Multiclassing

[Sharpy]

"...And for our special guest, seasoned pilot, and renowned scientist, professor Jebediah Kerman will open our conference with a lecture on space travel."

The idea is to go beyond the five stars.

Kerbin orbit: 2.
Kerbol orbit: 6
Jool orbit: 9.
Pol, Bop, each 20.
Tylo orbit: 12.

And you have five stars and nothing to learn more... or do you?

The game allows for a total of 241 points of experience to be gained by any Kerbal.

64 is needed for five stars. 3*64 is 192.

I don't think making a kerbal able to become simultaneously a two-star scientist and a two-star engineer would be a good idea. But once you max out your pilot career, you should be able to start gaining points towards a second skill. Once you finish that, you may start learning a third one. That way the 64 points is not the end, and your seasoned Kerbals become really valuable.

[AlamoVampire]

I like this idea. Way I see it the current system of pilot only or scientist only or engineer only is a bad one. Lets ignore a moment that this is a game. IRL if an agency is putting a human in space and paying them to be there, they are more than just one thing. They are trained to perform the mission first but are trained also trained to perform supplimental and tertiary tasks as a redundancy. So why no such luck for kerbals?

Edited September 6, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

Hi, don't often visit this thread, too busy making ksp the game i want.  In this case though I fully support this idea and the reasoning behind it.

I can't draw comparisons with real spaceflight as I'm no rocket nerd (no offence intended) From my background in the marine industry I can tell you that with minimal crew if everyone can't do everyone elses job even to the most basic level of competence then you are just increasing the odds that should some mishap befall you that you are unable to deal with it appropriately and what would be a serious but recoverable situation can end up spiraling into a disaster very quickly.

So yes give Kerbals the ability to learn new skills, you know it make sense.

[Kerbart]

22 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

(...) IRL if an agency is putting a human in space and paying them to be there, they are more than just one thing. They are trained to perform the mission first but are trained also trained to perform supplimental and tertiary tasks as a redundancy. So why no such luck for kerbals?

TLDR; it's a game mechanic to encourage multi-Kerbal crews.

---

When going back to older versions, Kerbals, at one point in time, were just Kerbals. Then science was introduced, and career, and in two releases we went from 0.23 to 0.9 to 1.0 and there was joy and happiness all around. Well, ok, maybe not the latter, but I digress.

At any rate, the distinction between various classes was added. One can ask, why? The likely answer is to provide challenges. As much as there are all kind of mechanics to encourage manned missions over robotic ones, this is a mechanic to encourage multi-crew missions over one-Kerbal missions. Surely it would be convenient to send just Jeb on that ten year mission to Eeloo, cozily packed in his Mk I capsule (if you're one of those decadent flight planners who doesn't put him on a flight seat packed inside a utility bay, that is), but since certain tasks can only be done by certain crew you can't get away with that.

The fact that slapping a remote guidance unit (or even a HECS core) onto your ship is a simple fix for needing a pilot (let alone an experienced one) will be considered bad enough as it is, by some!

[Bombaatu]

Oddly enough I had this same idea. Unlike the OP, though, I'm actually in favor of allowing skill-spread instead of having to max out one discipline before adding another. For that to be viable, each "star" for each skill would have to add something unique - this would allow for a reason to either spread out or  specialize.

My initial thoughts were that zero-star pilots could hold course & altitude in atmosphere (let's face it; they wouldn't be kerbalnauts if they couldn't fly a plane) as well as engaging SAS, then getting better at spaceflight (ie hold pro/retrograde, hold normal +/-, hold radial +/-, etc.) just like they do now. For Scientists, zero-star gives the ability to clean experiments; subsequent start increase MPL performance as well as a small increase the the amount of raw science gathered; possibly also the ability to transfer data from experiment to capsule without EVA. Engineers are the problem child; not sure how to make them more useful in the early game prior to getting ISRU. One idea would be that engines get better performance (ie a bump to ISP), struts get stronger, etc.

 

EDIT: Actually now that I think of it, I'd say there is no zero-star ability BUT every Kerbal starts with one star; they get to choose what it applies to.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Bombaatu

[steuben]

While  IRL the pilots are multi-class and just shy of BA normal warning Tvtropes link,  and if they didn't start that way they ended up after training. Multi-classing kerbals might not be a good idea. mostly for game balance reasons.

But... as for the mechanic. Perhaps an earn rate of 10% towards second class and an earn rate of 1% towards third class. So just over 7100 xp for all three and 700 for second. But given there appear to be 720 xp in the whole system...

 

 

[pandaman]

I like the OPS idea, though would be tempted to allow gaining of stars in new disciplines upto 1 (maybe even 2) below your current level

So a 4 star pilot could gain a max of 3 stars in science or engineering and then upto 2 stars in the other.

Edited September 6, 2016 by pandaman

[AlamoVampire]

@Kerbart Saying its a game mechanic to be the way it is, and is to encourage something is normally ok. But, in this case, its just an excuse for a poor design. This game is intended to mimic a real ish space program, where in real life asking a crew to not have at least basic competency in all positions is inviting a fatal accident. It should be no different in ksp. Lets say, for arguments sake you have tac ls, KIS/KAS and a cargo container with backup gear and reserve ls stuffs. You have a 3 Kerbal crew going to Eeloo. 

You are halfway done. You are on Eeloo, and lets say your engineer suffers a fatal accident. Now you have 2 crew. But since they can't cross class you are minus an engineer. Lets now say that the fatal accident damaged life support. You now have enough ls to only reach the orbital line of Jool but your reserves in the storage bin can get you home. No engineer means no fixing your ls. 

[Kerbart]

1 hour ago, AlamoVampire said:

(...) Lets say, for arguments sake you have tac ls, KIS/KAS and a cargo container with backup gear and reserve ls stuffs. You have a 3 Kerbal crew going to Eeloo. 

You are halfway done. You are on Eeloo, and lets say your engineer suffers a fatal accident. Now you have 2 crew. But since they can't cross class you are minus an engineer. Lets now say that the fatal accident damaged life support. You now have enough ls to only reach the orbital line of Jool but your reserves in the storage bin can get you home. No engineer means no fixing your ls. 

Some will argue that,if survival is that dependent on having an engineer with you, having backup gear but no backup engineer is a bit short-sighted.

I see your point, but diluting existing stock mechanics for the sake of fairly advanced features in a modded installs should not be Squad's concern or responsibility.

The game has limited realism, for the sake of game play. Sure, in real life crew members are cross-trained. In real life gyros saturate, spin is consistent, gravity works along n-body Newtonian physics (and beyond) and not with patched conics, and so on. We've accepted simplifications that make the game simpler and in most cases more enjoyable. Would the game benefit from proposed mechanics in the setup you descibe? Most certainly. But that should be something those mods take care of. As a discussion point; I can already see room for cutting corners here. Why send a three men crew when you can send two pilot/engineer/scientist kerbals (one, and a backup)?

[AlamoVampire]

@Kerbart I just think its a flaw, possibly a big one, for the setup we have now. Also, look at the xp system. It's clear we can earn the XP to cross train.

I would say, limit to 1 prime category and 1 sub prime tho

[Wjolcz]

Sorry, but nope. Having to collect even more points to make the kerbals any useful would be horrible. The already in-game KXP is pretty crappy. I really don't need to go places to learn how to change a tyre.

However, I wouldn't mind having more roles per each crew member. Like IRL the astronauts are trained to perform biological experiments, but they also sometimes go out and retract a radiator.