraroll said:

The MPL is not only OP, it's OPTIONAL. It can also be config'd and slidered and what-have-you-not, to tweak it into working almost the way you want it....

But the MPL comes mid- to late-game, and can be skipped entirely without any repercussions.

How exactly it can be configured ? Where are the configuration options ?

No, the MPL actually comes in early game, although, if you decide to use it to unlock the tech tree then I guess it qualifies as late-game. Why not just have a button in game options to unlock the tech tree.

Here is my science solution, bring back the science to Kerbin. 
Being able to do the science on site with MPL with 75%-100% science rewards would be the solution I prefer. So, in other words it would improve the science rewards compared to mere transmission which is (25%-100%) with a cost of science processing time and a need of scientists.

(Can't this forum create thumbnails for images ?! )


  

Edited May 11, 2016 by jarmonik

[Nich]

I have always thought that MPL should allow 100% transmission.  That way when you are on your Duna mission you can transmit the data back to kerbin for 100% and get started on your gilly mission without having to wait for the return window from Duna.

[jarmonik]

8 minutes ago, Nich said:

I have always thought that MPL should allow 100% transmission.  That way when you are on your Duna mission you can transmit the data back to kerbin for 100% and get started on your gilly mission without having to wait for the return window from Duna.

No, it gives about 1000% to 2500% science rewards which is 10x to 25x more than returning the science to Kerbin. So, the MPL provides an easy way to unlock the tech tree. Having on option to choose how the MPL operates would make it useful for more players and play-styles.  

[JoeNapalm]

 

Or...just don't use it if you don't want the benefit of using it?

 

-Jn-

[Xavven]

2 hours ago, JoeNapalm said:

 

Or...just don't use it if you don't want the benefit of using it?

 

-Jn-

No offense intended here, but "just not using" a part that is either underpowered or overpowered does not solve the game design problem of game balance. Almost all of the time, having player choice where there are balanced tradeoffs makes for a more interesting game and a better experience the players, and this is regardless of whether it's multiplayer or singleplayer.

For example, the fact that a lot of other players love the Reliant engine, but I don't really ever fit it into any of my designs, but we're both able to accomplish our mission goals with different designs, is a good thing! If something's so overpowered that there's really no other choice, all the designs start becoming the same (remember the 48-7S "Spark" engine in alpha, pre-nerf?)

The same holds true with the MPL. We do want players to be able to choose between two viable paths to unlocking the tech tree, but as it stands, the science from the MPL is a little too high, making the choice between doing a Gilly science return mission and an MPL to Minmus mission not really a choice. And you can unlock the tree so fast that it trivializes the whole tree to begin with. Might as well just play sandbox, right? In any other game it'd be like putting a lever in front of the player that says "pull to skip to the last level with full gear for the final boss fight". Hmm... or going to a concert but skipping to the last song and going home.

[Xavven]

4 hours ago, Nich said:

I have always thought that MPL should allow 100% transmission.  That way when you are on your Duna mission you can transmit the data back to kerbin for 100% and get started on your gilly mission without having to wait for the return window from Duna.

 

This was actually how the MPL functioned in early access. Since most players bring their kerbals back home, and the MPL requires kerbals to run, the only thing it gains you is not having to wait for the return window from Duna. BUT.... there's no downside to timewarping in this game, from a game mechanics perspective, so does it really gain you anything? The amount of extra fuel you have to bring to haul the very heavy MPL all the way to Duna, on the other hand, costs funds, which from a game mechanics perspective actually does matter. I think the MPL was frankly underpowered before, but now way overpowered with the 25x science. All squad has to do is find that sweet spot in the middle.

[jarmonik]

1 hour ago, Xavven said:

....so does it really gain you anything? The amount of extra fuel you have to bring to haul the very heavy MPL all the way to Duna, on the other hand, costs funds, which from a game mechanics perspective actually does matter. I think the MPL was frankly underpowered before, but now way overpowered with the 25x science. All squad has to do is find that sweet spot in the middle.

