A use for data

[Clockwork13]

I'm surprised no one else (as far as I've seen) has posted about this, because the problem is pretty obvious, and that problem is that data, such as the data you get from doing science experiments, seems to have no purpose.

To start, just in case you don't know what data is, it is what you get for doing experiments alongside science. The amount of data you earn from a science experiment seems to have no effect on gameplay, so I'm suggesting an alternative use for it. It would be used simply as a statistic to show how much science experiments you've done. In the R&D window, along with showing how much science you have, it would also show how much total data you have earned. You would also be able to check out graphs of data collected from certain missions.

Since it would be possible to get as much data as you want from repeating science experiments, it would have no actual purpose, and simply act there as a statistic for you to look over. Abusing the system to get more science would give you no benefits to gameplay, and there would be no motivation to abuse the system anyway.

And in case you aren't sure what I'm talking about, this is what I mean by data:

Edited October 15, 2016 by Clockwork13

[Jonfliesgoats]

I'm not sure I follow.  Explain please.

[Clockwork13]

13 hours ago, Jonfliesgoats said:

I'm not sure I follow.  Explain please.

updated OP, hopefully it's clearer now.

[Tex_NL]

@Clockwork13 Are you talking about the data in the MPL science lab? This data most definitely has a use. Throw a few scientists into the lab, supply it with a steady amount of electricity and click 'start research'. Now the data will be converted into science points you can spend in the R&D building. It does take a while but it is absolutely worth it.

Edited October 14, 2016 by Tex_NL

[Wjolcz]

So actual data records with graphs and such? If so, yes please. I'm sick of the current "science" system which has almost nothing to do with actual science and more with the research of parts. Not only it seems wrong, but also limiting* and once you finish the tree there's not much motivation to keep gathering it.

*Space companies gather scientific data only if it's helpful in the process of researching new parts and components. They don't send incomplete probes to other planets to make a bigger fuel tank. In KSP that's the only way.

[Clockwork13]

2 hours ago, Tex_NL said:

@Clockwork13 Are you talking about the data in the MPL science lab? This data most definitely has a use. Throw a few scientists into the lab, supply it with a steady amount of electricity and click 'start research'. Now the data will be converted into science points you can spend in the R&D building. It does take a while but it is absolutely worth it.

Please re-read OP, i cleared up what I meant

 

57 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

So actual data records with graphs and such? If so, yes please. I'm sick of the current "science" system which has almost nothing to do with actual science and more with the research of parts. Not only it seems wrong, but also limiting* and once you finish the tree there's not much motivation to keep gathering it.

*Space companies gather scientific data only if it's helpful in the process of researching new parts and components. They don't send incomplete probes to other planets to make a bigger fuel tank. In KSP that's the only way.

Actually, I never even thought of having graphs with it, but that would make a lot more sense.

[Wjolcz]

Well, yeah. Graphs coupled with experiments that gather data all the time would imo be way better. You would just keep them running while performing fast flybys, or going through the atmosphere, or whatever other engaging situation doesn't allow you to spam click the experiments like crazy because your forgot about action groups.

Right now the science gathering process looks more or less like this:

1. *click click click click click*

2. *a witty text pops up*

3. tl;dr just gimme dem otherwise useless tech research points lol

Edited October 14, 2016 by Veeltch

[Tex_NL]

13 hours ago, Veeltch said:

1. *click click click click click*

2. *a witty text pops up*

3. tl;dr just gimme dem otherwise useless tech research points lol

You nailed it there. This is probably why I never paid much attention to this before.

Looks like Data Gathered multiplied by Data Value equals Science. But how, what and why, I haven't got a clue.

[monstah]

The thing is, 'Data' is what tells you (in-game, I mean): how long and how much electric charge it will take to transmit, and how much it occupies to store (only in the labs). 'Science' is what you spend on upgrades. 'Data value' then is just the ratio (higher value means more science per electric charge spent transmitting).

 

But I agree with @Veeltch. "Data" is what you call pieces of information, and you only gather it if it's useful for something.

In the context of the game, for example, my dream science mechanic: all the bodies' masses, radii, atmospheric pressure and curves, orbital parameters, etc, are unknown (or a rough guess), and SCIENCE! is what gives you better approximations of true values. Now, all orbital predictions (give us something like the Trajectories mod, that includes atmospheric drag), resource scanning, performance of some parts (jet engines, for example) are tied to "known" information, rather than the hardcoded true values.

Doing science, then, is like clearing a "fog of war" on game information. Apoapsis (and time to)? You must understand gravity (and know your planet's mass/radius). Resource scanning? You must understand the target's geology (so, correlate orbital measures with surface samples, first approximating by what you know from other bodies but refining once you get an acual sample of that particular biome). Etc, etc.