What do you think of science-to-tech research mechanic?

[Wjolcz]

The question is pretty simple, I think.

I feel like the way science is traded to tech is limiting. Couple that with the tech tree we have and it's a real chore (going though all those nodes I don't need to get what I need).

What I would love to see is a tech research mechanic that gives you the choice over what you want to research next providing you the kind of progression you want. For example, I want one day to go full atmospheric/SSTO career. The SSTOs would be used to go into space and launch satellites Shuttle-Galileo style. The problem is, I can't do that, because I have to go to the Mun first to gather enough science points (AKA rubbish points), then accumulate enough money to upgrade the R&D and only then I would be able to unlock the nodes I need to make my dream come true.

Or I could go for the mods...

But that's not a good argument anymore (it never was, frankly), because we have the console version of the game. And there you can not use mods. IMO such freedom of choice could be achived by using money to unlock technology and reearangment of the tree itself (with themed branches instead of the senseless mess we have now).

So what do you think? Is there any particular progression you would like to perform yourself?

Edited August 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[Sharpy]

Very biased poll. The two options are "meh" and "nah."

I like the current mechanics. It's restricting and challenging.

If I don't want the restriction, I have the sandbox mode.

And if you really want career but without science progression, just edit the save and give yourself a million science points.

[pandaman]

Science to tech only really works if the science is relevant to the tech you are trying to develop. 

So... For example. .. Atmospheric studies could help accelerate tech progress with aerodynamics and engines intended to function in an atmosphere.  Or studying a planet in more detail would give you more data with which to plan your next visit. 

Science 'points' can have a function in measuring how much 'data' is collected and used to enhance the relevant tech, and/or be used as a simple 'currency' to measure how much 'science' you collect for a client for contracts.

[KOCOUR]

Cant vote! There is no "I like it as it is" option. OP should learn how to do polls before he attempts to do any.

[Wjolcz]

Eh, you guys.

I'll edit the poll

8 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

I like the current mechanics. It's restricting and challenging.

It's restricting and not challenging. You do what the game tells you to do early in the game and if you don't massively screw up it only gets easier later.

8 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

And if you really want career but without science progression, just edit the save and give yourself a million science points.

Oh, yeah. Or mod it.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[Sharpy]

2 minutes ago, pandaman said:

Science to tech only really works if the science is relevant to the tech you are trying to develop.

I doubt so. Seismic scans from Moho won't help you develop better wings, better engines, better fuel tanks, better structural parts, or better batteries and probe cores. So making this kind of connection is kinda silly.

My personal opinion on how that works: you perform scientific research at KSP however you see fit, with public/governmental funding. They demand results. You send in research results in planetary sciences, they fund your research into technology allowing you obtain more/different planetary science. And the fact you just checked soil composition of Ike doesn't mean you're using that data to improve your airplane. It means the government is satisfied with your progress and funds your airplane research.

[Wjolcz]

1 minute ago, Sharpy said:

I doubt so. Seismic scans from Moho won't help you develop better wings, better engines, better fuel tanks, better structural parts, or better batteries and probe cores. So making this kind of connection is kinda silly.

That's soooo taken out of context. He also said about atmospheric science helping in the research of wings.

2 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

My personal opinion on how that works: you perform scientific research at KSP however you see fit, with public/governmental funding. They demand results. You send in research results in planetary sciences, they fund your research into technology allowing you obtain more/different planetary science. And the fact you just checked soil composition of Ike doesn't mean you're using that data to improve your airplane. It means the government is satisfied with your progress and funds your airplane research.

Except there's no government and real funding from it.

[Sharpy]

12 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

It's restricting and not challenging. You do what the game tells you to do early in the game and if you don't massively screw up it only gets easier later.

It's a game about space. If you don't want to go into space, you either use mods or play a different game.

What you do in space is largely dependent on what you wish to do.

KSC "biomes" are enough to gather enough science for unlocking airplanes. Then the rest of biomes is open for you. You can gather a plenty of science over Kerbin, just driving and flying. And once you unlock the research lab, you can send several of them to the orbit and gather all the science in the world, just researching the same results over and over.

5 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

That's soooo taken out of context. He also said about atmospheric science helping in the research of wings.

Atmospheric science is more of an exception than a rule here. Most of scientific research performable in KSP has little to do with developments of R&D.

Quote

Except there's no government and real funding from it.

Says who?

[steuben]

12 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Except there's no government and real funding from it.

it is called an Acceptable Break from Reality, kin to the Willing Suspension of Disbelief. Warning TVtropes links

[Kerbart]

I think it's good. It's just that it could be better.