The mass of MPL is 3.5t where as Mk2 Lander-can is 2.66t, so I wouldn't call it heavy. If you look at the screen shot I posted a few post ago. The science payload requires a powered insertion to Kerbin orbit. Until it's safely on a surface of Kerbin, it does cost money and fuel and there's a lot of additional fuss with it. So, just not needing to bring back the science instruments for 100% benefits would be fine with me.

Also, there could be experiments those can be performed only on site with MPL, possibly unlocking special techs. There are plenty of ways to improve it.

Edited May 12, 2016 by jarmonik

[Xavven]

4 hours ago, jarmonik said:

 So, just not needing to bring back the science instruments for 100% benefits would be fine with me.

 

You don't need to bring back the instruments on a manned mission. Instead, EVA a kerbal, take the science results from each instrument, and store them in the command pod that will be returning. I see in your screenshot that you have multiple science jr.'s, multiple seismic accelerometers, and multiple fluid spectrometers, but that's completely unnecessary. You only need 1 of each if you bring a scientist to reset the goo and science jr.

Assuming you want to bring your kerbals back eventually, there's almost nothing to gain from an MPL "transmit for 100%" bonus like we had in KSP alpha.

[jarmonik]

8 hours ago, Xavven said:

You don't need to bring back the instruments on a manned mission. Instead, EVA a kerbal, take the science results from each instrument, and store them in the command pod that will be returning. I see in your screenshot that you have multiple science jr.'s, multiple seismic accelerometers, and multiple fluid spectrometers, but that's completely unnecessary. You only need 1 of each if you bring a scientist to reset the goo and science jr.

Assuming you want to bring your kerbals back eventually, there's almost nothing to gain from an MPL "transmit for 100%" bonus like we had in KSP alpha.

Yes, you are right. I wasn't aware of Kerbals ability to collect the data from science instruments to a command pod via EVA. That simplifies a things a lot. Such a surprises after all this time  Thanks for the info, really appreciated.  

Edited May 12, 2016 by jarmonik

[Sereneti]

15 hours ago, Xavven said:

No offense intended here, but "just not using" a part that is either underpowered or overpowered does not solve the game design problem of game balance. Almost all of the time, having player choice where there are balanced tradeoffs makes for a more interesting game and a better experience the players, and this is regardless of whether it's multiplayer or singleplayer.

For example, the fact that a lot of other players love the Reliant engine, but I don't really ever fit it into any of my designs, but we're both able to accomplish our mission goals with different designs, is a good thing! If something's so overpowered that there's really no other choice, all the designs start becoming the same (remember the 48-7S "Spark" engine in alpha, pre-nerf?)

The same holds true with the MPL. We do want players to be able to choose between two viable paths to unlocking the tech tree, but as it stands, the science from the MPL is a little too high, making the choice between doing a Gilly science return mission and an MPL to Minmus mission not really a choice. And you can unlock the tree so fast that it trivializes the whole tree to begin with. Might as well just play sandbox, right? In any other game it'd be like putting a lever in front of the player that says "pull to skip to the last level with full gear for the final boss fight". Hmm... or going to a concert but skipping to the last song and going home.

the probem is:
somethings, like the rapier-engine are at the end of the tech tree.

its like "you have to go to minnmus first, to get the tech to go to Minmus"....

 

[Zhetaan]

I was under the impression that the MPL gave a boost, but not a 100% boost, to transmission value; the best value still came from recovery, explained away by saying that KSC has the better-equipped labs and so forth.  Instead, I thought that the real value of the early access version was that it could reset Goo and Sci-Jr. canisters (Scientists didn't get that ability until much later), and that it could store multiple copies of the same experiment--so you could run a gravity scan two or three times and really grind out the science for it in one trip without needing to resort to tricks like multiple command pods to serve as glorified filing cabinets.  You still had to return, land, and recover the lab, but this was before heating was a thing, too.

