Decrease science from Minmus

[Jonfliesgoats]

Right!  The regolith does nothing to make a better extraction turbine.  I think we could get more science from recovery of craft AND positioning of craft.  We learned a lot through mid course drift of the Pioneer probes which were never recovered.  

What about science points which can be sold and build reputation and a whole new system of engineering points for achievements with craft?  Achieve a land speed of 100m/s with a 100ton craft: new landing gear!  That makes a lot more sense than getting new landing gear by measuring the non existent atmospheric pressure on Minmus

The tree of engineering acheivements would be visible just like the tech tree.  Speeds, altitudes, accelerations, temperatures, rotational velocities all specific to particular situations and biomes would count.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Jonfliesgoats

[Joonatan1998]

Maybe add an slider to tweak the amount of sciece in kerbin system in comparison to other planets?

But that wouldn't really fix anything.

 

I think the problem with the current system is that it encourages grinding instead of progress.

The rewards for visiting another biome are the same as the rewards for visiting a new planet, this is especially noticeable on minmus because it has lots of biomes even though it is relatively small.

 

I think the first biome you land in should give large rewards (larger than in the current version) , and every biome on the same planet after that would give less science than the previous one.

 

The player would still have the freedom to choose, but the choises would be more balanced.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Joonatan1998

[thereaverofdarkness2]

1 hour ago, Joonatan1998 said:

I think the first biome you land in should give large rewards, and every biome on the same planet after that would give less science than the previous one.

This exactly! The amount for a new biome should be reduced a bit, how much should depend greatly on what you're exploring. For example: Exploring a new biome on Minmus should give far less science than the first biome, while each new biome on Kerbin (which are actually very diverse as well as difficult to reach) should stay at a pretty good chunk of their base value. Also, checking out other flats on Minmus should give very little science after you've already researched one of the flats, because they're all relatively the same. You should get more science for scouting the Mün's crater, midlands, and highlands than you would for scouting the basins of three different craters. Different islands on Laythe should give quickly diminishing returns on science, but there should still be a lot to get from the ocean. So basically if you keep going to the same place on a different part of the planet, you shouldn't get tons of science for it. But going to new features and new kinds of terrain should give you good science. Also, the rate at which science diminishes should be relative to how easy it is to get around the body. Bigger and heavier bodies should give more science for full exploration, while smaller and lighter bodies shouldn't give much past the first few experiments.

Edited October 29, 2016 by thereaverofdarkness2

[Kerbal101]

On 10/28/2016 at 6:34 PM, thereaverofdarkness2 said:

It doesn't have to break science mode. Why not have science mode work the old way, but change career mode?

Then we still have the problem that we can't explore very well until we have the whole tech tree unlocked. That's why I think we should also expand the tech tree with upgrades to existing parts as well as futuristic tech that may cost large amounts of science.

Its sure does - science mode operates with science points for unlock currency. The point of career is to further bump difficulty and reduce progression by limiting parts no, total parts no, adding cost to every part.
Defining more precise science multiplier would suit all crowd types. Community tech tree essentially does this, but differently.
The "take reading" kind of missions already exist in career, its essentially money for science.
:Edit: screw that above ^^^^. I give it a thought and science-to-money conversion (to unlock and to build) makes much more sense than science unlock.

One can very well explore once panther, lv909, good wheels and most of 2.5 parts are unlocked. Bigger/smaller parts just increase range without refueling/mining. I'd be careful with "futuristic tech", I vote for addition of KAX and awesome USI stuff (Konstruction, LS, Underwater, mobile construction factories) instead.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Kerbal101

[Jonfliesgoats]

There are some pretty good ideas here.  Really we need to ask, what is the practical motivation to explore?  In human history it's usually tied with survival directly or indirectly (Polynesian clans forced to sea by conflict, searching for new fishing/hunting opportunities, new trade routes to out compete power monopolizing established routes, establishing plantations, avoiding some nasty naval encounters, etc.).

KSP doesn't have these geopolitical and social aspects, so the science, exploration and tech nodes don't feel organic to the game experience.  

 

This is why I get more and more interested in divorcing techndevelopment from science and making science and contracts sources of funds.  Funds get spent how the player wants on tech, infrastructure, personnel, failed launches, etc.

With regard to science from Minmus or Mun, having decreasing science simulates us running out of things to learn on a celestial body.  In reality, the reverse seems to occur.  We find more things that illicit more questions and offer more opportunities.  Subsurface, polar water on the moon, for example.

If our discoveries make us money or give us more opportunity to make more discoveries, perhaps things will feel better?

[TwoThe]

Having milestones would feel stupid to this game. "I'd like a better jet engine please." "Sorry no idea how to do that." "We've been to the mun!" "Great! I just had an idea that we could build a better jet engine." Yeah....

I am not saying that the science system currently is well done or even balanced, but probably that is not even the purpose of the system. As I see it the science system is just there to restrict you on the parts you have available, because otherwise you would never build low-tech rockets, and then it keeps you motivated to go on. And it does a good job on that.

Now of course you can complete the tech tree within Kerbin influence, but you could also adjust the slider in the options to make you finish the tech tree on Kerbin alone, or so low that you absolutely need to explore other planets to finish it. Essentially it allows you to decide how you want to play the game. But don't make the mistake and assume that everyone else would like to play the game the same way as you do.

On the other hand, even with whatever limitations in place, you can still complete all science without ever leaving Kerbin, by either using a Mobile Processing Lab, or even by just grinding contracts with "Unpaid Science Program" running. So whatever you try to do to the current science system won't work and it will backfire. If you don't like it, try a mod that changes it.

[Kerbal101]

On 10/29/2016 at 0:41 AM, Veeltch said:

Only if it's actual science. You don't need regolith from the Moon to make a jet engine work.

Hm,.. this makes a lot of sense. (really)

On 10/28/2016 at 6:34 PM, thereaverofdarkness2 said:

It doesn't have to break science mode. Why not have science mode work the old way, but change career mode?

I re-read few posts of @Veeltch and actually, I think I agree with you guys. Science should be sold for good amount of money. Contracts also bring money. Money unlocks stuff and money allows to build.

Yes, science-career ("old career") is then unaffected, because science stays anyway, just its use in regular career is changed.