In my book, "bad" means that the game is better off without it. Well, there's science mode and sandbox, so it can't make the game worse—just play those modes if it's that much of an abomination.

could it be improved? Certainly! But I consider it a low priority item, there's more important things to fix before the game leaves beta status.

“I don't know what to do in the game”

“Go and collect science points”

“Why? What’s the point”

That’s what career and the tech tree are all about, and they do a decent job at it. Not stellar, but decent. I'd applaud improvements, but not before things like landers sliding all over the place are fixed first.

[Wjolcz]

1 hour ago, Sharpy said:

It's a game about space. If you don't want to go into space, you either use mods or play a different game.

I do want to go into space, except I want to do it my way, not your way, or SQUAD's way. I want to pick the path of my own, not the one that SQUAD, or you, or other fanboys think is good enough.

1 hour ago, Sharpy said:

Atmospheric science is more of an exception than a rule here. Most of scientific research performable in KSP has little to do with developments of R&D.

What? scientific research has EVERYTHING to do with R&D. You CAN'T progress if you don't go somewhere and gather the science points.

1 hour ago, Sharpy said:

Says who?

Does anyone have to say it to make it true?

KSP's budget system has nothing to do with the way governments fund space programs. Government funding implies there's a certain organization that gives the space program money every X days/weeks/months. Not only KSP doesn't have that, but also it has some sort of mission slot machine hidden in the Mission Control. That's far from how government funding works. It's more or less like this:

1. The space agency makes a program of what they want to do and where they want to go.
2. The Government then looks at this plan and decides whether it wants to fund it or not
3. The space agency gets money/doesn't get money to fund the program

1 hour ago, steuben said:

it is called an Acceptable Break from Reality, kin to the Willing Suspension of Disbelief. Warning TVtropes links

Or, a lack of developer's vision, kin to the "it's good enough" approach, or simply being lazy.

1 hour ago, Kerbart said:

“I don't know what to do in the game”

“Go and collect science points”

“Why? What’s the point”

That’s what career and the tech tree are all about, and they do a decent job at it. Not stellar, but decent. I'd applaud improvements, but not before things like landers sliding all over the place are fixed first.

Well, I actually do know what I want to do in the game. The problem is it's something else than it was previously. I've been there, done that. Now I want something else. It's not the "I don't know what to do" approach. It's more like "I want to go my own path this time".

KSP's career simply doesn't allow for that. We have a tree which progression is inane and contracts are still random. You can't even filter them properly. I want to pick my own objectives and research things that interest me, not be a slave to the progression SQUAD created and approved by people who think "it's good enough/I got used to it".

Edited August 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[Sharpy]

1 minute ago, Veeltch said:

I do want to into space, except I want to do it my way, not your way, or SQUAD's way. I want to pick the path of my own, not the one that SQUAD, or you, or other fanboys think is good enough.
 

And how does it prevent you, from, say, going to Duna?

In my first game, after Mun, I didn't go to Minmus but sent Jeb on a Duna flyby. He spent seven years in space trying to catch a Kerbin encounter because I didn't know about Target modes. Upon return I built a rocket with 16 tiny landers that I scattered all over Kerbin.

In my second game, I didn't go to Mun until much, much later into the game. Instead, I made a suborbital launcher and landed Jeb in every biome of Kerbin, gathering science from there. Then I sent a probe into Sun orbit, using BACCs which I got through a contract, as experimental part. This allowed me enough science to unlock Ant, which I promptly sent to Eve, still with Stayputnik. Boy was that an adventure. Following that, and my earlier experience, I sent a rocketr with 12 tiny landers to Eve.

Are you saying Squad told me to do anything of that?

What exactly do you want to do that is so totally impossible in the existing system?

Quote

You CAN'T progress if you don't go somewhere and gather the science points.

Uh... @Overland could you butt in here?

 

Quote

KSP's budget system has nothing to do with the way governments fund space programs. Government funding implies there's a certain organization that gives the space program money every X days/weeks/months

NASA is not the only space organization on Earth. There are others, and they are funded in ENTIRELY different ways. Do your homework and tell me about the way SpaceX gets government funds.

Also, you fail to realize the differentiation between academic research grants, and commercial work.

 

Quote

1. The space agency makes a program of what they want to do and where they want to go.
2. The Government then looks at this plan and decides whether it wants to fund it or not
3. The space agency gets money/doesn't get money to fund the program

Roughly the way SpaceX gets government grants.

 

Quote

KSP's career simply doesn't allow for that.

Then don't play career. Who forces you to do that? There are two other stock modes, plus a number of mods that provide other alternatives.