Anyway, it made missions like the Jool-5 a lot more efficient.  You didn't need to bring the weight of many modules or send a flotilla of probes.  Granted, it was all still optional, both because you could still choose to go with the weight or the fleet, and because you could still get all the science you needed from the Kerbin system, but it made for a new and interesting option for play.

For myself, I don't like a lot of the things with the current science system, and for that reason, I mod the heck out of the instruments so they fit with my idea of what they should do, but there's a definite limit to what I can accomplish with that.  For example, I take a cue from a mod called Better Science and make all the recorders 100% transmittable.  I keep the basevalue:sciencecap relationship (I think there's nothing wrong with having to get a couple of seismograph or gravity readings to get full value), but once I have the readings, they're just numbers.  There's no reason why they can't be transmitted for full value.

Concordant with that, I modify the lab's return rate.  I turn the data multiplier in the lab's config down to 1, so data in = science out.  You may wonder why bother with the lab, then, but the trick is that I keep the context bonus (turned down to 10%).  My thinking is that sending a thermometer only gives me a single data point, but sending someone to watch a thermometer (and you need someone there to process the data, so I think it not too much to say that watching the instrument can be part of that) can glean additional information about local variations, spikes, sudden changes, and other minutiae that really does require someone there to watch, so the 10% extra that I get for doing that is somewhat justified.  I do get rid of the surface bonus:  I don't learn more about a temperature because I landed the lab.  That's piloting, not sciencing.

The seismic scan, gravity scan, and atmo analyser all have >1 datascale values.  I turn those down to 1.  Assuming I got it right (I haven't had too much time to test everything) this lowers the amount of data that goes into the lab but it also cuts the transmission costs--but that's justified as before by these things being simple numbers.  If the numbers are more valuable than that, I can change the basevalue to modify the science I get from them.  Because of the way the lab works, I'm seriously considering trying a fractional datavalue for the straight-numbers experiments.  Right now, I keep some of the gains of long-term surface sample, Goo, and SciJr. observation--we send ant farms to the ISS to see what they do over time in LEO, so there's a correlation there.  It makes sense that sticking around in an alien environment to see how actual samples behave when in that environment will teach you more than you could learn from just a short visit and get you better science.  But to get some fantastic gain from contemplating not the thermometer, but the single number you recorded from the thermometer, for one hundred days?  It might be very Zen but it's not good science.  If there were a way to tie the boost for contextual science to both having the thermometer attached to the lab and keeping the lab in that environment for the observation time, I'd jump on it, but that would require a mod.

[mrclucks]

On 5/8/2016 at 9:04 PM, Draco T stand-up guy said:

Nope, install ForScience and then take a lander to Minmus with one science jr, one goo, one tmp, one pressure, one scientist and one pilot. Visit two biomes to gather science and don't transmit any of it (not that you could - the batteries aren't good enough) and when you return to Kerbin get 1600 science. Yes, that is what I got from one trip.

There's a huge amount of science in the game and I suspect that most people are missing most of it. I doubt if people have actually got the time to actually process all of it. Besides, you can probably fill out the entire tech tree without the processing.

I feel that that mod takes out a large part of the game but I also think that Squad went a little bit overboard in sheer tedium of gathering all that science.

Holy poop, for science seems like the best mod ever!

Sorry mods for going off topic...

[wumpus]

25 minutes ago, mrclucks said:

Holy poop, for science seems like the best mod ever!

Sorry mods for going off topic...

Also don't forget to go into a polar orbit (to cover all the available biomes) and hangout in a spacewalk.  You can collect EVO reports "while flying over" the biomes while spacewalking (you have to put each back into the capsule, and you can't warp while spacewalking).  This will get a few more.  Also try to land on the side of the flats so you can jetpack over to "the slopes" and get samples and whatnot.  Grabbing 1600 science on two landings seems fairly low.