[Red Iron Crown]

How many threads are you going to make about this? Honest question.

[foamyesque]

2 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

How many threads are you going to make about this? Honest question.

 

As many as it takes to get the point across, I suppose. I can't say I blame him; the tech tree is very kludged together and reflects a lot of legacy design decisions that should be revisited and cleaned up.

[Jovus]

There was a guy with a cool idea to reform the R&D system with prototyping and gathering flight data; I want to hear more from him.

[Red Iron Crown]

6 minutes ago, foamyesque said:

As many as it takes to get the point across, I suppose. I can't say I blame him; the tech tree is very kludged together and reflects a lot of legacy design decisions that should be revisited and cleaned up.

I dunno, to my mind spreading it across multiple threads dilutes the feedback. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

[pandaman]

The current stock system is...   Go wherever you like and do random science and get 'points' for it. Those science points then become just currency with which you buy technological advances.  Yes, it works, but it is no different to going to a place digging up 'gold' then buying a bigger spade with it so you can dig up more gold next time, or buy a bottle of whiskey or any other unrelated item. 

What (I believe) @Veeltch is suggesting is that the science points you collect are used to improve the technology progression of the field(s) the experiment you just did relates to more directly...  Go dig up some gold,  in doing so you get an idea ('science points') of a way to make your spade better.  You can spend those points on getting a better spade quicker, because you can tell the guy that makes it what you want, rather than just buying the next model up which won't necessarily be tailored to your needs.

In other words you get more 'value' from your science points if you do experiments relevant to what you want to research.

[Wjolcz]

35 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

And how does it prevent you, from, say, going to Duna?

Did I say I can't?

35 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

What exactly do you want to do that is so totally impossible in the existing system?

You can't easily progress the way you want. You can't easily pick the objectives you want. You have to follow the tree provided by SQUAD and fish out for the contracts that have the exact objectives that interest you.

I want to do one thing and focus on it, not complete a bunch of unrelated objectives tht I don't care about.

35 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

NASA is not the only space organization on Earth. There are others, and they are funded in ENTIRELY different ways. Do your homework and tell me about the way SpaceX gets government funds.

Also, you fail to realize the differentiation between academic research grants, and commercial work.

Please, do illuminate me about it.

35 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

Roughly the way SpaceX gets government grants.

I'm totally fine with it if it was part of the game.

35 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

Then don't play career. Who forces you to do that? There are two other stock modes, plus a number of mods that provide other alternatives.

Great arguments.

Career was meant to be a part of this game since like forever. When I played this game for the first time I thought "This is great! I can't wait to see what they do wih the career mode!". So I waited, and waited and it finally came out! Aaaaand it was not what I expected, so I thought "OK, this is the first release. There's still room for improvement. I can wait." So I did. And all that ever came out was more "tweaks". Parts got moved around the tree, contracts got penalties for declining and useless strategies became a thing.

I've played enough of sandbox mode. I want a real experience now.

21 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

I dunno, to my mind spreading it across multiple threads dilutes the feedback. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

I'm just curious and want to know as many opinions as possible.

20 minutes ago, pandaman said:

What (I believe) @Veeltch is suggesting is that the science points you collect are used to improve the technology progression of the field(s) the experiment you just did relates to more directly...  Go dig up some gold,  in doing so you get an idea ('science points') of a way to make your spade better.  You can spend those points on getting a better spade quicker, because you can tell the guy that makes it what you want, rather than just buying the next model up which won't necessarily be tailored to your needs.

In other words you get more 'value' from your science points if you do experiments relevant to what you want to research.

Yeah, pretty much this. The problem with this analogy though is in KSP you start with a spade, dig the gold and then buy a pickaxe, because that's the only thing available and you need it to get a better spade for some reason.

And that makes no sense.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[Overland]

 KSP is much much much more than a game with missions or a specific way of doing things. far more than that.. I strongly believe the missions and science modes are more of an introduction to the universe that is lovingly crafted in KSP rather than any kind of end game or be all end all of anything

none of it gauges success in any measure of the word what so ever, progression is many things to many people,

 

seas are able to sailed, dived.. some of us sail ships across these vast oceans. its progress to some. and many.. I myself drive trains.. my success hasnt been dictated by any mission limitation but rather distance.. within kerbin and mods created to do so.. I think focusing on missions alone as any end all and be all of KSP gameplay is a little. self limiting.

 

as is thinking space is the everything of KSP, I assure you greatly it isnt 

(sorry I must have posted it before I finished)

Edited August 29, 2016 by Overland

[Wjolcz]

7 minutes ago, Overland said:

KSP is much much much more than a game with missions or a specific way of doing things. far more than that.. I strongly believe the missions and science modes are more of an introduction to the universe that is lovingly crafted in KSP rather than any kind of end game or be all end all of anything

I just wish they weren't "an introduction". There are already scenarios and tutorials (and KSPedia) that serve that function.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[Sharpy]

10 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

You can't easily progress the way you want. You can't easily pick the objectives you want. You have to follow the tree provided by SQUAD and fish out for the contracts that have the exact objectives that interest you.

I want to do one thing and focus on it, not complete a bunch of unrelated objectives tht I don't care about.

Then Career mode is not for you. Its focus and purpose is diversification of player's interests through incentives being spread far, wide and with slow progress depth-wise.

It's the kind of complaint that you hate the hammer because it's bad driving screws. Use the right tool for the job.

 

Quote

Career was meant to be a part of this game since like forever. When I played this game for the first time I thought "This is great! I can't wait to see what they do wih the career mode!". So I waited, and waited and it finally came out! Aaaaand it was not what I expected, so I thought "OK, this is the first release. There's still room for improvement. I can wait." So I did. And all that ever came out was more "tweaks". Parts got moved around the tree, contracts got penalty for declining and useless strategies became a thing.

I've played enough of sandbox mode. I want a real experience now.

You imagined that Career is something else than it is. And you're disappointed that it isn't what you imagined. It doesn't mean it's bad or wrong, it's just something else than you wanted it to be.

You want "a real experience?" Then Career is definitely not the way.

Kerbalism, Realism Overhaul,  Real Solar System, Deadly Reentry, and if your computer is a powerhouse, n-body gravitation.

This is the "Real experience".

[Pecan]

3 hours ago, Veeltch said:

...I want one day to go full atmospheric/SSTO career. The SSTOs would be used to go into space and launch satellites Shuttle-Galileo style. The problem is, I can't do that, because I have to go to the Mun first to gather enough science points (AKA rubbish points), then accumulate enough money to upgrade the R&D and only then I would be able to unlock the nodes I need to make my dream come true....

"SSTO"?  Do I have to say anything more?

[Sharpy]

37 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

Yeah, pretty much this. The problem with this analogy though is in KSP you start with a spade, dig the gold and then buy a pickaxe, because that's the only thing available and you need it to get a better spade for some reason.

And that makes no sense.

Oh hey, then the problem is not with science, but with the research tree layout!

The tree in its current form is aimed at new players, not to overwhelm them with tricky caveats of simpler parts. All seasoned players scoff at it because of that, but there are countless mods that fix that.

Or just pick the Difficulty: Custom, and move the Science slider all the way to the right.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Sharpy

[Wjolcz]

16 minutes ago, Pecan said:

"SSTO"?  Do I have to say anything more?

Yes...?

You probably misunderstood me though. Imagine you are a space company (one of the many on Kerbin; the rescue contrats imply that you are anyway). You work on your own technology and launchers.

Now some people want to be ULA (Lockheed + Boeing) and build planes and rockets (that's what both companies do), some want to be like SpaceX and focus mainly on launchers and some (like me in this SSTO example) want to be like Reaction Engines Limited and build SSTOs.

Since KSP isn't historical (I'm not saying it should as it would limit the tech progression even more), it should at least provide the flexibiliy needed to follow your own playstyle.

13 minutes ago, Sharpy said:

Oh hey, then the problem is not with science, but with the research tree layout!

Well, not exactly. That too, but it's also about the science-to-tech research mechanic. You can't buy tech (as it is done IRL), instead you have to gather unrelated scientific data (that can be only obtained "out there") to unlock more parts.

Edited August 29, 2016 by Veeltch

[Guest]

What's this thread really about, getting the devs to rewrite the thing? That ain't gonna happen. KSP's career/science gameplay is pretty much set in stone and rewriting it would take a big expenditure of dev resources for a couple of updates, at least. For what? That's not what sells the game, what sells the game is the magic of spaceflight and learning about it, seeing your own creations explore the cosmos (or the Kerbal's backyard cosmos, w/e). Your best bet to get what you want is to mod the game, and KSP is getting better for modding with every update.

And don't bother using console players as a defense against changing fundamental gameplay using mods.. What matters is that console players bought the game. They'll get their 20~40 hours in and move on; modding to extend gameplay is not essential to the console experience.

If you want research to take time, get KCT. If you want contracts to give research, alter the scripts with ModuleManager. If you want research to be paid for in funds, well, get cracking, I'm sure it's possible.